What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Fying impressions at 29 hours

randylervold

moderator
I just updated my web site with further flying impressions as of 29 hours, here's the text for those interested...
As I continue to get in tune with the -3 I'm realizing it really does have some unique qualities and is indeed different from the other RV models. You really do wear this plane. It is capable great finese that you don't realize until you get more in tune with it. I've been doing quite a bit of formation flying lately with my local group — when you fly in close proximity to another aircraft and are making constant control inputs you really get in touch with the feel quickly. While any RV is indeed very responsive compared to a common certified ship, the RV-3 takes responsiveness to a whole new level. You think and it's there. If you fly by moving your whole arm you will over-control the plane and miss the point altogether. Fingertip pressure and small movements are all that is required for most maneuvers, just relax and make small pressure adjustments. That there's simply less mass there is I'm sure part of the equation. After acclimating to it you feel like you can maneuver inside even another RV. The 747-like patterns that Cessnas fly in the pattern are becoming increasingly annoying. With the flexibility afforded by a constant speed prop I can fly a tight downwind at 125 mph, pull power, trim up, dump the flaps, and fly a rounded turn to base and final and land in a very small amount of geography.
Landings are continuing to improve, I even did my first formation landing the other day, no problem. The trick is again to be subtle and get in touch with the plane. If you do so it will reward you with instant responsiveness and make you look good. Doing a wheel landing and then keeping the tail up is easy. With just a bit of power and forward stick and the flaps down you can drive it down the runway with the tail up at will. I would estimate I can get down to about 25-30 mph until I must let the tail come down. Heck, it almost feels like I could steer it onto the taxiway with the tail up — with some brakes and a bit more throttle I might be able to.
Then there's the performance. As mentioned above, the climb is spectacular, and I really do need to get some hard data on this. As lead ship doing section formation takeoffs I need to use what feels like 2/3 power even with an O-360/Hartzell/solo RV-6/7/8 beside me. If it has a fixed pitch prop, regardless of engine, I'm only using about 17" of MAP for the entire takeoff which feels like about half power.
Needless to say, I'm a happy camper! Can't wait to finish my Phase I work and start on some cross country work.
 
Last edited:
Downward Dog

snip....snip...The trick is again to be subtle and get in touch with the plane. ...snip

Randy,

If I hear what you are saying....the RV-3B is what you could call "the yoga model" of RV ;).

And yes....I'm green with envy.

b,
dr
 
Last edited:
Too cool!

Randy,
Nice work. Your -3 is as beautiful, if not more, than your ole' -8 and I really enjoy your website! I hope that your efforts inspire a few folks to go for the -3. If not, we'll live vicariously through your exploits ;)
Thanks again!
 
RV-3 engine choice

Hi Randy,
You might be in a good position to help me decide on the engine for my project.
I am the new owner of the wrecked Harmon Rocket I on the "History" page of your website.
ontrailercm5.jpg

I am planning on ordering a tail kit for it soon. The old tail has .020 skins on the rudder and elevator, electric trim and counterweights like a RV-4. The engine was a IO360-A1A (200hp), with a Hartzell constant speed prop.
If I go with a lighter engine, I could use a stock tail. That would save a lot of weight in the back. The 25# battery is also about 5' behind the spar, so that could be moved.
Since it is a Rocket, the 'smallest' engine choice might be a IO320 with a constant speed prop. A parallel valve O360 is another possibility. I do prefer Hartzells, but they are heavy.
How much weight do you think could be saved? It was at 932# with the old setup, a lot of radios, autopilot, etc.
I was also wondering where to go for info on the plane, pictures of the plane in better days, etc.
Any help or info would be appreciated.
Thanks
Mark Scoggins
Charlotte, NC
 
Hi Marc,

You will really need to decide first whether you're going to keep it an O-360 powered Rocket 1, or rebuild it as a more conventional O-320 powered RV-3. The first thing you should do is contact John Harmon (http://harmonrocket.com/) and see what he knows about it. I'm guessing they put RV-4 empennage pieces on the HR1 so as to better handle the speed and offset the extra weight of the O-360 up front. If you stay with an 0-360 I'd follow his advice. If you put an O-320 in it then you'll have some additional decisions to make. The RV-3 is so light that your prop choice alone is very significant in configuring the rest of the plane. At any rate, you'll need a new cowl and other important parts that you're likely going to need to buy from Harmon.

I was very tempted to put the HR1-style raised turtledeck and canopy on mine but didn't want to increase my build time. I just love the lines on that plane, very sexy! Good luck with the rebuild.
 
IO360 angle valve vs IO320

Anyone know the weight difference between a IO360 angle valve and a IO320?

Thanks
Mark Scoggins
 
Randy: You make a good point about section takeoffs and landings. I was astonished the first one I made on the wing of a fixed pitch prop RV-6 in my c/s RV-4. I think I literally took off and landed three times before the RV-6 finally lifted off. After the -6 got up to speed all was just fine, but I was a newbie in my RV-4 and didn't realize how little power it actually needs to get off the ground with the c/s in fine pitch. With a new battery, you might not have to actually start the engine!!

Lee...
 
Engine weights

http://www.rvproject.com/tcds The TCDSs have some basic dry weight specs. YMMV due to different mag/alternator/starter combos, etc., but that should give you a general sense.
Dan,
Thanks for the reply. Looks like much less difference than you would think.(only 30 lbs or so)
The O360 looks like it weighs less than the IO320. Or is there something I'm missing?

Thanks,
Mark Scoggins
 
Back
Top