What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-14 drop test video

Certification Possibility

So I raise this question...

Does this mean they might have the desire to make the 14 a store bought certified aircraft as well as a kit?
 
So I raise this question...

Does this mean they might have the desire to make the 14 a store bought certified aircraft as well as a kit?
Or, by meeting Part 23 standards, Van's may have just wanted to avoid the RV-12 gear issues that came about from following the deficient SLSA consensus standards, and have a more rugged nose gear than the the other 2 seat "A" models have.

BTW, Great video and explanation of gear design by Van's.

There's been an effort for several years now to make Part 23 an ASTM standard. Van's had a rep on the committee at one point; not sure if they still are (I'm not anymore).

The idea of moving to an industry consensus standard was that it would make certification easier and faster, address inconsistencies and outdated practices, move to "desired result" rather than "prescribed method" rules, and make the rules more able to adapt to new technology. Unfortunately, it seems that all the government and industry committee members were actually willing to do was port over existing Part 23 language, change the terminology a bit, and require verbal stall warnings (a speaker saying "STALL STALL!") or "stall-resistant" airplanes.

I also questioned how much good it was going to do to make Part 23 easier and simpler if we didn't make Part 21 the same way, and allow production like we do for S-LSAs. "Showing compliance" the FAA way is still a massive paperwork exercise, and maintaining a production process like the FAA wants is what brings meaning to the joke about the weight of paperwork exceeding the weight of the airplane.
 
Very informative, but...

It makes me wonder to what extent the other Van's models have been tested, and how well they tolerate or would tolerate this testing.
 
They kinda skipped over 23.481(b) which requires consideration for spin up and spring back loads. (so does 23.479(b) or (c) depending on the path chosen) Usually the spring back load is the critical load case. And it did not look like they were compliant with 2.25 times the drop height in accordance with 23.726(a)(1) (between 20.7 and 42.075 inches drop height!) for demonstration of compliance to 23.481 dynamically. But maybe that was at least 20 inches high, or develops 1.5 times the limit load at a lower height, IDK. It is difficult to get from the video that was a complete part 23 demonstration but good for them on trying. I'm still going to fly the heck out of my RV-10. :D
 
It makes me wonder to what extent the other Van's models have been tested, and how well they tolerate or would tolerate this testing.

Watching some of the arrivals at Oshkosh, I'd say most of the models have been tested pretty well...
 
This test obviously places the focus on gear performance, but are drop tests also done with wings on?
 
RV-14 Drop Test Video Airfoil at 1:54

Hmmmm.
Interesting video but...at 1:54 it states the airfoil for the RV-14 is a NACA 23012. Now I know all the models up to the RV-9(A) were based on this series, in fact a bit thicker at 23013.5 (or 13.5% maximum thickness). The RV-9(A) airfoil is a custom John Roncz airfoil, and the RV-10 is another custom airfoil designed by one of the members of this forum (whose initials are SS). And I further understood that the RV-14(A) airfoil was the same as the RV-10, in fact the wing is the same only a few bays shorter.

Did I miss something, or did Vans return to the 23000 series after the RV-10?
 
Hmmmm.
Interesting video but...at 1:54 it states the airfoil for the RV-14 is a NACA 23012. Now I know all the models up to the RV-9(A) were based on this series, in fact a bit thicker at 23013.5 (or 13.5% maximum thickness). The RV-9(A) airfoil is a custom John Roncz airfoil, and the RV-10 is another custom airfoil designed by one of the members of this forum (whose initials are SS). And I further understood that the RV-14(A) airfoil was the same as the RV-10, in fact the wing is the same only a few bays shorter.

Did I miss something, or did Vans return to the 23000 series after the RV-10?

No, the RV-14 has the same airfoil as the RV-10.
That is a mistake in the video.
 
nose gear

You could never drop test the 7A nose gear like the RV14. RV14 has a way better nose gear setup.
 
RV14 nose gear on RV7

Now, all we need is someone to make a new engine mount/nose gear modeled after the RV14 setup to fit the RV6/RV7/RV9 models. . .Mmmmmmmm might be a good seller $$$
 
Now, all we need is someone to make a new engine mount/nose gear modeled after the RV14 setup to fit the RV6/RV7/RV9 models. . .Mmmmmmmm might be a good seller $$$

It'd be expensive, but at least it'd be heavier and solve a non-existent problem for the 6/7/8/9 A models, all of which have a lower design gross weight than the 14. What's not to like?
 
Back
Top