|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

02-10-2015, 09:02 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 845
|
|
Re: Quick Build: the harder parts (with the possible exception of the longerons) of building an RV-12 would not be alleviated by a quick build option. This is purely personal opinion based on my experience, but I found the fiberglass trimming and fitting, the canopy work, and that type of thing to be far more of a challenge than assembling the airframe.
Re: VNE: I cannot imagine a scenario absent complete loss of control wherein that would make a bit of difference. The 12 is non-aerobatic and not approved for intentional spins, so the normal flight regime fits well within a 160mph VNE
Re: 120 hp. As it is, the 12 has more power than it really needs with the 100 hp Rotax. Even at gross weight it climbs very well, and an additional 20 hp (minus the extra weight of the engine) would more than likely equate to better rate of climb than it would to increased cruise speed, which is legally capped at 120 knots anyway.
Add to your RV-12 pluses: ease of resale. A lot of people brush that off with the insistence that they will never sell, yet a lot planes seem to show up on Barnstormers eventually. A Van's RV-12 is likely to sell better than a Sonex (purely opinion here - YMMV)
__________________
Dave Gamble
Grove City, OH
RV-6 N466PG Purchased already flying - SOLD!
The Book: The PapaGolf Chronicles
Built RV-12
http://www.schmetterlingaviation.com
The Book: Being written.
The above web blogs and any links provided thereto are not instructional or advisory in nature. They merely seek to share my experiences in building and flying Van's RV airplanes.
Last edited by Dgamble : 02-10-2015 at 09:04 AM.
|

02-10-2015, 09:05 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Jesup, Iowa
Posts: 1,657
|
|
Just MY opinions - -
If you have not ridden in either, you may want to. Any LSA is light, and will give you a much rougher ride than a 'heavy' GA plane. Flying in the middle of a hot summer day can be less than fun. It will also seem like a serious change in speeds perhaps from your stated experience.
Jab engines have experienced many more problems than Rotax. They run fine, but history I feel backs up what I said.
I have flown many different planes. For their intended purpose, the RV-12 is as good as I've seen. I have over 700 hours on mine. Engine runs as good as any one.
Fly both if you can.
__________________
John Bender
Flying RV-12 - Serial #120036
Paid in May ( 5-2020 )
Last edited by JBPILOT : 02-10-2015 at 09:47 AM.
|

02-10-2015, 09:49 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 1,029
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbkasner
Again, thank you for the suggestions! They got me thinking....
I'm about 75% decided on the RV12 but the Sonex with quick build sub-kits is running a close second.
RV-12 thoughts:
+ ease/well documented build
+ support group (you guys)
+ easily detachable wings
+ large cockpit
- Vne at 160mph.
- no quick build kit options
Sonex thoughts:
+ Jabariu 120 hp
+ Sonex's Vne over 190 mph
+ quick build kit options
This being considered....I can't find much on S-LSA qualifications, other than it appears Van sales a completed plane that qualifies. I really want to share the building experience with my son, so no quick build kit for RV-12 is a definite negative, but the pre-formed/drilled parts may offset to some extent this negative.
The Vne differences play a factor as well, I cruise for business usually 300 mile day trips, and in my old Mooney I loved getting approach/tower clearance over 'slowtations' thinking about what the jet jockeys were thinking when they saw me coming down from altitude at 200mph+.
Any suggestions/thoughts on S-LSA "quick build" alternatives, using a 120hp or the Vne differences?
|
I wouldn't worry about the lack of a QB option on the -12, for reasons stated earlier. The prepunched parts make a huge time savings on their own. Both aircraft use blind rivets. Besides, if you want to share a building experience, why would you go quickbuild?
The Sonex is aerobatic, if that's important to you; the Vne difference will be to your advantage there. However, you mention cruising flight and Vne together; the only place that'll matter is in your descent at the end of the flight. Realistic cruise speeds for both aircraft will probably be pretty close since both are LSAs.
The Sonex will also be cheaper (to build or to buy) but your resale value will also be proportionally lower. You also won't recover the added cost of the quick-build option. And that cost difference will shrink as you add the QB option, Jabiru engine, and additional avionics.
The Sonex cockpit is pretty small; depending on how big you and your son are you may feel cramped. Go at least sit in both (if not fly both) before deciding.
The RV-12 can be built E-LSA, with the shorter fly-off/test period (if that matters to you). The Sonex cannot; it will be E-AB with the 40 hour test period.
Manufacturer support for systems/avionics installation is more complete on the RV-12; though some of us like doing that sort of thing on our own.
The Sonex is available with the little wheel on the proper end of the airplane; Van's hasn't (yet) offered that as an option for the -12.
In the end, you have to go with what works best for you. Again, if at all possible, get a chance to fly and look over both airplanes before making your decision.
__________________
RV-7ER - finishing kit and systems installation
There are two kinds of fool in the world. The first says "this is old, and therefore good"; the second says "this is new, and therefore better".
|

02-10-2015, 10:31 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: La Feria Texas
Posts: 3,822
|
|
For your information, when I was making the same decision, the narrow cockpit of the Sonex was a deal breaker. Since then there has become available a kit to make the Sonex cockpit wider for two larger pilots.
|

02-10-2015, 01:01 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Lucerne,Ca
Posts: 272
|
|
The Rv-12
The RV-12 takes about 800 hours to build and does not need a quick build kit.
The accuracy of rivit holes ( w/in 1000 if a inch) make it easy to build. The dual Garmin package for IFR only need a second comm/ils/mave radio added for IFR. I,m getting a 32 ft trailer to keep the A/C in with the removable wings, Savings on hanger rent. Good luck on your project.
|

02-10-2015, 03:51 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 1,647
|
|
No doubt some builders could build an RV-12 in 800 hours, but for first-time builders I think it would be more realistic to allow 1000-1200 hours for an un-primed, unpainted aircraft - and some of us have taken a lot longer than that! I had an idea that Vans were considering a quick-build RV-12 kit at one stage.
__________________
rgmwa
RV-12LR 912ULS
120346
|

02-10-2015, 04:01 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgmwa
No doubt some builders could build an RV-12 in 800 hours, but for first-time builders I think it would be more realistic to allow 1000-1200 hours for an un-primed, unpainted aircraft - and some of us have taken a lot longer than that! I had an idea that Vans were considering a quick-build RV-12 kit at one stage.
|
True, not everyone does.... but a lot of builders have completed an RV-12 in 800-900 hrs (what at Van's is considered the average). Some people take more time, and others less (there are quite a few experienced builders that have completed one in 500-600 hrs).
__________________
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 ")
|

02-10-2015, 04:16 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 1,647
|
|
Experience definitely helps, Scott. Having now completed one RV-12, I'm pretty sure I could do another one in average hours. In fact the airframe goes together quite quickly, and lulls you into a false sense of optimism. It's the fibreglass, canopy, wiring and FWF that seems to soak up the time. Also if you decide to prep and prime the internal surfaces, that can add a LOT of hours.
__________________
rgmwa
RV-12LR 912ULS
120346
|

02-10-2015, 04:33 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Perryville, MD
Posts: 93
|
|
Why Sport Pilot
If your son is going to learn to fly in your own plane why not go straight into Private? A RV-9 sounds like it would meet your mission a lot better and can be built for about the same price if you find good deals on an engine and avionics.
__________________
Joe Mikus
MSgt USAF Ret Avionics Tech
Perryville, MD
Student Sport Pilot
Future RV-12 Builder?
|

02-10-2015, 04:51 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Riley TWP MI
Posts: 3,070
|
|
The regulations prohibit an LSA from cruising faster than 138 mph. There is not much difference between the cruise speeds of the RV-12 and Sonex. The RV-12 never exceed speed is actually 156 mph compared to the Sonex 197 mph. Both planes need to be going downhill to attain those speeds. If my RV-12 was going faster than 140 mph, I would be very concerned about hitting turbulence that could damage the airframe. I agree with others that the RV-12 goes together so quickly, that a quick build kit is not necessary. The plans contain step by step directions. The builder checks off each step when completed.
A friend of mine is building a Onex. When his kit arrived, he took inventory and found the blueprints but could not find the directions. So he called the factory and was told that there are no directions. The builder must look at the prints and figure out what to do. I am not knocking the Sonex. But RV-12 builders are spoiled and might find a Sonex more challenging to build. I am sure that there are many happy and satisfied Sonex builders.
__________________
Joe Gores
RV-12 Flying
|
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 02:23 AM.
|