What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-12 Oshkosh News

rlundahl

Member
Would someone post what happened at the RV-12 forum on Thursday at
Oshkosh, and any other news on the RV-12 like when kits might be available.

Thanks
 
RV-12 forum notes

The stick mounted hand brake was replaced by conventional toe brakes. The steerable nose wheel was replaced with a castering type. This added about 3 inches of leg room.
Kits may be available later this year.
Build time is estimated to be between 800 to 1000 hours.
The rivet holes are pre-punched to final size. No drilling, deburring, and dimpling required.
A quick build kit option is NOT being considered.
Estimated finished cost is between 40K - 45K.
The airframe is designed only for the Rotax engine.

Steve
 
Steve said:
The stick mounted hand brake was replaced by conventional toe brakes. The steerable nose wheel was replaced with a castering type. This added about 3 inches of leg room.
Kits may be available later this year.
Build time is estimated to be between 800 to 1000 hours.
The rivet holes are pre-punched to final size. No drilling, deburring, and dimpling required.
A quick build kit option is NOT being considered.
Estimated finished cost is between 40K - 45K.
The airframe is designed only for the Rotax engine.

Steve
All good news, really. Toe brakes are not the norm in LSA, but are certainly the "RV Way", as is the castering nosewheel.

The Rotax will be the sticking point for those transitioning from "traditional" aircraft to the -12. Although the -12 is a fine engine, it is different enough from "modern" air cooled engines that a lot of people will think twice about building the -12. That is unfortunate, as the Rotax isn't hard to live with, just different. And a heavier, traditional engine will eat into the useful load fast.

TODR
 
No drilling, deburring, or dimpling

Thank you (Steve) for the forum info, especially this ...

"The rivet holes are pre-punched to final size. No drilling, deburring, and dimpling required."

Van's does not plan for a tail kit because they believe it will go together so fast
that they will immediately want the rest of the kit.
 
I can't wait to hear some different thoughts on flying the plane...if it flies anything like all the other RV's it's really going to sell!!

One of the Vans employees (Brian maybe?) said they are currently finishing up on the middle fuselage skins (getting the measurements for the CNC machine I suppose), and that was one of the last steps before the kit is ready (he said October...keep your fingers crossed!)


It sure will be nice to prime the parts, cleco it all together and then final rivet...basic airframe will go together in no time at all!!
 
No Quickbuild?

Steve said:
Build time is estimated to be between 800 to 1000 hours.
The rivet holes are pre-punched to final size. No drilling, deburring, and dimpling required.
A quick build kit option is NOT being considered.
Steve
WOW... This may take it out of the running for me.:( I have been looking primarily at the LSA's - as the performance parameters were acceptable, along with a somewhat lesser cost, and primarily a much faster build due to pull rivets, along with "quickbuild" fuselage and wings. Unfortunately my time is, and will remain a premium for a few more years. I am hoping for about an 18 month build time max. Other craft such as the 601XL quickbuild can be constructed in about 500 according to their builders. (But not wild about the 601). 1,000 hours equates to about 2 1/2 years at my realistic build time estimate. That would be taking me closer into an RV-9 quick-build range. Be interesting to see if RAN's does a quickbuild.

<Sigh> Fortunately (?) I am not in a position to start until a couple more must-do's are completed - hopefully by the end of the year. So I have more time to watch the market. DJ
 
more forum notes

The -12 cabin is 3 inches wider than the 7 & 9.
The plane was not designed for bucked rivets. The rib flanges are bent the "wrong" way so bucking bar access is impossible.
The folding wing system incorporates locking pins and micro-switches for safety and redundancy.
In his closing statement, Van said the -12 is not to be considered a last resort airplane for pilots about to loose their medical but was designed as a low cost fun airplane.

Steve
 
Phyrcooler

Now wait just a minute here Chief.

Do a little math.

You said you want to be done in 18 months.

O.K., if Vans high number of 1000 hours is used, 18 months is 78 weeks, and that is less than 13 hours a week.

Figure Van doesnt know what he is talking about, it will take half again as long--------and go for 1500 hours build time, and you get less than 20 hours a week.

I think you can fit that into your schedule, if you try.
 
Steve,

Thanks for that update.

Was there anything mentioned about progress on the new wing design to lower the stall speed?

Also, any mention about reconfiguring the fuel tank or are they satisfied with the current design?

One more detail. At one point I thought I saw the battery located in the baggage compartment. Having the battery and gas tank in close proximity makes me a little nervous. I wonder if the CG would support putting the battery under the engine cowl.

Regards,

Frank
 
Last edited:
Frank,

Neither Van nor Rian mentioned the new wing design and I forgot to ask.

The current fuel tank is welded aluminum sheet. Other materials are being evaluated. They want to stay away from proseal if at all possible. The tank resides behind the pax seat to allow for a simple folding wing design.

Steve

PS
It's a tight fit under the cowl what with the radiator, ducting, and hoses leaving little room for a battery.
 
Last edited:
Mike S said:
Now wait just a minute here Chief.

Do a little math.

You said you want to be done in 18 months.

O.K., if Vans high number of 1000 hours is used, 18 months is 78 weeks, and that is less than 13 hours a week.

Figure Van doesn't know what he is talking about, it will take half again as long--------and go for 1500 hours build time, and you get less than 20 hours a week.

I think you can fit that into your schedule, if you try.
LOL -Yeah... but you haven't seen my schedule! ;) (Remember, I am in the busiest unit in the state... and there are unfortunately whole weeks where I will get nothing done due to work.) My numbers aren't precise, and admittedly probably conservative. While I would hope and plan to work more hours, I look at an average of 8 hours a week. Just trying to low-ball my hours so I don't have an unreasonable expectation of the project.

As mentioned - luckily I don't have to make a choice today. I'm not ruling anything out. Because of so many converging issues, I wanted my first project to be on the less expensive/faster build side which the LSA seems to address. (That, and the exact plane I will need/want just isn't out there yet -something like a "Stretch-9") :D

Thanks for the encouragement!

dj
 
Any other info?

Steve said:
The stick mounted hand brake was replaced by conventional toe brakes. The steerable nose wheel was replaced with a castering type. This added about 3 inches of leg room.
Kits may be available later this year.
Build time is estimated to be between 800 to 1000 hours.
The rivet holes are pre-punched to final size. No drilling, deburring, and dimpling required.
A quick build kit option is NOT being considered.
Estimated finished cost is between 40K - 45K.
The airframe is designed only for the Rotax engine.

Steve

Thank you for the update. Did anyone mention anything about the length of time it took to remove the wings?
 
Jabiru for RV12

I attended the Jabiru forum @ Oshkosh. Pete Krotje said said that Jabiru anticipated offering a firewall forward kit for the RV12. Or did he say the RV9? can't remember. Anyone else there?
 
Last edited:
bonanza36 said:
I attended the Jabiru forum @ Oshkosh. Pete Krotje said said that Jabiru anticipated offering a firewall forward kit for the RV12. Or did he say the RV9? can't remember. Anyone else there?
The J3300 would be an interesting choice for the -9. Might be a bit underpowered, though.

The J3300 spins pretty fast at 2,850 max continuous (112Hp) and 3,300 max TO (120Hp). Power is down to 100Hp (83%) at 2,600. So, unless you had a CS prop, you're never going to get to the 120Hp figure; otherwise, you'd be loosing a lot of cruise speed with an underpitched prop. This would limit the climb a bit, but make for nice cruising economy. Not sure about the long-term longevity of the Jabiru.

I did enjoy flying behind the J3300 - much simpler than the Rotax for an LSA engine. It makes sense for the -12 for those who don't want the complexity of the Rotax and want something smaller / lighter than the O-200 at 178 lb with exhaust, starter, generator, dual CDI, etc. No mixture control with the altitude compensating Bing carb.
 
RV-12 News

I flew into Aurora OR. on Friday the 3rd. Took a tour of Van's factory. I asked our tour guide Rob when they expected to have the 12 ready for builders. He stated Dec. Hope this helps. I myself got my Demo ride in the RV-9A and walked out the door with the Preview Plans for the 9. The project has began. Went to Lunch in Independence. Their setting on the ramp was an RV-9 just out of the paint shop. :) The owner was as proud as a new Father, I guess in a way he was. If I figure out how to post photos. I will do so.

dsc02224eo6.jpg


Moose RV-9
Most tools acquired, setting up shop. Ready to order the
Tail feathers.

Send your wife & or girlfriends to;
NapaValleyEssentials.com
 
Last edited:
Jabiru will be looking at the RV-12

We will be doing a FWF for the RV-12 as soon as we get the final details of firewall layout, thrust line, CG limits, etc.

Pete Krotje

Jabiru USA Sport Aircraft, LLC
 
ceuh1v said:
We will be doing a FWF for the RV-12 as soon as we get the final details of firewall layout, thrust line, CG limits, etc.

Pete Krotje

Jabiru USA Sport Aircraft, LLC
Good to hear that Jabiru is on the job here. I think this could be a good market for the J3300 if you had a good FWF package.

TODR
 
Jabiru

ceuh1v said:
We will be doing a FWF for the RV-12 as soon as we get the final details of firewall layout, thrust line, CG limits, etc.

Pete Krotje

Jabiru USA Sport Aircraft, LLC
Might require a longer nose - which may make the RV-12 look better. It will be nice to have another engine option - especially the Jab. I would have to assume that putting out more max HP, it will really climb out on initial, before you have to throttle back. And, developing more HP at say 75%, will probably yield an even higher cruise speed for those of us NOT building the RV-12 as an LSA. For the LSA types, it may have to be really under propped (is that the right term?) and would climb like a rocket...

Pete - understanding that you are a dealer for Jabiru... but any thoughts from the manufacturers side regarding the current status on the 3300 - IE reliability claims, TBO, etc.? Any 3300's gone to TBO yet?

DJ
 
Phyrcooler said:
Might require a longer nose - which may make the RV-12 look better.


DJ
It would not require a longer nose. The Jabiru is heavier than the Rotax. I had to shorten the nose of my bi-plane to accommodate the 3300.
 
Mel said:
It would not require a longer nose. The Jabiru is heavier than the Rotax. I had to shorten the nose of my bi-plane to accommodate the 3300.
Ah - my error... I thought the Jabiru was lighter than the Rotax and all its trappings. Thanks for the clarification.

As an end-user - what is your impression of the Jabiru?
 
Pete Krotje - Jabiru USA -- I should have used " "

HI all,

The statement from Pete Krotje of Jabiru USA was a quotation. Mr. Krotje did not actually post the information about Jabiru doing a FWF for the RV-12, but he did write the statement just not to this forum!! Sorry for the confusion and my apologies Mr. Krotje for not quoting you!

Jim, Sacramento
 
Back
Top