What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-10 for 'round the world trip

tritonsubs

tritonsubs

I'm New Here
I'm new to the forum and to Van's aircraft and am trying to evaluate the suitability of an RV-10 for an around the world flight my wife and I are planning. The most notable requirement is a 2400 nm minimum range with a 15% over gross permit (3100 max gross, 1450 useful). Subtracting payload this would leave 1000 lbs/166 gallons of fuel.

Nys aircraft offers 120 gallon fuel capacity for the RV-10 and with taking out the aft seats I assume you could put a custom built 50 gallon tank aft.

Crashing on takeoff would not be good! But, that aside, do you experienced RV-10 owners think the fuel could be put within the proper CG and that an IO540 running LOP could get 2400 nm range? What sort of speed vs. fuel burn do you actually get?

Alternatives are a Mooney Ovation GX2, a C-210, or C-182 with an SMA diesel. If only one could get that SMA 235 HP diesel for an RV-10!

Thanks,

Bruce
 
why by air???

Gee, I think I'd like to do a 'round the world trip in one of these stylish Triton Subs!!!!!;

"....... an entire fleet of luxury submarine
offerings up to 213 feet in length and $90 million
in price."

...you DO take Mastercard, right?!?!? :)
.... put me down for 1/8" of one, ( $4400!) and I'll finance the rest , ok?

sorry, couldn't resist. Makes going UP 1000m look pretty cheap by comparison to going DOWN, eh?
 
Perry,

If 1000 meters isn't deep enough, our newest offering will take you and two friends to 11,000 meters (35,800 feet), the bottom of Challenger Deep, the deepest spot in the ocean.
 
Welcome To VAF

tritonsubs said:
I'm new to the forum and to Van's aircraft and Thanks,

Bruce
Click to expand...

Bruce, welcome aboard the good ship VAF :D

The gross weight is set by the builder, so you will not need to do a permit for 115%

The ten flys pretty good heavy, really surprised me.

There are a few folks now who have put double tanks in the wing, so it is got a short track record.

for an aux tank, have you considered an external tank, in a belly pod??
 
There's a guy I met at Oshkosh who is building a -10 specifically for an around the world trip When I track down his name, I'll pass it along. Jim
 
Do your fuel maths on 10.8 gph LOP at 160 knots, up higher you will get a bit more TAS or a bit less burn.

165 gallons of fuel is a fair bit:eek: if my mental maths was correct.
 
You might want to look at the Ravin.

It uses the same engine as the -10 and cruses at 196 kts (226 mph) TAS at 75% power and 6500'.

Here's the kicker, Range with 10% fuel reserve: 2000 naut miles (2300 stat miles)

If you pulled it back to 65% power you might get it to 2400 nautical miles.
 
fuel useage in an IO 540

My IO 540 burns 8.8 gallons per hour at 2100 RPM's and 19 inches lop. You need to find out how fast a heavy RV10 will go at given power setting from other owners. My guess is a hundred fifty knots plus, at 9 gallons per hour.

If my figures are correct you should be able to go 2500 nautical miles on 150 gallons of fuel if the 10 will burn 9 gph.

I am basing these figures on my super six which goes 165 kts at a little less than 9 GPH at 10'000 ft.

The key to flying long distances is not fast you can go, but how efficiently you can fly the aircraft and run the engine.

Steve Barnes "The Builders Coach"
 
The new Sport Aviation has an article on the -10. The factory plane gets about 11 gph at 15000' doing 160 knots true. However, to be prudent for a flight like you are planning, assume the winds will be against you, the burn not as good (engines get rough over water), the speed not as high (due to loading), etc. You might also consider putting the extra tank in the baggage area; the factory keeps lead shot back there when they are flying with just two people to keep the CG right. That way you can also use the back seat area for reachable cargo (I think I might like to have survival gear closer than the baggage area in case of a ditching).

For inspiration, try to find a copy of Jon Johanson's book Aiming High, about his flying an RV-4 around the world.
 
Welcome Bruce!

I just flew my -10 LOP at 60% power this week and the Dynon 120 said 1100 mile range with full tanks...60 gallons.

I've also flown it near 3,000 lbs and it did well.

Don't have a clue about range with a load as heavy as you're planning.

Best,
 
Bruce,
Judging by the distance you want, I'm guessing you're looking at the Hawaii/Mainland leg. if you took the Northern route from Japan to Alaska, you could avoid that distance. However, you could always rent tanks for the crossing - it's done all the time.
Practically speaking, you should probably look into a light twin, instead. A trip that long guarantees you will be over water at night - not fun....
John
 
Many Thanks

Many thanks for all the great info. It's just what I needed.

Jim, if you find that guys name from Oshkosh, I'd be grateful to have it. And Bill, thanks for the heads up on the Ravin. I'm not a big fan of the Comanche look but the bird sure performs.

Can anyone recommend an excellent commercial builder with RV-10 experience? Any thoughts on Nys Aircraft?

Thanks again.
 
It's quite common for ferry flights to get 10-20% gross weight (take-off not landing) authorized, but it's almost academic for a homebuilt as only the US, Mexican, Bahamas and Canadian authorities will permit you to fly without special authorization.
Turtlepac bladder tanks are the most popular range extenders that I'm aware of. They will effectively use up your rear seat space.

A recent earthrounder flight by a UK couple in a Long-Eze failed to get special authorization from Japan. They only had standard fuel for about 1200NM, so had to ship the aircraft by container from Asia to the US, whereupon they continued via the Crimson route back to the UK.

Europe will require liability cover of 2 million SDRs (over $3M) which may be hard to obtain in the US, though I think Pikwest(?) have offered similar cover. Iceland requires additional SAR cover and a 3 hour planned fuel reserve if you're heading that way.

Another handicap is that very few authorities permit IFR flight by amateur built aircraft which means a 5500' limit in the Atlantic oceanic airspace to remain outside Class A and that will also mean you're more likely to encounter IMC.

I'd recommend reading Jon Johannson's and Manuel Queiroz's books for some wonderful insight into the practicalities of taking an RV round the world. Bureaucracy seems as big an obstacle as weather and you're likely to get plenty of both.

Good luck with the planning
 
Mark,

Thanks for the comments. I've just finished 'Chasing the Morning Sun" and not once (that I could find) does Manuel mention any issues at all with respect to flying an Experimental aircraft. He certainly had many bureaucratic headaches, but those seem to be part of the process for all the earthrounders.

I wonder if it is not an issue of not calling attention to the fact that the aircraft is experimental and simply carrying on with the trip. Generally, the people you meet on the ground (e.g. customs, immigration, ground handling crews) are not likely to be those who review flight plans, etc. I've visited 115 countries and am fairly pragmatic when it comes to dealing with the bureaucrats.

Of the single engine earth rounder flights since 1990, 14 have been in homebuilts or LSAs.

Anyway, you bring up a very good point and one that requires some clarification. Thanks.
 
Bruce I would be very interested to follow your progress. Please keep us informed if you decide to go and welcome!
 
John Nys has built more -10s himself than most other builder's assistance organizations (over 40, I believe - all of which are still flying.) He also has considerable experience modifying -10s as well as many other experimental designs for various missions with great success. Plus, he is an all-around nice guy :eek:. I think it would be worth getting his input on your ideas at least.

Roger Pierce
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
(918) 810-0603

RV-10 fuselage
 
Thanks

Roger - thanks for the recommendation on John Nys. I sent him an e-mail on Friday asking for his thoughts. I'm quite intrigued with the 120 gallons of fuel he puts in the wings.

Any tankage we put in the airplane would likely be hard mounted and semi-permanent, custom built from aluminum to fit the location. The idea of bladders or drum tanks floating around back there just does not resonate with me. We expect several long legs, so renting is likely not an option, and I don't see us needing back seats at all for the duration of the RTW flight. With 120 gallons in the wings and a 50 or so gallon tank aft, we should be good.

Dave, thanks for the recommendation on Skyview Aviation. Ironically, I was flying my hot air balloon from Tracy Airport not too long ago. I'll call and ask about semi-permanent ferry tankage. And Jim, thanks for the referral.

Thanks to all of you for your comments and suggestions.
 
Bruce,

I met another RV-10 builder that is planning to become an Earth rounder. I'll E-mail his contact info. -David
 
Another ER Dreamer Here..

Bruce,

I too have been dreaming about a round the world flight in my RV-10. I am still building in the early stages, but have been asking around and doing some research on my own. I think (and have written in this forum) that the best place to have extra fuel is in the fuse. However, there may not be enough volume to do that. I have been thinking about belly tanks, and have had several conversations with David (of MotoPod fame) about using his pod to help with fuel. It's a long way out, but the idea of flying around the world with my wife in a plane we built is very intriguing. Hopefully the red tape doesn't grow into a full-fledged velvet rope by the time we're ready.:eek: Stay in touch. Maybe by the time you and I are ready, we could fly the trip together. There's safety in numbers, right?.. And perhaps it would be easier to deal with the bureaucrats as a contingency..

Mike
 
Delta Hawk XP

I was having a conversation today with a good friend of mine, George Bye of Bye Aerospace/Bye Energy, and he suggested the Delta Hawk XP inter-cooled turbo diesel for the RV-10. Specific fuel consumption is about 35% better, the engine weighs 100 lbs less than an IO-540 and it develops full HP to 18,000 feet. Output is 200 HP. They now have a firewall forward kit. George is working with them closely on a project and has a very favorable opinion of the engine. It's not cheap, but it could be perfect for a RTW aircraft given that Jet A/diesel is available everywhere.
 
Brian and Brandi,

Nice to hear that you two want to "go round" as well. I've been following your progress and I'm jealous about how far ahead of me you are. Then again my wife's pregnant and hasn't been able to help as much. :D I think I told you, but I grew up in Dunwoody, Georgia and my mom and sister live in Marietta... small world. Maybe I'll come visit your project one of these days.

Bruce,

You really have all the cool toys down pat, don't you! Subs, planes, probably boats too... Given your business skills, I think you need to launch a company for the first quick-build manned rocketship! I've heard about the DeltaHawk and it's been discussed several times on this site. I'd love to have an alternative to the Lycs, especially if it generates full horses at altititude (I live in Colorado). Maybe by the time I'm done with my plane, they'll be done with their engine.
 
We're actually looking at the Delta Hawk engines for a surveillance application that requires a very long endurance. The fuel availability and efficiency will be wonderful for a trip around the world... as soon as they work the last bugs out of it.

LoPresti recently developed a Cirrus cowl for the Delta Hawk engine. The diesel engine is more narrow than the Lycoming so they were able to streamline the cowl a bit more. I imagine that it will be a good starting point for an RV-10 installation.

AEROTV-OSH-LoPresti-0911f.jpg


I'd love to fly around the world at some point. Maybe it will be possible to fly through China soon!
 
First RV-10 from Ukraine would like to join the club.
Owner is Sergiy Shevchuk, aircraft is based in Evpatoria, Crimea, Ukraine.

This year plans are:
Phase 1/ Fly from Ukraine to Portugal in April 2012 without landings in between, leg is 3600 km, it will be the preparation for the phase 2/ flying around the world in second half 2012
 
Around 12 hours worth of endurance, running LOP at 11.5 GPH, since they've added around 80 gallons in the aluminum tank.

Good estimate, no?

Thanks,
 
amount of fuel 156 gallons.
110 +110 +330 +80 +80 (wings) = 710 liters or 156 gallons.
156/11, 5 = 13 hours 34 minutes
 
I currently fly 747s. If we do that sort of sector length, we have a double crew and get 5-6 hours bunk time. On top of which, even during the time at the controls, we can get up and stretch our legs.

During the Falklands war in 82, I flew UK/Ascension in an F4 - just under 10 hours strapped in an ejection seat. Not fun. And that is without the vibration of a piston engine and relying on one donk for your survival. Honestly I admire the spirit. I hope to fly my RV-10 UK/South Africa. But if you are relying on that sort of endurance to do a round-the-world trip then maybe you ought to think again.
 
Paul has a point. But then, I doubt anyone expects to do such an adventure in comfort. Imagine how Lindbergh felt. Or read his account. Doable, yes. Comfortable, no. Will the sense of accomplishment afterward be worth it? Only the individual can say. Me, I hate the commercial flights and get real fidgety after an hour or so but endure longer in my own aircraft because I have the job of piloting to focus on and distract me from any discomfort. 3 hour legs in a Maule to OSH a couple of years ago were fine by me. But I'm not sure I'd want to do longer legs without real strong motivation.
 
flion said:
Paul has a point. But then, I doubt anyone expects to do such an adventure in comfort. Imagine how Lindbergh felt. Or read his account. Doable, yes. Comfortable, no. Will the sense of accomplishment afterward be worth it? Only the individual can say. Me, I hate the commercial flights and get real fidgety after an hour or so but endure longer in my own aircraft because I have the job of piloting to focus on and distract me from any discomfort. 3 hour legs in a Maule to OSH a couple of years ago were fine by me. But I'm not sure I'd want to do longer legs without real strong motivation.
Click to expand...

Flion, you are right to say "without real strong motivation", there is the strong motivation to make this flight from Ukraine to Portugal for training purposes, because of fact that route around the earth is including also the legs T=10-12 hours, that is why to make ourselves be ready for such long legs is our motivation.

Thank you for interest and valuable comments.
 
flion said:
Paul has a point. But then, I doubt anyone expects to do such an adventure in comfort. Imagine how Lindbergh felt. Or read his account. Doable, yes. Comfortable, no. Will the sense of accomplishment afterward be worth it? Only the individual can say. Me, I hate the commercial flights and get real fidgety after an hour or so but endure longer in my own aircraft because I have the job of piloting to focus on and distract me from any discomfort. 3 hour legs in a Maule to OSH a couple of years ago were fine by me. But I'm not sure I'd want to do longer legs without real strong motivation.
Click to expand...

For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's sake. The great affair is to move.-R.L. Stevenson
 
Wait! I'm close to finishing my PPL. Years away probably from finishing an RV10. But I want to be in the next round or so if possible. How long is that going to take to circle the earth?

Jamie
 
u guys should check out: google: slingaircraftfactory.co.za. our local south african heroes who have flown TWICE around the world, in their own design a/c powered by a Rotax. you want motivation ot know how google them......a fantastic achievement twice, and an amazing a/c.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top