RV-7A Noseover Incident

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Pilottonny

I think I remeber posts here about at least one more "A" that flipped during taxi, or was that only a collapse, but not a nose-over?

There were two incidents that I am aware of that happened during taxi on grass. In both of those incidents the airplane did not flip.

[miyu1975]

The way the article read it sounded like he had a hard landing and the front tire busted. But we all know how acurate news reports are at times.

[mick]

I had a look at this RV. The plane was fitted with the new fork and there is no indication that the nose gear bent at the fork swivel point, the fork is still in-line with the nose gear which is unusual for a rollover caused by a fork digging in. There are rumors that the landing was at a higher than normal speed and hard braking was used, a prop strike was also mentioned by a witness and may have added to the weight already on the nose gear by the braking. The strip is also a bit rough in places and it is believed that he may have set down in the worst part of the strip.
The plane has sustained substantial damage but could be rebuilt.
The great news is the pilot walked away with no real injury. Not happy but alive which is always a good outcome.
Any landing you walk away from is a good one... Right???

http://[IMG]http://picasaweb.goo...eat=directlink[/IMG]

[John Clark]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Did anyone else notice that the airplane flipped during taxi? To my knowledge that's the first time that has happened.

I hate to speculate, but flipping the plane during taxi operations seems very odd, if you know what I mean.

There may be a semantics issue here. The news report says:

"The plane flipped on to its roof while ?on taxi? on the airfield?s longer runway".

I have seen the term "taxi" used by non-pilot reporters to describe any operation where some of the wheels were on the ground. Like "taxiing for takeoff" used to describe the takeoff roll. In this case "on taxi" could well mean landing rollout.

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by John Clark

There may be a semantics issue here. The news report says:

"The plane flipped on to its roof while ?on taxi? on the airfield?s longer runway".

I have seen the term "taxi" used by non-pilot reporters to describe any operation where some of the wheels were on the ground. Like "taxiing for takeoff" used to describe the takeoff roll. In this case "on taxi" could well mean landing rollout.

Yeah John, that's sort of what I was wondering. Again, we just need all the facts here to know what really happened instead of immediately implying that the new fork doesn't help, that there's a major design flaw, that the pilot just screwed up, etc.

[Ron Lee]

It was a non-paved surface. I avoid those which should greatly reduce the odds of this happening to my 6A.

[Webb]

I wonder if he debated whether to bust out the windscreen or the canopy?

[Jon Clements]

It is a 7A.

It had the Nosewheel upgrade.

Its a grass/gravel strip.

He was landing and (see Mick's comments above) and apparently he may have been hot and subsequently braked heavily.

He smashed the canopy with his feet to get out.....apparently.

Very minor injuries - luckily.

He is now another 7A shattered man (i dont believe an A has been nosed over by a woman yet.....).

OK....so the debate continues (Mick - see above - will give me stick over these comments).......

I am building a 7. No nosewheel for me. I will be flying in and out of more grass and/or gravel strips than sealed ones (this is common downunder).

I am not here to argue whether or not a 7 or 7A is better.

What I do want to say (and many of you are probably thinking it....) is that the if I owned a 7A (or 6A or 8A) I would be seriously concerned about the nosegear in consideration of the number incidents that have now occurred. Is it really acceptable to be lining up on final and focusing on trying to pinpoint the smoothest part of the runway for touchdown rather than focusing on more important issues such as "flying the plane". The concern will become a distraction....point being that every pilot should develop "confidence" in their aircraft.

The now arguably large number of similar incidents undermines confidence.

I reckon the "A" fraternity should put pressure on Vans to appropriately rectify this problem. OK so we are building EX's and it is unlikely they will provide all "A" owners with new nosewheel gear and associated engine mount to make the problem go away but ALL future "A" owners builders should expect something adequate for the job.

Even offering an upgrade option would be a good start......

My 2 cents worth.

PS I still love VANS, RV's and everything that goes with the company and the associated fraternity but it would be dissapointing to think that a serious injury or death would need to occur to result in change.....

OK - start throwing vegetables at me......

Cheers

JON.

[plehrke]

Originally Posted by Jon Clements

I am not here to argue whether or not a 7 or 7A is better.

One is not better then the other, they are just different. You can't say the 8 is better then the 7 or the 10 is better then the 12. They are different. Know the advantages, disadvantages, limitations (to you and how you fly) of the model you have.

[L.Adamson]

Originally Posted by Jon Clements

I am building a 7. No nosewheel for me. I will be flying in and out of more grass and/or gravel strips than sealed ones (this is common downunder).

Then put larger tires and a high wing on it; and expect lower airspeeds. RV's do have a tendency to get beat up a bit with gravel. These are not exactly the perfect "outback" planes...

And yes, there is a pun there, but we have the Utah Outback too!

L.Adamson -- I'm thinking one of the Cub clones or a Aviat Husky