Next RV model. The RV-1010

[rongawer]

Originally Posted by KRviator

Put a pair of Rotax 914's in it. 200HP available to FL160! And you can run Mogas... Two of those together probably aren't far off a new IO-540 with prop and accessories, and I'd guess 100lbs lighter.

I like it. You'd need to redesign the wing to handle the additional stress, but it would be cool. You might also want to stretch the fuselage - both changes might increase Vne, but either way, you'd definitely be expanding experimental aviation!

Note that you want the single engine to have enough power to allow the fully loaded aircraft to climb. Considering the RV-10 had a 210 horsepower option early on, it might work with turbo'd 200 hp. Another issue would be CG; You might need to build some fancy pylons to get the engines forward enough for that, or move the wing on them fuselage.

[Denok]

Certainly, all very interesting comments posted here but was I had in mind is certainly not anything close to a 50's-60's designs like a Twin Comanche/Aztec/Baron. What I'm talking about is an RV and like all RVs, a modern, fast, crazy simple, inexpensive (for a twin), all (almost all) weather go anywhere, fill ALL seats, IFR touring machine. Like all RVs a great bang for the buck.

[Smilin' Jack]

So sorry but had to make an observation
Yes there are multiengine jets that can accelerate
And take off on one engine. Been proven.
But the practically side is the available runway has to be over 8 thousand feet


I too have owned and instructed in a 1968 Cessna 310 N

It too would climb on one engine not great and you had to do all the right stuff ball in center slight bank into the operating engine etc. but with enough density altitude most piston twins can not climb on one engine.

Temperatures and altitudes have a lot of effects on the ability of a small twin to climb.
Thats why most pilots are safer in general aviation with one motor.
If it fails you only have one choice which direction your going.

[rocketman1988]

Originally Posted by Denok

Certainly, all very interesting comments posted here but was I had in mind is certainly not anything close to a 50's-60's designs like a Twin Comanche/Aztec/Baron. What I'm talking about is an RV and like all RVs, a modern, fast, crazy simple, inexpensive (for a twin), all (almost all) weather go anywhere, fill ALL seats, IFR touring machine. Like all RVs a great bang for the buck.

Hmmm...

Modern - Yeah, that would be nice.

Fast - Well, if you base it around an RV-10 design, those 50's-60's designs will likely be faster.

Crazy simple, all weather, go anywhere - Well, that's an oxymoron...crazy simple and all weather, go anywhere are mutually exclusive, in general.

Inexpensive - What's your definition? A nice go anywhere, IFR RV-10 without FIKI is going to be in the $200k+ range...now double the engines, double the props, multiple additional systems...you are going to be WAY up there price wise. Now add in FIKI and watch the price go up.

Fill all the seats - Yeah, that would be nice, too. Add bigger engines, more fuel, more wing area, taller landing gear, etc...Jeesh this is sounding like a 737 design history!

[David Z]

My day job is flying old Dash-8-100s. During my last simulator session, we had some spare time at the end. I asked the instructor if I could try taking off with an engine shut down and he agreed. So there we were, feeding in power as the rudder authority and steering permitted until we eventually reached rotation speed and up we went! Now this was a simulator, and I'm sure reality would have burned the tires right off the nosewheel, however it was possible. NEVER going to try that in a real airplane.

There's a rumour floating around that the Aero Commander, for it's single engine demonstration flight, flew to meet the FAA with one of the propellors in the cabin. They landed, taxiied in and reinstalled the propellor with the FAA watching. Not sure how true the story is, but it's fun to think about.

When I think of a modern, fast, crazy simple, inexpensive (for a twin), all (almost all) weather go anywhere, fill ALL seats, IFR touring machine, my brain thinks of a small King Air with most of the seats passenger seats removed. All-weather is a very daunting task requiring complexities and power, both of those things are expensive. Mother nature can throw a lot at airplanes. She has taken down stuff with far superior capability to anything with piston engines. Just because an airplane is certified for FIKI, doesn't mean it can handle all icing situations...ask me how I know

[olyolson]

Not a 4 seater but definitely a hot twin. The trick is to get the company to offer a kit. They are shooting for the military/govt market but if someone was to convince them to offer a kit I’ll bet a lot of us would build one, me included.

http://www.speedtwin.co.uk/speedtwin-movie/

[RV8JD]

Originally Posted by olyolson

Not a 4 seater but definitely a hot twin. The trick is to get the company to offer a kit. They are shooting for the military/govt market but if someone was to convince them to offer a kit I’ll bet a lot of us would build one, me included.

http://www.speedtwin.co.uk/speedtwin-movie/

Wow, an aerobatic, fixed gear, taildragger, tandem seat twin. I like it!

(No offense to my British friends, but why are so many British airplanes (with the exception of the Spit, of course) rather, um ... homely looking? Is that part of their "Design Requirements and Objectives" document or something? Or is it truly a case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder? )

[Greg Baron]

Try a P337. Single engine ceiling is 14K. Engine out handles like a heavy 210. Probably the most stable IFR approach craft in the air.

[togaflyer]

RV 10B....high wing bush plane

[emsvitil]

It's been a long time since anybody has made a tri-plane.............