VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-15
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #201  
Old 08-30-2021, 09:52 PM
jcarne's Avatar
jcarne jcarne is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Worland, Wyoming
Posts: 1,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grubbat View Post
and that magical 55mph survivability wall
Is this a thing? I have never heard of it.
__________________
Jereme Carne
PPL
RV-7A Flying as of 03/2021
Exempt but gladly paying!
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 08-30-2021, 11:25 PM
gasman gasman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma County
Posts: 4,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcarne View Post
Is this a thing? I have never heard of it.
You could crash your aircraft at 55 or less and as long as you don't hit something that brings you to a sudden stop, you should survive.........
__________________
VAF #897 Warren Moretti
2020 =VAF= Dues PAID
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 08-31-2021, 06:14 AM
FlyNSoCal FlyNSoCal is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Southern California
Posts: 17
Default Crashworthiness

Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
You could crash your aircraft at 55 or less and as long as you don't hit something that brings you to a sudden stop, you should survive.........
Interesting theory. Your odds of survival are certainly better at lower impact speeds. Depending on how rapid the deceleration, structure still plays a big part. If Vans decides to put a full wing spar right in front of the two front occupant's heads, that 55 mph could still leave a mark. If they put the fuel tank above your legs like Sonex, that could get interesting as well.

Here in congested Southern California, good luck finding wide open spaces to do a gradual rollout from 55 to 0 mph. Nevertheless, I'd rather do it at 55 mph than 63 mph in my current airplane.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 08-31-2021, 09:28 PM
jcarne's Avatar
jcarne jcarne is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Worland, Wyoming
Posts: 1,922
Default

Ya I know slower is better but I didn't know if that 55 number was statistically significant or not.
__________________
Jereme Carne
PPL
RV-7A Flying as of 03/2021
Exempt but gladly paying!
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 08-31-2021, 11:07 PM
gasman gasman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma County
Posts: 4,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyNSoCal View Post
Interesting theory. Your odds of survival are certainly better at lower impact speeds. Depending on how rapid the deceleration, structure still plays a big part. If Vans decides to put a full wing spar right in front of the two front occupant's heads, that 55 mph could still leave a mark. If they put the fuel tank above your legs like Sonex, that could get interesting as well.

Here in congested Southern California, good luck finding wide open spaces to do a gradual rollout from 55 to 0 mph. Nevertheless, I'd rather do it at 55 mph than 63 mph in my current airplane.
Van's won't do that. It will be above, behind or placed where your head will not hit it. IF you flip, you will want that spar there. Your chance of walking away, and even flying the airplane out are very good.
__________________
VAF #897 Warren Moretti
2020 =VAF= Dues PAID
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 09-01-2021, 06:28 AM
grubbat's Avatar
grubbat grubbat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ga
Posts: 714
Default Curve

If I recall, Vans had a graph with a curve on it that showed the relationship between speed and survivability, using data from I guess years of information. I donít think the point was the actual 55 number, but rather the desire to try and keep the stall speed on the lower end of the spectrum. I remember looking at the White Lightening and Lancair stalls speeds on the graph and it was humbling. The survivability curve got exponentially worse above 55 to 60mph. One thing that stands out in my mind was the amount of concern that Van gave this when he was designing his planes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcarne View Post
Ya I know slower is better but I didn't know if that 55 number was statistically significant or not.
__________________
Craig

RV-3 Sold
RV-4 Sold
1968 Twin Comanche - Sold
RV-6a Sold
1965 Comanche 260 - Sold
RV-9 Built and Flying
600A Aerostar - Sold and regretted
2000 Maule MXT-7 Project
1965 Maule M4 Bushwacker projectÖ till RV-15 shows up
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 09-01-2021, 07:38 AM
rocketman1988 rocketman1988 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sunman, IN
Posts: 2,675
Default yep...

KE=1/2mV^2, so an increasing the speed increases KE exponentially...
__________________
Bob
Aerospace Engineer '88

RV-10
N464RL

Dues+ Paid 2020,...Thanks DR+
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 09-02-2021, 05:41 PM
jcarne's Avatar
jcarne jcarne is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Worland, Wyoming
Posts: 1,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grubbat View Post
If I recall, Vans had a graph with a curve on it that showed the relationship between speed and survivability, using data from I guess years of information. I donít think the point was the actual 55 number, but rather the desire to try and keep the stall speed on the lower end of the spectrum. I remember looking at the White Lightening and Lancair stalls speeds on the graph and it was humbling. The survivability curve got exponentially worse above 55 to 60mph. One thing that stands out in my mind was the amount of concern that Van gave this when he was designing his planes.
I will have to look for that graph. Would like to see where the -10 falls on the curve.
__________________
Jereme Carne
PPL
RV-7A Flying as of 03/2021
Exempt but gladly paying!
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 09-04-2021, 07:27 PM
ssturges ssturges is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 63
Default

My need is for C182/206 version of an RV10 high wing.

Tricycle
4 seats
6 cylinder rv10 performance
upgrade path for a turbo, mid teens cruise
Easy to get in and out of
A big baggage door to rear seats and baggage area
Option for installing a BRS chute

The C206s are in very high demand for back country work. As they say the professionals choice.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 09-05-2021, 11:05 AM
mfleming's Avatar
mfleming mfleming is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Joseph, Oregon
Posts: 741
Default

Vans just posted a teaser on FB with the the RV-15 covered up in the background
__________________
Michael Fleming
Joseph, OR
sagriver at icloud dot com

RV-7 Slider #74572
Started 11/2016
Empennage completed 11/2016 (sans fiberglass)
Ailerons and flaps completed 3/2017.
Wings completed 12/2017
Started on QB fuselage 01/2018
Sliding canopy mostly completed 10/2020
Wiring and Avionics harness completed 9/2/2021
FWF Started 9/3/2021

Donated for 2021 and so should you

Last edited by mfleming : 09-05-2021 at 11:06 AM. Reason: typo correction
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 03:40 AM.


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.