VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-4
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-06-2006, 02:46 PM
knifeman knifeman is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Apple Valley, California
Posts: 8
Default RV-4 Fastback Question

A couple of years ago I saw a photo on the VAF website of a fastback modification done on an RV-4. Does anyone know if drawings and descriptions are available for this modification and if so, where can I get them?

Thanks

Chad Eyanson
Austin, Texas
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-06-2006, 04:20 PM
N916K's Avatar
N916K N916K is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tehachapi, CA
Posts: 538
Default

John Harmon has the parts to modify the turtledeck. The rear of a Harmon Rocket is just an RV4 with a turtledeck. I believe poeple just cut the rear of the canopy frame to make it fit the turtledeck. I don't think a Harmon canopy would work for you, but you may contact him about getting the hoops for the rear of the canopy to graft onto yours.
__________________
Cam
Santa Ana, CA
RV-9 at KFUL
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-07-2006, 05:55 AM
BruceMe's Avatar
BruceMe BruceMe is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shawnee, Kansas
Posts: 804
Default fastback

My -4 is fastback. My website has some information on it.

http://www.precision3d.com/rv4/rv4fuse.htm

The usual way to do this is to take a stock RV-4 fuse kit and buy the harmon components for the top-aft section. But I was told that there are some difficulties mating the harmon parts to the stock fuselage. So I did the whole thing myself from scratch with 0.025 aluminum. It came out ok, If I could do it again, I probably would do the same but be a bit more careful about drilling the F-407 bulkhead to the sheet. It's makes an awkward double-bend angle that I didn't check for a nice flat true face. So it's a little squew.

As for the canopy. Again, the standard way is to mangle the stock canopy. Again, I decided to do it custom for the following reasons:

- For PIC head clearance, I pushed the canopy forward so the tip of the canopy is about 1/2 way down the glare shield. (like an RV-3)... vs. right at the panel (like an RV-4).
- I angled the panel about 25 degrees. Typically -3 or -4 instrument panels are almost square to the longerons.

My canopy is tip-up. I bought the 6061 stock, layed it out (with the canopy jigged in place, bent the tube. I then gave the lot of bits to a professional welder. It came out shockingly [to me] well. I mated the standard Todds HR canopy to the canopy frame using the Sika adhesive system.

Todd's Canopies:
http://www.toddscanopies.com/

Todd's instructions on using Sika:
http://www.toddscanopies.com/bondrv8.htm

This Sika thing went really well. Relative to the old soft-rivets; Sika is far superior.

With some ingeniuty, I could have done a slider, and still could. But I dont really want it. I'd nead to fabricate a RV-8 like rollbar and a track system. There's also an issue with this HR canopy having clearance sliding past the pilots head. It's a low-profile canopy with marginal head-room. Pushing the canopy forward that foot really helped a lot though, so maybe it's not that big an issue, if you did that too.

-Bruce

Last edited by BruceMe : 05-07-2006 at 05:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-07-2006, 10:40 AM
mark manda's Avatar
mark manda mark manda is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bakersfield ,Calyfornia
Posts: 922
Default

That fastback look is like a P-51 D to what a early model looks like. just looks right.

Bruce I couldn't find hardly any picts of the fastback on that link. Are you flying yet?

Also-- I went and checked the old defunct RV-4 group and the picts I posted of a friend of mine's fastback are still in the photo section. title-- Mean Green.

In my humble opinion, one of the all time best looking RV's is Mean Green. If you toss out interior room etc. the RV-4 fastback is IMHO the best looking RV design of all time.

edit-- even if the Fastback design wasn't their idea-- Van's should take credit for it anyway. (it looks that good)

Last edited by mark manda : 05-07-2006 at 11:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-07-2006, 10:47 AM
knifeman knifeman is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Apple Valley, California
Posts: 8
Default Fastback RV-4

Thanks to all for the info.

The reason for the question is that fast back is a great looking mod that I expect wouldn't add much weight. I am still in the planning/dreaming stages and have narrowed my plane choices down to an RV-4 or the Nexus Mustang. I am leaning toward the RV because it is a proven, attractive design.

The help is much appreciated.

Chad Eyanson
Austin, Texas
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-07-2006, 12:16 PM
63scrounger 63scrounger is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 24
Smile Mean Green Pics

I know exactly the airplane you are talking about. Could you please post a link or photo of "Mean Green". Wasn't it an Austrailian airplane?

Also, do you fastback types expect/experiance any speed/performance increases? I'm not quite sure the "looks cooler" factor is enough to move me off the keep it simple beaten path.
__________________
I'm just grateful to be here.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-07-2006, 12:46 PM
szicree szicree is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,061
Default Mean Green Photo

Here it is

__________________
Steve Zicree
Fullerton, Ca. w/beautiful 2.5 year old son
RV-4 99% built and sold
Rag and tube project well under way

paid =VAF= dues through June 2013
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-08-2006, 08:27 AM
BruceMe's Avatar
BruceMe BruceMe is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shawnee, Kansas
Posts: 804
Default P-51's

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark manda
That fastback look is like a P-51 D
I believe you ment P-51B. The P-51D (besides adding the HUGE Rolls Royce Merlin engine) added the bubble canopy. P-51D is what everyone thinks of when you say "Cadallac of the Sky".

To my knowledge (and there are many P-51 experts out there who may know) there where no fastback P-51's with the big engine. That should have been a bit faster than the bubble canopy variant. The bubble canopy was at the pilot's request for improved visibility.

-Bruce
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-08-2006, 08:41 AM
BruceMe's Avatar
BruceMe BruceMe is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shawnee, Kansas
Posts: 804
Default More on the fastback mod

Quote:
Originally Posted by knifeman
Thanks to all for the info.

The reason for the question is that fast back is a great looking mod that I expect wouldn't add much weight. I am still in the planning/dreaming stages and have narrowed my plane choices down to an RV-4 or the Nexus Mustang. I am leaning toward the RV because it is a proven, attractive design.

The help is much appreciated.

Chad Eyanson
Austin, Texas
First thing... I installed the canopy last night and put the cushions in. I did my very first cockpit ergonomic analysis. I have WAY more headroom than I thought I would have. The top of the stock rollover bar is about 3" bellow the crest of the canopy. My cusions put the top of my head (I'm 5'6") about 6" bellow the top of the canopy. So I will have to add A LOT of booster cushions and under-cushion foam to get my head up high enough. I'm pretty pleased with what I have. I nead to get a decent digital camera so I can post some pictures.

Here's my personal overal analysis on the mod:

1 - I should be one of the lighter RV's ever made (for many reasons) so when I weigh mine in a few weeks, I can put up or shut-up about weight. Whatever is gained in more aluminum top-deck matrial should easily be lost in canopy weight (it's a smaller canopy).

2 - I should be 5-10kts faster than a similarly configured bubble canopy RV-4. This has been said to me by other fastback -4 owners.

3 - In the tip-up configuration, the canopy arrangment is functionally identical to the bubble canopy RV-4.

Despite the drastically different look, this modification is IMHO, a very minor one entirely cosmetic with the only drawback being poor 6-o'clock visibility. But when I dog fight in my stock -3, with all four points of my harness synched as tight as I could get them, I couldn't crick my neck to see in the dead 6-o'clock anyways. If you let up on the seatbelts, you can bend your back around to see there, but I got motion sick in about 5 seconds.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-08-2006, 10:18 AM
Dayton Murdock's Avatar
Dayton Murdock Dayton Murdock is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Carson City NV
Posts: 550
Default Images

Hey Bruce
How about some images of you RV4 project!
__________________
Dayton Murdock
VAF#408 RV4 N359DM Flying 1046 hrs 7/16/19
Builder Log
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:11 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.