Looking into RV-6A as a fairly new pilot

[Neal@F14]

Originally Posted by Turbo69bird

Had a Freind ground loop a Pitts after flying it for 16 years and that made me think twice about tail wheel, not to mention insurance for a low timer

A Pitts is a hard plane to land well and smoothly. An RV6 is a lot easier. Still, the RV6 is the most difficult one of the RV tailwheel planes to land consistently well IMHO. It's taken me a couple years of ownership to learn to land mine well and consistently.

Is it insurmountable for a low time pilot? No, but it does take training, practice, determination and focus. You can't expect it to be as forgiving as a Cessna or Cherokee.

I know a very high time pilot who owned and flew his Pitts for many years and thought he'd mastered it, but totalled it in a ground loop one windy day.... its a much meaner animal than an RV6 though.

[jpowell13]

I don't think a 6A would be that hard for an average 100 hour pilot to transition into with good transition training. You have to take care not to let the nose wheel hit the pavement hard. It's not as strong as a Cessna or Piper nose gear.

A well built 6A that's not too heavy and with the right CG can carry two average size people and plenty of baggage a long way for very little money. It gets you there fast and is fairly comfortably. Many 6A's have very capable autopilots which won't add much to your purchase price and which is really nice for VFR flights and a necessity for IFR IMHO.

I think of my 6A as a 2 seat sports car versus a sedan. It corners better than the sedan, but isn't really any harder to drive. It's a short tail, by the way, which I wouldn't change.

John

[Turbo69bird]

Originally Posted by Chkaharyer99

1. Answer to question 1: Formal training is essential! I too am a low time pilot. I got my license May 2014. Nearly all of my training was in a C172. I had about 120 hours when I started earnestly looking to buy an already flying RV-8. Quality training with a qualified experienced instructor is very important in my opinion (yeah, I said that twice). I used Mike Seagar in Oregon. Flew in his RV-7 for ten plus hours. Got my TD endorsement. That convinced me I can do it. Now I own and fly an RV-8.

2. Answer to question 2: You stated, " Don't think a tail wheel is a good Idea even if I could get ins which I probably couldn't". I have insurance. It's not cheap but I'm worth it.

3. Answer to number 3: My hangar mate just sold a beautiful RV-6 with under 200 hours TT on the engine and airframe. I think he took $60,000 for it. It needed nothing but fuel, oil and someone to love it.

You're in the right place.

I got my ppl in April 2014, One reason I want the 7 tail is spin recovery, just added insurance. I do like the 6 tail and it's better looking but spins kill and anything that increases those odds to me is a plus. I'm sure that comment will open a can of worms though.


I'm glad I posted,
the encouragement and comeradere here is awesome and it's nice to hear of successful low time transition.

Another thing I really appreciate about the RVs over the other planes is its added visibility. While the tip ups probably even have better visibility I think they cause other concerns.

I'm also not terribly interested in the speed aspect of the RV as much as I am the agility of it. I've had 1000 hp street cars, so that feeling of speed / power is never going to match the cars anyway. Yes it cuts the flights shorter but it's not really what I'm after, it's the handling that got me hooked. 172 to an RV is like a suv to a Porsche 911.

Why RV6 Vs other models?

Don't like to fly solo I'd prefer to share the experience with friends., I know a bit more about 6s than other models, I dont really care for front to back seating, prefer side by side, and a 6 is a better bang for the buck than other side by sides , due to other expensive hobbies, family obligations and this wonderful 8 year+ housing economy, I'm on a tight budget. 😀

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by Neal@F14

Don't dismiss the standard low profile RV6 tail. It works just fine as long as you avoid spins.

When considering spin recovery, the difference in tails on an RV-6A it is not much different.

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by Turbo69bird

I got my ppl in April 2014, One reason I want the 7 tail is spin recovery, just added insurance.

It's not a can of worms, but in the hope to dispellrumors or old wives tails.....

The spins that most often kill people are unintentional spins at low altitude. They are usually 1/2 to 1 full turn at the most (because of the low altitude).

If an immediate recovery is initiated, you wouldn't detect much of any difference in the two tails on an RV-6. This means that a difference in recovery time from a 1/2 to 1 full turn spin will probably be undetectable by most pilots.

Where the (slight) difference is apparent is when recreationally doing spins and allowing them to fully develop (3+ turns). In that case, the larger rudder will terminate the rotation just a little bit sooner.

[newt]

Originally Posted by Turbo69bird

I got my ppl in April 2014, One reason I want the 7 tail is spin recovery, just added insurance. I do like the 6 tail and it's better looking but spins kill and anything that increases those odds to me is a plus.

I don't want to be presumptuous, but I suspect you've made a bunch of decisions already that might be closing off some good options for no good reason.

1. Whether the rudder pedals are hinged from the top or the bottom doesn't make much difference. You won't notice in flight, you won't notice on the ground either.

2. Whether it's a tricycle or taildragger doesn't make much difference either. Every RV needs to be flown 'til it stops moving, regardless of which end has the little wheel. Do your taildragger rating to become a better pilot and open up some options, then you'll at least be qualified to have an opinion for the forums on whether you're more likely to flip or groundloop

(It wasn't THAT long ago that every pilot was a taildragger pilot, because there weren't any tricycle trainers in existence. They seemed to cope from ab-initio onwards. You can probably cope too, it's just a training and confidence issue)

3. Whether the fin is old style or new style doesn't matter. You're going to crash if you spin close to the ground. If you don't want to crash, don't spin close to the ground. The size of the splat-mark on the ground made by your fin in your wreckage will make literally no difference whatsoever.

Have a good think about whether those criteria you've described are objective or just based on "the vibe." You're probably currently ignoring excellent options for reasons you might not fully understand this early in the game.

I'm sure that comment will open a can of worms though.

Meh :-)

- mark

[Arlen]

Here's a 6A advertised here on VAF. http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...d.php?t=124731

[rbibb]

Regarding "low time" pilots taking on an RV.

IMHO

Its all about the attitude of the pilot and the instructor.

In the 1950s the USAF used T6's as PRIMARY trainers - as in your first solo was in a 600hp, 4500 lb, taildragger. In WWII kids with maybe a couple hundred hours strapped on a P51 or a Hellcat.

So its not the number of hours per se but the instruction that goes into flying the plane.

So flying an RV (either TW or A model) with, say, 110, total hours is not that big a deal and should not scare you off. Key to that is getting a good instructor to give you the transition training for the type,

RVs are very docile taildraggers BTW so letting that be a determining factor alone limits the availability a suitable planes to buy.

Go find the plane that fits your budget and an instructor who can help you get comfortable in it. Its not that big a deal.

[rmartingt]

I started transitioning to Dad's -6 at 18, with a whole 50 hours of C150 time under my belt. It took 30 hours over a year and a half (being away at college made it hard to fly a lot at one time) to transition and get signed off--but then, that wasn't just a regular transition-training or tailwheel transition program, either. A lot of that was him imparting 20 years of military and airline experience and teaching what I'll call "aeronautical decision-making"--stuff my instructor didn't know or teach because he didn't have the experience. We also did spins, formation, basic aerobatics, and a bit more cross-country. Basically, he wanted to cover everything I might want to do before he'd let me run off with his brand-new airplane.

I don't think you'll have any problem transitioning.

[Kahuna]

FWIW, I cant remember the exact number, but I was a 50hr pilot when I took the first flight in my 6A. Managed to survive the process. There was not much for formal transition training like there is now. Looking back, that would have been useful. I would have no trouble recommending the 6A or 6 to a low time or no time pilot. Flying is relative. You will adapt very quickly.