What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Radio Call - RV use in initial calls to controller / tower

I use RV598SD

I think technically it is correct, at least on first call up, to identify as experimental. I find that doing so, however, virtually always generate a question about what type of experimental I am.

When I identify as an RV, however, only infrequently the controller will call me experimental.

What I gather from that is that most controllers prefer the type because they already know its experimental. A few like to go by the book.

This may also be regional.

When filing IFR I identify as experimental in the comments.
 
In the early 90's, I flew a Navion out of Shreveport Downtown, which is in Barksdale AFB airspace.

Nearly every time I checked in returning home from the east: "Approach, Navion 2512T, six thousand" there would be a long pause and the confused Barksdale controller would answer "Navy Aircraft calling Barksdale, state intentions..."

LOL! Once when I was flying my TriPacer into KSPS (Sheppard AFB) I called in "Sheppard Tower Tripacer 5951D 10 miles to the West at 3000". I was promptly answered back by a trainee controller with "Citation 5951D . . . ."
 
The FAA should have kept the "NX" prefix in the registration number, it says it all with one letter.

"NX123AB", or "Vans NX123AB", then after that, "Vans 3AB".
 
Me: Mather Tower, RV 516SB 10 miles southeast inbound with Juliet.
Tower: 6SB report 2 mile left base for 22
Me: Report 2 mile left base for 22, RV 6SB
Me: Tower, RV 6SB is 2 mile left base for 22.
Tower: Army 6SB cleared to land on the north heli-pad.
Me: Uhm... I'm an airplane and would like to land on the runway, Experimental RV 6SB.
Tower: Oh! I thought you said "ARMY"... Experimental 6SB cleared to land on 22R
(there are Army helicopters at Mather) :)

Dave C
-7 flying
 
Me: Mather Tower, RV 516SB 10 miles southeast inbound with Juliet.
Tower: 6SB report 2 mile left base for 22
Me: Report 2 mile left base for 22, RV 6SB
Me: Tower, RV 6SB is 2 mile left base for 22.
Tower: Army 6SB cleared to land on the north heli-pad.
Me: Uhm... I'm an airplane and would like to land on the runway, Experimental RV 6SB.
Tower: Oh! I thought you said "ARMY"... Experimental 6SB cleared to land on 22R

Exactly why I make my first call with "experimental RV NXXXXX"

Meets the requirements of the operating limitations and provides the controller with enough info to know what my performance capability's are.

I don't think that using just RV complies with the requirement of the typical operating limitaions. That doesn't necessarily mean experimental any more than Cessna means non experimental.
There are experimental Cessna's (and Boeing's, and Pipers, etc.) flying around being used for flight test, etc. that have experimental C of A's and I'll bet they use experimental in there first call.

As a side note, Maybe in a few years there will S-LSA RV-12's flying around. Then RV will no longer automatically mean Experimental. :D
 
I got it

Fun 72 Victor Lima:D:D


As soon as you identify yourself to ATC and they have you on radar, they know how fast you're going so that may not be that big an issue.

I only wish that some word could be officially designated by the FAA to be used in place of "Experimental" in the call sign. Not to pick nits, but that's five whole syllables that would be nice to have shortened to something more abbreviated.

I don't care what the word is. The FAA can make up a whole new word not even in the dictionary (if they want) and declare it to be a replacement for Experimental in communications.
As long as it's just one or two syllables, that would be nice. And as long as it's easy to understand, even it it sounds silly. Offered as an example and what comes immediately to my fertile mind might be something like "Chunk", as in "Chunk 72 Victor Lima".
It's sounds kind of silly at first, but it's easy to understand and almost impossible to MISunderstand, and it's only one syllable. If the FAA were to publish that single syllable word as being a direct replacement for the word Experimental (for radio communications only), comm use would end up being exactly 4 syllables easier.

My 1/5 cents worth.
 
As a side note, Maybe in a few years there will S-LSA RV-12's flying around. Then RV will no longer automatically mean Experimental. :D

Nor will it automatically mean a fast airplane :rolleyes:

I can see the AIM being amended to include either "experimental" or "light sport" upon initial call up. Light sport is a performance envelope by definition. Certainly for the aircraft and likely the pilot too. :)
 
Never heard the call sign "Army" before

Me: Mather Tower, RV 516SB 10 miles southeast inbound with Juliet.
Tower: 6SB report 2 mile left base for 22
Me: Report 2 mile left base for 22, RV 6SB
Me: Tower, RV 6SB is 2 mile left base for 22.
Tower: Army 6SB cleared to land on the north heli-pad.
Me: Uhm... I'm an airplane and would like to land on the runway, Experimental RV 6SB.
Tower: Oh! I thought you said "ARMY"... Experimental 6SB cleared to land on 22R
(there are Army helicopters at Mather) :)

Dave C
-7 flying

I don't know what controller you got when you came in here. The copters at Mather usually call themselves "Spartan." But then again, they do seem to get a lot of trainees in the tower here lately. In over twenty years of working on airports I have never, ever heard an Army aircraft call itself "Army." They use some other name.

And when Boeing flies their test airliners into the area they don't say "experimental" over the radio even though the word itself is plastered above the main door.
 
As a side note, Maybe in a few years there will S-LSA RV-12's flying around. Then RV will no longer automatically mean Experimental. :D
I find lots of different controller reactions when I use "Flight Design" - sometimes they put me in the system, no problems, often I get asked for the identifier - FDCT - and that's good enough for them. Sometimes I gets turned into "Cessna". Once they started calling me "flight 621CT..." - they thought I was a flight of multiple aircraft.

However, once I tell them "light sport", they all seem to understand. I suspect that for the RV-12, the "light sport" call-up will be better than using "RV" - they might expect you to do things you can't, like maintain 150kt until short final

TODR
 
Right, wrong, indifferent....I use RV 727BM on my initial call so they will immediately know my speed potential if needed.
 
That is a bit of a stretch. As one poster said "some controllers think an RV is a Winnebago." Sad, but very true. Of course some controllers know all about Experimentals, but you can't count on that. Here is the FAA on what your are supposed to put on a flight plan under type.

http://tinyurl.com/58z6ha

This contains the main things an IFR controller is interested in, speed and rate of climb.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAAST Team Member
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA


In the same publication you will see that RV's have accepted aircraft codes. You should use the accepted aircraft type code unless there isn't one, then use the experimental code. Your airspeed is contained in your flight plan. It is the controller's duty to know approved aircraft types.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/CNT/5-2-R.htm
 
Say "Experimental" no more

While on the way to OSH I flew through the DET class Bravo airspace. The controller I spoke to told me RV's are now a recognized aircraft type and we no longer need to use "Experimental" when checking in.

Could it be? Have we been "accepted" by the FAA?

Have any of the rest of you been told the same by ATC?
 
RVx has been on the recognized list for quite some time now. Now if they'd just come up with a designator for LSAs. Every time I get flight following, I have to tell them I'm an experimental, 'cause there's no identifier for the Light Sports.....
 
Not me

When flying into and out of the Washington DC area recently it was amazing how many Army... flights checked in and they sounded exactly like RV... identifications. Ocassionally I will have a controller call me RV-zero-bravo-juliet and I may respond with that identification to that controller or I may not. It is very foriegn to me personally and it makes me have to think about what I am supposed to call myself instead of the essence of the communication.

Bob Axsom
 
...The controller I spoke to told me RV's are now a recognized aircraft type and we no longer need to use "Experimental" when checking in...
My operating limitations haven't changed so I slip experimental in there to a tower, and I guess that includes approach control. I also call myself RV whenever possible once I have satisfied my limitations. Experimental is pretty worthless, but it is required -- ONCE.

Just as "conditional inspection" is Paul Dye's number one pet peeve, calling oneself an "experimental" on the CTAF is my number one pet peeve.
 
Last edited:
Wish they would all get their stories straight

I think it is all related to the mood of the controller at the time.

I have gotten into the habit of saying "Experimental RV" on the first call anytime I change frequency.

Last Friday, coming into my home base of Goodyear (KGYR) I called tower as "Experimental RV" on the first call only, then when I contacted ground after landing, I called as "Experimental RV".

The ground controller immediately and matter of factly corrected me by saying something along the lines of "the proper usage of the term Experimental is on initial call only".

Whatever. First time in 3 years since I have been flying the RV that anybody ever said anything to me about it.
 
Same way

I do exactly as Tim, "Experimental RV XXXXX," for first contact, then drop the Experimental. I don't do for ground though.

Most controllers are more than knowledgeable and accept, "RV," but, I still use the Experimental on the first contact.
 
RV not FAA recognized

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/acdesig.html
I think you still have to file HXB on a flight plan, too. It doesn't recognize RV-X.
 
As I approach 3000 hours on the hobbs in 8 years, I'll say it again; The only time I use EXPERIMENTAL is when I'm asked "SAY TYPE AIRCRAFT". There are 12 pages of this very topic located here. Whatever makes you feel good :D Rosie

PS: I disagree with H. Evan's post title "RV not FAA recognized"... Here's the FAA APPROVAL page with the RV models listed.
 
Last edited:
Nope

Try RVX, no dash and no "A" and let us know how you make out.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] CSC DUATS on the Web
Error(s) in User Input [/FONT]


Unrecognized aircraft type designator.
Note that the FAA has been changing the list of aircraft type designators.
Please use the aircraft type search facility to verify that you're using the right identifier for your aircraft. You can do this by clicking on the words "Aircraft Type" on the flight planning form.
 
RVx has been on the recognized list for quite some time now. Now if they'd just come up with a designator for LSAs. Every time I get flight following, I have to tell them I'm an experimental, 'cause there's no identifier for the Light Sports.....

Depends. Some LSAs do have type identifiers. The Tecnam Sierra for example is SIRA and I've used it plenty of times. I think the Flight Design CTsw and Evektor Sportstar have them too.
 
Interesting...."Air Beetle"

As I approach 3000 hours on the hobbs in 8 years, I'll say it again; The only time I use EXPERIMENTAL is when I'm asked "SAY TYPE AIRCRAFT". There are 12 pages of this very topic located here. Whatever makes you feel good :D Rosie

PS: I disagree with H. Evan's post title "RV not FAA recognized"... Here's the FAA APPROVAL page with the RV models listed.

Looking at the APPROVAL list under RV6 and there are three entries:
RV-6, AVA-202 and Air Beetle. Did someone build a RV6 and then tell the FAA that it was an Air Beetle?

Kent
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The other DUAT

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] CSC DUATS on the Web
Error(s) in User Input [/FONT]


Unrecognized aircraft type designator.
Note that the FAA has been changing the list of aircraft type designators.
Please use the aircraft type search facility to verify that you're using the right identifier for your aircraft. You can do this by clicking on the words "Aircraft Type" on the flight planning form.

www.duat.com (the other DUATS) has all RV types as RVX (no A's).
 
DUATS accepted RV7/U

This time DUATS accepted RV7/U. I cancelled it before it was sent to FAA. Happy days!

I tried it live with a briefer, explaining what I was doing. She said her system took it just fine.

OK, here's the problem. I am happy to be wrong on FAA approval (I was looking at something else, I guess). But the Op Lim's are unambiguous and say we must advise controllers on first contact of the experimental nature of the flight. We are still certified as Experimental.
 
Last edited:
Yes ... someone did

Looking at the APPROVAL list under RV6 and there are three entries:
RV-6, AVA-202 and Air Beetle. Did someone build a RV6 and then tell the FAA that it was an Air Beetle?

Kent

Yes ...

The Nigerian Air Force with help from Van's.

They use them as trainers.

See Van's website.

James
 
I can assure you that what is operationally accepted, what is allowed for filing in the system, and what the Op Lims require are 3 different things.

As long as your op lims require it, then you are required, no matter what is operationally accepted. Its all fun and games till someone gets their eye poked out. Having had my set of dealings with the FAA and Insurance, if you are in violation of your op lims, then you are suspect to penalties from the FAA should they choose to do so.

Should you fail to identify yourself as expermental, then you are subject to penalties at the descretion of the FAA. If you have never seen this big stick before, then you are in for a rude awakening.

You can never use in your hearing.
1. Ive been doing this for years
2. All the guys do it
3. add in any other story here

...... You will be violated pronto. If you dont identify yourself to ATC as experimental, are are in strict violation of your op lims. You have no out from that.

My 2 cents having been around the block a few times.
Best,
 
Kahuna is right on!
Read carefully the first paragraph in your operating limitations. To paraphrase, it says that this aircraft must be operated in accordance with part 91 rules plus any additional limitations specified within these limitations.
 
Army what?

I still think that since the faa pub has the rv's listed, which are all experimental, if you file as RVX, you have, by definition, notified ATC of the expiremental nature of your aircraft. I have had no problems (other than being called Army from time to time.) I guess someone will just have to argue it in court, if ever charged. I don't know of the FAA ever pursuing a violation for someone calling thier aircraft "RVX" sans experimental. If you are really worried about that, then use experimental on the initial call. Alot of the RV's I have seen buzzing around have a much greater chance of being violated for other easily enforcable and dangerous reasons.
 
I still think that since the faa pub has the rv's listed, which are all experimental, if you file as RVX, you have, by definition, notified ATC of the expiremental nature of your aircraft...
My limitations refer to "control tower" but ATC in general, and control towers in particular, know nothing about your VFR flight plan. That is a flight service deal.
 
Last edited:
Then why is it written on the plane?

I don't buy the "technically" notified since we have to put the word Experimental in plain view. I don't think that RVX would take it's place.

I plan to include it on initial contact to ATC......
 
To the best of my knowledge, "experimental" is still required on initial call to every facility, call yourself "November' after that for all I care.
 
By my Ops Limitations, it is required for the first call up to a Control Tower, and then not after. I wish folks would answer questions like this based on documented facts, and not just post what they heard, what they think, or what they were told. This is a clear cut issue of what is documented (not necessarily "what makes sense") and can be easily looked up.

Paul
 
It's well documented...

By my Ops Limitations, it is required for the first call up to a Control Tower, and then not after. I wish folks would answer questions like this based on documented facts, and not just post what they heard, what they think, or what they were told. This is a clear cut issue of what is documented (not necessarily "what makes sense") and can be easily looked up.

Paul


Paul is correct, the facts win out here...

It's not just in your Operating Limitations, but it's also specifically in a FAR...

FAR 91.319 (partial)

(d) Each person operating an aircraft that has an experimental certificate shall--
(1) Advise each person carried of the experimental nature of the aircraft;
(2) Operate under VFR, day only, unless otherwise specifically authorized by the Administrator; and
(3) Notify the control tower of the experimental nature of the aircraft when operating the aircraft into or out of airports with operating control towers

This makes it also cover my Experimental, Exhibition and Racing sailplane - which does not have it in it's old (1977) Operating Limitations.
 
Last edited:
Why don't you just send a letter to each control tower letting them know of the experimental nature of your aircraft? This would meet the requirements of the op limits and the reg. There is NO specific requirement to use the word "experimental" on the radio.
 
By my Ops Limitations, it is required for the first call up to a Control Tower, and then not after. I wish folks would answer questions like this based on documented facts, and not just post what they heard, what they think, or what they were told. This is a clear cut issue of what is documented (not necessarily "what makes sense") and can be easily looked up.

Paul

Well, you probably are correct. However, since there are no factory built RV's, notifying the tower that you are an RV does "notify the tower" that you are experimental.

That being said - I still use the word "experimental", but the tower guys around here simply call back with "RV 66AP". I'll ask the tower guys next chance what they've been told.

And on and on goes the discussion.
 
My Ops Limits say exactly what Mel said, but also includes IFR filing restrictions: "(24) The pilot in command of this aircraft must notify air traffic control of the experimental nature of this aircraft when operating into or out of airports with an operational control tower. When filing instrument flight rules (IFR), the experimental nature of this aircraft must be listed in the remarks section of the flight plan."

It appears that when just using VFR flight following the word "experimental" is not required (at least for my aircraft).

Mitch Garner
RV-4 flying
PL-4 flying
 
My Ops Limits say exactly what Mel said, but also includes IFR filing restrictions: "(24) The pilot in command of this aircraft must notify air traffic control of the experimental nature of this aircraft when operating into or out of airports with an operational control tower. When filing instrument flight rules (IFR), the experimental nature of this aircraft must be listed in the remarks section of the flight plan."

It appears that when just using VFR flight following the word "experimental" is not required (at least for my aircraft).

Mitch Garner
RV-4 flying
PL-4 flying
That's 2 sentences. The first one which requires you to "notify ATC" says nothing about IFR.

You are however correct about "flight following". The requirement is "when operating into or out of airports with an operational control tower."
 
calling oneself an "experimental" on the CTAF is my number one pet peeve.
Not just you! Worse is "Experimental November 1234 Alpha..." OK, are you a Lancair IV or a Breezy? Gimme something here.

Forgive my marginally useful contribution to an otherwise good discussion.
 
If you don't say Experimental another controller may chew you out?

While on the way to OSH I flew through the DET class Bravo airspace. The controller I spoke to told me RV's are now a recognized aircraft type and we no longer need to use "Experimental" when checking in.

Could it be? Have we been "accepted" by the FAA?

Have any of the rest of you been told the same by ATC?
I did not read all the replies but that is not LAW. Unless there is some public change in the FAR's, RV's are experimental. I am under the opinion on initial call up you should say experimental RV-7, N-number.

Controllers can be cranky (no offense). One will say it's NOT necessary to say experimental and another will demand you say it on initial call up. The next controller will demand you say it RV7 not just RV. Just say yes sir. However don't wear out "experimental" once is enough than just N number. Un-controlled field its up to you. Personally I like hearing experimental because I know most experimentals flying around are smaller and faster than your typical GA plane.

It has to be in the AIM/FAR. If the controller lectures you, than get THEIR number and call them with your anytime minutes. Let them explain it and give the reference, if they are going to teach you over the Com radio.

It could be the controller was saying I KNOW ITS EXPERIMENTAL. Fine but there is nothing wrong with saying it on inital. Unless they changed the regulation and Pilot/Controller responsibilities you are required to say experimental on initial call up. You are not allowed to fly over heavily populated areas unless taking off or landing (which kind of gives you a lot of latitude).

Also if you tell a controller "RV N-number" with out the DASH number, they might get on your case. WHAT RV? You need to tell them what type, they will say. I have heard that before. I think it's nit picky, since most all RV's have the same shape and performance, but since there is now a RV10 (bigger) and RV12 (slower) it makes more sense. Its like Cessna can be a Citation Jet or a C-152.

I have heard enough controllers to know some have pet peeves. If you DON'T say experimental another will chew you out.

There is nothing that says an RV is not experimental, even though they are popular and more are flying than some GA factory birds.

This happend to me once. I was doing flight test in some Pipers, one a twin Comanche, the other a Tomahawk. Both times the planes where in experimental status, for a fight test period to gain STC's on those planes. They where both in fact experimental Piper XYZ's. One controller just got nasty with me about the experimental status. WHY IS THAT EXPERIMENTAL? I told him I'd call him when I got on the ground and tell him, but the big letters on the side of the plane say experimental. I guess I could have not mentioned it. However again you are not allowed to fly over populated areas unless taking off or landing. Unless they change the AIM/FAR it is required to say experimental on initial call up in MY opinion.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone know what the original intent of this op lims language was?
Did/Do tower controllers handle experimental planes differently?
Why the language in the op lims. There must be a reason for it.
Perhaps controllers pay extra attention to experimental planes?
 
calling oneself an "experimental" on the CTAF is my number one pet peeve.

Not just you! Worse is "Experimental November 1234 Alpha..." OK, are you a Lancair IV or a Breezy? Gimme something here.

Forgive my marginally useful contribution to an otherwise good discussion.

I fly a Radial Rocket more specifically a "Concannon, Milton Radial Rocket 91TX".

That is quite a mouthful on the Radio as opposed to "Experimental 91TX"

Only 2 Radial Rockets have ever flown and I suspect less than 1% of all pilots and controllers have seen one or are familiar with their performance. As such identifying myself as experimental tells you what to look for just as much as using the long winded name. If you are in the pattern when I call in as experimental and must know what I look like just ask and I will tell you a 2/3 scale F8 bearcat.


I suspect the requirement to say experimental comes from a time when there were few experimentals and not a lot of approach control radar. It allowed the controller to ask performance ie speed on final and aided in sequencing at busy airports. Most controllers by now are probably quite familiar with RVs, lancairs, velocites etc, but everytime one asks what I am and I say Radial Rocket I get silence followed by "whats that" mthis continued back and forth on the radio ticks people off more than simply using the word experimental so pet peeve or not I will continue to use experimental as a descriptor in my communications.
 
Clarification

Reference this quote:

"By my Ops Limitations, it is required for the first call up to a Control Tower, and then not after."

I am assuming that you mean any ATC element at airport XYZ.

Example, you call XYZ Approach and use "Experimental" then never say "Experimental" again when handed off to tower then ground.

Likewise, after having breakfast you contact ground and use "Experimental" but not again when you go to the tower then handed off to departure?

Correct?
 
Back
Top