VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-14
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #311  
Old 07-24-2012, 02:14 PM
scsmith scsmith is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ashland, OR
Posts: 2,573
Default 32"

Quote:
Originally Posted by William Slaughter View Post
According to the spec sheet, it is 3" wider than a 7, and only 2" shy of being as wide as a 10. Of course as an 8 builder, anything over two feet wide just seems excessive to me.
Hate to break it to you, but your -8 is quite a bit over 2 ft wide.
__________________
Steve Smith
Aeronautical Engineer
RV-8 N825RV
IO-360 A1A
WW 200RV
"The Magic Carpet"
Hobbs 625
LS6-15/18W sailplane SOLD
bought my old LS6-A back!!
VAF donation Jan 2020
Reply With Quote
  #312  
Old 07-24-2012, 02:55 PM
pilottangocharlie pilottangocharlie is online now
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 169
Default

From the talk here anyone that builds this new model is destined to be hated by all. Maybe the main objective of this design isn't to target just those that need a wider airplane. What percentage of kits sold today make it to first flight with the original builder? If the process can be shortened and simplified it decreases the chances of the kit becoming a pile of metal in an attic or garage. Four to five years of building is not uncommon for a lot of people. As a first time builder looking at this new offering I can factor in some additional expense to have a finished airplane in a substantially shorter amount of time. As fellow builders we should embrace the design and use it to bring more people into homebuilding and possibly aviation in general rather than mumble how we wouldn't spend the extra cash on something like this. Does it meet every single mission out there? No, but the 172 I currently rent definitely doesn't either.
__________________
Tyler
Newcastle, OK
N825TC
RV-14A #140754
Project Log
Reply With Quote
  #313  
Old 07-24-2012, 02:57 PM
Kram Kram is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilottangocharlie View Post
From the talk here anyone that builds this new model is destined to be hated by all. Maybe the main objective of this design isn't to target just those that need a wider airplane. What percentage of kits sold today make it to first flight with the original builder? If the process can be shortened and simplified it decreases the chances of the kit becoming a pile of metal in an attic or garage. Four to five years of building is not uncommon for a lot of people. As a first time builder looking at this new offering I can factor in some additional expense to have a finished airplane in a substantially shorter amount of time. As fellow builders we should embrace the design and use it to bring more people into homebuilding and possibly aviation in general rather than mumble how we wouldn't spend the extra cash on something like this. Does it meet every single mission out there? No, but the 172 I currently rent definitely doesn't either.
You got that right, I have been wanting to build a 9 for over 1 year now. This is the best of everything.
__________________
EAA Workshop 2013
Reply With Quote
  #314  
Old 07-24-2012, 03:12 PM
brianwallis's Avatar
brianwallis brianwallis is offline
VAF moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In Walter Mitty's dreams
Posts: 947
Talking the proof.... is in the puddin

Regardless of all the armchair quarterbacking... I was very impressed with the new videos and graphics. Time and the market will tell it's fate. I suspect Vans thought long and hard about this one.... I do think people will appreciate the extra margins it provides.... kind of like a 182 vs a 172.... We shall see..... I'm hoping for the very best!
Best,
Brian Wallis
"With Inflation, there is hope for me to be a millionaire yet!"
quote by me
__________________
Brian Wallis
(Exempt AND VAF dues paid 02 FEB 16)
Callsign: VOODOO sold RV3 to pay for ratings !!!
AP/IA COM/Multi/IFR/350 type
Reply With Quote
  #315  
Old 07-24-2012, 03:25 PM
David Paule David Paule is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 4,435
Default

It looks like the RV-12s are flying after about 1,000 hours of building. With about the same level of kit maturity, plans development and integration on the RV-14A, I'd bet that they'll be flying well under 1,500 hours. Maybe even lower.

The RV-14A will fit more people, have better visibility and although it's not an LSA, it has nearly the same performance as the older two-seaters. It'll carry more, too.

It'll sell, and the buyers and builders will be some of the people who've so far passed on the older kits.

Dave
RV-3B, horizontal stabilizer skins in progress now
Reply With Quote
  #316  
Old 07-24-2012, 03:27 PM
rgmwa rgmwa is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlittle View Post
Finally, a significant amount of Van's business is export. The more complete a kit can be made, including wiring and avionics, the more attractive the kit becomes. International clients spend a lot of money on shipping, so bundling everything you need in a few subkit shipments makes sense. Spending $50 on shipping a $5 component and waiting weeks for it to arrive is a problem.
You're right there! I'm in Australia, and my RV-12 will have cost $88,000 USD by the time it's finished - without paint. Shipping and exchange rates are serious considerations for overseas builders.
__________________
rgmwa
RV-12LR 912ULS
120346
Reply With Quote
  #317  
Old 07-24-2012, 03:35 PM
Flying Scotsman Flying Scotsman is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,256
Default

On a serious note...what exactly is different/quicker about this one?
All the aluminum components are formed and pre-punched
for all the rivet and bolt holes. The ?matched-hole? punching
technology makes the airframe essentially self-jigging: when all
the holes line up, the airframe must be straight. As with all other
RV kits, all welding is complete. Wing spars come fully assembled
and ready to install. The canopy has been the focus of considerable
design effort. It should install with much less effort than
any previous RV. Fully designed wiring, avionics and engine
installation packages will be available that reduce the time spent
on those traditionally very time-consuming tasks dramatically.
The 7,8,9,10,12 are all prepunched, right? So that's no different. I believe they all come with pre-assembled spars. Also no different. The canopy construction seems perhaps easier, so that's a plus. There might be some gains to be had on pre-packaged/designed wiring harnesses and avionics packages (or not...I don't know how many people would go that route vs. choosing their own). Full-up engine installation kits would *definitely* be a plus, assuming *everything* is included and it all fits correctly "out of the box" (along with clear instructions and schematics to go with it).

Hard to see "dramatic" improvements in build time, but there may be some there...
__________________
Steve "Flying Scotsman"
Santa Clarita, CA
PP-ASEL, ASES, Instrument Airplane

RV-7A N660WS flying!
#8,000
Reply With Quote
  #318  
Old 07-24-2012, 04:08 PM
pilottangocharlie pilottangocharlie is online now
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 169
Default

In reading through build logs it seems some builders spend nearly half their time with the construction that comes after assembling the major metal components. If I understand correctly the design of the -14, once a wing is built its complete and ready. FWF slows a lot of people down too. There are countless threads on "what length prop/throttle cable do I need?" or "where do I penetrate the firewall for these connections?". Van has answered questions and time spent here with a seamless approach to building. Having a better build manual should greatly reduce build time as well. Imagine getting your first kit and very little instruction on the how-to. That could be frustrating.
__________________
Tyler
Newcastle, OK
N825TC
RV-14A #140754
Project Log
Reply With Quote
  #319  
Old 07-24-2012, 05:08 PM
Jamie's Avatar
Jamie Jamie is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying Scotsman View Post
On a serious note...what exactly is different/quicker about this one?
[indent]All the aluminum components are formed and pre-punched
for all the rivet and bolt holes. The ?matched-hole? punching
technology makes the airframe ...
I believe the key word here is "all". As you know on our build there we're lots of little strips, brackets, plates, etc that had to be measured, cut, etc that consumed considerable time. Only the sheet metal parts of the 7 were pre-punched and virtually no brackets, gussets, etc were provided.

Remember your canopy frame? That alone is a huge improvement, IMHO.
__________________
"What kind of man would live where there is no daring? I don't believe in taking foolish chances but nothing can be accomplished without taking any chance at all." - Charles A. Lindbergh
Jamie | RV-7A First Flight: 7/27/2007 (Sold)
Reply With Quote
  #320  
Old 07-24-2012, 05:25 PM
rockwoodrv9 rockwoodrv9 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Meridian ID, Aspen CO, Okemos MI
Posts: 2,645
Default correct

Tyler, as a first time builder I agree with you.

It is interesting reading the posts about how the 14 isn't any better than the 7 or 9 and costs more. Posts on how it will not be that much faster to build than the other kits. All of this without seeing the plans or instruction manual.

I admit it is fun to guess on why Vans did this model and not the one I would really like. It is also interesting reading what sounds like some are almost mad that Vans came out with a new model.

My son in law is going to build a Factory 5 car. I asked him which one he was going to build. He said the 33 Hot Rod. I like the Mk4 Roadster. When we were discussing why we would do different cars, it was easy to see what was important to him was different than what I wanted in a car. The thing is, neither of us got mad at Factory 5 or each other because we wanted different models.

I have a friend that flys a Husky so he can fly and land at his ranch. My partner has a Citation Ultra because he wants to get places fast (and for his ego! haha)

There are 2 things on the 9 I would change - bigger baggage area to fit a couple bikes or small motorcycle and the nose wheel. This 14 appears to change both of those issues. I am happy with the 9, and I am sure I would be happy with the 14 too. Sometimes money is not the reason a person picks what plane they want to build.
__________________
rockwoodrv9a
Williamston MI
O-320 D2A
Awaiting DAR Inspection
Reply With Quote
Reply



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 11:57 PM.


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.