What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Introducing the RV-15!

Sorry to have to be in the group on the other side of the fence, but my first impression is not positive. I’m sure it will fly great and people will make great machines out of them, but as compared to the cubs, kitfoxes, rans, and others, the aesthetics are somewhat lacking. I do realize it is just a prototype that isn’t completed yet, but the bones don’t live up to the sleek designs of ALL of the rest of the Vans aircraft. It looks like a less refined Cessna at this point. Maybe it’s flying characteristics will overcome its current looks…….
 
Mothership replies on YT....

...gleened from various mothership YT replies...


"The rope pull handles are test aircraft feature only, to enable emergency door jettison if needed."

"The fuel tank in the cabin is only for the test airplane. Certain prototype aircraft design considerations are there to enable us to make engineering changes and adjustments (keep in mind, this is an engineering test prototype airplane), easily change configurations in weight/balance, loading, etc."

(regarding ordering)
"No, not yet. This is the engineering prototype, from which we develop the kit airplane. We will take orders once we know when kits can be delivered. That takes some time."

".....There are some features you just can't see (we can talk about those at OSH), and a couple things you mentioned were not quite correct...
Early flight - not the first flight.
Very close on your the take-off roll estimation. Yes - Flaps were up.
Prop correction: Hartzell prop. Big one. Constant Speed.
Fairings come later. This is a test prototype.
Push rod controls. Standard Van's style design.
Trapeze handles are in fact for emergency door jettison. Good catch!
The pilot definitely works for Van's. Great guy, and accomplished test pilot.
Softie is actually a parachute brand. :)
Correct on the in-airframe latching mechanism.
Again, keep in mind that everything is an engineering prototype design at this point.
The fuel tank in the right seat area is for the test article airplane. Flexibility in test loading, engineering changes, etc."
 
Last edited:
Another suggestion - curve the windshield like a C180 instead of like a C170. It will have lower form drag and less noise.

Dave
 
OK Van's for the important stuff...

Where's the high rez photo's for my screen wallpaper and ceiling print???

Bob :)
 
Gear

I am glad to see they went away from the round steel gear. It still looks too short; it appears out of proportion. If I had a dollar to bet, I would bet the gear is changed to allow a larger prop. But I don't have a spare dollar... Steinair got it all; I am broke.
 
Sorry to have to be in the group on the other side of the fence, but my first impression is not positive. I’m sure it will fly great and people will make great machines out of them, but as compared to the cubs, kitfoxes, rans, and others, the aesthetics are somewhat lacking. I do realize it is just a prototype that isn’t completed yet, but the bones don’t live up to the sleek designs of ALL of the rest of the Vans aircraft. It looks like a less refined Cessna at this point. Maybe it’s flying characteristics will overcome its current looks…….

Aesthetically I must admit I'm underwhelmed. While I understand that wing struts allow the wing to be lighter and better headroom due to a smaller spar carrythrough, they are draggy. Yes I know most Cessnas have them, I have a C-150. But the Cardinal and later 210s as well as the C-190 and C-195 don't. Even the 1930s Airmaster doesn't. In keeping with Vans Total Performance mantra, I'll be totally impressed if the RV-15 speed ratio is about 4:1 like most of their low wing models.

As I posted in #149 08-19-2021 here
https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?p=1549283&highlight=helio+courier#post1549283

the Helio Courier has a speed range of 5.16:1 and no wing struts. I noticed extended flap tracks on the RV-15, so I expect large Fowler flaps which should help the low speed stall. And the wing doesn't look like an RV-14 wing as I surmised, so likely a custom airfoil and planform. It should be able to beat the performance of a Cessna 170 or 180 which had 1930s era airfoils. I'm looking forward to the release of the performance numbers.
 
Looks like

And the wing doesn't look like an RV-14 wing as I surmised, so likely a custom airfoil and planform. It should be able to beat the performance of a Cessna 170 or 180 which had 1930s era airfoils. I'm looking forward to the release of the performance numbers.


The airfoil looks real close to the RV9. But i dont think the RV9 airfoil would work with large fowler flaps.

The struts provide a place to attach stuff and push the plane around, but I am with you, I would dump the struts to get a higher cruise speed. But I am only one of a quizillion buyers.


Maybe the RV16 will be a strutless 4 seater?
 
Last edited:
Interesting...

Maybe its just the test article but it appears that the horizontal stab has an adjustable angle of incidence (Cessna C-180, C-185, Mooney, etc.), but also has dual trim tabs (RV-10 elevator) on the elevator.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-07-10 at 1.05.27 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-07-10 at 1.05.27 PM.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 1,219
  • Screen Shot 2022-07-10 at 1.06.21 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-07-10 at 1.06.21 PM.png
    372.7 KB · Views: 1,033
15

Gotta say I’m underwhelmed. Hopefully it’s got a magic wing with an unbelievable stall speed. Otherwise just build a Dream Tundra or buy a 170
 
Maybe its just the test article but it appears that the horizontal stab has an adjustable angle of incidence (Cessna C-180, C-185, Mooney, etc.), but also has dual trim tabs (RV-10 elevator) on the elevator.

Looks like a flying tail (stabilator) to me. the tabs are probably anti servo tabs like on a Piper Cherokee.
 
Give it a chance and accept it for what Van’s says it is: A back country *capable* aircraft. Not a back country *optimized* aircraft. They are not the same.

Likely it will be a nice flying aircraft. But nobody should be expecting it to compete with the Highlanders and Zeniths in the STOL competitions, nor to be landing in the serious Alaskan backwoods with the modified Super Cubs, etc.

What will be interesting will be the modifications that builders start making after a few customer-built examples are flying…

- Pat
 
Maybe its just the test article but it appears that the horizontal stab has an adjustable angle of incidence (Cessna C-180, C-185, Mooney, etc.), but also has dual trim tabs (RV-10 elevator) on the elevator.

Yes. Need a lot of trim authority with the big Fowler flaps.
 
Am I the only one who is disappointed to see struts?

Unless you can find pilots with big holes in their head for spar carrythru then struts are unavoidable. The C-177 is hopelessly nose heavy and would never get low stall speed with big flaps. The C-210 is a great airplane but much bigger-and they did/do have engineering challenges with their spar
 
I am glad to see they went away from the round steel gear. It still looks too short; it appears out of proportion. If I had a dollar to bet, I would bet the gear is changed to allow a larger prop. But I don't have a spare dollar... Steinair got it all; I am broke.

The engineering of the gear with energy absorption is pure genius
 
Another suggestion - curve the windshield like a C180 instead of like a C170. It will have lower form drag and less noise.

Dave

Every C-180 I’ve flown has terrible optics in the curved portion. I haven’t been in a C-170 so not sure of the difference
 
Last edited:
Give 'em some time!

Ya'll gotta remember that someone with a 2003 Motorola flip-phone posted a pic on the ol' interweb that probably forced Van's hand in releasing this information before they were ready.

All prototypes and test mules are "purposeful" - no one would ever mistake them for being sexy. Anyone look at the RV-1 compared to the RV-3?

My money is on a great performing - and great looking - kit when they have had a chance to refine it and are ready to release it!

My hats off to Greg and the team at Vans for working hard to bring this new design to market! 'Can't wait to see the finished product!
 
What’d y’all expect?

LOL It looks exactly like what everyone should’ve known it’d look like; an RV with a high wing! Yeah, it may not be the sleekest, or the most aerodynamic but it looks like a perfect, back-country airplane. Designed and built to do things very well. And I’m sure it will. Did y’all really expect a four seater? I didn’t. They make up, well, one of the current RVs and a small percentage of all other current STOL/BC offerings. Two seater are king. Now, this may be a 2+2 since it does look like there’s some room for rear seats and there is a smaller back window. We’ll see. I for one like what I see so far and am happy to wait for the final product. Why? Because I know it will be an amazing airplane.
 
Plus 1

LOL It looks exactly like what everyone should’ve known it’d look like; an RV with a high wing! Yeah, it may not be the sleekest, or the most aerodynamic but it looks like a perfect, back-country airplane. Designed and built to do things very well. And I’m sure it will. Did y’all really expect a four seater? I didn’t. They make up, well, one of the current RVs and a small percentage of all other current STOL/BC offerings. Two seater are king. Now, this may be a 2+2 since it does look like there’s some room for rear seats and there is a smaller back window. We’ll see. I for one like what I see so far and am happy to wait for the final product. Why? Because I know it will be an amazing airplane.

Another one of those times when I wish we had a “like” button.

I don’t know if they plan to offer a 2+2 or let builders roll their own. But there is certainly room
 
That can’t be right-we were just working on the airfoils about then.

My guess is that they transferred the tail number from an RV-8 to this RV-15 recently. FlightAware is still showing the last flight tied to the previous plane. If I were Vans I wouldn’t put a transponder in that plane until they are ready to be tracked by some smarter than me Vans builder.
 
I Like It!!

I think it has nice lines. I wouldn't judge too much on the test aircraft. I'm sure there will be some refinements.

The difference between the 15 and the others in the ilk will be the ease of the build. In a conversation I had with someone from Van's, one of the design goals was to make it one of the fastest and most prefabbed kits available. This stands to reason with the continued improvement on the latest kits.

Congrats to the Van's crew who made this happen. I'm sure there were many sleepless nights by Greg, Rian and others involved in the development.

Oh yeah, my guess is the the RV16 will be a four seat version!!! Only makes sense!!
 
All I kmow

All I know, is that I imagine Vans is flying the snot out of it to make sure it is ready for a CC to Osh. Go team!
 
I sure hope it has a baggage door. My old Cessna 175 didn't and it was a real pain to load it for a trip.

It would also be nice if the RV-14 had a baggage door, but there's lots of structure in the way...

Heresy of heresy, I must be one of the few who would appreciate a high wing airplane just for being high wing, even if it never touches grass or gravel. Worse, I'd like a nosewheel. Flown a bunch of tailwheel, been there, done that.
 
Maybe its just the test article but it appears that the horizontal stab has an adjustable angle of incidence (Cessna C-180, C-185, Mooney, etc.), but also has dual trim tabs (RV-10 elevator) on the elevator.

It’s a stabilator, not a horizontal stab.


Gotta say I’m underwhelmed. Hopefully it’s got a magic wing with an unbelievable stall speed. Otherwise just build a Dream Tundra or buy a 170

Uhhhh…from a Tundra builder and owner….no. Just No…… (Besides, the company is no longer actually doing business, and last I was told, the assets are for sale.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Who is going to be first to get the Fowler Flap track forehead indentation??

No cargo door? Maybe the seats are set on a double extend track and will go to the panel with the stick full fwd.

Where is the fuel? I don't see it in the wing.
Are there four bell cranks for each aileron?
 
It’s a stabilator, not a horizontal stab.




Uhhhh…from a Tundra builder and owner….no. Just No…… (Besides, the company is no longer actually doing business, and last I was told, the assets are for sale.)

Ok … Scratch The Tundra , I just read your Article.
Sounds like you have an engine, prop and panel looking for a new home . Might wait for the “ B “ model Rv 15 🤡
 
Who is going to be first to get the Fowler Flap track forehead indentation??

That may have been me. Not certain. :rolleyes:

No cargo door? Maybe the seats are set on a double extend track and will go to the panel with the stick full fwd.

Where is the fuel? I don't see it in the wing.
Are there four bell cranks for each aileron?

It's an engineering test prototype airplane. Cargo doors, etc. can come about a bit later.

The fuel is in the location where the right seat would be in this test airplane. This decision/design provides some flexibility in loading, making changes, etc. Obviously, it won't be located there in the kit airplane.
 
Someone above mentioned the difference between back country capable and back country optimized. For me, the ability to get to the back country is part of the equation. I can land my J-3 anywhere, but it won’t haul two people plus gear and it would take over 6 hours to get to a really cool back country strip I have in mind. My RV-14 can get there with two people and gear in 2.5 hours, but I have to hope the runway is smooth when I get there. If the RV-15 can outrun, say, a Piper Archer and safely handle the less extreme strips in the back country, it will make a very good fit for a lot of people’s 90% mission and cover a lot of the remaining 10%.
 
Who is going to be first to get the Fowler Flap track forehead indentation??

I am afraid that was me a couple of weeks back.
 
Sorry to have to be in the group on the other side of the fence, but my first impression is not positive. I’m sure it will fly great and people will make great machines out of them, but as compared to the cubs, kitfoxes, rans, and others, the aesthetics are somewhat lacking. I do realize it is just a prototype that isn’t completed yet, but the bones don’t live up to the sleek designs of ALL of the rest of the Vans aircraft. It looks like a less refined Cessna at this point. Maybe it’s flying characteristics will overcome its current looks…….

Geesh! What more could you want than to look like a Skywagon? The perfect utility airplane. I can foresee a paint job that looks like Oshkosh Bygosh coveralls and a tool belt full of tools around the middle.
 
That looks like Grove main landing gear. If so, I think that's an excellent addition to this great looking airplane. I can't wait to learn more about it at Oshkosh in a couple weeks!
 
That may have been me. Not certain. :rolleyes:

Who is going to be first to get the Fowler Flap track forehead indentation??

I am afraid that was me a couple of weeks back.

Ok this is important stuff here folks. Let me just set the story straight on this. Greg was absolutely the first person to introduce himself with the flap tracks. Mitch was a few minutes later. I guess they both win. does anyone want to talk about primer? I can clear that one up too.
 
Ok this is important stuff here folks. Let me just set the story straight on this. Greg was absolutely the first person to introduce himself with the flap tracks. Mitch was a few minutes later. I guess they both win. does anyone want to talk about primer? I can clear that one up too.

So how short do you need to be to clear the tracks....
 
I’m going to go out on a limb and say the final version won’t have the struts. Just my guess.
 
Back
Top