Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Late Model -6 tail vs. early -7 tail
- Thread starter Inverted
- Start date
Martin Sutter
Well Known Member
Late model RV6 vertical tails were the same as early model RV7 tails. They both used the RV8 tail.
Martin Sutter
building and flying RV's since 1988
Martin Sutter
building and flying RV's since 1988
The early -7 tail did improve spin recovery on the -6. The smaller -6 tail was never used on the -7. The -6 and -7 are totally different airplanes. Different wing spans and different fuselage lengths.
I understand the fuselage and wings are different. When I am talking about spin characteristics I mean strictly in relation to the different tail versions on the rv-6. I saw a -6 this past weekend that had one of the early style -7 tails on it and I was wondering what the difference was between that tail and the later production -6 tails. I've heard the later -6 tails were .16, but I haven't asked Vans.
Jim P
Well Known Member
Isn't the -7/-8 vertical stab the same with exception of the rudder tip? When they put the -9 rudder on the -7/-8 VS, I thought they just added the taller rudder tip fairing. So the -7/-8/-9 VS is basically the same, but are mated with different rudders, depending on the airframe?
jsharkey
Well Known Member
The prepunched 8/late 6/early 7 rudder skins are .020" and if I remember have an RV8 part number - for what that's worth.
petercavallo
Well Known Member
Spins and early RV 7 tail
I have a RV6 with the early RV7 rudder , I ordered the tail feathers all 0.020 with my quick build kit (better with an IO360 180) Spins are quick and predictable for me (2 turns and less) and up to Aerobatic standards. I have no expirence with the early tail ( but you can read the info on Vans website) seems ok There. Make sure you know what you are doing if you want to spin your AC (take training)
I have an inverted system but have not tried Inverted Spins yet.
Hope this helps
Peter
I have a RV6 with the early RV7 rudder , I ordered the tail feathers all 0.020 with my quick build kit (better with an IO360 180) Spins are quick and predictable for me (2 turns and less) and up to Aerobatic standards. I have no expirence with the early tail ( but you can read the info on Vans website) seems ok There. Make sure you know what you are doing if you want to spin your AC (take training)
I have an inverted system but have not tried Inverted Spins yet.
Hope this helps
Peter
gvgoff99
Well Known Member
Cody, You may want to read this if you have not already done so. http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/sb02-6-1.pdf
It is Van's SB comments on the rudder differences and spins. Hope that it helps.
Is it possible to retrofit a -6 with the older/smaller vertical fin to a later/larger fin or are there major structural changes that need to take place ?
I am looking into purchasing a half finished -6 kit (haven't found one yet) and only after reading this discussion did I realize that there are different size fins out there. If I'm going to be building/finishing a kit, I may as well put a larger fin on there. And I assume Van's would sell me just the required parts ?
Thanks,
Darren
I am looking into purchasing a half finished -6 kit (haven't found one yet) and only after reading this discussion did I realize that there are different size fins out there. If I'm going to be building/finishing a kit, I may as well put a larger fin on there. And I assume Van's would sell me just the required parts ?
Thanks,
Darren
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
I believe it was Bob Axsom who coined the phrase "classic tail" for the shorter RV6 tails. I have one, and I like the looks much better, than the tall replacements. I also put a lot of hours on RV9's with the taller counterbalanced setups, and I'll be danged if I notice any real difference between flying the two in reference to stability and tail wag. Basically, I wouldn't take the taller tail if it was given to me...
L.Adamson --- RV6A
JonJay
Well Known Member
Nothing Major
There are some minor differences and perhaps someone who has done it can chime in on the specific modifications, but as I understand it, it is not difficult to put the 7 tail on the 6. I agree with L.Adamson on both points; the classic tail looks better and there is no compelling reason to put the larger tail on the 6. IMHO
There are some minor differences and perhaps someone who has done it can chime in on the specific modifications, but as I understand it, it is not difficult to put the 7 tail on the 6. I agree with L.Adamson on both points; the classic tail looks better and there is no compelling reason to put the larger tail on the 6. IMHO
Larger Tail on the RV-6
My opinion is that you should go for the larger -7 vertical fin and rudder. I know of two accidents that occurred on the taildragger RV-6 because the pilot ran out of directional control on the ground, in a crosswind. I know one of the pilots very well. He flew the airplane a lot, and he knew the airfield and its wind conditions very well. He was almost down to taxi speed when a gust hit the airplane, and despite full rudder, it departed the runway surface and turned turtle in the grass. He is a tall guy and when his head dented the tip-up rollover tube, he broke the second vertebra in his neck. He was lucky, and we are grateful that he recovered to repair and fly the airplane, using the -7 fin and rudder. Think about it. A tailwheel airplane is directionally unstable on the ground. The same airplane is directionally stable in the air. When you are rolling out after landing, the airplane becomes less and less directionally stable. As speed decreases, you want to keep all the aerodynamic stability you can until it's gone. The larger -7 fin and rudder will you provide with a little more for a little longer. Someday, it might make a difference.
My opinion is that you should go for the larger -7 vertical fin and rudder. I know of two accidents that occurred on the taildragger RV-6 because the pilot ran out of directional control on the ground, in a crosswind. I know one of the pilots very well. He flew the airplane a lot, and he knew the airfield and its wind conditions very well. He was almost down to taxi speed when a gust hit the airplane, and despite full rudder, it departed the runway surface and turned turtle in the grass. He is a tall guy and when his head dented the tip-up rollover tube, he broke the second vertebra in his neck. He was lucky, and we are grateful that he recovered to repair and fly the airplane, using the -7 fin and rudder. Think about it. A tailwheel airplane is directionally unstable on the ground. The same airplane is directionally stable in the air. When you are rolling out after landing, the airplane becomes less and less directionally stable. As speed decreases, you want to keep all the aerodynamic stability you can until it's gone. The larger -7 fin and rudder will you provide with a little more for a little longer. Someday, it might make a difference.
Norman CYYJ
Well Known Member
The larger tail will give you more cross-wind capability as mentioned in the above post. BUT there will always be a cross wind gust that you can't handle no matter how big the tail is. Leave your 6 the way Van's designed it, it works well and will save you a lot of work and a more aft C of G with the bigger tail.
JonJay
Well Known Member
Doesnt matter what size of tail you have...
If your down at "almost taxi speed" you dont have much rudder left. You still have brakes though and if his airplane left the runway with full rudder and full differential braking, there was nothing that could have saved it, regardless of what rudder it was.
Plenty of rudder in the 6 as designed, but I wont argue that you would have a little more rudder for a little longer with the larger tail.
If your down at "almost taxi speed" you dont have much rudder left. You still have brakes though and if his airplane left the runway with full rudder and full differential braking, there was nothing that could have saved it, regardless of what rudder it was.
Plenty of rudder in the 6 as designed, but I wont argue that you would have a little more rudder for a little longer with the larger tail.
This is our reason for the 8 vertical/rudder.
My 6A is literally weeks from flying. It has an RV-8 vertical stab/rudder and a 6 horizontal stab/elevators with .020 skins. low speed transition control was the primary reasoning for the change on my part. I have no direct experience for the basis of this decision, but logically, a larger control surface should increase the control at lower speeds, correct? I also plan to use an 8 tail on my HRII based on the same reasoning.
It was an easy change from the 6 vert/rudder to the 8 vert/rudder. I would recommend the change.
Good luck.
My 6A is literally weeks from flying. It has an RV-8 vertical stab/rudder and a 6 horizontal stab/elevators with .020 skins. low speed transition control was the primary reasoning for the change on my part. I have no direct experience for the basis of this decision, but logically, a larger control surface should increase the control at lower speeds, correct? I also plan to use an 8 tail on my HRII based on the same reasoning.
It was an easy change from the 6 vert/rudder to the 8 vert/rudder. I would recommend the change.
Good luck.
In my opinion; for whatever that's worth...
I think the larger tail helps slightly in spin recovery. As far as cross wind control I consider it a wash. The larger rudder gives you a little more authority; but, the larger overall tail surface causes you to "need" more authority. So they about equal out.
Send your $.02 to BR-549 please!
(If you understand the above statement, you're telling your age)
I think the larger tail helps slightly in spin recovery. As far as cross wind control I consider it a wash. The larger rudder gives you a little more authority; but, the larger overall tail surface causes you to "need" more authority. So they about equal out.
Send your $.02 to BR-549 please!
(If you understand the above statement, you're telling your age)
Ok, can someone tell me how many vertical stab variants there are out there for the -6.
I have read the service bulletin from Van's, which was posted earlier on this thread, and it talked about testing a -6 with a -7 tail. Then the bulletin deviates and talks about using a -9 tail on a -7.
So what is currently available if a fella wanted to change an older -6 tail to something larger ?
"Mr. T Robby Hard Knox" mentioned that he put an -8 tail on his -6 ! So is this larger than the -7 ? He also said it wasn't too hard to do either.
I'm damned confused Great discussion though.
Darren
I have read the service bulletin from Van's, which was posted earlier on this thread, and it talked about testing a -6 with a -7 tail. Then the bulletin deviates and talks about using a -9 tail on a -7.
So what is currently available if a fella wanted to change an older -6 tail to something larger ?
"Mr. T Robby Hard Knox" mentioned that he put an -8 tail on his -6 ! So is this larger than the -7 ? He also said it wasn't too hard to do either.
I'm damned confused
Great discussion though.Darren
At least two, but depending on which RV7/8 tail you choose it could be three or four. The pic below is of my old RV6 and my newer one. The tail on the white RV6 is an RV7 tail and the black/green plane is the original RV6 tail. Calculated tail area is nearly double on the white one.
Like Mel said, it's a double edged sword. Bigger tail equals bigger area exposed to the wind. I think as far as Xwinds go it's almost a wash, but - with the big tail you can really do a good slip whereas the old tail was rather anemic when it comes to agressive slips. One benefit to the larger tail is that the dog wagging tail is pretty much dampened out in flight with the larger tail, whereas the old small tails are well known for their tail wagging in bumpy air.
Anyway, my 2 cents as usual.
Cheers,
Stein
Like Mel said, it's a double edged sword. Bigger tail equals bigger area exposed to the wind. I think as far as Xwinds go it's almost a wash, but - with the big tail you can really do a good slip whereas the old tail was rather anemic when it comes to agressive slips. One benefit to the larger tail is that the dog wagging tail is pretty much dampened out in flight with the larger tail, whereas the old small tails are well known for their tail wagging in bumpy air.
Anyway, my 2 cents as usual.
Cheers,
Stein
JonJay
Well Known Member
Nice pic Stein.
I had no idea the 7 tail was that much larger. Great pic Stein, really shows the difference.
As far as the wagging, I consider that part of the character of the classic 6 tail. I just completed a 3 1/2 hour leg in rough air and it would occasionally wag, but it is not like it continually wags back and forth. I am told some of the old V-tail's would do this to the point of making passengers sick. On the 6,once in a while, it would shake its tail a bit. Kind of cute actually
The 6's look short and stocky compared to other models. I compensated for this with my paint job. When you put the big tail on the 6, it really throws off the lines in my opinion. That is a very subjective thing I will admit.
One benefit to the larger tail is that the dog wagging tail is pretty much dampened out in flight with the larger tail, whereas the old small tails are well known for their tail wagging in bumpy air.
Anyway, my 2 cents as usual.
Cheers,
Stein
I had no idea the 7 tail was that much larger. Great pic Stein, really shows the difference.
As far as the wagging, I consider that part of the character of the classic 6 tail. I just completed a 3 1/2 hour leg in rough air and it would occasionally wag, but it is not like it continually wags back and forth. I am told some of the old V-tail's would do this to the point of making passengers sick. On the 6,once in a while, it would shake its tail a bit. Kind of cute actually
The 6's look short and stocky compared to other models. I compensated for this with my paint job. When you put the big tail on the 6, it really throws off the lines in my opinion. That is a very subjective thing I will admit.
Don't do it on a 320 FP powered plane...the -7 tail is heavier than the 6 tail by a fair bit (don't know the #'s off the top of my head, I'd have to go back and look at my W&B data), but it made my 320 FP tail heavy. With the 360 and C/S up front now, the W&B is great.
Other than that, it's almost a bolt on affair. Little tweaking with the fairing, but overall no issue.
Cheers,
Stein
jsharkey
Well Known Member
Goldilocks Tail
If any one is interested this is the not too big and not too small intermediate tail shipped with late model 6 and early model 7 empenage kits. Not sure why it didn't work on the 7 but does on the 6. It has the .020" thick rudder skin with a -8 part number which is supposed to be less prone to trailing edge cracking - although stabilizing the ends of the stiffening angles with RTV helps too.
Jim Sharkey
RV6
If any one is interested this is the not too big and not too small intermediate tail shipped with late model 6 and early model 7 empenage kits. Not sure why it didn't work on the 7 but does on the 6. It has the .020" thick rudder skin with a -8 part number which is supposed to be less prone to trailing edge cracking - although stabilizing the ends of the stiffening angles with RTV helps too.
Jim Sharkey
RV6
Last edited:
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
Just flew a 1.6 hr, bumpy cross country over the mountains in my 6A with a 9A owner. At lunch afterwards; I mentioned that the "classic tail" was suppose to wag. I guess neither of us noticed...
L.Adamson --- RV6A
RV-6 tail wag.
If you really look for it, in turbulence, you can see the wing tip rocking back and forth slightly. But since you are sitting directly on the center of the pivot, it's not noticeable.
BTW, the Bonanza tail wag is not limited to the "V" tails. The straight tail Bonanzas do it too. I have a good friend who sold his F33A for just that reason.
If you really look for it, in turbulence, you can see the wing tip rocking back and forth slightly. But since you are sitting directly on the center of the pivot, it's not noticeable.
BTW, the Bonanza tail wag is not limited to the "V" tails. The straight tail Bonanzas do it too. I have a good friend who sold his F33A for just that reason.
Garage Guy
Well Known Member
yaw damper?
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/instruments_yaw_damper.htm
--Paul
tiny-tail RV-6
So, maybe not worth a $2500 add-on to get rid of it?
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/instruments_yaw_damper.htm--Paul
tiny-tail RV-6
Not for me!
I love mine just the way it is.
Besides, If I built a new vertical tail, I would have to invest in 2 new "U.S. of Texas" decals.
So, maybe not worth a $2500 add-on to get rid of it?
--Paul
tiny-tail RV-6
I love mine just the way it is.
Besides, If I built a new vertical tail, I would have to invest in 2 new "U.S. of Texas" decals.
One thing you'll find is that if you fly the old tail any time at all, you quickly and completely forget about the tail wag and don't notice it. But...if you give a ride to someone who hasn't spent much time in the wagging RV, they notice it right away in the bumps.
Cheers,
Stein
Cheers,
Stein
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
However, today's passenger & one half of the flight time pilot in my 6A, has a 9A with close to 250 hrs, and over 100 hrs in a previous 9A he built. I mentioned the supposeable "tail wag" scenario at lunch afterwards, and he figured that the 9A bounces around just as much as my 6A in turbulence. Today was full of bounces.
Yet................I do have one of those fin like marker beacon antenna's that's placed directly below the TruTrak elevator servo behind the baggage bulkhead. That must be acting like one of those fins you see on Lear Jet's as well as others these days....................and it's taking care of my tail wag..
L.Adamson -- RV6A
tail wags and crosswinds
I've had two RV6's since 2003, smaller tails both, and have not noticed any "tail wag" in either.
Dutch roll is a phenomenon that primarily affects swept wing aircraft.
I've landed both RV6s in several up to direct 15 knot crosswinds, and would not want to see the upwind wing tip much, if any, lower for landing. I was not out of rudder in these instances which is usually what invokes a crosswind landing limit in light airplanes.
As to heavier tails, whether bigger, "beefed up" vs plans, or with plenty of gear mounted aft of the baggage compartment, it's important to consider that aft CG limit usually drives max gross weight limits in the RV6, notwithstanding spar strength, gust loads, etc.. If you're at or near your aft CG limit, the plane is going to be squirrelly in the pitch axis, especially on landing, no matter how much it weighs. Recall that CG goes aft as fuel is burned off. So takeoff and landing pitch feels can be real different with 2 adults, baggage. Also remember that if you manage to get an airplane into a spin, you do not want to have an aft CG right about then.
If a flying RV, and you want to mod the tail, I'd run it by Van's tech folks. Also, there's lots of discussion to be found on this and other topics in "27 Years of the RVator", sold by Van's. Every RV owner should have this book.
I've had two RV6's since 2003, smaller tails both, and have not noticed any "tail wag" in either.
Dutch roll is a phenomenon that primarily affects swept wing aircraft.
I've landed both RV6s in several up to direct 15 knot crosswinds, and would not want to see the upwind wing tip much, if any, lower for landing. I was not out of rudder in these instances which is usually what invokes a crosswind landing limit in light airplanes.
As to heavier tails, whether bigger, "beefed up" vs plans, or with plenty of gear mounted aft of the baggage compartment, it's important to consider that aft CG limit usually drives max gross weight limits in the RV6, notwithstanding spar strength, gust loads, etc.. If you're at or near your aft CG limit, the plane is going to be squirrelly in the pitch axis, especially on landing, no matter how much it weighs. Recall that CG goes aft as fuel is burned off. So takeoff and landing pitch feels can be real different with 2 adults, baggage. Also remember that if you manage to get an airplane into a spin, you do not want to have an aft CG right about then.
If a flying RV, and you want to mod the tail, I'd run it by Van's tech folks. Also, there's lots of discussion to be found on this and other topics in "27 Years of the RVator", sold by Van's. Every RV owner should have this book.
IMHO - out of ignorance
Saw jsharkey's comments many days back about the -7 tail question and have my experience that 'might' be of interest. I'm awaiting my finishing kit for -6A QB (vintage 1997) - 2nd owner. The first owner did some work on rudder, seat floors, and rt seat back. I replaced two out of three - he threw out the rudder. He then stored the kit until early 2006, when I rescued it from the back of his hanger.
Anyway, since I needed a replacement rudder I contacted Vans support and was told that it would require a line by line order of every major and minor part of the rudder. However, they answered my question about getting a -7 rudder or VS/Rudder instead. The answer was NO, not the right substitution - but I 'could' order the -8 VS/Rudder as a single line item. This was the answer I needed, CAD and pre-punched. Think it was $570.
It was a taller unit, with the counter-balanced rudder, and more surface area. (pics on request)
Ran into a fellow from Florida at CopperState 2007(?) who had a similar VS and he claimed it was part of the original kit, one of the later kits (2000 or 2001?).
Vans support said there were 'some' -7 VS/Rudders included in the emp kits for late -6's but Vans offered to provide everyone of them with -8 VS/Rudders (like mine), at no charge. Voluntarily swap, some did, some didn't.
When I questioned the logic of this, and benefits of the -8 (better spin recovery?) Vans support denied there were any problems with that but decided to go with the -8 units for the late -6 empennage kits.
BTW, my -6 QB (originally purchased as fuselage, wings, empennage and picked up at the factory) included factory built control surfaces (ailerons, flaps, elevators) except for the rudder and trim tab. I've heard that was done only during the early -6 QB's. This was a definite time saver to me by buying that kit. I think it was a great deal.
Pics if you desire -
Appreciate all the comments in this thread. Getting IO-360, FP.
PS: New to VAF (today) - hope to be a regular (lurker).
Glad to share my inexperience, don't let it misinform you.
Saw jsharkey's comments many days back about the -7 tail question and have my experience that 'might' be of interest. I'm awaiting my finishing kit for -6A QB (vintage 1997) - 2nd owner. The first owner did some work on rudder, seat floors, and rt seat back. I replaced two out of three - he threw out the rudder. He then stored the kit until early 2006, when I rescued it from the back of his hanger.
Anyway, since I needed a replacement rudder I contacted Vans support and was told that it would require a line by line order of every major and minor part of the rudder. However, they answered my question about getting a -7 rudder or VS/Rudder instead. The answer was NO, not the right substitution - but I 'could' order the -8 VS/Rudder as a single line item. This was the answer I needed, CAD and pre-punched. Think it was $570.
It was a taller unit, with the counter-balanced rudder, and more surface area. (pics on request)
Ran into a fellow from Florida at CopperState 2007(?) who had a similar VS and he claimed it was part of the original kit, one of the later kits (2000 or 2001?).
Vans support said there were 'some' -7 VS/Rudders included in the emp kits for late -6's but Vans offered to provide everyone of them with -8 VS/Rudders (like mine), at no charge. Voluntarily swap, some did, some didn't.
When I questioned the logic of this, and benefits of the -8 (better spin recovery?) Vans support denied there were any problems with that but decided to go with the -8 units for the late -6 empennage kits.
BTW, my -6 QB (originally purchased as fuselage, wings, empennage and picked up at the factory) included factory built control surfaces (ailerons, flaps, elevators) except for the rudder and trim tab. I've heard that was done only during the early -6 QB's. This was a definite time saver to me by buying that kit. I think it was a great deal.
Pics if you desire -
Appreciate all the comments in this thread. Getting IO-360, FP.
PS: New to VAF (today) - hope to be a regular (lurker).
Glad to share my inexperience, don't let it misinform you.
Either you misunderstood the person or they mistakenly gave you incorrect information.
The RV-8 vertical stabilizer even today is what is supplied in RV-7 and 9 kits.
They both use a different rudder than the RV-8.
The very late RV-6 kits were delivered with an RV-8 vertical stab. and rudder.
Initially the RV-7 kit was introduced with the RV-8 vertical stab and rudder.
The rudder was later changed to the larger one that had been used on the RV-9 from it introduction.
The reason was to improve the spin recovery to be similar to what the RV-6 spin recovery had always been (the RV-7 has a longer wing span than the RV-6). A replacement rudder (RV-9 style) was offered to all early RV-7 builders to replace the RV-8 rudder that they had received in their kit. It was never offered to RV-6 builders because they did not require a different rudder for spin recovery (the one on the 7 was being changed to make it perform similarly to the 6)
I fly an RV-6A with an RV-8 vertical and rudder. Mainly because it was much easier to build since I was replacing parts that were damaged. The RV-6 fly's great with the original vertical and rudder or teh RV-8 version.
I hope this helps clear up any confusion about the when and why regarding different vertical tails.
That's my story ... I think, maybe
Not wanting to risk the potential of posting something I 'remember' and misleading someone further, here is the accurate msg from Vans support. (May 2006) With inexperience on ettiquette of posting direct correspondence - hope this is ok with forum protocol -
From my email with Gus Funnel - Vans -
Questions: (in order to complete [my second-hand] RV-6A kit)
>
> 1) Is the RV-7A empennage compatible, if purchased to supply the VS
> and Rudder components? This assumes that the existing RV-6A HS
> components from the kit would be used but substitute the RV-7A VS &
> Rudder for a complete VS replacement.
It would be better to use the 8/8A VS tail - that is the same as late
model 6/6As. You can still get the original non-counterbalanced
rudder if you wish.
>
> 2) I have discussed spin characteristics of the RV-6 (and -7) with a
> number of builders and have the impression that the larger RV-9A
> VS/Rudder a) could be substituted to gain stability, and b) would be
> an improvement over the -6/-7 stability. Can you confirm use of RV-9A
> VS/Rudder on an RV-6A QB?
>
We have not tested a 9A rudder/VS on the 6, and don't advise it.
Our view is that it would be too big, and the added weight is not
desirable, for very little (if any) improvements in stability. Stability
and spin recovery is fine with the original rudder, and slightly
improved with the later 8/8A VS/rudder.
Vans
I subsequently ordered -
Part Number: 8 RUDDER & VS
Quantity: 1
Unit Price: 570.00
PS: Thanks Inverted for some details
Not wanting to risk the potential of posting something I 'remember' and misleading someone further, here is the accurate msg from Vans support. (May 2006) With inexperience on ettiquette of posting direct correspondence - hope this is ok with forum protocol -
From my email with Gus Funnel - Vans -
Questions: (in order to complete [my second-hand] RV-6A kit)
>
> 1) Is the RV-7A empennage compatible, if purchased to supply the VS
> and Rudder components? This assumes that the existing RV-6A HS
> components from the kit would be used but substitute the RV-7A VS &
> Rudder for a complete VS replacement.
It would be better to use the 8/8A VS tail - that is the same as late
model 6/6As. You can still get the original non-counterbalanced
rudder if you wish.
>
> 2) I have discussed spin characteristics of the RV-6 (and -7) with a
> number of builders and have the impression that the larger RV-9A
> VS/Rudder a) could be substituted to gain stability, and b) would be
> an improvement over the -6/-7 stability. Can you confirm use of RV-9A
> VS/Rudder on an RV-6A QB?
>
We have not tested a 9A rudder/VS on the 6, and don't advise it.
Our view is that it would be too big, and the added weight is not
desirable, for very little (if any) improvements in stability. Stability
and spin recovery is fine with the original rudder, and slightly
improved with the later 8/8A VS/rudder.
Vans
I subsequently ordered -
Part Number: 8 RUDDER & VS
Quantity: 1
Unit Price: 570.00
PS: Thanks Inverted for some details
