Is the risk worth it?

First, I want to say that I am in no way trying to damper the awesome feelings of a first flight nor the magnitude of the accomplishment reached. I don?t know the owner of the video posted nor do I intend to hurt anyone?s feelings. I am addressing this post from a safety point of view and safety concerns only. First flights (regardless if there are 7,000 RVs flying today) are dangerous and somewhat higher risk than normal. I took a long time to type this and even longer trying to figure out if I should post this. If at least I keep one person from doing something that can potentially put their life in danger, then the flak that I will receive from this post is worth it.

Like many of you I watched the video of the first flight located on the front page. The video does not show what occurred before the first flight so I am aware that I don?t have all the data available and data may be skewed. I conduct flight test on high performance airplanes and helicopters for a living. As I watched the video, the hairs on the back of my neck kept standing up. All I kept hearing were my instructors at Test Pilot School and my dad saying don?t do this and don?t do that.

I don?t know the background of the pilot, I am sure he is well qualified and experienced based on the flying skill observed on the video. However, I think we should address some things.

-I never saw the use of a checklist during the entire flight (maybe it was on the EFIS). First flight is a time that your nerves are potentially on edge and a time were you are potentially task saturated with all this ?to dos? in your head. One of the best mitigation for minimizing a mishap is the use of a checklist.
-The aircraft was started and almost an immediate taxi to the grass followed. Were the brakes check? I assume they were.
-Was the engine warmed-up enough prior to departure? I am assuming that there was a ground test performed prior to the video and the engine was within operating temps/conditions.
-Were controls checked? I saw a quick aileron/elevator check. I am assuming the rudder, trims and other controls were checked for proper functionality before the video.
-Were the mags/engine/prop checked prior to take off?
-Was the backup altimeter set to field elevation prior to take off just in case an electrical failure occurred and the glass cockpit went dark? I assume it was.
-Seconds after the first time the wheels left the ground for the first time under its own power, we see a ?look mom, no hands on throttle?.
-I saw a very nice roll during the first flight without much previous ailerons control checks. This one is ? I will leave it at that.
-A quick low pass with shallow dive (looking outside and no apparent cross checks with instruments, Vne? Engine rpm?).

There are some plusses:
-Stall checks prior to coming in for landing, verifying slow airspeed handling qualities in potential landing attitudes and airspeeds.
-Nice long stable final to get settled in on parameters.
-Nice smooth landing profile and landing.

I am not pretending to know everything about RVs or flight test (I know I am a pup compared to others) and I do have the luxury of Monday morning quarterbacking but the point is; flying is dangerous, first flights are more dangerous, not reducing risk by using common know aviation practices is very dangerous and introducing maneuvers that can have higher negative outcomes to a first flight is extremely dangerous. Why put yourself into that situation when your life or job does not depend on it?

Moderators, if this is not an appropriate post, please delete. Just want to get future pilots performing first flights on RVs to be aware of some potential hazards.

well said!!!!

As one that has been test flying RV's and others I quit watching when the wave to the crowd happened on the take off role.

Yes, there should be a disclaimer on that video. It was NOT his first rodeo! He is clearly a very accomplished pilot and has flow RV's before and not just a few hours of transition training. Not your typical first flight video.

I actually enjoyed it very much.

Hmmm... I don't use a checklist in any of the six varients of F-18 I fly. Whats that mean?

Maybe he was a repeat offender, built several before.
Maybe he's alerady inspected it top to bottom.
Maybe he's already taxi tested it.
Maybe he'd already test run the engine earlier.
It was VFR, who cares if the altimeter was set?



Or maybe... it wasn't actually the airplanes first flight.

Unless discussing an accident/incident for the purpose of learning/education, Monday morning quarterbacking isn't a "luxury." It's a sign of unprofessionalism.

Thanks!!

Axel, thanks for putting into words the feelings I had running through my veins, and down my spine.

As I hope to be doing my maiden flight tomorrow------I was eager to see the video.

Like you, it struck me as a very different set of activities than what I have expecting for my first flight.

Add to the list of missed items, cycling the prop.

As I learned a long time ago, you can usually learn from most folks, sometimes it is to do what they do, sometimes it is to NOT do what they do.

In all fairness, the video did mentioned things were edited ------- hopefully most of the items brought out were part of the edit.

First flight

It's good to see that others feel the way I do, I was going to post, but didn't want to ruffle the guys feathers. I would however like to hear from him, to hear his side of it. How about it???

I got some mixed emotions as well about that formation flight video in questionable vfr conditions in mountainous terrain....Right after watching that I saw the post of the crash in similar conditions.

I am also guilty of similar things. Guess we all should take a good look in the mirror at times....

Gents, it's first flight video, not the video of first flight. Those who read forum long enough, know how skilled Mike is. I like the video great editing job! I also like other movies and videos but it doesn't matter I will follow them.

rvaitor87 said:

It's good to see that others feel the way I do, I was going to post, but didn't want to ruffle the guys feathers. I would however like to hear from him, to hear his side of it. How about it???

Click to expand...

Why does he have to come on here and "defend" himself? It's his plane, he built it, he obviously flew it within his comfort level. Others may not agree, that's their opinion.

I used to pick up brand new Cessna's in Kansas, built by high school drop outs, rolling off an assembly line. You want to talk about nervous? Had more failures on more $x00,000 172/182's with 2 hours on them than any other platform I've flown. I'll feel a lot better the first time I launch in a plane I built myself, knowing what standard it was built to.

Oh, also had/seen plenty of failures in F/A-18 Super Hornets with <50 hours on them, so it's all relative.... your tax dollars at work!

Sig600 said:

Why does he have to come on here and "defend" himself? It's his plane, he built it, he obviously flew it within his comfort level. Others may not agree, that's their opinion.

Click to expand...

Asolutely true, he does not need to defend hiimself. From his profile, and the testimony of others, he is a very experiened pilot, and was probably well within his personal capabilities. However, the point that I read into Axel's post is that the more experienced folks need to be examples to those less experienced. What happens when an inexperienced builder/pilot looks at that and goes "I guess that's what I am supposed to do..."? I have seen numerous reports of first flights from very inexperienced pilots that had no idea how dangerous some of the things they reported really were.

I am with Mel - I am an EAA Flight Advisor, have been in the aerospace flight test business for over three decades, and I try to be a good example to others.

We are fortunate to have the freedom to do whatever we want - within reason. I personally feel that I also have a responsibility to help those less experienced understand the safe way to do things. Others may not feel that way, but it is how I serve our community.

Paul

Sig600 said:

Hmmm... I don't use a checklist in any of the six varients of F-18 I fly. Whats that mean?

Unless discussing an accident/incident for the purpose of learning/education, Monday morning quarterbacking isn't a "luxury." It's a sign of unprofessionalism.

Click to expand...

Sir,
If you choose not to use your pocket NATOPS for start up, shut down, etc procedures, that is your choice. We use it in the test squadron due to the numerous different types of aircraft and systems configurations we have to evaluate (new and experimental). In addition to that we use flight cards with test points (not shown in the video either). The last thing we want to do is waste a bag of fuel and our set up/configuration was incorrect therefore invalidating our results.

Also, I rather not learn from an accident/incident, I rather prevent it. And my post is an attempt to get pilots thinking about the risk involved with first flights. I am hoping someone views this as a learning opportunity and not in any way unprofessional. I value your input, I hope you value mine.

Axel, Mel and Paul are absolutely right on. Not a very good example
to set. I wanted to start another thread myself after watching the
video. Thanks Axel. Also, trying to defend not using a checklist
is absurd.

??

After reading this thread, I expected to see something just terrible in the flight video...

I didn't! Obviously, the pilot is experienced with RV's. It's also obviously edited between time frames. And who say's the control surfaces & movement wasn't checked to a high degree before the video begins.

Aileron roll............why not? It's England and a lot of open country. The ailerons were working correctly the first part of the flight, so why put it off?I use a mini checklist these days. I'd assume that a pilot who is quite familiar with RV's or similar aircraft could also have a mini checklist just sitting on the other seat.

Nope........... I don't see the big deal. I just saw an experienced and calm pilot, taking an RV for a test flight. Besides, I think England has a lot of good looking countryside.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

Well, if the goal is to be constructive....

Let's use the roll as the example. Easy to say "bad doggie", but sooner or later almost everyone rolls their new RV 3-4-6-7 or 8.

Assume it flies well. What sort of special inflight checks or tests are advised prior to the simple roll in the video?

Agree with some

Sig, L. Adamson and Dan (as always) are right. To each his own. Reading into this videowhat did or did not happen is just like assuming what happened in an accident prior to all the facts coming out. If someone sent in a video of a first flight that was a poorly produced flight of straight and level, I doubt it would have found its place on the front page. All you ne'er-do-wells, chill. I won't do a roll on a first flight, and I'm mature enough to know what I want to do (or not) in a similiar situation. That dosen't mean I didn't enjoy watching.

I am on dialup so may never see the video. The intent of this post is good. Let's make sure that the first flight fatality statistics remain rare.

It would be good to go after and reduce the day to day fatalities. There are way too many and we have it within our collective grasp to identify (See Nall report) and reduce the common accident causes.

I can almost guarantee you that fancy glass cockpits or ADS-B Out are not the saving grace.

strahler13 said:

Sig, L. Adamson and Dan (as always) are right. To each his own. Reading into this videowhat did or did not happen is just like assuming what happened in an accident prior to all the facts coming out. If someone sent in a video of a first flight that was a poorly produced flight of straight and level, I doubt it would have found its place on the front page. All you ne'er-do-wells, chill. I won't do a roll on a first flight, and I'm mature enough to know what I want to do (or not) in a similiar situation. That dosen't mean I didn't enjoy watching.

Click to expand...

For those that don’t see the merit in the advice of Axel, Paul, and Mel, I doubt there is anything I can say that will change your mind.

For those that are still reading, my perspective was slightly different from Axel’s, but I have to admit a couple of things caught my attention. The wave immediately following takeoff wouldn’t look near as cool if the engine sputtered…yes, I know it didn’t. It’s just that the hair on the back of my neck stands up when I see even the most experienced pilot intentionally distracts himself during an inherently a high risk moment. We see it again when he does the stall testing…why is he fiddling with the radios in the middle of a stall? We can debate about the merits of the roll but that 210 MPH (look at the round dial at 9 O’clock) pass over the runway doesn’t seem like a good time or place to do flutter testing.

Paige

The wave immediately following takeoff wouldn?t look near as cool if the engine sputtered?yes, I know it didn?t.

Click to expand...

English countryside with lot's of open space, means a lot more opportunity to take care of engine problems, than I had with subdivisions below. Just looked like a experienced pilot under total control.... to me. Not someone freaked out about a first flight, and wishing someone else was doing it.

It?s just that the hair on the back of my neck stands up when I see even the most experienced pilot intentionally distracts himself during an inherently a high risk moment. We see it again when he does the stall testing?why is he fiddling with the radios in the middle of a stall? We can debate about the merits of the roll but that 210 MPH (look at the round dial at 9 O?clock) pass over the runway doesn?t seem like a good time or place to do flutter testing.

Click to expand...

Wasn't a full 9:00, and my gauge shows 190 mph at that point. And the stall, was the second. Looked like everything went well on the first.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

Noel Simmons said:

As one that has been test flying RV's and others I quit watching when the wave to the crowd happened on the take off role.

Click to expand...

And I thought that was the English combo of "Flower Pot " and "Tally Ho"!

There are "first flights" and there are "first flights". When I did mine, I had 5 hour in an RV and less than 25 tailwheel and 2000 total flight hours. The guy in the video I would bet has 25,000 flight hours, has performed 2000 stalls and rolled hundreds of times.

I, as did the video poster, had no concern about the structural soundness of my RV. I did however, have concerns about my zero time engine. I saw nothing but very good flying skills with relaxed effort in a well constructed airplane.

I thought the stall while fiddling with the radio was awesome. I actually am going to try that. It should be added to the PTS! Not too many people stalling while they are paying attention killing themselves.

A good self-evaluation should be made prior to a first flight. You may discovery that you need someone else to do your first flight.

DanH said:

Well, if the goal is to be constructive....

Let's use the roll as the example. Easy to say "bad doggie", but sooner or later almost everyone rolls their new RV 3-4-6-7 or 8.

Assume it flies well. What sort of special inflight checks or tests are advised prior to the simple roll in the video?

Click to expand...

His skills are way beyond mine but in the US a parachute would be required to do that roll.

RV7AV8R said:

His skills are way beyond mine but in the US a parachute would be required to do that roll.

Click to expand...

Not true. See FAR 91.307. Parachutes are not required for solo aerobatics.

sprucemoose said:

Not true. See FAR 91.307. Parachutes are not required for solo aerobatics.

Click to expand...

OK, I stand corrected!

I'm not going to argue with anyone here about what's been posted. Good comments, all.

I'm just glad that I didn't post any video of MY first flight ... I'm just sayin' ...

I can't help thinking that a first flight is not about the experience or capability of the pilot. It should be about nothing but the airplane and the test procedure...IMHO.

John in Irvine

I can't help thinking that a first flight is not about the experience or capability of the pilot. It should be about nothing but the airplane and the test procedure...IMHO.

John in Irvine

Click to expand...

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. This is the best way (in my opinion) to sum up this whole subject. Who knows what was edited, or not. Done before, or not. Who cares that this was the 7000+ first flight on type, etc. But the airplane was definately not the focus of this first flight.

A close second is the thought that someone else mentioned is that those of higher experience should understand that certain things should not necessarily be put out for lesser experienced folks to try to emulate because they may not understand the ramifications.

Just my take on the subject. It seems obvious there is a large divide that most will not see the other sides opinion as valid.

Mark

To answer the original question

The original question is it worth the risk. In this case the answer must be yes. The pilot in the video in question must have done his homework and decided this was within his ability and accepted the risk. Each pilot must do his own assessment and act accordingly.

The Big Divide

RV Wannabe said:

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner.

Just my take on the subject. It seems obvious there is a large divide that most will not see the other sides opinion as valid.

Mark

Click to expand...

Kind of like the real world. There's the right way, the wrong way and my way.

I witnessed a first flight that this video reminded me of. This guy had several very experienced RV types at the airport for his first flight. We all had hand held radios. He briefed he would check in for comments before he took off. NOT..
He immediately flew out of sight and range of any airport. Still no radio. Came back 15 minutes later to buzz the field at high speen and very low altitude. Set up for his first landing and clipped a wing on a tree and knocked a big dent in it. Proceded to do a touch and go and another high speed pass and then landed. We all went out to see what we had heard and sure enough a big dent in the leading edge.
Oh, by the way, his wife was there telling us all what a safe pilot he was.

I guess it's all perspective.

This is another fine example of the first flight being about the pilot and not the airplane.

As I used to say when people said I made the big bucks pushing big iron around, my response was they just pay me that for my judgment.
Just my 02cents worth.

RV Wannabe said:

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. This is the best way (in my opinion) to sum up this whole subject. Who knows what was edited, or not. Done before, or not. Who cares that this was the 7000+ first flight on type, etc. But the airplane was definately not the focus of this first flight.

Click to expand...

It looked like lot of the focus to me! If you've been flying this type of aircraft long enough, you'll certainly know what to be looking for, and if something doesn't feel right. There is no requirement to have a clip board and 15 page questionnaire on the first few rounds around the patch. I'd rather see that temps were in line, that the constant speed prop functions, as well as a few other parameters. Looks like he went through all that, as well as three power off stalls. Between edits, I see that he spends quite a bit of time quickly checking the panel as well as scan.

I really do think this subject is getting overblown. I find myself now reading it for the "soap opera" value. Seriously!

L.Adamson --- RV6A

RV8iator said:

I witnessed a first flight that this video reminded me of. This guy had several very experienced RV types at the airport for his first flight. We all had hand held radios. He briefed he would check in for comments before he took off. NOT..
He immediately flew out of sight and range of any airport. Still no radio. Came back 15 minutes later to buzz the field at high speen and very low altitude. Set up for his first landing and clipped a wing on a tree and knocked a big dent in it. Proceded to do a touch and go and another high speed pass and then landed. We all went out to see what we had heard and sure enough a big dent in the leading edge.
Oh, by the way, his wife was there telling us all what a safe pilot he was.

Click to expand...

Like I said............I'm now reading this thread for the "soap opera" aspect.
How on earth does this video remind you of the flight you just portrayed? It "ain't" even close...

Anyway, it's now getting senseless, and I'm out of here.....

L.Adamson --- RV6A

Good post Axel and you are spot on..


Even profesionally trained, mulity thousand hour, multi platform qualified test pilots use a carefully balanced build-up approach for every flight no matter how benign and simple it may seem. Why? Because our egos have proven to get in the way of good judgment - and then we die.

SIG if you are active duty I invite you to review your NATOPs and requirment for use of checklists...I'm sure your CO would appreciate it!

Experience does not equal quality decision making processes..

apkp777 said:

A good self-evaluation should be made prior to a first flight. You may discovery that you need someone else to do your first flight.

Click to expand...

...so long as you apply the same evaluation criteria to that 'somebody else'.

I watched an RV-4 being flown for the first time at a local airfield about ten years ago. The pilot had looked at all the variables, and had made the decision to find the most experienced pilot he could to test fly his pride and joy, which had been 5 years in the making.

That pilot turned out to be a local CFI with decades of GA experience, and 10K+ hours.

This 'experienced' pilot took off in this brand new aircraft, turned downwind, and promptly executed an aileron roll at circuit height of 800' AGL. I was absolutely stunned beyond belief.

To be fair, I have subsequently flown with that CFI (he was the only person who could sign off on my BFR checkflight) and he seemed to be a very good and relaxed instructor - perhaps a little too laid back.

But I can tell you someone who won't be allowed within 20' of my -8.

apkp777 said:

I thought the stall while fiddling with the radio was awesome. I actually am going to try that. It should be added to the PTS! Not too many people stalling while they are paying attention killing themselves.

Click to expand...

If you want to practice channelized attention for your proficiency, I guess that's your call. I'd rather avoid it, use a little CRM, and prioritize.

That aside, why is he doing stalls on the first flight? Is it for his proficiency? Or, is it to determine the stalling characteristics and speed? Paying attention to something else probably isn't the best way to setup a maneuver, or collect data on it, IMHO.

Paige

Well It didn't look like a big deal to me but...

I knew when I watched there would be an outcry from the instructor oriented folks when I saw the pilot going through his mental checklist in this super simple airplane. The thing I didn't like was the primer switch configuration and placement. A toggle switch in a row of identical looking toggle switches.

Oh, never mind.

Bob Axsom

Just my take... but...

I think he means that this is his "first attemp at videoing a flight"...
not a "video of his first flight".

???

L.Adamson said:

It looked like lot of the focus to me! If you've been flying this type of aircraft long enough, you'll certainly know what to be looking for, and if something doesn't feel right. There is no requirement to have a clip board and 15 page questionnaire on the first few rounds around the patch. I'd rather see that temps were in line, that the constant speed prop functions, as well as a few other parameters. Looks like he went through all that, as well as three power off stalls. Between edits, I see that he spends quite a bit of time quickly checking the panel as well as scan.

I really do think this subject is getting overblown. I find myself now reading it for the "soap opera" value. Seriously!

L.Adamson --- RV6A

Click to expand...

Cheers...well said.

Here's a reminder folks - you can keep the thread running if you want (if you think there is anything new to add) as long as you keep it civil. You'll note that a number of moderators have commented here - we have our opinions, and let others have theirs - so long as you don't insult other members. We could just delete the opinions different from ours, but we don't do that here.

boring first flight....

My -RV9A first flight video (if I had made one) would have been boring
compared to this one.

By the book; a shallow climb out to 3000 AGL; gentle turns to remain over the airport.

Then the really exciting part - a couple of approach to stalls

And then, the uneventful landing.

Boring and uneventful is what I thought you wanted in a first flight...

Neat video though. I enjoyed it.

Dave
-9A flying

How about a positive, constructive addition to the thread:

AC90-89A

Chapters 2, 3 and 4 for suggestions and safety recommendations;

I used this as a guide with some judgment or lack thereof, added for the environment.

DanH said:

Well, if the goal is to be constructive?.Let's use the roll as the example. Easy to say "bad doggie", but sooner or later almost everyone rolls their new RV 3-4-6-7 or 8. Assume it flies well. What sort of special inflight checks or tests are advised prior to the simple roll in the video?

Click to expand...

Dan,
I respect your opinion and value the contributions you provide on this site. Our approach is crawl before you walk and walk before you run. Yes, the majority of us will do acrobatics in our aircraft. That is why we have them, they are fun and very capable machines.

A lower risk approach to a first flight would be to initially limit certain parameters. An example of that would be something like A/S below 120 KIAS, G?s less than 2.0, altitude less than 2,000 ft AGL, flight time to less than 15 minutes, no spins, ect. Then build up (or in some cases build down). With regards to the roll, maybe limit the angle of bank to 15-20 deg. On each additional flight expanding the envelope 10-15 deg until you test the entire envelope. Although it would be difficult to do because of the overwhelming excitement of a first flight going on, one should be discipline enough to plan the flight prior to take off and fly the plan. Not throw in any ?flare? or unplanned maneuvers. I am not saying that the gentleman did not plan the flight and did not do everything he planned. I am just answering your question regarding the roll.

If the moderators feel that this is getting out of hands, please delete the thread. I certainly did not intent for this to become a ?soap opera? or in any ways derogative to anyone or anyone?s believes. I knew it would get people talking/thinking and I would take shoots on the face like the ?sign of unprofessionalism? comment. But if the pilot that will be performing his/her first flight test is thinking about this and he/she now have more information (like the posted flight test documents) I feel like I am contributing to the aviation community in a positive way. I value aviation, one of my major drives in life is to improve aviation and kept it going for the next generation. The accident rates for Experimental aircraft are way too high, in order to mitigate accidents one should evaluate risks and figure out if the risks are worth it. Not only for myself but for my wife, family, the people on the ground and the next generation of pilots.

Here are a few example of a flight card from NTPS. Yes I know these are for certified or military aircraft. But at one point there were all considered experimentals.

Roll Performance
http://www.ntps.edu/images/stories/documents/test-hazard-analysis/17roll.pdf

Stall Performance
http://www.ntps.edu/images/stories/documents/test-hazard-analysis/07stalls.pdf

Va
http://www.ntps.edu/images/stories/documents/test-hazard-analysis/14bmanfl.pdf

AX-O said:

If the moderators feel that this is getting out of hands, please delete the thread.

Click to expand...

Not at all out of hand------just good mental stimulation, and raising the awareness of flight safety----I think it is serving a good purpose.

AX-O said:

But if the pilot that will be performing his/her first flight test is thinking about this and he/she now have more information (like the posted flight test documents) I feel like I am contributing to the aviation community in a positive way. I value aviation, one of my major drives in life is to improve aviation and kept it going for the next generation. The accident rates for Experimental aircraft are way too high, in order to mitigate accidents one should evaluate risks and figure out if the risks are worth it. Not only for myself but for my wife, family, the people on the ground and the next generation of pilots.

Click to expand...

Yep, that is very well said, thanks again.

Part of safe flying and learning is a self critique after each flight as well as listening to the constructive criticism of others and consideration of advice given.

The subject of this thread appears to be reading it and has commented on it in his own thread. He does not appear to have taken any affront at this discussion and as such I would not worry too muchabout hurt feelings or the moderators so long as the comments remain constructive.

Having said that I have come to 2 conclusions (for those with thin skins) in recent months.

1. Don't land an A model at an RV flyin late in the day when everyone is standing around, drinking beer, and watching.
2. If you are posting a first flight video do the video from the outside of the plane and just post the takeoff like Starkey

N395V said:

Having said that I have come to 2 conclusions (for those with thin skins) in recent months.

1. Don't land an A model at an RV flyin late in the day when everyone is standing around, drinking beer, and watching.
2. If you are posting a first flight video do the video from the outside of the plane and just post the takeoff like Starkey

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more Milt.

Jim Tambs

AX-O said:

Dan, I respect your opinion and value the contributions you provide on this site.

Click to expand...

Same here. I'm not a professional pilot, yet I in this game I sometimes serve as a test pilot.....like two very different aircraft in the last 60 days. My question was completely serious. I need to know.

With regards to the roll, maybe limit the angle of bank to 15-20 deg. On each additional flight expanding the envelope 10-15 deg until you test the entire envelope.

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand the "small steps" approach to the unknown. It is a prudent philosophy, in particular when applied to the test of a new airframe design, the aerodynamic modification of an existing design, or the addition of new systems (like weapons). However, those steps are based on a careful assessment of practical fact to arrive at an actual risk level. The test of a new design would include a great many small steps which would be considered a waste of resources for a proven design. Put another way, I am quite sure production flight test is flown with a plan, but that plan is much different from one for truly experimental flight test.

Let's apply the NTPS hazard card for roll:

Hazard:
1) Aircraft departs controlled flight
2) Aircraft exceed structural limits
Cause:
1) Airspeed allowed to reduce below stall speed
2) Roll coupling

When I assess the RV-7 and a positive-G roll maneuver I find a very low probability of critical airspeed loss or any roll coupling.

Let's dissect the maneuver. Check airspeed, pitch up 10-15 degrees at a 1.1G-1.3G rate, reduce to 1G, apply aileron deflection, hold, return aileron to neutral, 1.1-1.3G pitch recovery if required.

Now apply the small step approach to the above. The required airspeed is middle of the envelope. The pitch rate very low. The aileron response can be checked in ever-increasing deflections over the course of a minute or less of flight test time. The only new addition becomes the "hold", during which, from a purely physical standpoint, the airplane doesn't know it is momentarily inverted.

So, seriously, what am I missing? The test of a stock RV airframe is a form of production type conformance rather than true experimental test flight. Why should I increase bank angle by 10-15 degrees in subsequent flights rather than during a single flight? Same for roll rate; why would I need to use sequential flights for an increase?

Gotta go with Dan on this point - a roll is perhaps the most benign "aerobatic" maneuver out there - I don't see the issue with this once the basics are covered (which they were). The 707 airliner was rolled in flight test, for cryin' out loud!

As to the video itself, let's keep it in context - It's a keepsake for the proud new owner, not a "how to" on first flight procedure. As a "how to", it's poorly done, and while I think it was PERFECLY safe for this pilot, certainly sends a less than optimal message to the "lowest common denominator" pilot. However, it was NOT a instructional video; it's a relaxed, proficient pilot "flight testing" another example of a highly conventional, benign, and simple aircraft design. In this context, the new owner has a lot to be proud of and the video will be a great keepsake.

DanH said:

So, seriously, what am I missing?

Click to expand...

A left over bolt from the construction phase that didn't get found during inspection, and finds its way into the control system during the roll? Been there - done that - escaped with my life (not in the RV, and not during a roll).

You are correct Dan, that testing an RV that has been built to plans is NOT experimental test flying - it is more akin to production test flying. Yet the purpose is to make sure that there is nothing wrong after construction. All sorts of things can be missed, and missed by a series of inspectors. That's why production test flying for certified airplanes follows a strict, boring test card as well.

I present those for the inexperienced who may be reading this - not for the folks that have the knowledge already.

Paul

DanH said:

So, seriously, what am I missing?

Click to expand...

Nothing Dan, you nailed it. Either the ailerons work or they don't. If they don't, then you've got significant problems whether you choose to do a roll or not. If you do, then it's about the most benign maneuver you can do in an RV. That the airplane is at a certain bank angle means nothing functionally. You could establish any particular bank angle by using full aileron or very slight aileron. Like Dan mentioned, the airplane doesn't know it's inverted, and completing a roll is no different from stopping at any arbitrary bank angle. How you feel about this probably depends on your aerobatic experience and comfort level.

Ironflight said:

A left over bolt from the construction phase that didn't get found during inspection, and finds its way into the control system during the roll? Been there - done that - escaped with my life (not in the RV, and not during a roll).

Click to expand...

With all due respect, FOD issues are no more likely to happen during a basic positive G roll than any other maneuver. A complete roll can be completed by using the same aileron input as would involve a shallow turn. I don't feel rolling 360 degrees vs. 20 degrees presents any more risk for FOD interference, since if it happens during the first few degrees (even if you intend to do a shallow turn only), you're just as "screwed" as if you had continued the roll. Either way, the roll should be a strictly positive G, and coordinated one. Anyone with any acro ability at all can do this without even paying much attention.

Operating Limitations

Paragraph (16) in the operating limitations for experimental amateur-built aircraft states that
"Aerobatics must not be attempted until sufficient flight experience has been gained to establish that the aircraft is satisfactorily controllable and in compliance with paragraph 91.319(b)."
Basically what this means is that all other flight testing must be completed prior to aerobatic testing. This is FAA AFS-640 interpretation.

True Mel, bad form from a legal standpoint, but hardly "unsafe"...

As far as having loose hardware around, then the aircraft is UNAIRWORTHY! Flight test is NOT to find mistakes in building!