WTB RV15

[cattflight]

Originally Posted by N729LS

I think it's called a Glastar.

Almost. The Glasair Sportsman 2+2 is your answer. Though it's 210hp, it can be built in 2 weeks. The Glastar, not so much. Ask me how I know. 😳

[Jaypratt]

I think Bill is spot on with his ideas.
I too think there is a Big big unfilled hole in the Home Built market.
A 170/172 sized home built is not out there.
All metal, = easy to build
struts. Something to push on
Sticks, have you worked behind a 170 panel?
ExperMental, I want this option.

I love the capabilities of The RV series. I have built 4, RVs for my self. The first one flew 1996. Two 6s and two RV8s, since. But! There is always a but. My interest is back country flying.
I built a North Star 180hp, like a Super Cub in 2004 to complement my RV6. The Cub, I call it Shooter, has flown to The Idaho back country 6 times from Fort Worth. 80 - 90 knots. Slow. Not the 160! RV Knots. 2007 Enter Carol in my life. I needed more airplane.
Nothing, nothing! On the home built market perked my interest.
Glass? NOT
Fabric? No more
Super Rebel? Too big, not the best reputation/ support. Remember I’m a RV guy at heart. Give me a match hole all metal Van’s kit.
I found a Cessna 180 near home NDH, hangered, no mods. That was 2009. I wrote a check and flew it home. It does 130 knots pretty easy.
I went from 15.5 hours home to Idaho to about 10 hours. Cool.
Not cool,,, A certified plane. I added a Sentry Auto Pilot and Could Not Do the install myself, it cost $14,700. I’m still mad about that.
I want the airplane that Bill described. An improved wing and probably an improved cowl over a 170/172 might go faster?
I call my 180 ‘Paul Revere’ if Van’s Aircraft offered this dream plane ‘Paul Revere’ would get a new name,,,,,,,,, For Sale. ��

[DeltaRomeo]

I respectfully disagree with Bill and those wanting the next RV to be a non-STOL 2+2.

If it won't comfortably land on a sandbar here on the Brazos I'll say thank you and pass (and I guess do something Super-Cub after Tate gets out of college). I would dearly like to help promote a STOL Backcountry RV.

I don't need a non-STOL 2+2 RV. The (16) configurations of RVs already developed are non-STOL and won't land comfortably on sandbars. Why make a 17th? By all means offer a 2+2 down the road, just like they did offering the RV-10 after many 2-seat models. Just please offer the 2 seat backcountry STOL slash also-works-on-floats first so you can grab the largest share of the backcountry market from the get go.

As I mention in my 63 page sales pitch/plea, I need a 2 + tent/fishingpole/RC car/telescope RV. Give the doc a read if you haven't, and let me know if you would order one....I'll add you to the list.

It needs to be STOL for my needs, otherwise it's just another RV model I can't land on a sandbar with.....and I have that now (RV-6). The current models/configurations offer 75% of what I want to do with a plane. I'm craving the other 25%, but in an RV. Building something that is essentially what I already have isn't appealing to me. I have to believe there are hundreds upon hundreds of RVators who would want a backcountry STOL RV to compliment their current RV stable. Now THAT would be TOTAL Performance!!!! <g>.

Fingers crossed!

v/r,dr

[Pat Hatch]

Currently, the best back country kit on the market is the S-21, hands down.

Problem is, there's currently a 14 month wait. That's a lifetime for us older guys!

This presents a huge opportunity for Vans to steal (read: jump into) this market. Obviously, there's a huge demand for this airplane. And there's room for improvement: an 0-360 option? I really like the 500-man-hour build time.

I suspect this hasn't gone unnoticed at the mothership. Come on Vans, you can make a lot of us really happy! I'm ready to place my order.

[DeltaRomeo]

Preach Bro Pat! Preach!!!!!

Originally Posted by Pat Hatch

Currently, the best back country kit on the market is the S-21, hands down.

Problem is, there's currently a 14 month wait. That's a lifetime for us older guys!

This presents a huge opportunity for Vans to steal (read: jump into) this market. Obviously, there's a huge demand for this airplane. And there's room for improvement: an 0-360 option? I really like the 500-man-hour build time.

I suspect this hasn't gone unnoticed at the mothership. Come on Vans, you can make a lot of us really happy! I'm ready to place my order.

[mattsrv7]

There are options out there and may be part of the reason Vans hasn't jumped into that part of the homebuilt market.The Bearhawk is a pretty decent high wing Cessna 170/180 size airplane as is the Dream Tundra. Murphy aircraft also has both 2 and 4 seat all metal high wing options.

That said; hopefully they come out with a tandem, cantilever high wing, STOL, airplane that can be put on floats (need entry doors on both sides and no strut to duck), and can do mild acro like a Citabria when on wheels .

[N941WR]

Doug, as Pat pointed out, there are many two seat options available. Also of the eight models in the current Van's lineup, only one is a four seater. The problem with the -10 and -14 is the cost. While selling well, a $150+K hoppy build is way out of reach for most builders.

A 2+2 model that can be built for the price of a -7, 8, or 9 would be outstanding!

[Mark33]

Here’s what’s on my wish-list:

1. All metal.
2. Tandem.
3. STOL.
4. High wing.
5. Can be put on amphibs/floats.
6. Entry doors on both sides.
7. Big payload.
8. Minimum 50 gallon tanks with built in fuel return lines to accommodate the more modern electronic fuel injection systems that utilize a high pressure fuel rail and that requires a return line setup.
9. Big tires and big off-road suspension.
10. Accommodate and perform well with many engines....(O-320 to IO-390).
11. Ultra quick build...maximum of 500 hours.
12. “Decent” X-country cruse speeds...maybe somewhere around 120 knots.

****All of the above could also be incorporated into a four seater at some point.

[Kyle Boatright]

Originally Posted by N941WR

Doug, as Pat pointed out, there are many two seat options available. Also of the eight models in the current Van's lineup, only one is a four seater. The problem with the -10 and -14 is the cost. While selling well, a $150+K hoppy build is way out of reach for most builders.

A 2+2 model that can be built for the price of a -7, 8, or 9 would be outstanding!

I lobbied for an AA-5B knockoff for years.

[Jaypratt]

STOL
The plane I’m thinking of would land on river bars. My C180 lands and takes off river bars just fine. Bills 2+2 170 ideas will do that job as well.
A Home Built ‘improved’ C170/172 would weigh less than my 1976 C180J. It is 1700 lbs empty.
My North Star weighs 1320 with 31” Alaskan Bush wheels and Baby BushWheel tail wheel.
I would hope, not being an engineer, that something Van’s might design would be in the 1200 lb range. I’m doing it with 1700 lbs, and 230 hp. And I’m doing it with a cub weighing 1320 lbs, with 180 hp.
The light airplanes have been designed. The 180 185 is certified, and too big. The market would buy a STOL 2+2 sized plane. It’s is not available.
Yes there are a few that are close, Rans 21 is a 3 run homer,,,but Van’s could hit a grand slam if done right.