Transition from PA28 to RV-10

WannFly

WannFly

Final Approach
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
6,553
Location
KLZU
Display Name
Display name:
Priyo
Still kicking tires...

Anyone transitioned from a PA 28-181(or it’s high wing twin) to -10? I hear -10 is fairly slippery and it is fast, I mean anything that climbs around my cruise speed of 115 is fast for me, but people generally cruise at 160 or more, that’s plenty fast for me with shorter wings on -10. Hows the low speed handling? Numbers i see is 90 pattern entry, then 80 and nothing short of 70 on final and keep some power in while touching down. It also climbs like a rocket ship compared to mine.

PA is very docile and pretty forgiving, -10 might not be as forgiving

Thoughts?
 
Mine's a -9A, but I got current in a Cherokee 140 before flying the new bird.

The two biggest things that stand out:

1) Staying ahead of the plane. It's gonna cover ground a lot faster, so you have to adjust and get your ATIS earlier, make radio calls sooner, etc.
2) Slowing it down to flap deployment speed. The delta between performance cruise at 155 KTAS and Vfe (78 KIAS) is quite large, so I start reducing power and increasing pitch 10 miles out,
instead of on downwind with the Cherokee. I can put in 10 degrees flaps at 85 KIAS, though.

Again, can't speak to the -10, but the -9A is an ultra-docile aircraft. It's also a great glider, so I have to make sure the idle speed is set low so it doesn't float excessively in the flare.
 
Not slippery, cruises fast, more docile than the rest of the RV line as a cruiser should be. But still much lighter on the controls and more fun to fly than any certified aircraft in the class.

I have no Piper experience. Trained in Cessnas, some Mooney time, owned a Maule and lots of glider time. The RV10 is a piece of cake. You just need a high performance endorsement.

Get a flight in one and you’ll see.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
I transitioned from a Tomahawk to an RV-6 with a fixed pitch prop. The -6 slows down way "worse" than anything with a constant speed prop and is a lot more sensitive on the controls than the Tomahawk. The transition was very easy.

Your challenge with the -10 is (as far as I can tell), there is exactly one -10 on the planet where someone is doing "above board" transition training and has gone through all of the loopholes to get the airplane registered for that activity (with the proper insurance and the letter allowing the owner to rent out the experimental for training). That is Van's factory demonstrator and is A) in Oregon and B) isn't terribly easy to schedule.

There are other options, but most of 'em involve doing something with the airplane that isn't covered under the insurance or isn't legal by the strict definition.
 
kyleb said:
I transitioned from a Tomahawk to an RV-6 with a fixed pitch prop. The -6 slows down way "worse" than anything with a constant speed prop and is a lot more sensitive on the controls than the Tomahawk. The transition was very easy.

Your challenge with the -10 is (as far as I can tell), there is exactly one -10 on the planet where someone is doing "above board" transition training and has gone through all of the loopholes to get the airplane registered for that activity (with the proper insurance and the letter allowing the owner to rent out the experimental for training). That is Van's factory demonstrator and is A) in Oregon and B) isn't terribly easy to schedule.

There are other options, but most of 'em involve doing something with the airplane that isn't covered under the insurance or isn't legal by the strict definition.
Click to expand...

Could you elaborate on the above board training part. Not looking at acro, there is a vans recommend CFI in MSP area who does transition training, inspection, first flight etc. he doesn’t own a -10, but have good experience with them, or so I hear.
 
WannFly said:
Could you elaborate on the above board training part. Not looking at acro, there is a vans recommend CFI in MSP area who does transition training, inspection, first flight etc. he doesn’t own a -10, but have good experience with them, or so I hear.
Click to expand...

The issue is that the -6, -7, -8, and -14 are all similar enough where if you're current in one, most insurance will transition you without additional requirements to another. The -9 may be "close enough" too. But the -10 is a different animal - it is bigger and less responsive. So all of the underwriters want you to have a sign-off in the -10 to write a policy. I have 1100 RV-6 hours and even the most flexible underwriter wants me to have 2 hours of RV-10 dual before they will underwrite an in-motion policy.

At that point, the challenge is finding an RV-10 to use for instruction. There are two -10's with the letter of authorization that I'm aware of (where you can pay to rent the airplane for training), but one guy is on sabbatical. Others have done it, but none are active. So (unless you use the factory -10 in Oregon), you're trying to get a buddy to "loan" you his RV-10 to get dual in (which the insurance won't like) and you can't pay him for the time on the airplane (can't legally lease out an experimental). Finding an instructor who has time in an RV-10 is another issue, but is more solveable than the airplane part.
 
@kyleb is mostly correct. My insurance company will accept a CFI with 25 hours in "any A-model" for checkouts and transitions in my RV-6A. They wont's accept the tail dragger time of this purpose.

You'll like get much better information on "the other forum" for transition training to a 10, since there are far more people who have done it over there.

Also, check with insurers as to their requirements for your RV transition. I did mine in my plane, but a friend of mine was finishing his 7A and I loaned him my 6A with the stipulations that he replaced the fuel and used MY CFI. I met him in person a few months later (now 3 years ago).

Get that sucker built, getting the transition training will be easier by comparison!
 
WannFly said:
Could you elaborate on the above board training part. Not looking at acro, there is a vans recommend CFI in MSP area who does transition training, inspection, first flight etc. he doesn’t own a -10, but have good experience with them, or so I hear.
Click to expand...

You are so far from needing to be talked out of anything!

Paying for dual training in a specific experimental type is not really something you can easily do per the regs. Some recent actions allow some exceptions but don’t worry.

You will need the high performance endorsement (anything over 200hp and you want the constant speed prop). Not a big deal.

Transition in practically any RV will prepare you for the ‘10. It’s more lively than anything you’ve ever flown but more docile than any other RV perhaps excepting the ‘9 and ‘12. I suspect someone will exercise the regulatory exceptions (for lack of a better description) on a RV-14 which would be perfect for all involved.

It’s an easy, honest aircraft. I was flying my Maule 7 days a week right before my first flight. Doesn’t seem like the ideal or even a good transition path but i had no concerns. I had 10 minutes of some follow-thru stick time on a ‘10 several years earlier and I knew it could easily be done. Well, given the proficiency I had developed on the somewhat challenging tail wheeled fixed pitch Maule in the weeks leading up to my test flight, it turned out that I could do no wrong in the ‘10. I didn’t even come close to bouncing or otherwise missing a landing for at least the first 6 months. Slowly I lost that and I’ve bounced a few since but what I learned is that 1) Proficiency is primarily about recent stick time and 2) the ‘10 is a very easy plane to fly and land well.

There just aren’t any tricks or dark corners on it. The Mooney had a few. The Maule had more than a few. The ‘10 is easier and a lot more fun due to the light and responsive controls. It’s not designed for acro and I will never do any in one, but I know it would do a fine job of the basics.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
SoCal RV Flyer said:
The delta between performance cruise at 155 KTAS and Vfe (78 KIAS) is quite large, so I start reducing power and increasing pitch 10 miles out,
instead of on downwind with the Cherokee. I can put in 10 degrees flaps at 85 KIAS, though
Click to expand...
Wow, that is a big delta.. any reason for it other than "that's just how they designed it"? When you are at 90 knots do you need a fairly high deck angle to keep level flight? How often do people bust the speed and bent metal?

In the Skyhawk and Cherokee unless you are in a nose dive you can pretty much start using flaps more or less right away. That was an adjustment for me in the Cirrus, slowing from 150-160 KIAS to 120 for the first notch and being vigilant of that restriction. Later models got bumped to 150 knots.. which almost feels *too* fast and may encourage, IMHO, sloppy flying
 
You should build the Rv-10. Get an older mooney to hold you over until then. Transition should be fairly lateral from a mooney. :p
 
kyleb said:
The issue is that the -6, -7, -8, and -14 are all similar enough where if you're current in one, most insurance will transition you without additional requirements to another. The -9 may be "close enough" too. But the -10 is a different animal - it is bigger and less responsive. So all of the underwriters want you to have a sign-off in the -10 to write a policy. I have 1100 RV-6 hours and even the most flexible underwriter wants me to have 2 hours of RV-10 dual before they will underwrite an in-motion policy.

At that point, the challenge is finding an RV-10 to use for instruction. There are two -10's with the letter of authorization that I'm aware of (where you can pay to rent the airplane for training), but one guy is on sabbatical. Others have done it, but none are active. So (unless you use the factory -10 in Oregon), you're trying to get a buddy to "loan" you his RV-10 to get dual in (which the insurance won't like) and you can't pay him for the time on the airplane (can't legally lease out an experimental). Finding an instructor who has time in an RV-10 is another issue, but is more solveable than the airplane part.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the details, I will talk to my insurance gal. We did talk about no motion coverage while building, but not so much about in motion. Think they need 10 hr in type.
 
WannFly said:
Thanks for the details, I will talk to my insurance gal. We did talk about no motion coverage while building, but not so much about in motion. Think they need 10 hr in type.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about insurance and sign-off's. It is a known unknown at this point. In 4 or 5 years when you complete the RV-10, the landscape will have changed and you'll figure it out at that time. Kind of like planning your first flight. Do it then. Circumstances will change between now and then...
 
Tantalum said:
Cool! What's your main reason? Looking for more speed? Just curious.
Click to expand...

4 seat traveler, will probably fill the 4th seat 1% of the time, other times just junk to carry around with 2 upfront. For long XC, I could use some speed, lots of gizmo.... so ideally a cirrus, but ain’t no $$ for even a relatively new one. I priced out new enterior, panel and paint for my PA 28, just not worth putting so much in it at 120kts. Not worth to me at least. So essentially looking for something that I can putter around in and go places without breaking the bank so to speak and spread out the cost over 3-4 years so mostly it’s paid off.
 
kyleb said:
I wouldn't worry about insurance and sign-off's. It is a known unknown at this point. In 4 or 5 years when you complete the RV-10, the landscape will have changed and you'll figure it out at that time. Kind of like planning your first flight. Do it then. Circumstances will change between now and then...
Click to expand...

Yah I am thinking way out ahead... but it’s 003 OVC... got to do something
 
WannFly said:
4 seat traveler, will probably fill the 4th seat 1% of the time, other times just junk to carry around with 2 upfront. For long XC, I could use some speed, lots of gizmo.... so ideally a cirrus, but ain’t no $$ for even a relatively new one. I priced out new enterior, panel and paint for my PA 28, just not worth putting so much in it at 120kts. Not worth to me at least. So essentially looking for something that I can putter around in and go places without breaking the bank so to speak and spread out the cost over 3-4 years so mostly it’s paid off.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. The Archer really is a great platform, I loved doing all my primary and IR work in it and enjoy the safety pilot time I get to do in them now. Good, solid plane.. but if you are looking for longer and faster trips whirring along in the 117-123 knot regime starts to get boring, especially with a headwind!

WannFly said:
but it’s 003 OVC... got to do something
Click to expand...
Practice instrument approaches? jk!
 
Tantalum said:
Wow, that is a big delta.. any reason for it other than "that's just how they designed it"? When you are at 90 knots do you need a fairly high deck angle to keep level flight? How often do people bust the speed and bent metal?
Click to expand...
It’s good to plan out descents and arrivals just a bit but it’s not critical or difficult. Here’s what a my typical point A to point B flight profile (a note about flaps - full up flaps is actually a slight reflex or negative position. This is where the plane goes fastest, cruise climbs and descends best. The 0 position is good for normal takeoffs, 1/2 flaps for short fields and pattern flying, full flaps for landing):

Takeoff with 0 or 1/2 flaps and full power and 2700rpms. I reduce rpms to 2600 once obstacles are cleared and go to reflex flaps for a normal climb. Normal climb is 130 IAS which turns into 120-130IAS or 150-155 TAS at altitude.

Typically cruise at 6-9, sometimes higher, never lower if I can help it. Cruise at 155 to 162 TAS, 2200 to 2300 squared (2200 rpms 22”) LOP @ 10 to 11.2 gph. I can go slower at lower fuel burns and faster at higher burns.

Descend at 2000-2200 rpms and hold the MP at 23” by pulling back the power starting at 5,000 or so at 160+TAS. I keep it very LOP during descent to keep fuel consumption at a minimum.

At 5 - 10 miles or passing the IAF, I reduce power to 19” and go to zero flaps when leveling out. From there I reduce power to descend and or slow, take the prop up to 2500 and don’t touch it again.

I’ll fly the entire IAP like that with speeds between 100-120IAS and zero flaps until the FAF or breaking out. Plenty of time and ability to slow to under 90 for flaps. The flat pitch prop slows it quickly when you pull off some power, that’s something you don’t have with fixed pitch props. I’ve gotten carried away with keeping the speed up and been asked to slow it down “to follow the Airbus”.

Flying the visual I’m comfortable flying it tight or wide. 1/2 flaps come on in the turn to base, full when ready. Flying it tight, you can always pull some G in a tight turn to slow it down fast.

Lot’s of numbers and strange power/prop terminology. Don’t let it bother you. I learned almost all of it just flying the ‘10 during the flyoff, which btw is flown a bit different at first where you just run it hard and rich and hot.

OP, you are going to love it!





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Tantalum said:
Makes sense. The Archer really is a great platform, I loved doing all my primary and IR work in it and enjoy the safety pilot time I get to do in them now. Good, solid plane.. but if you are looking for longer and faster trips whirring along in the 117-123 knot regime starts to get boring, especially with a headwind!


Practice instrument approaches? jk!
Click to expand...

0 degree C and mist ....
 
Tantalum said:
Wow, that is a big delta.. any reason for it other than "that's just how they designed it"? When you are at 90 knots do you need a fairly high deck angle to keep level flight? How often do people bust the speed and bent metal?
Click to expand...

I think it's just a factor of having large flaps with a lot of surface area, and the whole strength vs. weight equation. Quite often when I'm approaching an unfamiliar airport, I'll have her slowed down with all flaps in by the time I enter downwind and fly at a nice, steady 75 kts or so, just to reduce the workload. I'm definitely pitching up at 90 kts, but not to the point where vision is really compromised over the cowling. It's like kicking the La-Z-Boy recliner back to the first notch. :D Controls do feel decidedly mushier in that 70-90 kt realm...different enough in control feel that it was spooky for the first couple of laps around the pattern.

I haven't heard about anyone doing damage to a -9's flaps by overspeeding, and I am guilty of going as fast as 85-86 kts with them fully extended, due to the occasional distraction.
 
Didn’t you just redo the panel on your plane? :p
 
@Bill Watson thanks for the detailed write up and explanation!! Even though I drive a Cirrus I actually do understand many of those terms LOL but that makes perfect sense. Really cool that you actually have a slight "negative" on the flap.. seems like that helps the camber of the wing overall be slightly more efficient in certain flight regimes
 
All these pulling and pushing the blue knob reminds me I no nothing about CS prop.... need some HP time
 
WannFly said:
All these pulling and pushing the blue knob reminds me I no nothing about CS prop.... need some HP time
Click to expand...
personally I wasn't that impressed with the whole blueknob experience. It is absolutely nothing like driving a manual car. There's a 182 in the club I fly sometimes that you basically just set it from a handful of different RPM settings depending on where you in flight, and otherwise leave it alone

to me it is a kind of like having two different flap switches, one for each wing. It's kind of neat, and I could see why some people might think it's good to have, but frankly I don't find it adds any real value. And that's probably why Cirrus and I think a handful of others have done away with it
 
Tantalum said:
personally I wasn't that impressed with the whole blueknob experience. It is absolutely nothing like driving a manual car. There's a 182 in the club I fly sometimes that you basically just set it from a handful of different RPM settings depending on where you in flight, and otherwise leave it alone

to me it is a kind of like having two different flap switches, one for each wing. It's kind of neat, and I could see why some people might think it's good to have, but frankly I don't find it adds any real value. And that's probably why Cirrus and I think a handful of others have done away with it
Click to expand...

Yes, Cirrus seems to have done a nice job with the mechanical linkage.

It’s nice to have something to do while Otto otherwise flies the plane. It will be nice to have a truly optimized single lever throttle... I think.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Tantalum said:
@Bill Watson thanks for the detailed write up and explanation!! Even though I drive a Cirrus I actually do understand many of those terms LOL but that makes perfect sense. Really cool that you actually have a slight "negative" on the flap.. seems like that helps the camber of the wing overall be slightly more efficient in certain flight regimes
Click to expand...
Welcome.

All 4 aircraft I’ve owned have had reflex flaps (PIK20b, LS6b, Maule MX180a and the ‘10). Never leave home without it.

I’ve really been tuned into laminar flow airfoils and such because of glider racing. Changing the camber of the wing at different speeds/AOAs can be a big deal.

The PIK20b (70s vintage) was sort of a first generation high performance sailplane with an early laminar airfoil. It didn’t tolerate rain well and it needed 3 or 4 flap settings (2 reflexed) with a complex aileron mixing system for optimum performance across the 60 to 140 knot cruising range while still being landable. They didn’t put spoilers on it because it they disrupted the sensitive profile so it had 90 deg flaps for landing, which was far from ideal.

The LS6 had a more advanced airfoil that could tolerate rain, bugs and spoilers while maintaining it’s high performance. Fewer flap and flaperon settings for optimum performance. Sweet, easy to fly aircraft that won many races in more competent hands.

The Maule had reflex flaps simply to dump lift. A big fat flat bottom airfoil that had too much lift for good cruising speeds. The reflex flaps were supposed to increase cruise speeds but they didn’t. The normal flap positions should have allowed steep approaches but they really didn’t do that either. Cessna 150 flaps were far superior. But the reflex position was good for descents and high crosswind conditions. They basically just reduced the effective AOA and total lift of the wing. It was a donkey of an airplane - big fun but performance, meh.

The RV10 has what seems to me to be a very advanced airfoil with good laminar flow characteristics in the sense that it performs well with all the humps and bumps of aluminum construction, water, ice or whatever. (Cirrus definitely falls in the advanced category due to the magic of computer optimized airfoils and composite construction.) The reflex position is ‘normal’ on the plane and provides the best profile for all speeds over say 90 or 100 knots (took me awhile to figure that out). It’s important in the build and rigging to get the wing tips and ailerons lined up with the reflex flap position for best performance from what I’ve seen.

To me, it’s all about the wing. That’s what makes Mooneys, especially the early small engined ones, such performers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
The 10 is a straight forward nice flying airplane. While you are building it would be nice if you can find someone with a 6,7,8 or 9 that would let you fly with them a bit as all RVs fly pretty much the same. A good example is a friend that bought a 6A right after he got his PPL in a 172. We transitioned him in about 10 hours. After a couple hundred hours in the 6 he bought a 10 and it only took about 5 hours to get him flying it.
When you build yours don't skimp on the engine. A nice IO-540 with flow ported cylinders will put out over 300hp. You are building it to go fast so why not. When you are done find a good test pilot to to the initial few hours. There has been a lot of experimentals have been wrecked on first flights just because the builder wanted to say he flew it first. That same guy could probably do a good job of trasitioning you in the airplane. The FAA has made it legal for the owner/builder to get dual during the test phase. A lot of insurance companies will also allow a non CFI with a lot of time in type to do your training. Keep at it as there nothing better than flying an airplane that you built.
 
I went from a PA-28-140 Cherokee to my current RV-7A and the transition was a breeze. All the RVs have much more responsive controls than the PA-28 series. Learn to fly with 3 finger-tips instead of a hand or two on the yoke. When slow, go to a full grip as controls (mentioned above) are less responsive but still more so than a Cherokee. Slowing down takes practice but I now come in rather fast and slowly lower flaps on final and bleed off speed (towered field). If I have to do a pattern, I may go full flaps on down-wind or do a 10-20-40 on DW, base and final. Flaps are electric so that's a 2 count, 2 count and 4 count.
 
I don't know why everybody has to make it so complicated to slow an airplane down to enter the airport environment. First off you have to know the power setting for downwind. On the RV7 it is 14"mp 1/2 flaps that gives 90 mph. So I plan on hitting pattern altitude about 4 miles out pull the power back to 14" level off and add 1/2 flap at flap speed and trim. At that point I will be turning downwind. When I'm ready to turn base I pull throttle to idle, push the prop in add full flap and trim for 70mph fly final level off and flare. Simple two power changes two trim changes. This works for any airplane by the way fast or slow. When I turn downwind I'm configured for downwind no trying to get rid of excess speed in the pattern. Also a normal landing in an RV is full flaps none of this half flap BS going 90 like I see all the time. I have several hundred hours in all the RV series and fly a 7 and 10 regularly. Picture is of me and my friend Harry on his 100th birthday in an RV7 a couple of months ago.
 

Attachments

  • harry.jpg
    harry.jpg
    118.2 KB · Views: 37
Last edited:
Transitioned from PA28-180/181 and C177RG type a/c over to RV-7A after an hour and half of transition training in a RV-6A. After a few hundred hours in the -7A, transitioned from RV-7A and C182RG to the -10 with zero time in the -10. It was an easy transition.

-10 is lighter on the controls than a 182RG, but other than that it's a similar feel as far as size - the speeds are just faster. Transition from PA28 to the -10 would be similar to a transition from PA28 to a 182RG type a/c in that it's bigger, heavier, slightly more complex system-wise, but other than that no big deal. There is nothing 'special' about the transition to the -10.

As @yakdriver mentioned, it's all about speeds (regardless of whether it's a 182RG or a RV-10). Know the speeds and the power numbers required to hit those speeds and you'll be fine.
 
SoCal RV Flyer said:
2) Slowing it down to flap deployment speed. The delta between performance cruise at 155 KTAS and Vfe (78 KIAS) is quite large, so I start reducing power and increasing pitch 10 miles out, instead of on downwind with the Cherokee. I can put in 10 degrees flaps at 85 KIAS, though.
Click to expand...

78 KIAS?! :eek: Hopefully that's full flaps.

Typo? Or someone with a low speed? I see someone's -10 POH and the have 96 KIAS for the 1/2 flaps and then 87 KIAS for full flaps.
 
WannFly said:
Still kicking tires...

...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Just another plane. Yes, things will happen faster/quicker. You have to plan your descents starting further out, but often the same time from your destination. If you need to descend 8,000' and you descend at 500 fpm, it's still 16 minutes. It's just that 16 minutes can easily be 48 nm away instead of 32 nm. A good tailwind up at 10k or 11k and it's fun how far away the descent is at 500 fpm, even more fun is when WingX starts showing the descent rate (at 200 fpm). I see that sometimes north of Knoxville, or even the north side of TN when going to PDK (Atlanta). I flying SR22s and a Baron, so similar speeds to a RV-10.

If that's a good plane for you, shop away. Then get some dual training time. Good to learn the plane and avionics, especially if you have your IR. That should satisfy insurance needs. It can be harder getting it in an experimental aircraft than certified, but doable.
 
Skyrys62 said:
You may have looked at these already, but aren't the SR20's pretty competitive to the RV-10 in most circumstances (other than climb rate)?

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/28323073/2004-cirrus-sr20-g2
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/27328305/2003-cirrus-sr20
https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/22769535/2002-cirrus-sr20
Click to expand...

I thought the 10 pretty much spanked the SR20 in performance but I could be wrong. I thought it was closer to 22 performance
 
CC268 said:
I thought the 10 pretty much spanked the SR20 in performance but I could be wrong. I thought it was closer to 22 performance
Click to expand...

Most people seem to cruise their -10's in the 160-170 knot window, with the guys who focus on fuel economy being towards the bottom of the range and people who really want to go fast hitting 180 knots at the expense of ridiculous fuel burns. I think the SR-20 is a bit slower than that and doesn't climb as well.
 
RV10 has more useful load, more room in the cockpit and is faster than the Cirrus. Flys nicer too. My friend's does 180kts on about 12-13gph. Flap speed on all the RVs is 100-110mph. I have another friend with a clean RV10 with a Lycon built IO-540 and he gets 185-190kts on 15gph. Good solid airplane. You can't go wrong. You and your dad need to build one Carlin.
 
Skyrys62 said:
You may have looked at these already, but aren't the SR20's pretty competitive to the RV-10 in most circumstances (other than climb rate)?
Click to expand...

RV-10 completely destroys any Cirrus in the STOL numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top