What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Pre Buy Madness 2

g zero

Well Known Member
Just looked a 9 for a customer . This is a first ... Some of the blue plastic was never removed ! And some of it was pulled / torn off after riveting the pieces together .
After looking at the airframe I wonder how or why it was signed off as airworthy.
Maybe 1 out of 100 rivets would meet acceptable standards . Almost every screw holding the fuel tanks to the spar were cross threaded and looked like bent over nails . There was also plenty of other issues .
If you are looking to purchase a Vans Aircraft remember they are home built by individuals with a very wide degree of skill . A pre buy is highly recommended .
 
and some things you will never be able to see completely with a purchased homebuilt. you have to be able to trust the builder to have done it correctly. if you can't trust the builder, walk away.
 
Last edited:
Was that a -9 or a -9A?

There aren't very many -9's out there, so it is good info for anyone looking that if it a -9 for sale, they had better take a very close look!

As for leaving the plastic on, that is as bad as letting the proseal harden before riveting. Eventually, it will deteriorate and let the skins loosen and the rivets "work".
 
9a

It's a 9A , Bill and Tony are the only 9 tail wheels I know .

If any VAF guys are looking at a bargain priced 9A , PM me
the tail number , might save you the time .
 
It's a 9A , Bill and Tony are the only 9 tail wheels I know . ....
There are a few more, but not many. Mark W., Stein's father, Greg Arehart, and a few others. (Thus our values should be higher than all the other RV's.)

Posted with permission:
image5.jpeg


image8.jpeg


image7.jpeg


image6.jpeg


image.jpeg
 
Can't somebody do something?

Can't something be done to insure that this plane has its airworthiness certificate rejected and registration revoked? This could get somebody killed.
 
I especially like how each alternate screw is tipped the other way. Shows the builder cared about symmetry.
 
Those photos scared the heck out of me. I can't believe anyone could consider that to be anywhere close to acceptable workmanship. I'd love to know more about those photos... not names or places, but other details: was this all one plane or several different ones? Did they actually get an airworthiness certificate looking like that, or is this post-certificate damage? ... and on and on...
Dang.... I might not be able to sleep now...
 
Awww, shoot, that's nothin'!

We once had a low wing wood and fabric bird show up at SERFI with (1) all the rib stitching sanded through on the upper surface of the wing, and (2) an inch of water in the rear fuselage. We noticed all this because the owner had requested judging.
 
While it's fun to rag on the builder of this plane, I also keep a few things in mind.

1) My workmanship is poor, and I'm not nearly as good a craftsman as some who post on here. But with that said, I will reject anything that's unsafe (appears to be the case with this plane) but will accept something that is perhaps ugly but safe. Clearly this plane has some unsafe construction standards, but I don't want other potential builders on the site to get discouraged. My advice would be to get a tech counselor or experienced builder to act as a go/no go gauge during building.

2) This is a pretty good testament to vans. I'm assuming this plane is flying, or has been flying, for a while. The fact that it has not cracked and rattled apart makes me feel somewhat comfortable that there is some structural margin built into the design that might compensate for less than ideal construction. I'm not saying this plane is airworthy or safe, just that for some time period it did fly without incident.

3) I agree with the others on here, I'd have a hard time believing someone representing the FAA issued an airworthiness certificate. Something has failed in the system if that is the case.

Good luck to any potential buyer...
 
At least as a -9 (or -9A), the airframe won't see any stresses from Aerobatics.

Well, as long as we assume the owner/builder's judgement about aerobatics is better than his judgement about installing screws and rivets...
 
why would it be for sale?????

In an 'almost' serious vein, what would this aircraft be worth?
I think aluminum is about 50 cents a pound, so at least $400, right?

this reminds me of the 1970's, when everyone was building an ultralite in their basement, from old lawn chair tubing and pop-riveted beer can brackets, lawn mower engines, etc.

I too am concerned where this falls in the regulatory world, without causing a firestorm of regulation, we have to see this tracked back to the builder, who thru little fault of his own, may just not have any support, or, thru 100% fault, did not ask for help.
and the inspector, who perhaps signed off on an incomplete airframe, or a wreck has been rebuilt with NO inspection afterward.

What did the controls and systems look like on the INSIDE, if this is what can be seen from 10 yards away??????
:( Perhaps the thread should be titled, Pre-buy sadness.....cause that's one of the emotions surfacing right now.
 
You guys quit obsessing over the little stuff. The most important questions are whether it has Garmins and when was the static check done.
 
Prebuy

I was pretty amazed at the construction of this plane . The pics on the add don't look bad , most are from 10 feet away . The logs show the first go around with the DAR had some issues with rivets on the trailing edges . How those rivets got singled out is beyond me . There are plenty of other issues with the airframe .
My question is how it received an Airworthy Certificate ??? Maybe Mel can fill us in .

I did receive an email from the overseas buyer after I gave him the report , I shattered his dream , but thanked me for it .
 
Construction Issues

If you enjoy working on RV's, then something like that might be right up your alley. IMO, You'd have to treat it as a full blown restoration, and tear it all apart to see what you've got, and then start fixing all stuff you found wrong with it. After 300-500 hundred hours, you could have a solid safe a/c!

Doug Lomheim
(spent 350+ hrs. "restoring" an RV-3A...)
 
First off, the DAR makes NO claim that the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation. The applicant makes that statement when he applies for the airworthiness certificate. The DAR's job is to confirm that the aircraft meets the requirements for the certificate requested. In this case, that it was indeed at least 51% amateur-built. That's why many FAA inspectors don't dive too deeply into an inspection of the aircraft.

Now having said that, most DARs DO indeed inspect the aircraft for standard and safe build practices. The DAR DOES have to authority to deny a certificate for anything he feels is not safe or anything that makes him uncomfortable.

Ugly workmanship does not necessarily mean it is unsafe, but it certainly makes one look deeper into the aircraft.
 
I agree with you

I agree with Mel. Not all are award winners. They only have to be safe, and some things are certainly at the discretion of the DAR. That being said, it's so sad for someone to have spent so much money and time end up with something so poorly constructed. With all of the resources available today there really is no need for that to happen.

Vic
 
This is really a curious set of photographs.

On one hand, we can't be looking at a QB wing kit because there's virtually no imaginable way the tank screws and left aileron could end up looking like they do.

On the other hand, there are areas that display perfectly adequate (from the surface) construction technique. The tank baffle rivets look really good actually, and presumably the tanks don't leak fuel faster than you can pump it in.

Any guesses as to how this particular mix of build standards end up on the same airplane?
 
Prebuy

The builder / owner said the tanks were built by Vans . ( I don't think they offer pre built tanks ) . The tanks had No sealant on the shop heads inside the tank .
 
Back
Top