Thoughts on Vans RV?

pfarber said:
Well considering the new policy isn't even effective yet you have a few days to get in that training.

Since the LODA is nothing more than an email with the absolute basic information this seems to be just bureaucracy at work.

"Creating more than 30,000 new LODAs and exemptions is a paperwork exercise that does nothing to advance safety.”"
Click to expand...
Minor point here... the LODA isn't just an email. It's an email, then wait for it to be routed to the FSDO, and wait for the FSDO to actually issue the LODA. We have no idea how long that process will take. And, apparently, the FAA thinks it's always been that way, they just didn't really know it. Or something like that. Figure that one out.
 
DaleB said:
Minor point here... the LODA isn't just an email. It's an email, then wait for it to be routed to the FSDO, and wait for the FSDO to actually issue the LODA. We have no idea how long that process will take. And, apparently, the FAA thinks it's always been that way, they just didn't really know it. Or something like that. Figure that one out.
Click to expand...

Nothing to figure out. They don't call them reindeer games for nothing. It's a closed loop system and the only way to ultimately break even is to not play. Thing is, when one person owes the bank money, that person has a problem. When everybody owes the bank money, the bank has a problem.

On the record, I discourage the practice of pencil whipping/scofflawing regulatory capriciousness. Off the record...you know, the bank and all that jazz.
 
I've thought about the whole "being in a bubble" issue and have been thinking I ought to wait and see where prices go before deciding. I also saw a nicely equipped Velocity for sale for the same ballpark money as an RV6. I kind of like the metal construction over composite but I must say that full glass and twin GPS/NAV/COMM heads are :cool:
 
pfarber said:
Don't settle on a TYPE, settle on a plane that will accomplish the mission.

A Wittman Tailwind, or any of the two seat 100hp E/ABs (Sonari, Long EZ, etc) will do the exact same thing and at a significant discount.

Everyone is correct, RVs have a name based premium on them. Why walk past a $28k Tailwind with EFIS for a $60k RV-6A??

https://barnstormers.com/listing_images.php?id=1672746

Or a Sonerii 2LT for $18k?

https://barnstormers.com/listing_images.php?id=1670135

If simply want an RV and have $60k to spend, sure. But there are other options.
Click to expand...

Would either of those aircraft be suitable for someone who doesn’t know how to do maintenance, and would it be difficult to find a qualified mechanic who could work on them?
 
DMD3. said:
Would either of those aircraft be suitable for someone who doesn’t know how to do maintenance, and would it be difficult to find a qualified mechanic who could work on them?
Click to expand...
If a mechanic can work on an RV, a Tailwind shouldn't be an issue. Some people may not be comfortable with composite E-AB - but in general the structure on an aluminum or rag and tube homebuilt tends to be less complex than a type certificate aircraft. If an A&P isn't comfortable with fabric, read the book and do it yourself - ain't exactly rocket science. (Or, hire some other homebuilder.)
 
As for maintenance, I consider myself a competent home mechanic. I would feel comfortable doing any of the maintenance myself that would be allowed on a certified plane, and anything that I wasn't 100% comfortable doing I would try to find someone from the EAA who was able to do that (I'm a member) or I would ask the mechanic that did the condition inspections if he could walk me through the job, similar to an owner assisted thing. I'm really hands on with my car and my bike, but I respect where my limits are and I have good relationships with my mechanics. I'll even ask them if they think certain jobs are something I could do competent work at and I trust their opinions. I'd want to treat an EAB aircraft the same way. One of the big attractions to EAB's for me is the ability to use non-TSO'd instruments and avionics, and the ability to make modifications without having to find an STC or do a field approval.
 
LoLPilot said:
I've looked at the Lightning and I admit they are a tempting option! Aren't they limited to 120 knots with the LSA certification?
Click to expand...

That 120 knots is an FAA limitation, not an aircraft limitation. You should fly one and see how fast it will go.
BTW: The Vne on the LS-1 is 180 knots.
 
Not the same airplane. The lighting kit (classic) is faster because the wings are 3 feet shorter and the airfoil is thinner. They purposely fattened and lengthened the wings in the LS-1 (S-LSA offering) in order to reduce the stall speed and increase the frontal area to slow it down on the same output engine. The experimental lighting XS offering (taller gear and beefed FWF) allows for the more conventional bigger engines like the Lycos 320/40/60 and clones, which is the variant that gives the 150/160KTAS profile those not medically tied to LSA could dabble in.

Like everything in this space, the price point is a non-starter, compared to well worn RVs in the resale market. The point of leaving my family behind (like an a-hole :D) due to lack of seats, would be to leave the supra-100K price point behind too. I'm not an RV fanboi, but if people are going to point at the cult pricing supposedly afflicting RVs, throwing Saratoga-priced speed-handicapped non-acro LSAs as the alternative seems to fly on the face of what is being attempted in the first place.

100K+ LSAs are a "good" deal if you can't medical anymore. Otherwise, full metal jacket EAB is better bang for the buck, RV or no RV, imho.
 
LoLPilot said:
As for maintenance, I consider myself a competent home mechanic. I would feel comfortable doing any of the maintenance myself that would be allowed on a certified plane, and anything that I wasn't 100% comfortable doing I would try to find someone from the EAA who was able to do that (I'm a member) or I would ask the mechanic that did the condition inspections if he could walk me through the job, similar to an owner assisted thing. I'm really hands on with my car and my bike, but I respect where my limits are and I have good relationships with my mechanics. I'll even ask them if they think certain jobs are something I could do competent work at and I trust their opinions. I'd want to treat an EAB aircraft the same way. One of the big attractions to EAB's for me is the ability to use non-TSO'd instruments and avionics, and the ability to make modifications without having to find an STC or do a field approval.
Click to expand...
With the exception of a few things, which also apply to wan also, there is no requirement to use tso’ed avionics in a standard catagory aircraft under part 91
 
LoLPilot said:
As for maintenance, I consider myself a competent home mechanic. I would feel comfortable doing any of the maintenance myself that would be allowed on a certified plane, and anything that I wasn't 100% comfortable doing I would try to find someone from the EAA who was able to do that (I'm a member) or I would ask the mechanic that did the condition inspections if he could walk me through the job, similar to an owner assisted thing. I'm really hands on with my car and my bike, but I respect where my limits are and I have good relationships with my mechanics. I'll even ask them if they think certain jobs are something I could do competent work at and I trust their opinions. I'd want to treat an EAB aircraft the same way. One of the big attractions to EAB's for me is the ability to use non-TSO'd instruments and avionics, and the ability to make modifications without having to find an STC or do a field approval.
Click to expand...

I've been stuck AOG since last Friday with an airplane 7 hours away and still unable to find a lEgAl option willing to work on the stupid thing...in an MSA of 1.4 million with 5ish area airports. That alone is worth considering EAB. If this had been an RV, I'd be there with a local car mechanic and a much cheaper replacement part (since it can be procured/substituted without having to pay homage to the stovepiped part number certified nonsense kabuki) ready to wrench and go.

I've been in this hobby 12 years, and honestly the landscape is getting worse, not better, on the dispatch and servicing front. I dismissed a ton of signs during my failed former marriage; this time around I think I'm gonna start paying attention and follow the signs in front of me for once :D

EAB is the future.
 
Owner produced part not an option?
 
SoonerAviator said:
He won't know until he can get a mechanic to identify what the problem is. I believe he's had trouble getting an A&P to want to take a look.
Click to expand...

There's nothing in the regulations that prevents an owner from diagnosing and tearing apart an airplane. The relationship I have with my A&P, I do the work, I send pictures or have him look at it, and he makes the logbook entry for me. It's just the logbook entries and return to service that has to be signed off on by an A&P.

He jokes around asking me when I want to take my A&P test.
 
I've flown about every type of RV out there thats worth flying and love them all. The 6/7/and 9 all suck in nose wheel configuration. The gear box for the mains hits you right in the calf. The tailwheel versions are very well mannered though and super comfortable.
 
malichite said:
I've flown about every type of RV out there thats worth flying and love them all. The 6/7/and 9 all suck in nose wheel configuration. The gear box for the mains hits you right in the calf. The tailwheel versions are very well mannered though and super comfortable.
Click to expand...

Again, depends on the person and how the builder did things. The -6 was not super comfy, nor was the 9A. The 8 was fine and dandy.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I've been stuck AOG since last Friday with an airplane 7 hours away and still unable to find a lEgAl option willing to work on the stupid thing...in an MSA of 1.4 million with 5ish area airports. That alone is worth considering EAB. If this had been an RV, I'd be there with a local car mechanic and a much cheaper replacement part (since it can be procured/substituted without having to pay homage to the stovepiped part number certified nonsense kabuki) ready to wrench and go.

I've been in this hobby 12 years, and honestly the landscape is getting worse, not better, on the dispatch and servicing front. I dismissed a ton of signs during my failed former marriage; this time around I think I'm gonna start paying attention and follow the signs in front of me for once :D

EAB is the future.
Click to expand...

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I spent 5 days stuck in a hotel room in Laurinburg NC waiting on a new voltage regulator and alternator for my Decathlon. Was all set to jump start and fly 3 hours day VFR home when an FAA maintenance inspector walked up and stated I could not take off because the original type certificate included an electrical system. There were literally 2 human beings within one mile of that plane on a Saturday morning; me, and Mr FAA guy who just randomly walked up.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I spent 5 days stuck in a hotel room in Laurinburg NC waiting on a new voltage regulator and alternator for my Decathlon. Was all set to jump start and fly 3 hours day VFR home when an FAA maintenance inspector walked up and stated I could not take off because the original type certificate included an electrical system. There were literally 2 human beings within one mile of that plane on a Saturday morning; me, and Mr FAA guy who just randomly walked up.
Click to expand...

I am here from the government, how can I help?
 
EdFred said:
There's nothing in the regulations that prevents an owner from diagnosing and tearing apart an airplane. The relationship I have with my A&P, I do the work, I send pictures or have him look at it, and he makes the logbook entry for me. It's just the logbook entries and return to service that has to be signed off on by an A&P.

He jokes around asking me when I want to take my A&P test.
Click to expand...
Oh I hear ya, we're on the same page. In the confines of my hangar, all day Ray. This close to FAA HQ? im disinclined at this juncture to double down on my virtue signaling on that open ramp. Im gonna wait until i can bring the darned thing back to home plate, but i think im done for the year. I got some decisions to make, mostly because i dont want to lose my hangar (if i did id just quit completely until retirement). So we ll see.

Ed Haywood said:
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I spent 5 days stuck in a hotel room in Laurinburg NC waiting on a new voltage regulator and alternator for my Decathlon. Was all set to jump start and fly 3 hours day VFR home when an FAA maintenance inspector walked up and stated I could not take off because the original type certificate included an electrical system. There were literally 2 human beings within one mile of that plane on a Saturday morning; me, and Mr FAA guy who just randomly walked up.
Click to expand...

yup, standard toolbaggery from the self important brigade. Thats why im gonna lay low until i can swap over.
 
malichite said:
I've flown about every type of RV out there thats worth flying and love them all. The 6/7/and 9 all suck in nose wheel configuration. The gear box for the mains hits you right in the calf. The tailwheel versions are very well mannered though and super comfortable.
Click to expand...

Just how bad are the nosewheels on those? I got a comparative insurance quote from an agent who was very helpful, and found out that the nosewheel was cheaper enough to not be a "must have" factor, but enough to be an enticing factor. The kicker was that the transition training requirements on the t/w were double.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Oh I hear ya, we're on the same page. In the confines of my hangar, all day Ray. This close to FAA HQ? im disinclined at this juncture to double down on my virtue signaling on that open ramp. Im gonna wait until i can bring the darned thing back to home plate, but i think im done for the year. I got some decisions to make, mostly because i dont want to lose my hangar (if i did id just quit completely until retirement). So we ll see.



yup, standard toolbaggery from the self important brigade. Thats why im gonna lay low until i can swap over.
Click to expand...

Effing send it!
 
LoLPilot said:
Just how bad are the nosewheels on those? I got a comparative insurance quote from an agent who was very helpful, and found out that the nosewheel was cheaper enough to not be a "must have" factor, but enough to be an enticing factor. The kicker was that the transition training requirements on the t/w were double.
Click to expand...

The nosewheels are fine. I have an -8A. Good landing technique- increasing back pressure, plane settles onto the runway and hold full aft stick on rollout and taxi - and there won’t be any issues. I’ve seen too many guys three-point nosedragger RVs or force them onto the runway following a too-fast approach, followed by a bounce. If you’re on grass, make soft field takeoffs and landings.
 
LoLPilot said:
Just how bad are the nosewheels on those? I got a comparative insurance quote from an agent who was very helpful, and found out that the nosewheel was cheaper enough to not be a "must have" factor, but enough to be an enticing factor. The kicker was that the transition training requirements on the t/w were double.
Click to expand...

In reading the comments on how to land a nose wheel equipped RV, it sounds pretty much the same as a three point landing in a taildragger. In the taildragger you can three point or wheel land depending on conditions and there is never a nosewheel to deal with or maintain / upgrade or fix. The fact that these planes practically need an aftermarket solution entitled “anti splat” should tell you something. I’ve only owned three planes so far, two nose draggers and an RV4. Over the years I have spent more more money and downtime on nosegear related issues than all other issues combined. But I’ve never had to do anything other than grease my tailwheel.

Also, don’t shy away just because of transition training; I got mine done in 2-days and regardless of how many days it takes it will be good experience.
 
Last edited:
Johnbo said:
In reading the comments on how to land a nose wheel equipped RV, it sounds pretty much the same as a three point landing in a taildragger. In the taildragger you can three point or wheel land depending on conditions and there is never a nosewheel to deal with or maintain / upgrade or fix. The fact that these planes practically need an aftermarket solution entitled “anti splat” should tell you something. I’ve only owned three planes so far, two nose draggers and an RV4. Over the years I have spent more more money and downtime on nosegear related issues than all other issues combined. But I’ve never had to do anything other than grease my tailwheel.

don’t shy away just because if transition training; I got mine done in 2-days and regardless of how many days it takes it will be good experience.
Click to expand...
And I wouldn't shy away from either configuration of an RV.
They're great planes.
For the record, I've spent $0 on nosewheel-related issues in over 15 years of flying.
 
Johnbo said:
In reading the comments on how to land a nose wheel equipped RV, it sounds pretty much the same as a three point landing in a taildragger. In the taildragger you can three point or wheel land depending on conditions and there is never a nosewheel to deal with or maintain / upgrade or fix. The fact that these planes practically need an aftermarket solution entitled “anti splat” should tell you something. I’ve only owned three planes so far, two nose draggers and an RV4. Over the years I have spent more more money and downtime on nosegear related issues than all other issues combined. But I’ve never had to do anything other than grease my tailwheel.

Also, don’t shy away just because of transition training; I got mine done in 2-days and regardless of how many days it takes it will be good experience.
Click to expand...

I’m with Adam on this one. I have a 9A and have had zero problems with the nose wheel. My plane has 1300 hours on it. As long your technique is sound you should be good to go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Peter Anderson said:
I’m with Adam on this one. I have a 9A and have had zero problems with the nose wheel. My plane has 1300 hours on it. As long your technique is sound you should be good to go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Fair enough. My dealings with nose draggers are not in any of the RVs just my overall experience which may not fully apply due to the RV design. You probably can’t go wrong with either one but if you are going to pick a taildragger an RV is a well behaved one with good visibility on the ground and in the air.
 
Here’s my one gripe about nosewheel RVs, specifically the RV-8A; it’s a goofy, weird looking airplane. The taildragger -8 looks and flies just right, but put a nosewheel on it and it just makes me cringe… I know, I’m a taildragger snob.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I spent 5 days stuck in a hotel room in Laurinburg NC waiting on a new voltage regulator and alternator for my Decathlon. Was all set to jump start and fly 3 hours day VFR home when an FAA maintenance inspector walked up and stated I could not take off because the original type certificate included an electrical system. There were literally 2 human beings within one mile of that plane on a Saturday morning; me, and Mr FAA guy who just randomly walked up.
Click to expand...
The FAS isn’t happy until you’re not happy!:mad:
 
jbDC9 said:
Here’s my one gripe about nosewheel RVs, specifically the RV-8A; it’s a goofy, weird looking airplane. The taildragger -8 looks and flies just right, but put a nosewheel on it and it just makes me cringe… I know, I’m a taildragger snob.
Click to expand...

I guess the other thing I did not consider in my replies is ground clearance… at my airport which is all grass I actually have to taxi up over a berm, along side of a tree and then down the hill to get in and out of the hanger I would not try that with any nose wheel aircraft. That probably is not the norm for most people but I still think you get more versatility with any Taildragger when it comes to prop clearance.
 
jbDC9 said:
Here’s my one gripe about nosewheel RVs, specifically the RV-8A; it’s a goofy, weird looking airplane. The taildragger -8 looks and flies just right, but put a nosewheel on it and it just makes me cringe… I know, I’m a taildragger snob.
Click to expand...

I know a guy with an 8A; he wants to swap for an RV-8. Says the nosegear on the 8A has a reputation for being fragile, and he doesn't like doing unimproved fields with it.
 
texasclouds said:
Not even a single overhead break? I am dissapoint.
Click to expand...

My only "overhead break" was when I lost my mechanical fuel pump at 5500' MSL. :D

malichite said:
I've flown about every type of RV out there thats worth flying and love them all. The 6/7/and 9 all suck in nose wheel configuration. The gear box for the mains hits you right in the calf. The tailwheel versions are very well mannered though and super comfortable.
Click to expand...

How tall are you? The main gear weldments on my recently sold -9A never came anywhere near my calves...I'm 6'2". They also make exceptional cupholders.

They do sell quickly, and maintain their value well. I sold mine in two days via a VAF classified ad. Mine was a lower-spec build (VFR, FP prop, GRT EFIS, minimal interior, but with a flashy paint scheme) and the sale price basically paid for all components I had bought.

I had a challenging and memorable flight from SoCal to eastern Oklahoma to deliver the aircraft to its new owner. 1300 miles in one day is a lot of time in a little airplane!! Especially the leg from Grants-Milan, NM to Pampa,TX, fighting turbulence the whole way.

I slept like a baby afterward...woke up every hour and cried for my mama! :)
 
I admit to just "liking" tailwheel planes. I think they look prettier and I'll admit that I like to be able to say I can fly them. I enjoyed the endorsement and my practice the other week.

However, the insurance premium difference is enough to make one consider how important looking cool is, and also one of the posters on this thread mentioned the scenario of a long cross country flight after work one day and arriving after dark at my destination while I was tired, and would I want to have to worry about landing even a well-mannered taildragger. I think that's a valid concern. For the right plane I'd definitely go either one, and I can say that the heart wants it to be aiming up towards the sky while it sits on the ramp, but the head says they both fly...
 
LoLPilot said:
I admit to just "liking" tailwheel planes. I think they look prettier and I'll admit that I like to be able to say I can fly them. I enjoyed the endorsement and my practice the other week.

However, the insurance premium difference is enough to make one consider how important looking cool is, and also one of the posters on this thread mentioned the scenario of a long cross country flight after work one day and arriving after dark at my destination while I was tired, and would I want to have to worry about landing even a well-mannered taildragger. I think that's a valid concern. For the right plane I'd definitely go either one, and I can say that the heart wants it to be aiming up towards the sky while it sits on the ramp, but the head says they both fly...
Click to expand...
The thing is, if you get the RV and decide it isn't for you after 6 months or 6 years, you can likely sell it within weeks of listing it and try something else with little to no loss on investment (less adjustment for time on the engine). It's one of the few experimental aircraft that can claim that.
 
LoLPilot said:
I admit to just "liking" tailwheel planes. I think they look prettier and I'll admit that I like to be able to say I can fly them. I enjoyed the endorsement and my practice the other week.

However, the insurance premium difference is enough to make one consider how important looking cool is,.
Click to expand...

My premium is <$1,000/yr. I think it is below $900. That's for tailwheel RV-6. I honestly doubt it would be any lower with a nosewheel. I'm sure I paid a premium when I only had 12 hours or so of tailwheel time and did the first flight in my RV, but I never thought the premiums were out of line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top