IMC experience

ok, I think I know what will help make the decision.

Can I get comments on IMC EXPERIENCE in the RV-7 vs RV-9.

I think in many of the threads about the choice the message was being lost that would help make a decision. Yes, I'm sure either aircraft is a great IFR or cross country platform. The difference is time spent in IMC.

Thanks for the guidance from IMB experience.


Michael B.

IMC in an RV-9A with a Dynon Skyview and auto pilot is very stable. Add in a TSO'ed GPS / VOR (Garmin 430W) and ADSB and you would well equipped for IMC flight.

The RV-9A tip up canopy does leak a bit in heavy precip.

I would not want to fly in icing conditions.

One thing that I did not anticipate was how much reflection the Dynon Skyview would have on the inside of the canopy at night or in low visibility, even at the lowest setting

I don't have experience in either a 7 or 9, but I have IMC experience in a 6 and 8. In the 6,7,8 at least you should consider a good auto pilot a requirement for anything other than punching up and down through a layer.

That said, I have no issues droning along for hours IMC in either of mine. Its not as stable a platform as my old Grummans were, hence the a/p requirement.

Planning is important. It can take a little while to get slowed down, especially if ATC keeps you up at altitude until right before the FAF as they did with me shooting an RNAV approach 2 weeks ago.

You definitely can get IMC experience. You just have to be VERY selective about what IMC you are going to experience. As said, the tip-up leaks like a sieve. So when you have water dripping off your avionics you will need a "dry" back up. Also, the tip up fogs up pretty quickly. So even after you exit IMC you may still have to stay on instruments. As far as hand flying in IMC, it just depends on your experience. It can be done and done safely. Just a ton of work in an already high workload environment. The are solutions to every IMC situation. I would just avoid it if I can, or make sure that I always have an "out".

apkp777 said:

You definitely can get IMC experience. You just have to be VERY selective about what IMC you are going to experience. As said, the tip-up leaks like a sieve. So when you have water dripping off your avionics you will need a "dry" back up. Also, the tip up fogs up pretty quickly. So even after you exit IMC you may still have to stay on instruments. As far as hand flying in IMC, it just depends on your experience. It can be done and done safely. Just a ton of work in an already high workload environment. The are solutions to every IMC situation. I would just avoid it if I can, or make sure that I always have an "out".

Click to expand...

Really interesting about mention of the tip-up. I had not thought about that at all but the intent was always for a slider. And the intent is autopilot but I like to think in terms of failure and having to fly by hand.

Keep em' coming. This is exactly what I was looking for.

Cheers.

Michael B.

apkp777 said:

You definitely can get IMC experience. You just have to be VERY selective about what IMC you are going to experience. As said, the tip-up leaks like a sieve. So when you have water dripping off your avionics you will need a "dry" back up. Also, the tip up fogs up pretty quickly. So even after you exit IMC you may still have to stay on instruments. As far as hand flying in IMC, it just depends on your experience. It can be done and done safely. Just a ton of work in an already high workload environment. The are solutions to every IMC situation. I would just avoid it if I can, or make sure that I always have an "out".

Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments, it reinforces my plan to include heated defogger air for my tip up. Also I have located everything possible behind the sub panel and I am prepared to cover the remaining avionics.

Regarding leaking - what efforts have you made to seal and what thwarted them? I have built some bridges over the hinges to enable continuous seal to the skin. The challenge is the space and geometry there.

BillL said:

Regarding leaking - what efforts have you made to seal and what thwarted them? I have built some bridges over the hinges to enable continuous seal to the skin. The challenge is the space and geometry there.

Click to expand...

Bill,
I have a pretty good seal around the front of my tip-up. Basically, I taped the FWD flange with a Teflon tape to bridge all the gaps there, then installed a "bulb" seal. Still water comes in from somewhere, not sure where. Probably the hinges. I do have most of my avionics located between the panel and the sub-panel, so I am much more vulnerable to water. I have a "Kate's Kover over the top of the avionics. I could probably do more to make it water tight, I did by some new bulb seal from a vender at OSH and have yet to install it. Hopefully, it will be better.

1bigdog said:

Really interesting about mention of the tip-up. I had not thought about that at all but the intent was always for a slider. And the intent is autopilot but I like to think in terms of failure and having to fly by hand.

Keep em' coming. This is exactly what I was looking for.

Cheers.

Michael B.

Click to expand...

The problem with hand flying isn't so much maintaining the heading and altitude. The -9 is definitely stable enough for that. It's when you need a "third" hand that it's a problem. Making frequency changes while trying to read a chart, while entering a waypoint, while talking on the radio, etc, etc. In my cherokee, it wasn't too difficult to fly the airplane straight and level with just the rudder. My nine just likes to wander around. I try to pinch the stick between my thighs, but it's a challenge. I do have AP so really its not an issue with it working. I would not fly mine IFR without an AP. I generally don't fly IFR anyway, just because I am lazy and don't want to talk to anyone or listen and follow ATC instructions.

Michael,
I chose to build the RV-9 because I wanted a stable IFR traveler. I felt the RV-7 would be a little twitchy. Remember this a high performance airplane and will not be as stable as a 172 or Cherokee. However I planned my panel for IFR and I have some time IMC since I finished the plane and I have no regrets. I would fly this plane to minimums. Smooth IMC is easy but like any plane convective IMC is a handful. Thank goodness the A/P is rock solid. I have the slider and no water issues.

RV7 is quite easy to hand fly to minimums following the needles.

Really really really need an autopilot to allow the pilot to do anything other than flying the plane. The craft are too responsive for turning your head away from the gages to look at a chart or write notes or fool with a touch screen.

In regards to the tip-up leaks, yes, they leak. The challenge is to direct the water to a place you don't care and keep it off the electronics. That can be done.

I flew IFR (as copilot) to Oshkosh and back in my buddy's Navion. He just installed an autopilot and we have both fallen hopelessly in love with it. I have been flying my -4 for 13 years (VFR only) and could not imagine trying to hand fly it in IFR (and do everything else that's required of an IFR flight). Last year, we flew the Navion IFR (with a bunch of IMC) to Oshkosh without the autopilot and used paper charts and approach plates. This year we had the autopilot, Foreflight and an iPad. It was a totally different trip.

The only downside was that I found myself loitering around the Tru Trak booth... It is fun to rib my buddy about his $20K S-Tec autopilot that is not quite as capable as a $3K experimental system. Definitely, install an autopilot.

IFR 9A tip-up.
Getting the IFR rating was one of the best things I have done - very satisfying learning and mastering (hopefully) the skills involved. I did all my IFR training in my 9A in the middle of an Australian summer! It was a steep learning curve but hand flying even in very turbulent conditions was doable. The main issue initially was holding a constant altitude.

Misting of the canopy can be an issue. I installed 3 computer fans in the glare shield in front of the pilot and they seem to have solved the problem. It took a bit of doing but my tip-up does not leak.

As others have said, install a good autopilot. Consider one that does not rely on an the EFIS for pitch and level information. If the EFIS fails or misbehaves (mine has) you will still have an autopilot capable of flying the aircraft.

I had to install different static ports as rain would get into and block the Vans ports causing erratic instrument readings including the pitch display on the Skyview.

Fin
9A Australia

IFR in an RV-7A

I fly a lot of IFR in my RV-7A, many time to mins. Yes, the autopilot allows you to do other things more easily as you really need to be on the panel all the time. As the the tip-up canopy, I don't have any leaks. There are things you can do to stop them (better drip edge seal, side rail water dams, etc). This is my third tip-up RV, and none leaked....

rzbill said:

RV7 is quite easy to hand fly to minimums following the needles.

Really really really need an autopilot to allow the pilot to do anything other than flying the plane. The craft are too responsive for turning your head away from the gages to look at a chart or write notes or fool with a touch screen.

In regards to the tip-up leaks, yes, they leak. The challenge is to direct the water to a place you don't care and keep it off the electronics. That can be done.

Click to expand...

Dean Pichon said:

I flew IFR (as copilot) to Oshkosh and back in my buddy's Navion. He just installed an autopilot and we have both fallen hopelessly in love with it. I have been flying my -4 for 13 years (VFR only) and could not imagine trying to hand fly it in IFR (and do everything else that's required of an IFR flight). Last year, we flew the Navion IFR (with a bunch of IMC) to Oshkosh without the autopilot and used paper charts and approach plates. This year we had the autopilot, Foreflight and an iPad. It was a totally different trip.

The only downside was that I found myself loitering around the Tru Trak booth... It is fun to rib my buddy about his $20K S-Tec autopilot that is not quite as capable as a $3K experimental system. Definitely, install an autopilot.

Click to expand...

Actually, what you are saying about the 3k exp AP was a huge selling feature for me.
But if I'm reading everyone correctly the IMC behaviour of the 9 vs 7 seems largely similar. Either is busy hand flying so AP is a must (obviously now need to find out what AP everyone is using). I'm not hearing anyone who has flown both in IMC for differences but sounds about the same.
BTW, my trainer, and what I now rent as PPL is the Archer. I used it for OTT and it was fairly Unstable in holding altitude because it always wanted to change RPM. That was busy doing a couple hours in IMC real and simulated.

Thanks all for the comments so far. Greatly appreciated.

Imho the Archer is much more stable - and therefore easier to hand fly in IMC - than either a -7 or a -10 (the only two RVs I've flown).

I have a decent amount of IMC time in my 8, and I've flown a few approaches in a friend's 9. To put it bluntly, the 9's roll response / stick forces feel like a Mack truck compared to the 8. I have some time in some fairly high performance jets without autopilots, and one 4 hour IFR flight in the 8 was enough to convince me to install an autopilot. I have time in the 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9. IMHO, the 9 is much more stable than the others (but I would still put an autopilot in)

Paige

Take a Look at the CAFE FOUNDATION reports

Roll rate of the 8 is approximately 2x that of the 9. I believe 7 and 8 share a common wing, correct? The span of the 6 or 4 is even shorter, so again, higher roll rate/lower stability.
I find myself not using the A/P in my 9A very often, even in IMC. Is it as stable as an Archer? No (28ft vs. 35ft span). But, it's extremely easy to fly on the gages. Now if I could only get my buddies to stop busting my chops because I'm al little slower than their 360 equipped 6's and 7's.
Terry, CFI
RV9A N323TP

I think you get the picture by now. If you are planning to fly in IMC conditions often or have a history in being "in the soup" with your flying for very long then the 9 is more stable due to the bigger wing. If you are use to a Cherokee or a Cessna then both are going to be much more "unstable" but I rather use the word precise. So the turns are more precise but so are the bumps and rocking around in turbulanace. I transitioned from a twin Cessna to a -7 . . . wow a big difference in handling the turbulance and in IMC conditions so do yourself a favor, whichever you choose make sure you have a nice autopilot. It is a must.... Now I'm sure some rock star pilot will come on here and say they hand fly a -7 in IMC all the time but we're not all TopGun pilots

BCP Boys said:

I think you get the picture by now. If you are planning to fly in IMC conditions often or have a history in being "in the soup" with your flying for very long then the 9 is more stable due to the bigger wing. If you are use to a Cherokee or a Cessna then both are going to be much more "unstable" but I rather use the word precise. So the turns are more precise but so are the bumps and rocking around in turbulanace. I transitioned from a twin Cessna to a -7 . . . wow a big difference in handling the turbulance and in IMC conditions so do yourself a favor, whichever you choose make sure you have a nice autopilot. It is a must.... Now I'm sure some rock star pilot will come on here and say they hand fly a -7 in IMC all the time but we're not all TopGun pilots

Click to expand...

Very much so I've got the picture now. Most of the postings elsewhere are for cross country VFR perspective which is why the question was specific to IMC. I've seen people comment elsewhere that the 2 would be similar. Actual IMC experience is telling me get the 9.
It did also help to hear about the stick response. Flew the Archer this morning in glass smooth skies si it's easy to forget just how forgiving and docile the Cherokee is. The 9 sounds closest to the mark for the mission.
As to how quick. The calculations suggest that in 3 hour legs there is only minutes difference between the 7 & 9. So unless I was **** bent on wanting aerobatic ....

I greatly appreciate all the constructive feedback from everyone.

Regards.

Michael B.

1bigdog said:

The 9 sounds closest to the mark for the mission.
As to how quick. The calculations suggest that in 3 hour legs there is only minutes difference between the 7 & 9. So unless I was **** bent on wanting aerobatic ....

Click to expand...

This has been a very interesting and educational thread. I drew a slightly different conclusion. My take was that unless you are already an IFR/IMC pro, no RV is sufficiently stable to hand fly without running the risk of pilot overload. I have only flown VFR in the RV-4 and only my -4, at that, so I have no relevant experience, but based on this thread it seems hard to downselect among Van's aircraft using IFR stability as a filter...

Thanks for a very interesting discussion.

Speed wise the 9 and 7 are comparable ...

Dean I would say what you are getting out of this thread is correct. The fact that the RVs are such incredible planes and handle so well is the exact reason why they are a handful in IMC. Even a pro can look at the radio to add a way point and any slight movement will get you off of heading and altitude, that's why almost every post here says to have an Autopilot in IMC.

Water on the avionics

We were trying to make an IFR departure out of COS in my tip up 6A about 10 days ago. Couldn't get the big knob on the Garmin 400W to move the curser and kept losing GPS position. Water had leaked past the canopy cover onto the avionics. Once we got everything dried out and ceiling went up to 700' we made it out with no problem next day. Next project is to build some diverters to shield those electronics from water. In the mean time I'll double cover the canopy.

John

jpowell13 said:

We were trying to make an IFR departure out of COS in my tip up 6A about 10 days ago. Couldn't get the big knob on the Garmin 400W to move the curser and kept losing GPS position. Water had leaked past the canopy cover onto the avionics. Once we got everything dried out and ceiling went up to 700' we made it out with no problem next day. Next project is to build some diverters to shield those electronics from water. In the mean time I'll double cover the canopy.

John

Click to expand...

While my choice will be for a slider I found it funny how much of the discussion went to the tipup.

Is there any reason why people with tipups would not simply use a velcro'ed fabric on the panel top as a diverter, then they can just peel back the fabric when they want to access behind the panel. Maybe snaps at the back (sorry back at the firewall) to make it more secure. I really like the idea of access with the tipup but won't risk the electronics I plan to put in.

Cheers.

Michael B,

Sealing the tip-up

1bigdog said:

While my choice will be for a slider I found it funny how much of the discussion went to the tipup.

Is there any reason why people with tipups would not simply use a velcro'ed fabric on the panel top as a diverter, then they can just peel back the fabric when they want to access behind the panel. Maybe snaps at the back (sorry back at the firewall) to make it more secure. I really like the idea of access with the tipup but won't risk the electronics I plan to put in.

Cheers.

Michael B,

Click to expand...

This is how it's done. The devil is in the details. The drip edge MUST be waterproofed (not in the building instructions). The cover is tent fly material...











Van's drip edge seal is installed using Pro-seal or similar sealant. Don't use RTV!

My tip-up doesn't leak!

Fred, knowing how much avionics you have and ifr you fly, I'm sure it is water tight. Great post.

Fred, good to see you on Saturday!

I have a very similar setup to you, but I still have water leaking on my feet and I'm not sure from where. I believe water is getting in behind the subpanel.

I think you mentioned at one time needing to do something along the sides as well, maybe some dams so that the water that leaks onto the fabric and slides down sideways will go outside the skin of the plane and not down the sides internally.

How did you evaluate your seals? Do you get inside and upside down while somebody sprays the plane with water?

Fred,
I appreciate the timely pics. I already have the proseal and the hinge gap spanning pieces in place. Coincidentally talked with the sewing guru (SWMBO) yesterday about doing the cover. I had not come to a resolution on how I was going to make the dams on the forward decks. I see you simply used wide Velcro and nailed the cover to it. Easy peasy.

Tip Up Canopy Seal

Noah said:

Fred, good to see you on Saturday!

I have a very similar setup to you, but I still have water leaking on my feet and I'm not sure from where. I believe water is getting in behind the subpanel.

I think you mentioned at one time needing to do something along the sides as well, maybe some dams so that the water that leaks onto the fabric and slides down sideways will go outside the skin of the plane and not down the sides internally.

How did you evaluate your seals? Do you get inside and upside down while somebody sprays the plane with water?

Click to expand...

There's some detail in the above pictures that may not be apparent: The Velcro is held in place by metal that is pop riveted. Note the pop rivets on the drip edge and along the top of the instrument panel (flush pop rivets there). The glue on regular Velcro doesn't hold up very long, so it's important to hold the Velcro in place with metal strips, essentially sandwiching the Velcro between two pieces of metal. You will never have to replace it if you do this....

A seal on against the hinge side surface isn't necessary if you already have a tight drip edge seal, and you've "bridged" that drip edge seal over the hinge slot as shown in the pictures. If water can't get past the drip edge, it can't get to the hinge slot.

The one thing not shown in the pictures is an additional water tight dam on the canopy deck behind the instrument panel. This section of the deck slants inward, allowing any water that gets past the drip edge seal (and onto the water proof cover) to drip down the inside wall of the cockpit (where I hang my headsets). I put a 1/2" right angle .020 metal strip into this area (and sealed it against the deck, bulkhead, and instrument panel edge) such that any water getting into this area would pool there instead of leaking into the cockpit. (See picture below).

Definitely seal the forward skin to the bulkhead in front of the canopy.... Also plug all the holes in that bulkhead where that skin comes into contact.

If you do all these things your tip up canopy won't leak in these areas. It's also important to have a good seal in the area where the closed canopy meets that fuselage canopy deck. Standard hardware store variety (3/4" wide x 1/4" thick) closed cell door seal material works great there.



The rear edge of the canopy, going over the roll bar, also has to have a good seal. I put a multiple layer 3"" wide fiberglass overlap (glued to the canopy, overlapping the roll bar and real glass area) into this area, then put an open cell 1/2" wide (soft material) Hardware store door seal onto the underside of this surface, such that it sandwiches the seal against the rear glass.
I hope all this helps..... Remember when building to think about where water can get into the plane, and take the appropriate actions to stop it!

Sealing an RV7 tip-up

Hi folks,

This has been a very interesting thread for me. Just a couple of stupid questions come to mind.

Is the water leakage only a problem on the ground, or while flying in rain?

I would like to put a defrost fan in to help cool the avionics and keep the windscreen clear. Has anyone come up with a design to keep things dry while having a defrost fan?

Thanks,

Steve Wolfe

eh_v8_tor said:

Hi folks,

This has been a very interesting thread for me. Just a couple of stupid questions come to mind.

Is the water leakage only a problem on the ground, or while flying in rain?

I would like to put a defrost fan in to help cool the avionics and keep the windscreen clear. Has anyone come up with a design to keep things dry while having a defrost fan?

Thanks,

Steve Wolfe

Click to expand...

For most flyers, it's both situations, especially if the aircraft isn't hangered. The best way to test the canopy for leaks is with a hose streaming water...

As for the defrost fan, I've really never needed one, even while flying during New England winters.

Sorry but this is a little bit more of thread drift away from the original IFR question. My wife made a nylon cover like Fred shows in his posts. Additionally, I knew my tip-up was leaking because the curved sides did not fit well. I had done some metal bumping to see if I could improve the fit but it was obvious that the metal needed to be shrunk. I bought a shrinker from Harbor Freight and went at it. My Tip-up no longer leaks because the canopy actually sits down on the seal at the sides and does not protrude into the airstream like a scoop anymore.

Flew IFR in the rain this morning (which I have been previously avoiding).
All good. Additionally, I am getting better at the navigator and EFIS integration and use for fully coupled approaches. During practice, I have made every error you can imagine and as a result have been hand flying many approaches just to be "safe". Today I flew a full RNAV coupled approach in the soup and it was really cool for the 430W and GRT to do the whole thing including procedure turn. The approach was a piece of cake.

rzbill said:

Sorry but this is a little bit more of thread drift away from the original IFR question. My wife made a nylon cover like Fred shows in his posts. Additionally, I knew my tip-up was leaking because the curved sides did not fit well. I had done some metal bumping to see if I could improve the fit but it was obvious that the metal needed to be shrunk. I bought a shrinker from Harbor Freight and went at it. My Tip-up no longer leaks because the canopy actually sits down on the seal at the sides and does not protrude into the airstream like a scoop anymore.

Flew IFR in the rain this morning (which I have been previously avoiding).
All good. Additionally, I am getting better at the navigator and EFIS integration and use for fully coupled approaches. During practice, I have made every error you can imagine and as a result have been hand flying many approaches just to be "safe". Today I flew a full RNAV coupled approach in the soup and it was really cool for the 430W and GRT to do the whole thing including procedure turn. The approach was a piece of cake.

Click to expand...

It is simply amazing watching how well the GRT/430 and in my case TT handle approaches and so accurately. All my acutal IFR approach are with the use of my "system" and I hand fly only during paractice approach.

Dean Pichon said:

This has been a very interesting and educational thread. I drew a slightly different conclusion. My take was that unless you are already an IFR/IMC pro, no RV is sufficiently stable to hand fly without running the risk of pilot overload. I have only flown VFR in the RV-4 and only my -4, at that, so I have no relevant experience, but based on this thread it seems hard to downselect among Van's aircraft using IFR stability as a filter...

Thanks for a very interesting discussion.

Click to expand...

I would disagree with this. The RV6 is fine for hand flying IFR. It's not as easy as some aircraft but better then others. I would submit that if you are not comfortable hand flying the aircraft IFR then perhaps you should restrict flight to better conditions. I can assure you the autopilot can and will quit working at the worst possible time. It should be considered a aide but not a crutch!
George

good points

sailvi767 said:

I would disagree with this. The RV6 is fine for hand flying IFR. It's not as easy as some aircraft but better then others. I would submit that if you are not comfortable hand flying the aircraft IFR then perhaps you should restrict flight to better conditions. I can assure you the autopilot can and will quit working at the worst possible time. It should be considered a aide but not a crutch!
George

Click to expand...

I have flown my -4(no a/p) in IMC a few times and I wouldnt recommend it as a serious IFR airplane. Definitely not for beginners.

Someone should tell the fleet managers at the airline I work for that a pilot should be able to hand fly in IMC without an A/P or F/D. I fly with a crop of former RJ pilots who couldnt hand fly a Cat1 ILS. Pretty sad! ...and scary!
Cm

Leaky Tip-up

Tip-Ups only leak when you haven't built them correctly. That said, Van's plans don't tell you that you have to seal the drip edge to the bulkhead. His plans also say to cut the drip edge for the hinges, which is also a mistake (and a carry-over from the old blade style hinges in the original -6).

I've built three RV's with tip-up canopies, and none have leaked. It can be done..... And I've flow all of them in hard IFR rainy conditions.

apkp777 said:

You definitely can get IMC experience. You just have to be VERY selective about what IMC you are going to experience. As said, the tip-up leaks like a sieve. So when you have water dripping off your avionics you will need a "dry" back up. Also, the tip up fogs up pretty quickly. So even after you exit IMC you may still have to stay on instruments. As far as hand flying in IMC, it just depends on your experience. It can be done and done safely. Just a ton of work in an already high workload environment. The are solutions to every IMC situation. I would just avoid it if I can, or make sure that I always have an "out".

Click to expand...