What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-7/7A assembly manual update proposal

tgmillso

Well Known Member
Sponsor
Hi All,

Yesterday, I suspect I have botched yet another set of parts because I followed the instructions, rather than spending hours trawling through other builders websites, making up a decision which one is right, then executing on it. Either way, both methods appear to be a waste of time, and it would be so much better if the instructions were just correct. I am a little staggered by the lack of updating of the instructions. I have the ones that came with my original emp kit 11 years ago, and they are virtually unchanged to the current ones. There has been little to no attempt to take into account the learnings from the past decade or so of builder discoveries. Coming from an engineering optimization background, I find this bewildering, and living 8140 miles from Vans Aircraft, it is painful having to wait for replacement of your botched part. I see the best way for improving the completion rate, and ensuring that QUALITY aircraft are constructed, is issue a genuine attempt at updating the assembly manual. I am currently working on the fuel tank Z brackets, and frankly Van's method sucks, as it doesn't allow accurate match drilling of the tank to spar/skin geometry. If only I didn't drill that 1/8" hole in the other side of the flange as the instructions told me to and I had found the method formally know as The Checkoway Method earlier... now I have to order 14 new Z brackets and spend $100 airfreighting them here. This is unfortunately not an isolated incident. Just a few that come to mind are the bending of the elevator tab trim tab ears, the overhang of the wing walk doubler (if you use the 1" recommended by Van's, then they will interfere with the flaps) and the list goes ON and ON. Sometimes Van's will send me an excerpt from the RV-14 instructions where they have obviously been updated, but frankly, thanks, but I don't need an RV-14 (I'm only 150lbs), I just want to successfully build my RV-7.
Now that I've got the blood pressure up of you second, third or 30th repeat offenders (I know there will probably be a tirade of "this is all part of the education" launched in my direction) I am proposing a solution. I have been keeping notes in my manual that could possibly be used as upgrades, and I would be prepared to provide a track changed document back to Van's. I figure this is something that we as a collective community could accomplish, looking toward those of you who are further on in the build or have completed and would be willing to assist. I just feel that we as a group spend so much time keeping our own journals and web logs of what we have learnt, but nowhere is this pulled together into one document so that future builders can benefit to the fullest extent. Should there be disagreement on the process amongst the builders, then that is the beauty of this forum, we can launch a poll and take the most preferred solution, and if things are near equal, then we can provide multiple choices (but state which one is preferred). Frankly, I don't think this list or the modifications will be massive, but they will go a long way to improving things in the future.
I know this will still require acceptance by Van's and they may even have to take things past the FAA again, but frankly I think this would do great things for reducing builder frustration and subsequently improve the completion rate and the general construction quality.
If you are interested in assisting, let me know, along with the stage of completion of your project. I figure this may also be applicable to the RV-8, RV-9, RV-4 and RV-3, so if others are interested in putting up their hand to assist on those older platforms (still available from Van's), it would be greatly appreciated, at least by future builders or those midway through their current build. Imagine the good karma you could earn by assisting!
Conversely, if I am way off the mark and this has previously been tried unsuccessfully for currently valid reasons (and I just need to get better at using the search function), let me know. Time for me to get off my soapbox and back to ordering those replacement Z brackets.
Regards,
Thomas.
 
I agree that updates (to the plans/proceedures) should occur from time to time.

Another example would be...for the RV7...

Do not cut the final length for the large aileron push/pull tubes to the length according to the plans. If you do, they may be too short and you will have to re-order or have minimal thread engagement of the rod end bearings. Cut the tubes to fit YOUR airplane. Maybe vans could give a range. I needed abour 3/8" longer. If you would like to just build them as per the plans, just buy my first set and save yourself some time. Save your parts for the real length.

Bevan
 
I built an RV6 tail some 20 years ago, giving up when life events interfered. But one reason I wasn't too sad to see it go was exactly what you're talking about; I followed the plans slavishly but things didn't fit (the trim tab to comes to mind). ISTM that a lot of these 10-year builds could be 5-year builds if following the instructions made parts that fit.

As I again contemplate building, my previous experience with Van's instructions makes me pause and consider Zenith, Rans, and Kitfox. Unfortunately, when it's all finished, I don't want to own and fly a Zenith, a Rans, or a Kitfox.....

So I think some kind of continuing update is an excellent idea.
 
Ideas

I think it's long overdue.
I've tried to document any part of the build that didn't go as planned. Z-brackets are the worst offender in the manual. I documented my processes on my blog and added them to the "Gotchas" thread. Unfortunately the "Gotchas" thread wasn't started very long ago and it's still a work in progress. I'm no expert, engineer and don't stay in Holiday Inn so I can't say it's the right way to do it. It at least throws up a flag to research the sequence in question.
That will be the biggest hurdle. Which way is the right way. Some techniques are as controversial as the primer wars.
I applaud you for th effort. Build on
 
Last edited:
It has been requested MANY times by many builders to Vans. Nothing happens/changes. I think these errors are their built in Profit margin boosters. :D
 
As I again contemplate building, my previous experience with Van's instructions makes me pause and consider Zenith, Rans, and Kitfox. Unfortunately, when it's all finished, I don't want to own and fly a Zenith, a Rans, or a Kitfox.....
If it's not the idea of an LSA that is unappealing, I can tell you that the RV-12 has a state-of-the-art assembly manual, and it's a pleasure to fly.

That said, there are cases where it would behoove you to consult a build blog, not because following the Van's guide will ruin parts, but because there are certain things that are better done sooner and some that are better done later than the guide calls for them simply for ease.
 
A wiki-pedia type page that verified builders have access to edit could probably be a great resource and put all the knowledge into one place. I'd be glad to contribute.

Chris
 
It has been requested MANY times by many builders to Vans. Nothing happens/changes. I think these errors are their built in Profit margin boosters. :D


As much as I believe Vans is an honest company, you may be correct. There is an ethical responsibility for them to continually update the plans and correct their mistakes. Maybe not adding in short cuts per say, but at least correcting measurements. I am flabbergasted that there is not a "Version 3.24" on the bottom of the set of plans. With the advent of distributing them via pdf, its a no-brainer.

I wonder what the copyright laws are for reproducing the plans with these corrections? It would really be eye-opening if Vans legally fought other people distributing their plans with the corrections that they refuse to do.
 
Video

Maybe a short clip of a youtube video of each of the gotcha's. Sometimes, a picture is all that it takes to bring clarity, especially when the plans are in error.
 
We're on.

So it looks like the general consensus is that we should press ahead and put a proposal to Van's. I hope they don't take it the wrong way, but ultimately the idea we are floating will be of benefit to them. Should they turn down the proposal, I love Chris' idea of starting a wiki page that experienced builders can populate and that experienced builders can turn to. I have always been impressed by the quality of Wiki information, even though some may disregard it because it is open sourced. Frankly, of all the donations I make annually, it is the second on the list regarding "value for money" to only VAF. I will let you all know what I hear back from Van's.
Cheers.
Tom.
 
When I asked about improvements to the manual, back when I was building, the reason I was given that improvements had not been made was that the original manual was written during the build of a prototype aircraft. Re-writing and making corrections, in their view would basically require building another aircraft etc.

I can also understand that there has not been much monetary reason for them to put in an effort to improve the original manuals since they have been so successful at continuing to sell plenty of kits.

I must say that this all flies in the face of my QA background involving "continuous improvement forever". It is a shame to know that builder after builder will fall into the same "traps" unless they take time to gather lot's of information from lot's of builders websites. Back in the day Dan C's web site was a great source of info, even though it was only generated by one person. Imagine what a collective effort of some kind could do...

I suspect that Van's will never step into an effort to re-write or make corrections, but if builders want to put in an effort to make better information available, I am sure they would gladly sit back and smile as it would all be in their benefit.

Randall from Sedona
 
If Vans won't get involved, that's OK too. At least it is a decision. Then this collective group can move forward to compile "builder's suggestions" based on experience and grouped by model type or whatever is appropriate. It should be hosted right here on VAF. Sort of a go-to place for newbies.

Bevan
 
Last edited:
z brackets

Speaking of z brackets, is it possible or even feasible to build the fuel tanks before getting the wing kit? Will I be able to get to the z bracket attach point to the spar later? I heard that someone actually will build the tanks for you and then send them back to you, but I do not recall if you need to send them the z brackets that are match drilled.

Buy and build as I go. I know it will cost more in the long run, but I would be able to build it faster if I buy partial.

Working on empanage now.

Bob
St Pete, fl
 
When I asked about improvements to the manual, back when I was building, the reason I was given that improvements had not been made was that the original manual was written during the build of a prototype aircraft. Re-writing and making corrections, in their view would basically require building another aircraft etc.

I'm going to stick with post #5. :D
 
Z-brackets

Speaking of z brackets, is it possible or even feasible to build the fuel tanks before getting the wing kit? Will I be able to get to the z bracket attach point to the spar later? I heard that someone actually will build the tanks for you and then send them back to you, but I do not recall if you need to send them the z brackets that are match drilled.

Buy and build as I go. I know it will cost more in the long run, but I would be able to build it faster if I buy partial.

Working on empanage now.

Bob
St Pete, fl

I don't see how you could hope for a perfect tank fit. Once you've drilled the z-brackets and fit the parts to the splice strip then match drilled the tank, sending the parts to another builder would be ok. Should fit just fine. Maybe they have some sort of jig to insure a perfect fit.
 
is there a list somewhere of the better online builder logs? I've looked several and found a couple that are informative and a few that are like cat videos.
 
Last edited:
I don't think "we" would like the embedded cost of someone at Van's perpetually updating plans. However, it shouldn't be prohibitively expensive for Van's to publish a list (by type) of known mistakes in the plans, just so builders could check the lists and update their plans (even if by hand) on some frequency. As much time as the guys at Van's spend on the phone doing customer support, they might even come out ahead by preemptively offering plans corrections, rather than dealing with the same issues over the phone repeatedly.

But as an old school builder (I promise, the -6's wing directions didn't use enough paper to make a decent cheat sheet), I'll point out that it is important for builders to look way ahead on their build(s). That way, they can identify potential issues beforehand, instead of running headlong into the problem(s).
 
Thunderbirds are go...

Hi All,

So I had a call today with Ken Scott, and whilst he was initially a little defensive (as to be expected I guess) he warmed to the idea by the end of the conversation. Ken first gave me the usual spiel about how there were thousands of aircraft flying so there couldn't be any problem with the manual. When I pointed out to him that he had personally sent me clarification material two weeks earlier from the RV-14 manual regarding a countersink issue on the main-spar of the RV-7, he then reverted to a statement about the lack of engineering resources available to include the said information in the RV-7 manual. That was where I pointed that we as a builder community are prepared to assist them, free of charge. He of course stated that anything provided would have to go through engineering review and would not be accepted verbatim (fair enough), however they would consider our work and not just throw it straight in the recycle bin.
I am convinced our key to success here is to target the must haves, not nice to haves, i.e. the limit the modifications to the top items that people screw up and not go for a complete re-write, as we first need to gain their trust that we know what we are doing. At the end of the day, we can always create a wiki site with the amended instructions should Van's decide not to participate for liability/resource reasons etc, which Ken was also supportive of, but as I stated to him, my preference was for an updated manual to be issued from Van's to new builders, but with us as a community doing the leg work.
Kens suggestion was that I start by creating a word document from the PDF so that we can track changes made to it, making it easier for them to see what we have modified. I will do so and host it on a dropbox so that those involved with the editing can access it accordingly. Once complete we can forward onto Van's and see where things go from there. I will post again under this topic once I have the dropbox set up and the PDF translated to Word.
Anyway, thanks everyone for the overwhelmingly positive feedback. Van's has an absolutely fantastic product and I think if we can just tweak a few small items in the assembly manual for the older (but still in production) aircraft, it will hopefully go some way to making the construction process a more productive, informative and safer experience for future builders and pilots.
Cheers,
Thomas.
 
Back
Top