|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|
|
View Poll Results: Now that the RV-12 is out the door, what should the next RV be?
|
|
Nothing for now - focus on efficiency, cut costs and prices, survive.
|
 
|
209 |
30.20% |
|
A factory-built version of the RV-12
|
 
|
36 |
5.20% |
|
The RV-11 Motorglider
|
 
|
120 |
17.34% |
|
An amphibian
|
 
|
54 |
7.80% |
|
An updated single-seater
|
 
|
111 |
16.04% |
|
A twin, using the new IO-233 or Rotax engines
|
 
|
71 |
10.26% |
|
A turboprop
|
 
|
36 |
5.20% |
|
A jet!
|
 
|
55 |
7.95% |

01-21-2010, 05:07 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Port Orange, FL (7FL6)
Posts: 274
|
|
I'd like to see a fast back option on the RV-8 and for the company to just survive. Too many kit manufacuring companies have gone out of buisness going down the road of too many airplanes too fast.
__________________
Flying as of 1-12-2016!!!!!
|

01-21-2010, 08:26 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,012
|
|
What should they do? Take a break and go fly!
Then come back and keep doing a great job of providing a very high value product. The more RVs out there flying, the better off we (GA) all are.
__________________
Bryan
Houston
|

01-21-2010, 09:15 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Walnut Creek CA
Posts: 513
|
|
VTOL single seat air to air refueler bush plane on floats. They would have the market cornered.
__________________
Rob Holmes
www.myrv3.com
N59LG
The minimum number of planes one should own is one. The correct number is n+1, where n is the number of planes currently owned. This equation may also be re-written as s-1, where s is the number of planes owned that would result in separation from your partner.
- Veluminati
|

01-21-2010, 09:19 AM
|
 |
Senior Curmudgeon
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton Airpark, NV A34
Posts: 15,420
|
|
You forgot to mention the
Quote:
Originally Posted by rph142
VTOL single seat air to air refueler bush plane on floats. They would have the market cornered.
|
Diesel engine
__________________
Mike Starkey
VAF 909
Rv-10, N210LM.
Flying as of 12/4/2010
Phase 1 done, 2/4/2011 
Sold after 240+ wonderful hours of flight.
"Flying the airplane is more important than radioing your plight to a person on the ground incapable of understanding or doing anything about it."
|

01-21-2010, 09:41 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 276
|
|
I recently saw a Tecnam P2006T Twin
It is a certified airplane, but it has some pretty interesting characteristics:
Twin Rotax 912 (100hp each)
145kt true cruise speed
10gph total at cruise on autogas
About $500k.
Admittedly this is not the right price range for most successful homebuilts, but it shows that a twin Rotax setup is doable.
__________________
Bruce
Richmond, VA (KFCI)
RV-10 (520+ hours since first flight in Nov 07)
RV-8 (500 hours, sold Sept 07)
|

01-21-2010, 10:18 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,231
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSFT-1
It is a certified airplane, but it has some pretty interesting characteristics:
Twin Rotax 912 (100hp each)
145kt true cruise speed
10gph total at cruise on autogas
About $500k.
Admittedly this is not the right price range for most successful homebuilts, but it shows that a twin Rotax setup is doable.
|
Here is a twin-Rotax kit plane that beats the Tecnam in every way, and for more realistic home-built prices.
Aerocat Amphibian
On this design you could easily substitute a pair of WAM 120s or Gemini 100/125s (if they are actually in production), or the less expensive 135 HP Jabirus as well. There are lots of engine choices at the low end of the power spectrum...
|

04-17-2010, 10:23 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, WA
Posts: 47
|
|
After reading several articles on the Tecnam P2006T, I think this would be an ideal setup for a kit plane. I bet Vans could easily design a platform for dual Rotax's. A twin for the masses! That's my vote.
|

04-17-2010, 12:17 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Eastern, PA
Posts: 828
|
|
Many of these choices (A twin, using the new IO-233 or Rotax engines, A turboprop, A jet) are incongruous with Van?s philosophy ? simple, efficient, cost effective.
How about certification of the RV-10! Every time I fly the RV-10 I?m amazed how much they ?got right?, its efficiency and performance. This did not work out so well for Lancair/Columbia but their philosophy is soooo much different from Van?s.
For now though I think he should ?go to Disney world.? When he gets back, update the 7/8/9 kit plans to the same format as the 10 & 12, then he can start looking into certification of the 10 to compete with Cirrus, Cessna, et al.
|

04-17-2010, 12:33 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,275
|
|
I agree with W1Curtis. Take a break. Travel a bit. See the country. Smell the roses.
Then fix the plans. I am helping a guy with an RV-8A quickbuild and looking at the fuselage part of the plans it will take a lot of time to understand what to do.
|

04-17-2010, 05:12 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Lee
Then fix the plans. I am helping a guy with an RV-8A quickbuild and looking at the fuselage part of the plans it will take a lot of time to understand what to do.
|
It must be an older vintage kit. The 8 (and 8A) plans issued with all fuselage kits since the -1 kit came out (about 4 years ago) have a point in the manual that says "If building from a Q.B. kit start here" (or something like that).
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.
Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:55 AM.
|