What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Service Bulletin 12-11-09 (Main Landing Gear Upgrade)

Tony_T

Well Known Member
Patron
I decided to start a new thread since there have been several previous threads but none with the new SB in the title. This SB supersedes Notice SB 12-09-26.

Here is what the kit looks like:
P1030398-L.jpg


The instructions are complete with all installation details and pictures. My SB kit does not include the plans drawings for these areas that were recently published and they are not needed as the SB instructions are complete.

Robert, yes, the bottom wings skins will require trimming to account for the additional thickness of the new doublers.

Tony
 
Will the mod affect flying painted planes? Will any areas show new metal so touch up paint is needed?
 
Painted planes question

Will the mod affect flying painted planes? Will any areas show new metal so touch up paint is needed?

Larry,
It looks like the doublers will probably slightly show for a ways along the bottom of the wing. It would not be a big issue to me, I don't think I would even touch it up, but that would be an individual thing I suppose.

Of more concern to me than paint is this upgrade will require some careful workmanship. The fuel tank, ELT and it's antenna, and the gear must be removed. A lot of rivets have to be carefully drilled out. Any paint build up around the removed rivets will have to be cleared. There are some new holes to be drilled perpendicular in the channel, etc.

Tony
 
Larry,
It looks like the doublers will probably slightly show for a ways along the bottom of the wing. It would not be a big issue to me, I don't think I would even touch it up, but that would be an individual thing I suppose.

Of more concern to me than paint is this upgrade will require some careful workmanship. The fuel tank, ELT and it's antenna, and the gear must be removed. A lot of rivets have to be carefully drilled out. Any paint build up around the removed rivets will have to be cleared. There are some new holes to be drilled perpendicular in the channel, etc.

Tony

The rivet removal is actually pretty simple if the instructions are followed. As is any paint build up.
The work done adding the new 1/4" holes to the channel are the highest level of precision required in the whole process, but even that should not cause too much heart burn. The level of precision attainable by an average builder using a hand help drill is an the level of precision being expected (if you are a below average builder maybe find a helper to do those :D) The cross brace for the seat backs is a great help in steadying the drill.

There is a small amount of the doubler that shows outside of the wing root footprint. I would estimate it to be less than 3 square inches per side.
 
I was ready to take my fuselage to the paint shop so I am torn about the decision I have to make. Is this SB mandatory, important or just optional and just intended at addressing those planes that got the wrinkles problem?
As E-LSA is it mandatory to have it done to get the certification from VANs? I guess that as experimental it's mostly the builder's decision for E-AB planes.
What is the delay to get the mod kit?
... and I just riveted the end of channel skins yesterday! :(

BTW, I could not locate this SB on VANs web site, the last SB is still 12-09-26
 
Last edited:
I was ready to take my fuselage to the paint shop so I am torn about the decision I have to make. Is this SB mandatory, important or just optional and just intended at addressing those planes that got the wrinkles problem?
As E-LSA is it mandatory to have it done to get the certification from VANs? I guess that as experimental it's mostly the builder's decision for E-AB planes.
What is the delay to get the mod kit?
... and I just riveted the end of channel skins yesterday! :(

BTW, I could not locate this SB on VANs web site, the last SB is still 12-09-26

I can't understand why you would not comply with it? You are in a better position to do it than many others (currently painted and flying 12's). It seems there has been plenty of chatter about the mod on this forum as Van's has made no secret that it was coming. If for no other reason, think of the resale of your -12. Who wants to buy an airplane that has outstanding SB's, SD's, AD's, etc? This sort of thing tells a story at purchase time. Additionally, what would an insurance companies position be at claim time?
I think there are many of us that aren't thrilled about performing the mod and may never need it, but who knows? It can't hurt anything.
Don't mean to bust bulls here and please don't take it that way. I just can't find any viable reasons not to do it.....and I have tried!
 
Tony, Scott
What does this kit cost? Thanks.

Pete

The kit was furnished at no cost. Also, I have not been in contact with Van's and have just been waiting my turn. I am an early builder and I live close enough to the factory that stuff FedEx'ed to me arrives in a day. That may account for why I have it already.

Tony
 
Tony, thanks for posting. You are SO correct in that all the recent -12 gear threads have indeed become a bit confusing when it comes to the final fix from Vans. I'm just very happy the factory got this issue resolved for us!
 
The rivet removal is actually pretty simple if the instructions are followed. As is any paint build up.
The work done adding the new 1/4" holes to the channel are the highest level of precision required in the whole process, but even that should not cause too much heart burn. The level of precision attainable by an average builder using a hand help drill is an the level of precision being expected (if you are a below average builder maybe find a helper to do those :D) The cross brace for the seat backs is a great help in steadying the drill.

There is a small amount of the doubler that shows outside of the wing root footprint. I would estimate it to be less than 3 square inches per side.

Good stuff Scott, thanks. Looks like the Vans crew made a nice mod and had flying planes in mind. Nicely done. ;)
 
Fuel Tank Removal?

Tony,

From looking at the side skin doublers it is unclear to me why you need to remove the fuel tank. I have drilled out all of the rivets in the affected side skin areas without removing the fuel tank. Maybe you need to remove the fuel tank to straighten out side skin wrinkles? Are there any instructions or criteria on how straight the side skin needs to be to install the doublers?

Anxiously awaiting my repair kit.
N712BK
 
My 12 is painted and flying so I am frustrated as many others are too. I haven't seen the details but I'm surprised the fuel tank needs to come out. Is that to facilitate drilling holes? Would a drill stop be an alternative? I've always thought periodic tank removal causes more problems than it is worth: fuel spills, fire hazard, tank damage and fitting leaks. This is a great airplane design, but there are some design features that don't show much forethought for repair and maintenance activity.
 
Many companies would not provide free updates to their products. I commend Van's Aircraft for shipping the fuselage reinforcements free of charge. For those who intend to register as E-LSA, this mod is mandatory because you must sign a paper stating that the RV-12 was built according to plans. And my DAR had me sign a paper stating that I complied with all service notices.
I do not think it was ever determined for sure what caused the side skin to wrinkle, hard breaking or hard landing or loose bolts. Whatever the cause, it is better to install the upgrade now instead of waiting until after damage is found.
Joe Gores
 
Answers to some questions....

Tony,

From looking at the side skin doublers it is unclear to me why you need to remove the fuel tank. I have drilled out all of the rivets in the affected side skin areas without removing the fuel tank. Maybe you need to remove the fuel tank to straighten out side skin wrinkles? Are there any instructions or criteria on how straight the side skin needs to be to install the doublers?

Anxiously awaiting my repair kit.
N712BK

You will be match drilling additional holes using the doubler(s), so the
tank removal is to avoid accidental drilling of holes in the tank :(, and to properly deburr as many of the new holes as possible. It will also make it much easier to drill two new holes that get added to the center section channel on each side.
As with anything else related to RV building / maintaining, the person doing the work is the final authority in how they decide to accomplish it. If you chose a different method (or choose not to do it at all), it should be understood that you are baring additional responsibility.

Regarding whether you have to comply by installing the S.B. kit...

Technically there is nothing regulatory that can force you to do so IF your airplane is already certificated and flying (an aircraft with an experimental airworthiness certificate is not bound to comply with A.D.s, S.B.'s, etc). I do think it would be a poor decision not to. A lot of testing and design effort went into this modification. When properly installed it should make the main gear on an RV-12 very robust. (pilots causing damage after installing this mod. should probably switch to the sport of off roading in 4X4 vehicles ;))
As already mentioned, not having it installed would always be a black mark against the airplane regarding resale value, insurance claims, etc.

Regarding compliance requirements on an airplane not yet certificated...
This is a bit more of a gray area depending where in teh construction process the builder is. For certification the airplane must show compliance with the current design using the documentation dates and rev. levels listed in the Form 8130-15 issued to the builder by Van's. So if you have an 8130-15 form that was issued before this S.B was supplied to you, you may be able to pass the airplane off to a DAR as being in compliance. My opinion is that he shouldn't certificate it (and I think the FAA would say the same).
Here is the reason....
From the very beginning, RV-12 builders have been told that the revision process works as follows -
For normal plans revisions and changes, if you have already built passed the drawing page it occurs on, you can ignore it (it was most likely a revision to more clearly describe a process, etc.)
But for notifications, service bulletins, and safety alerts, you must comply.
So, everyone who has not yet received there fuselage kit, will receive a kit with the changes incorporated into the parts and drawings (the reason for the drawings being posted last Friday) when they purchase that kit.
For everyone that already has a fuselage kit but has not yet received a documentation package and 8130-15 form, they will receive the parts as a S.B. kit, and when ready for certification the 8130-15 form they receive will show the rev level established by the fuselage changes.

As already mentioned, those with flying airplanes, that have complied with S.B. 12-09-26 and found no damage (you should have made a log book entry), can wait until the next condition inspection sign off to install the service bulletin to be in compliance with Van's requirements (as already mentioned, there is technically no regulatory requirement to comply, but it has potentially many other related issues if you choose not to).

That leaves the few kits for which an 8130-15 form has been issued, but have not yet been certificated. They will also be receiving a S.B. kit in the mail (probably in the next few days) It will be between you and your DAR what happens regarding whether you must install it prior to certification... though my opinion is that the S.B. should have to be complied with before certification.

One final comment...
The work required looks like more than it really is. My opinion is that anyone mechanically familiar with their RV-12 (built it), and reads through the documentation a couple of times so they can plan ahead for what they need to do (required tools and supplies available, etc.), should probably be able to complete the required work over a weekend (particularly if they get help from one other pair of hands).

I hope this helps cover some of the questions people might have.
 
Although there was some rocky road to the final solution, I feel that the parts are well designed to reinforce the problem areas, and we all owe a lot of gratitude for Vans for their willingness to tackle the problem and provide us with an easy to install fix. One more good reason for having selected to build a Vans RV 12. Thanks Vans.
 
Scott, I presume we 'overseas' customers will receive the SB kit as well?

As has been said, Van's should be commended for the way they handle problems like these that crop up. If only some of the 'certified' airframe and engine manufacturers behaved as honourably.
 
Awwww, *&(*^&**

I'm one of those guys who modified the bulkhead and baggage floor so that the tank would never have to come out again. I firmly believe (having had a tank leak and mess up a new paint job shortly after it was removed for the first C.I.) that taking the tank in and out, with all the flexing and twisting that occurs, is a potential source of problems, not to mention a major pain!

Wayne 120241
 
When will these 30 pages of SB instructions be posted on the Vans website?

Is it true the MLG also must be removed???

Bob Bogash
N737G
chasing a set of moving goalposts
 
Scott, I presume we 'overseas' customers will receive the SB kit as well?

I believe all RV-12 kit customers will receive the S.B. kit.

I'm one of those guys who modified the bulkhead and baggage floor so that the tank would never have to come out again. I firmly believe (having had a tank leak and mess up a new paint job shortly after it was removed for the first C.I.) that taking the tank in and out, with all the flexing and twisting that occurs, is a potential source of problems, not to mention a major pain!

Wayne 120241

The only flexing possible is with the lines. If you developed a leave on a riveted seam of the tank, it would have happened whether you remove the tank or not.
As already said, "you can comply (or not) with the S. B. how ever you choose" The very detailed process describes what was felt to be the best process using standard aircraft construction practices. If you feel that a different process will produce the same result, you have the freedom to do so (but you should also be willing to accept the outcome if it doesn't work out as planned)

When will these 30 pages of SB instructions be posted on the Vans website?

I don't know when the drawings will be posted, but it doesn't really matter. Without the kit, their is no related work you can do (other than leave rivets out of the fuselage side, and info related to that was clearly detailed in the initial S.B.

Is it true the MLG also must be removed???

Yes the Main L.G. have to be removed.

chasing a set of moving goalposts

As for moving goal posts.... would you rather there be no goal posts at all, so that you just had to guess which direction to kick and hope for the best?

I understand builders frustrations... they go much wider than just the builders though.
A huge amount of engineering dept. resources have been dedicated to this issue since it first (sort of) came to attention of Van's.
Not to mention all of the parts being supplied to every one, it adds up to a lot of $$. But with the damage that occurred in about 5% of the fleet, it was the right thing to do.
 
Scott, I understand the skin doublers are supporting the gear channel and making the structure stronger but what is the reason for the doublers (1202C & 1203E)?
Just out of interest can you tell us some background info about the testing and designing this mod. I think Van's did a great follow up!

You have to drill holes below the baggage floor. How to debur those holes? (Or do we have to remove the F-1273L&R-bagage corner skins?)

Thanks, Joeri.
 
Last edited:
we all owe a lot of gratitude for Vans for their willingness to tackle the problem and provide us with an easy to install fix. One more good reason for having selected to build a Vans RV 12. Thanks Vans.

Don - you KNOW I luv 'ya man. I've said it publicly. But here, we must disagree.

I've put on my asbestos suit for all the folks bound to come after me for the following flame, but I'm NOT a Happy Camper and decline to genuflect at the alter of Aurora, Oregon.

Like every builder, I've put in a lot of time (and money) into building this airplane. I badly miscalculated the time required. Quite a few times. Being a dumb old Boeing engineer, I put together a Master Schedule, and calculated estimated flow times - allowing lots of padding for the one hour jobs that take 8 hours.

I had hoped to be flying in April. Then July. Sept 15 was THE date. Now I'm shooting for December 15. Along the way, I started working in the cold, wet, and dark - through all the good weather flying months of summer - and back again into the cold, wet, and dark. I've coordinated with the FAA, the DAR, and the guy who is going to do my first engine run (now sked for Dec 3.) All my coords have become stale as my sked continually slid. I took the Repairman School. I arranged for, and took, recurrent flight training to get my Biennial renewed, and spent three days getting RV-12 Transition Training with a Vans approved instructor.

Each of these things took a lot of time (and money) and advance planning, because other people have busy schedules. Since I am retired, I can devote substantial time to the build. It quickly became clear that if I wasn't working on it, it wasn't going to get done. So I went into High Blower early on. For many months, I worked on my airplane all day, every day. It's about a two hour round-trip drive to the airport, so I invested a lot of driving time and gas money as well. I began even going on weekends (when retired folks try to stay off the roads!)

Without any exaggeration, I have put my entire life on hold for the better part of a year, in order to get this airplane finished. My goal from the get-go was to be a FLIER, and not a BUILDER. (I've built airplanes my whole life. Been there, Done that.)

So - now I'm closing in on the finish line, although my Repairman and Pilot training have already become stale. I have detailed timelines for the race for the finish. I'm up at the crack of dawn and arrive back home from the hangar exhausted in the dark.

Friday, Nov 16, with the help of Tony T., we installed the fuel tank, rigged the stab control cables, and installed the wings. This week, I added fuel, did extensive leak and pressure checks, checked out all the wing wiring and began buttoning up the airplane. I'm making my final arrangements with the Rotax dealer, the FAA, and the DAR.

Now comes a flurry of Vans Revisions to a bunch of Builders Plans Sections, as well as the Maintenance and Flight Test Acceptance Manual. As usual, there's no clue what the changes are. And, the Service Bulletin has not been posted, although it has clearly been created and sent out with the mod kits to some folks.

From Tony's posting, it looks like my last 2-3 weeks of daily trips to the hangar are supposed to be trashed. Worse, I'm supposed to invest more hours and days un-doing what I just did. I'm supposed to drain the fuel system, remove the just installed tank, wirth its just sealed filler neck, the just installed ELT and antenna, the just installed wings, and the MLG as well, draining the newly serviced and bled brake system, so that I can do this mod, and then re-install and re-service and re bleed and re-leak check and re-seal the filler neck (that Tony just sealed) and recall all my outside parties to slide everything one more time - and then I'm supposed to smile and say "Thank you, Vans, for being so prompt and thorough and sending us these bits and pieces free of charge."

Lemme just say, I value my time more highly than that, the journey is NOT half the fun (for me, anyway,) and after you pass a certain age, each tick of the clock gets louder, faster, and more valuable. Now we have Scott telling us - as usual - that compliance is not mandatory, BUT --- if he was a DAR or the FAA, he'd certainly make it so for non-certified airplanes. Thanks, Scott! I hope my DAR doesn't read VAF.

What I want to do - and what is clearly allowable for airplanes already certified, is to get mine certified, and do the bloody mod sometime in the next year, at a convenient time - when it's not 35 degrees in the hangar and dark, with the doors closed because of the wind and driving rain.

Scott may say that it looks like more work than it really is, but drilling a few pop rivet holes is the least of the angst if you have to remove and replace and drain and re-service a lot of major hardware and systems. The goalposts keep moving and maybe I'll get to flying..... by Christmas 2013.......maybe.

Maybe, I ought to add, being on a roll, that this "problem" was initially poo-poo'd away, after being reported by DonfromTx. Go back through the archive and you'll find all this stuff - some of it from Vans - about hard landings, and hard braking, and grass strips, etc. And that the landing gear and structure were "great" -- if not abused, yadda yadda. Turns out, maybe, not so "great." That's OK - I'm an engineer, and know things don't always work out. But i get heartburn when this "non-problem" not only becomes a major mod (free parts not-withstanding), but is cloaked in language like "it would be a poor decision not to do the mod", and "the DAR shouldn't certificate the airplane without the mod", etc.

That's a big change for something that "wasn't a problem", was " caused by poor piloting skills", and will now result in a main gear that is "VERY robust." Maybe I can just get my airplane completed finally and certified with the old gear - the ones that were "just" robust, before I make them "very" robust.

(I took by Biennial in a Cherokee 140. The last time I flew one was in 1965. Coulda been this very airplane - which has spent the last 47+ years being pounded onto the pavement by generations of ham-fisted students, and, like the EverReady Bunnie, is still going strong. Now THAT's what I call ROBUST.)

the rest on post #2 (I went "over the limit"!)

Bob Bogash
N737G
 
Rant - Part 2

While I'm in High Blower RANT mode, let me kick one more can down the road - something that I have mentioned before. It concerns REVISIONS.

Way back in 1965, I came to work for Boeing with an engineering degree and pilots license and determined to become a Test Pilot. I almost made it, but that's another story - but first Boeing saw fit having me write Manuals - Maintenance, Overhaul, Flight, Ops - you name it - Boeing has lots. Later in my career, I got to receive all those manual revisions. In the good old days, before computers and even microfilm, all the revision pages had to be inserted by hand. Not all bad, as you got to review the changes. You see every change was DOCUMENTED. No, I don't just mean the Revision Date and Number. But, the actual change. It was marked alongside the change on the page by a vertical bar, and in the List of Effective Changes by a DESCRIPTION of the Change. "Changed torque to XXX ft-lbs", or "Added anti-seize compound to engine mount bolts.", etc. I mean- really - how are you supposed to know anything otherwise??????? Proof Read the whole manual?

Well, that's what Vans expects you to do (and Dynon too, I might add.) So here comes a Revision - say the Maintenance Manual (often posted, for some reason, many weeks or months after creation), - Revision 4 dated 19 Sept 2012, but only posted 13 Nov 2012. It's Revision 4. 187 pages. Guess you need to Print that out, Punch it, and File it. Well, maybe just the Revised pages - dig those out of the PDF and just Print them. But, Whoa!!! Rev 4 seems to only constitute TWO pages - the Cover page and Page ii - which is the Revision Summary and List of Effective Pages. Rev 4 only changed the Cover Page? Guess so - and Page ii dutifully documents it. But wait - there's more - what happened to Rev 3? There are only Revs 1,2 and 4 shown, and the actual changes on those pages are anyone's guess.

The POH is even worse. Rev 1 was posted on 10 Apr 2012. (SV version.) Since the whole manual is posted, I printed out all 80 pages. Then to get it down to the Handbook binder size, I had to cut out each page by hand. But first I had to make two templates, since the pages are offset (odd/even) to allow the holes to be punched and I could not print them two sided to get the holes to line up. Then, all the pages had to be hand-punched to accomodate the small six-ring binder. Next, I started to insert each revised page. The lack of two-sided printing created a logistic difficulty (Rev "0" ) on the front, Rev "1" on the back) necessitating some sort of scheme to put the new back page on the old front page - my solution is glue.

OK, OK - so now I'm finally "there" -- after many hours of printing, cutting, punching and pasting. Ready to settle down and see what's changed. Comparing the new and the old side-by-side. The answer - NOTHING! Well, to be more accurate - ALMOST NOTHING. The Font has changed (smaller, as my wife noted), but almost zero changes after all this work. Really ! What's going on here?

For example, let's take Page ii in the Checklist - Pre-Start and Starting Engine. Rev 0 vs Rev 1. I can't find a single word changed.

Page iii Pre-Taxi and Before Takeoff. Same story Page iv - Same story. In fact, almost every page shows no change that I can discern from Rev 0 (7/12/2011) to Rev 1 (4/3/2012.)

I have spent many hours over a number of days printng, cutting, punching, and then comparing - and in the end, I drilled a Dry Hole. Tell me - why was this Revision released??? It seems I recall one or two changes, but when I re-reviewed for this diatribe, I could no longer find them. I'm sure they're in there, somewhere. In any event, they should be called out Clearly and Specifically in the Change notice. This is not a game of hide the weenie.

A few of my pals have said something like "Well, this isn't Boeing, you know." Not much different to my mind. Airplanes with Airworthiness and Registration Certificates from the FAA and a collection of Plans and Documents. Having been in this exact business, I fail to see why it would be any burden for the person making the document change to note the Change and the Reason for it ("Increased torque to address problem with loose MLG attach bolts.")

If I'm over-looking something or all wet on this, feel free to hose me down some more.

So - For me, Scott, the goalposts keep moving, -- costing dollars, man-hours, time - to solve a problem that "wasn't a problem" (like crazing rear windows), but now is a BIG problem. I'm in a man-hour and logistic battle to complete this airplane, and am taking two or three steps back for each step forward.

"..... would you rather there be no goal posts at all, so that you just had to guess which direction to kick and hope for the best?"

Scott, I don't want to get into a pee'ing contest with you, but that remark is disingenuous at best. Why do I (or we, as builders) have to be ever grateful for your listening to our problems and taking actions when required. Vans is a reputable company, a reputable manufacturer of kit-built airplanes, and reputable companies support their products on an after-sale basis. Especially when those products happen to be airplanes.

Rant over - I'll don my fireproof gear.

Bob Bogash
N737G
 
Rant - Part 2
While I'm in High Blower RANT mode, let me kick one more can down the road - something that I have mentioned before. It concerns REVISIONS.

Bob, I definitely agree with your comment about revisions. As an engineer, I have also been irritated that Vans have not followed standard practice. It's easy to do, and should not even be a discussion topic. However, I think Scott said recently that they will be correcting this soon. As for your other comments, while I can understand your frustration, I don't feel the same way about it. I'm happy that Vans have taken the hit and fixed the problem, and that I'll have a stronger aircraft as a result. If it means that my build has been delayed and I need to do some re-work, well that's just the way it is.
 
Maybe, I ought to add, being on a roll, that this "problem" was initially poo-poo'd away, after being reported by DonfromTx. Go back through the archive and you'll find all this stuff - some of it from Vans - about hard landings, and hard braking, and grass strips, etc. And that the landing gear and structure were "great" -- if not abused, yadda yadda. Turns out, maybe, not so "great."

Your right, it is in the archives. And I think if people look at the whole situation fairly and objectively, they will see that it started out very thin on details with almost zero contact with Van's directly. Even after encouraging people to contact Vans with their information, I think only on the order of about a dozen did. Only about 1/2 of those had any damage, the others sent in info to say that everything looked ok but they had found the bolts slightly loose). If Vans went off chasing every little issue that gets mentioned on VAF, before any determination could be made that it was more than just an isolated issue, a couple or three full time employees would probably have to be hired to work on just that.

Scott, I don't want to get into a pee'ing contest with you, but that remark is disingenuous at best. Why do I (or we, as builders) have to be ever grateful for your listening to our problems and taking actions when required.

Bob,
I am truly sorry that you ended up being one of the few builders caught in the middle of a transition.
An attempt was made to to warn all builders that a change was coming (In the addendum to S.B. 12-09-26), but since no one knew exactly when it was going to be ready for release, and there is no way for anyone at Van's to know who is getting close to having a final inspection, it was inevitable that this might happen to a few builders.

No one has to be grateful, and I didn't think I wrote anything implying they should be. If it came across that way to you, I am sorry because I didn't intend it to.
I think you will find that a lot of other people do seem to be grateful (they have said so in their posts), because they may have been around this business long enough to know that the majority of the time, when dealing with a service problem such as this, it is dealt with in a much different manner (kit and certificated airplane companies alike).

Once again, I am sorry for your frustration.
 
Thoughts

- AD's issued to certified aircraft are almost always FAA accident driven; this was initiated by customers and a fix delivered to your doorstep...for free.

- attempts to duplicate the customer reports was not possible until Vans exceeded ASTM standards. SLSA's are required to meet ASTM standards.

- as Scott says, flying aircraft are not required to complete. Many, many 12's have 200, 300, 400 hours with no damage. You are the builder and the one that decides what comfort level you fly at. Do you plan to fly in a manner that exceeds ASTM standards?

- removing the gas tank will be nothing compared to removing the main gear...think brake lines etc.

- yes several people got caught in the "DAR coming soon" situation. That gets into "why do you build?" arena. If you are upset that precious time has been stolen...and employed...then hire someone to do it. If you are retired, then you flunked retirement.
 
Removing MLG

Is it actually possible for one person to remove the Main Landing Gear? Those things were installed when it wasn't much more than a canoe and it was a bear to do then. This just keeps getting to be more fun-- pull the wings (two people again!!!) drill out a bunch of rivets (that I can do), break open the brake lines and drain them (BIG mess, and brake fluid is an excellent paint remover!!!), pull the tank (and we all know that you can't get all the fuel out so there goes some more of my nice, expensive paint) and then drill holes in the thickest piece of material (OK, second thickest to the spars), reinstall everything, hope the tank doesn't leak, and fill/bleed the brakes again. A weekend job??? Scott, you've been a great help here on the forum but you've got to be one of the world's fastest builders, too. My old Yankee is starting to look pretty good, now!
 
5% of the fleet?

Scott, when you said the problem affects 5% of the fleet, did you mean the loose landing gear bolts or skin damage? With well over 200 airplanes flying, that would mean over 10 airplanes with structural damage. What portion of the SB can be accomplished without removing the MLG. I've checked the gear bolts twice (once when the topic arose and again just recently at the CI-- bolts loose the first time and tight the second.

Wayne
 
I can feel your pain Bob. Working in a temperature controlled part of my house and being at a point in the build that makes the upgrade a minor issue lets me off easy in that respect compared to you.
If I were you in your situation, I would go ahead with the AW cert process, and upgrade when you find better weather, even if it meant going EAB to get around the ELSA issues, if there are in fact any.
I would like to think that this has been a learning process for many, perhaps owners will be more likely to use the Vans reporting system for problems, maybe Vans will be less inclined to defame those reporting problems, and not so eager to dismiss problems not reported by owners on their form as not existing, maybe this will help foster better communication. I would suspect that happening as it did during the process to begin production and sale of complete aircraft, was another reason to try to make it go away.
Although I was fully prepared to make my own fix as some have already done, I preferred to wait for a solution from those with more expertise and facilities to do it right, and pending receipt of the instructions and parts, believe that they did.
At 75 years old and in not the best of health, I am fully aware of the effect of a ticking clock on a fast completion!
 
At a point a couple of months ago, I was personally aware of 10 damaged planes that had been reported to me with photos. I have no idea how many more may have been reported to Vans.

Scott, when you said the problem affects 5% of the fleet, did you mean the loose landing gear bolts or skin damage? With well over 200 airplanes flying, that would mean over 10 airplanes with structural damage. What portion of the SB can be accomplished without removing the MLG. I've checked the gear bolts twice (once when the topic arose and again just recently at the CI-- bolts loose the first time and tight the second.

Wayne
 
- AD's issued to certified aircraft are almost always FAA accident driven; this was initiated by customers and a fix delivered to your doorstep...for free.

- attempts to duplicate the customer reports was not possible until Vans exceeded ASTM standards. SLSA's are required to meet ASTM standards.

- as Scott says, flying aircraft are not required to complete. Many, many 12's have 200, 300, 400 hours with no damage. You are the builder and the one that decides what comfort level you fly at. Do you plan to fly in a manner that exceeds ASTM standards?

- removing the gas tank will be nothing compared to removing the main gear...think brake lines etc.

- yes several people got caught in the "DAR coming soon" situation. That gets into "why do you build?" arena. If you are upset that precious time has been stolen...and employed...then hire someone to do it. If you are retired, then you flunked retirement.

I could not have said it better. Yes, Bob, wear the fireproof suit with pride. I with others cannot say enough with regard to the manner Van's Aircraft and particularly the manner Scott has supported us via his participation in this forum.

How one could have mis-estimated the time it takes to assemble the RV-12 in light of all of the builder logs available confounds me. As one of the initial builders, and one of the first to fly, all of us had to deal with minor issues during the build. Implementing each issue improved the quality of not only my RV-12, but, all of the future RV-12's. We took the issues in stride as we knew implementing a revision was in the best interest of the fleet.

Step back, take a breath. Please do not flunk retirement.
 
Imagine how frustrating it will be for some builders who delay upgrading when then they discover wrinkled fuselage skin. Then the repair will be much more difficult. My daddy told me, "Do what you do, do well boy", and "Do it right the first time."
Van's Aircraft is not perfect. But at least they they try to correct their mistakes and make them right. I admire Scott for posting on VansAirforce and giving helpful advice, despite all of the flack he is taking. Judging by the time of day of his postings, I think that he posting on his own time.
Keep up the good work, Scott.
Joe Gores
 
Thanks for the info, Scott.

I am in full agreement with Peter, Joe and Marty and all the others who support and praise Van's and in particular, Scott, for all his own time that he spends on here helping us.

Imagine if you'd bought a factory engine from Lycoming in the late 90s and then found out you had to buy a new crankshaft for it because they didn't make it right. It wasn't sent FOC!

Bob, I'm sure it is very peeving for you because of your postion (geographically and build-wise) but just think yourself lucky you didn't order a Boeing or Airbus. Imagine how their customers feel with all the delivery date delays and daily (mandatory) Airworthiness Directives....
 
There are also lucky builders

Happy people never complain but in the context of this discussion I find it worthy to tell how lucky I feel:

I started almost 2 1/2 years ago, at the time the avionics was D100, Garmin GPS etc... As a green builder it took me enough time to get to the avionics kit to fall into the "Skyview hole", a six month delay and uncomfortable wiring retrofit but very satisfying glass panel result. Because of this delay I find myself with a plane that still has the fuel tank on a shelf and the brake lines filled with air (easy to purge!).
I forgot to mention that after pondering building or buying the fuel tank I opted to build based on the wise advice of a fellow builder (i.e., if you build it you know the screw-ups that are inside, if you buy it you don't)... and bingo, the fuel tank mod came just before I started building it. Had I bought it the modification would have been almost as aggravating as building the whole thing.
... And another one: because the news of the avionics update came so early (albeit at the cost of VANs credibility for a release date), I was aware that new wing connectors would replace the flimsy ones I was supposed to build which also saved me some work to be undone later.

Now I am waiting for the engine kit... and I cannot help wondering what kind of trouble is looming with Rotax...

Did you say Injection? :D
 
Last edited:
Note to any prospective builders reading this. If you think that you need to build this plane at an airport that is a 2 hour drive (or even a 20 minute drive away), please rethink! These HAVE been built in a one car garage! You can complete everything then do final assembly at the airport and have a faster, more efficient build. You could have these as separate pieces: Wing, wing, stabilator, vertical stabilizer, rudder, and completed fuselage complete with engine and avionics on the gear and easily trailered. Thats how I did mine - the wings were transported on a carpet-type wing stand inside a borrowed horse trailer. Fuselage on a flatbed borrowed trailer. If building space on that fuselage-tail "chunk" was a problem, you could keep the main fuselage and tailcone separate and easily assemble those two pieces at the airport.

I sympathize with Bob - I waited about 5 months for Skyview like many. My build (first-timer and very meticulous) took 950 enjoyable hours. If I was to do another, probably 800 due to learning. Extremely happy with the results - as you can see in the current issue of Sport Aviation.

I'll be doing this mod as part of the annual condition inspection in April. Having co-owned a Bonanza for 5 years, this issue is comparatively a pretty trivial bump in the road in terms of certainly cost and even time...

Bill H. N412BR "Sweetie"
 
I agree Bill. I think it was Bob that mentioned having to find someone to help remove and reinstall the wings. I do it all by myself quite easily, a look back in my log will show how it is done easily at practically no cost.
 
Vlad built a 9A in the living room of his NYC apartment. Considerably more difficult than a -12. the -12 is far more of an assembly than a build. Talk to someone who has built a Falco or even a early 3,4 or 6! Truthfully, there are a couple of contributors to VAF that spend entirely too much time crying!!!!!
 
Thread creep...

My MLG upgrade thread is straying off topic a bit, but that's OK. And now, as the OP, I will exercise the privilege of straying a bit further because I want to introduce Bob Bogash.
As you already know, Bob is an airplane nut and knows a lot about them. What you may not know is the depth of his involvement and you will be astounded when I show you some of his accomplishments. Bob, among other things, is a very active volunteer at the Museum of Flight in Seattle. A link to his website is a step into a amazing world of Planes, Trains and other...
So, to introduce, here is a picture of Bob, wife Dot, and one of his mistresses, a Super Connie:
i-qwsH3Xz-L.jpg

Bob was (volunteer) project manager to acquire, refurbish and transport, by highway the Connie from Canada to the Museum in Seattle. Quite a trip as photos on his website will show. Here it is arriving in Seattle after a road trip from New York:
i-4SW2JMc-L.jpg

Bob's forum moniker, NASA515, is the ID number of the prototype 737 which he worked on as a Boeing engineer.
i-pbwbw67-L.jpg

In retirement, Bob made over 140 trips across the Cascades to Moses Lake, to get the retired 737 prototype flyable and fly it back to Boeing Field where it now resides in the Museum airpark. Talk about a commute to the airport. He "owns" many other aircraft included a B-52, and is busy on several acquistion project including a Boeing Clipper that was sunk by naval gunfire (ours) and is currently at the bottom of the ocean. I think he may get it.
Gentlemen, check out his website, this is not a guy who failed retirement.

Tony
 
Last edited:
Thanks Tony....

... for pointing out the other side of Bob. Now, instead of thinking of him as a crabby old man;) (same age as me, BTW), I think of him as a really neat guy that I would like to meet! Hopefully now everybody can cool off and get this thread back on track! And thank you Bob, for all your contributions to aviation. If I didn't live on the other side of the country I would come and help you apply the mod, after I get some experience with mine.
 
Another delayed almost-done builder

I am truly sorry that you ended up being one of the few builders caught in the middle of a transition.
I'm one of those too. Not that anyone asked, but here's my perspective:

1. I agree on the topic of revisions. I long ago gave up trying to figure out what changed. I decided that if it was important enough, I would receive a service bulletin. Between that and my small local RV-12 builder's network, along with this forum, I have been able to remain reasonably aware of important issues. That isn't to say that revisions shouldn't be detailed/highlighted. They should. It makes no sense to me that they're not.

2. I waited two months for a center section.

3. I waited months for the Skyview and spent a lot of time re-doing wiring work when I got it.

4. I am currently waiting for the SB parts to arrive so I can get them installed and begin to rebuild momentum with the FAA inspectors. They're probably wondering what they did to chase me away.

5. I am upset about precisely NONE of this. I love the Skyview and would have crawled through broken glass to get one. I WANT the strengthened landing gear. In fact, one of the reasons I built this plane in the first place was so my daughter could learn to fly in it. Having been the guy that taught her to drive, I decided that learning in an RV-6 was not the way to go with her. I almost wrote off the idea of her learning in the 12 until the SB parts came to light.

6. I am not upset about not meeting a self-imposed schedule because I never had one. I never had one because I did some research before taking the plunge. I was a member of this forum for years before starting to build. I saw that delays were inevitable. I saw many, many people urge new builders to not impose a schedule on themselves because delays are inevitable. I wanted to build - I wanted the experience. At one point a few years ago, I wanted an RV-6 or RV-7. I've always said that building an airplane is something to do when you're trying to fill your time, not when you're trying to find time. So I bought an already flying RV-6. The RV-12 changed that mindset - here was a kit that I could actually finish in less than a decade. I could have easily bought one of those already flying too. They're out there.

7. I do have issues with Van's. There is a support guy that is rude and combative every time I have to talk to him. They seem to put no effort at all into minimizing or even predicting shipping costs. I also have issues with Time Warner. I have issues with Best Buy. I have issues with AT&T. I have issues with Aetna. In that list, my issues with Van's are minor by comparison. No one is perfect, but some try much harder than others. I include Van's in that category. I worship at no altar, but I do try to maintain a sense of perspective.
 
I learned from VANs this morning that they are shipping SB 12-11-09 kit to everybody and in priority to RV-12 that are currently flying (which makes sense from a liability perspective). Indeed although I am receiving my engine kit end of this week, I was not among the kits already shipped. I also learned that they are likely going to run out of parts before all shipments are made, therefore additional delays might be added to just shipping delays. If you are blocked as I am, you may just make a deal with a fellow flying builder who is not going to use his kit right away: swap your kit with his as I did.
 
I agree that revisions to drawings should be plainly noted as any I have ever been exposed to were except for Van's.
A bigger deal tho is the quick work on the SB and gear support revision. Cudos to Van's for that!
I will make the installation as soon as I receive the parts in spite of fact I have experienced none of the associated issues reported. It makes sense to me to upgrade whenever one becomes available.

Dick Seiders 120093
 
If you are wondering where you are in the queue, I received my SB kit today 11-27-12. The package is about 15x22x2 (inches). The SB lists the weight of the installed package as 2.22 lbs and gives a new CG calculation. I am kit 412, first flight April 12, 2012, the 156th RV-12 flying per Vans. The SB includes instructions about flattening any damaged side skins.

The SB does not look onerous at all. I think I could do it even if I had bought, rather than built, my RV-12 (I'm a first time builder with no prior experience) - maybe in that case with a bit of help from a local EAA chapter member.
 
I am ready for my kit today, but the way Vans does it will put me at the tail end of things since I did not buy an engine from them. You beat me by a long ways on the Skyview too Bill for that reason. I think the first priority is all that bought engines and are flying, then all that bought engines and then probably me. As simple as the kit is to produce, it should not create much of a backlog I would think since they knew exactly how many kits they sold that needed the parts.
 
I am kit 194, first flight in August 2011 and live less than 150 miles from the factory. NO kit yet!!:confused:
 
That makes no sense. I am curious as to how I am going to jack up the plane to take off a MLG, has anyone came up with a slick idea for doing that yet?
 
jacking up the plane?

The maintenance manual has a pretty simple destructions on getting the plane jacked up on some appropriately-sized saw horses--takes two people--one to push the tail down and then up while the other slides the padded saw horses into the designated places--jacks all three gears up about two inches--enough to slide the gears off, requiring no hernia transplant afterwards. I bought a pair of metal and MDF collapsible saw horses at Harbor Freight Aerospace and whacked the bottoms off to get the appropriate height--keep them in the corner of the hangar.http://www.harborfreight.com/two-piece-foldable-saw-horse-set-41577.html
 
Last edited:
Parts arrival

I'm assuming Van's did a mass mailing. I'm kit 241, #55 to fly (Sept 2010) and my SB parts arrived today. My plan is to pull one wing at a time, jack up the wheel, use padded sawhorses under the remaining wing and under the fuselage-- at least that's what I think now. I'm wondering if we can avoid pulling the tank by placing plywood (or thick aluminum) between the skins being drilled and the tank. Next question is how to drain the brake lines so they can be disconnected without dripping fluid inside the fuselage. It's a GREAT paint remover.

I'd really appreciate it id some of the first to do the SB could post photos (new thread??) of the process-- I won't get to 3WM until late Jan/Feb.

Wayne 120241
 
Back
Top