What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Economic Musings and Dreams of Low and Slow RV Flight (RV-15?)

It the perfect combination.

Im in same situation as Sam. I think they are the perfect complement of airplanes.

I've got an RV6a I fly if Im going anywhere or taking the kids for a flight and a "legal eagle" for pure enjoyment.

My Legal Eagle is called a spread eagle. Has a Honcho Wing which is a fabric covered metal structure. It was the test bed plane for Culver Props. They build the Back Yard Flyer.

My Eagle has their engine/prop package which I love. Electric start, 4 Stroke, sounds like a Harley. . . and burns 1.2 gal an hour putting around. I fly the RV all winter . .. and when I go to the airport in the summer evenings. . its almost always the Eagle. I'll fly 4 or 5 times before filling the 5 gal tank back up. Compared to the RV its like flying for free.

Its not the anti-RV exactly. Its just the opposite end of the spectrum. They are the perfect complement to each other.
 
badmrb said:
Im in same situation as Sam. I think they are the perfect complement of airplanes.

I've got an RV6a I fly if Im going anywhere or taking the kids for a flight and a "legal eagle" for pure enjoyment.

My Legal Eagle is called a spread eagle. Has a Honcho Wing which is a fabric covered metal structure. It was the test bed plane for Culver Props. They build the Back Yard Flyer.

My Eagle has their engine/prop package which I love. Electric start, 4 Stroke, sounds like a Harley. . . and burns 1.2 gal an hour putting around. I fly the RV all winter . .. and when I go to the airport in the summer evenings. . its almost always the Eagle. I'll fly 4 or 5 times before filling the 5 gal tank back up. Compared to the RV its like flying for free.

Its not the anti-RV exactly. Its just the opposite end of the spectrum. They are the perfect complement to each other.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the positive connotation I meant by "anti-RV" but it may have been misunderstood by some.
 
parasol-woody pusher

I think that the given the type of flying we are talking about here, the Curtiss-Junior Woody-Pusher design offers some nice advantages. Namely by moving the engine back to the wing and the pilot (and passenger) forward, you get better visibility, less noise, and a nicer flying experience.
 
OK found a nice single seater today at the Montana Aviation Conference. Fuel burn and restoration cost might put it a little over budget. and far as low and slow....well that'd be missing the point with a Sabre this sharp :D

F-86 Sabre painted in the South Dakota National guard colors.
IMG_20120302_182713.jpg
 
Last edited:
maybe it'd be possible to...

..... offer this plane as a single-seat AND a two-seater?

Yes, the wings and the fuse would probably have to be longer, but maybe that would be doable...?

And think about the name of the plane: RV-15A and RV-15B ;)

Then we can start waiting for the RV-16A and RV-16B! :D
 
I had discussions with Van's about revisiting the single-seat market a few years ago.

My opinion was that a single-seat, folding wing (low-wing) light aircraft with modest horsepower would fit in a Tee hangar next to an RV-10 (or 172 or whatever qualifies for the family cruiser).

Since hangar costs around these parts are the most significant annual expense, this proposed aircraft has no incremental storage costs, plus low fuel consumption and insurance costs.

And guess which one you would prefer to fly?

Well, my idea was not well received because the RV-3 was not selling very well and a single-seater had the problem of training and no room for pax, etc.

I raised the suggestion again one year later, only to get the same answer.

So Sonex decided they liked the idea better and built it... the Onex.

It's not a low and slow aircraft, however. It has commendable performance using a VW engine with low fuel consumption. Training is done with the Sonex 2-seater.

I know DR's suggestion is constrained to one seat, but rather to be very economical to fly. I think Sonex has that market sewn up pretty nicely, so here's a new suggestion: Van's should buy out Sonex!

Nomex suit switched to 'On'.
 
Efficiency

rocketbob said:
Exactly. I bought a decent little C150 to get me around until I get my rocket done, when my -6 got tore up at SNF. Paid 10K for it. Going to OSH I burned twice as much fuel to get there and back than I did in my -6 in the previous 11 trips there.
Click to expand...

Travel Efficiency:
It is always interesting how higher fuel higher fuel usage in a C150 or many simular types happens for distance travel. The current RV's are very efficient for travel.

Local flying is a different story when you are just putting in an hour or two of time to stay local and just get in the air and have fun. For Efficiency in local flying it is simply GPH regarding fuel cost.

Doug's idea of the single seater is to meet the parameters he set. (Entry and operational expense.) I like it as a second airplane.
 
Last edited:
Look, I think you're all getting off-track a bit.

Before going over the financials, use-cases, benefits and disadvantages, what we really need to know is:

TRICYCLE OR TAILDRAGGER?

- mark :D
 
Engine choices?

What do we have for Engine choices?

This would be for local flying, so even electric would be an option.

Continental?
VW?
Electric?

Interesting.

I would like to share the low and slow fun, although I don't want to give up the RV7 for traveling. A Highlander, Cub, Champ and S-7 have been on my mind for a few years.
 
24 hr update: 44 people want 'IN'

....after (1) day of this marketing survey document being live, I have been contacted by (44) people saying they are ready to order right now if Van's offered this.

br,
dr


(in an email overnight) "I enjoyed your RV15 article today. I'm not an RV builder but I am looking at the Rans S6ES taildragger (pic) to build in the near future.

You must have been reading my mind when you wrote that article. I've been searching for an all metal pop rivet high wing taildragger that meets the light sport aircraft requirements. Do you know how many kit built airplanes there are like this, maybe 4 or 5. I would think there could be a real opportunity for someone to jump in and start a kit plane such as the RV15 that you purpose.

Having said that, you can count me in as a customer. I hope you get 250 names to present to Van's and they can see the opportunity here."

(Rans S6)
2ls76u.jpg


​
 
Last edited:
I am in. A J3 version would be great. There are a few folks producing these today but 100K plus for this aircraft is hard to accept. If Vans could develop a J3 type kit under 50K with engine options similar to those on the J3 type certificate it would be a hit.

Pat
 
44 folks interested? Ah heck Doug, I can beat that. I'll just propose a $10,000 price point, the orders will roll in, and maybe Cessna will build it.

I keed, I keed!

Seriously, at $17,500 for everything needed to fly there will be plenty of interest. However, I doubt the price point for new components (including engine and accessories) in kit form.

A Onex is the same bill of materials and kit production process as your proposal. Check the prices:

http://www.sonexaircraft.com/kits/pricing.html#completecosts

My buddy Stan (my RV-1 wheelpant co-conspirator) has one on order. With options like nikasil cylinders and reality issues like shipping the total is going to be $28~$30K ready to fly.
 
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the climate factor for some of us. While the idea of wind blowing in your face, and an open cockpit with doors optional sounds like a lot of fun, those of us that live in certain parts of the country would be lucky to be able to enjoy a machine like this much more than 2 months out of the year. If that much. The fun vanishes very quickly when you're freezing your bunns off. At least it would for me. I gave up motorcycle riding years ago for this very reason. I don't know... maybe I'm too much of a fair weather person. Anybody else feel this way?

So no matter how economical it might be to build and fly, I think if I had one it would be sitting in the hanger most of the year. Makes it hard to justify spending even a modest amount of money on one. I like the idea, though, Doug!
 
Last edited:
Sorry Doug, I guess I just don't get it. Is it the aluminum covering? The Van's Brand/data plate? The price point (which seems very low, almost unrealistic, IMO).

Why not buy/build a Kolb or similar? Regardless, the engine seems to drive the price.

Disclaimer: very little research, cursory really, more a gut feeling.
 
This is a DR1 not an RV15...

Best of luck reviving ultralights but this sure is NOT an RV and there is no way to introduce the concept of Total Performance in the idea. If Van offers a high wing bush plane (hope) it better carry the theme of Total Performance in the design... the market is pretty saturated with 'modern' super cubs already though so it is probably not going to happen. I am considering building a Rans S7 to complement the RV someday.
 
...Yes there are several on the market as I pointed out above, even more if you take into account wood based designs or tube and fabric. None of them say Van's... :mad:
Click to expand...

There are more than "several" inexpensive, low and slow types on the market - there are dozens and dozens. Most are well proven, with many, many examples flying. What value does the Vans "brand" bring to this market segment?

The current RV's are popular because compared to their contemporaries, they are inexpensive, easy to build and fly, and perform well. But it is going to be very hard to leverage that competency in a market that is defined by cheap, simple to build and slow.

While it is clear that there are some on this site who are loyal to Van with a fervor that borders on religious extremism, I'd say Van has little chance in any return on his investment. The market is simply too flooded with good flying existing designs. Anybody who wants cheap and slow flying can get one today.
 
@Doug,

I really, really want to send that email, but I am in the middle of a 7 build and couldn't see taking on another project at the moment. Had something like this been available 5 years ago, I would already be flying it and would have also bought my 7 kit as soon as the 15 was completed. I would love to be flying a high-wing single-seat right now, while I am building, instead of renting the Citabria for $118/hr.

Another business argument you might present is that there are a lot of guys who will naturally work their way up the model line. Cessna has used this business model successfully for decades.

Oh, and I don't understand all the guys saying that your single-seat airplane concept should have two seats. That seems counter-intuitive. :confused:
 
Murphy Maverick

I hate to spoil the fun, but the aircraft has already been designed and is in production. It's called a Murphy Maverick. Remember Murphy from Chilliwack British Columbia? The Renegade, Rebel, Elite and Moose? Well, they also did a Maverick. Two seat, side by side, high wing, pop riveted aluminum (partial fabric covered wings), 400 lbs empty, 950 lbs gross, 65 hp. Take the doors off and the visibility is better than a Cub. Take one of the seats out and it's a single seater. Now let's see the orders flow in.

http://www.pattersonaerosales.com/Aircraft/Maverick/Maverick.html


[ed. Too many seats, too big, not an RV, and since they don't list a price...I'm guessing too expensive! Pretty though... ;^) dr]​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
terrye said:
I hate to spoil the fun, but the aircraft has already been designed and is in production. It's called a Murphy Maverick.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the Maverick is more airplane than Doug wants.

I just emailed the Murphy sales people and got a price list back. $22,300 for the complete kit firewall back. So you need an engine at least, on top of that. And those are Canadian $, so it'll be a little more in the US (sorry...).

I'm not sure I see the value add in having this be an all-metal design though. For such a small, light aircraft, to keep the structure light as well would require pretty thin skins. At that point, you're probably better off with fabric, as it'll be more durable.
 
Why, other than religious reasons

does it need "Van's" as the 1st word in its name?

As others have pointed out, there are lots of existing choices, & if what I'm told is true, Van's isn't interested, anyway.

This might be a good 'open source' project, analogous to the Mega-Squirt series of engine controllers. There's plenty of engineering talent around, & I'll bet that the design could get done on 'community' time. With CAD/CAM, even if the work went to a for-profit sheet metal shop, I suspect that producing the ribs/bulkheads/skin blanks would be relatively inexpensive. Even hydroforming might not be that expensive, and a poor man's version can be done at home with a 20 ton press, form blocks & rubber stock. The toughest things to source would be weldments & stuff requiring precision machining.

As long as we're dreaming....

Charlie
 
To each their own.

Wow...44+ people ready to put down their deposits on a proof of concept PDF Doc?

I like the innovative brainstorming though. Not sure if Van is on board with this concept or willing to support..but Doug you may be onto something for your own venture.

Personally, for low and slow, I like the idea of the Just Aircraft Highlander...and two seats to boot. That is all performance minus the high speed spectrum.

[ed. 58 now. I have a 75% Legal Eagle XL kit that I bought for $2900 that arrives next week. I'll fly that until Van's (hopefully someday) does something similar. I'm a cheerleader for Van's Aircraft first and foremost! dr]​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Day and a half update: 58 people

Would like to order right now...from five different countries.

Just a PIREP.
br,dr

Correction......make that 59. Right as I posted this another hit my inbox. dr
 
Last edited:
2-Seater wanted

I like the idea of a low cost flyer, but Sorry Doug... I'm with the 2 seat crowd. I prefer a tandem seat low wing LSA capable. There's really nothing on the market. I did like your open cockpit idea. My desire is for Van's to reinvent the RV-4 in a matched hole, pulled rivet upgrade. EAB/O-233/wing'ed for LSA stall compatibility.

I'm currently watching the development of Thatcher CX-5.

I'll one-up your list. I'd send Van's a $1K deposit today if they'd start my dream plane!

Interesting discussion...

DJ
 
As discussed in another thread, I'd love to see Van's come up with a high wing. I love the idea of the low budget affortable open cockpit...but i'm not sure it's Vans thing...

What I'd be really interested in is something like this, a high wing RV-9 with longer wings and heavy duty gear.

RV-X.jpg
 
almost got it

terrye said:
I hate to spoil the fun, but the aircraft has already been designed and is in production. It's called a Murphy Maverick. Remember Murphy from Chilliwack British Columbia? The Renegade, Rebel, Elite and Moose? Well, they also did a Maverick. Two seat, side by side, high wing, pop riveted aluminum (partial fabric covered wings), 400 lbs empty, 950 lbs gross, 65 hp. Take the doors off and the visibility is better than a Cub. Take one of the seats out and it's a single seater. Now let's see the orders flow in.

http://www.pattersonaerosales.com/Aircraft/Maverick/Maverick.html


[ed. Too many seats, too big, not an RV, and since they don't list a price...I'm guessing too expensive! Pretty though... ;^) dr]​
Click to expand...

Having built a Murphy Rebel (which was pre-punched WAAAY back in the 90's :) ), a single seat version of this would be awesome.

Can't put my name on the list. I am building a Legal Eagle XL :)

Ryan
 
Doug,

You keep posting the increasing number of people who are interested in putting money down on an "airplane" for which no performance specifications, flying qualities, or even an engine are known, and exists only on paper.

I can't help thinking that this data set demonstrates something a lot closer to religious fanaticism to Van than a valid marketing survey.

Pehaps Van should run for office!:D
 
Up to 66 people

...ready to order now. About to walk out the door for Mass and thought I'd update the total. Document been 'live' for two and a half days.

br,
dr
 
Sam Buchanan said:
Bob, you enjoy flying fast. Some of us also like to fly fast........and slow. :)
Click to expand...

Sam, if you think Bob doesn't understand slow, imagine how he must feel amount all of my time in gliders!:D:D

Personally, I think the anti-single seat crowd are missing out on one of lifes great joys. There is nothing more personalized than a single seat airplane.

Keep the ideas coming.
 
As the previous owner of two different Rans S-9’s and a RV-3, the smaller the aircraft the more fun it is to fly.

Just in case Vans passes on DR’s RV-15 idea.

Single seat High wing aircraft;
Rans S-4, Team HI-MAX, Team Air bike, Kolb various models, Golden Circle Air T Bird I, Ridge Runner I, Ridge Runner II, The Kite fox light, the Belite, Titan Tornado I, Quad City Challenger.

There are others but which is the best choice Single seat High wing aircraft right now. Which one is the safest, best flying, easiest to build, best value, and best support, with the most financially stable provider of kits?

After owning three different RV’ s, I looked at several different examples of the above mentioned single seaters with the intention of purchasing one, but I never did find one with the build quality I had seen in the RV’s I had owned. I would rather wait until at least a 100 examples are flying so the bugs are ironed out, I think many of the names on the list above have hit 100 examples.

jsm_ridge-runner.jpg

Ridge Runner I
Copy_of_instrument_panel_rr3crop.JPG
 
Last edited:
RV15

OK, try this one.

With the RV15, it would be wonderful to fly it from my home in the country, to the airport hanger where my RV7 lives. I could especially appreciate this set up when it is the week of the annual condition inspection that usually ends up being two weeks waiting for a part to come in.

I have a big smile on my face just thinking about flying my RV15 from my pasture, over to the airport, (RV GRIN.)
 
With the RV12 done for some time, Vans must have 2 years of R&D into the next lets assume RV14. Before I would be jumping the gun to a RV15 I would really like to see what those 2 years pondered up. I hope Vans to make some kind of statement soon about what next, this might just be the kicker for them to let leak something.

Kind Regards
Rudi
 
I was very interested in the Criquet version of the Storch.

I would be very interested in this if it was of a similar STOL capability.
 
By the way, it's not real obvious but the Legal Eagle is an ultralight, and most hypothetical designs which meet DR's criteria will be too.

Dave
 
David Paule said:
By the way, it's not real obvious but the Legal Eagle is an ultralight, and most hypothetical designs which meet DR's criteria will be too.

Dave
Click to expand...

A Legal Eagle built to plans can meet Part 103 requirements. However, it can also be registered as experimental if a builder wants to avoid the weight limit of 103 and fly instead as a LSA. This is sometimes done when a larger engine or additional fuel is desired or to keep the locals happy. I think Doug is thinking along the lines of a very light LSA aircraft [ed. That is correct. dr]. Staying under 254 lbs requires fanatical attention to weight, but a very light LSA has most of the operational advantages of an ultralight.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you want to know more about the KK1, the entire set of Kitplane articles in PDF format are here. It certainly adds understanding to what was undertaken and can be expected.

http://falcon-design.com/kk1/
 
Last edited:
I, too, am surprised by the number of give-me-two-seats-or-give-me-death comments. Given DR's requirements, adding a seat adds weight, which requires beefier structure (more weight) and a bigger engine (more weight & $$).

I love my RV-8. It's fast, fun and relatively inexpensive to operate as planes go. However, like DR, 95% of my flights are solo -- AND I LIKE IT THAT WAY. Flying is my escape. When I fly, my job doesn't exist, I don't have to converse with anyone and I can just listen to the music and enjoy the flight. That's just how I roll. And my wife doesn't like to fly.

So, as I contemplate eventual retirement, and most likely a fixed income, I would LOVE to have an economical, second plane to enjoy. It doesn't have to have Van's name on it. However, it would have:

One seat
Minimal instrumentation
Electric powerplant
Foldable wings
Open cockpit (Yes, I intend to move to somewhere warm!)
Easy (RV-ish) construction

Whether there are enough of my kind out there to warrant the design and fabrication of kits that meet my criteria remains to be seen. If things don't change with the economy, electric or small gas engines will see a growing market.

BTW, in a recent "Flying" magazine article, I think I read that a Rotax 912 FWF package is something like $30K! That's nuts.
 
I think many people are misinterpreting some of the "2-place" comments.
I have no problem with this type aircraft being single seat.
I was simply stating that for MY circumstances, I don't want a single seat aircraft.
Less than 5% of my flights are solo
 
So Doug, where can we find the build log for your legal eagle? I am a big fan of the airplane... I can't wait to see the finished product!

[ed. Look at Sam's at www.eaglexl-58.com Mine isn't online yet. dr]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A Kolb Firestar would fit the bill

I hope I am not perceived as a party pooper, but there are several proven designs that would fit Doug's criteria. The Kolb Firestar is an excellent design [ed. Not all metal. dr] that has been flying for a generation with great success. A kit with engine package can be had for about $21k. As an added bonus, you can take a (small to medium) passenger riding tandem. With the pusher motor, viz is great, enhancing the free flight experience. Am I way off base?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't marginalize the 2nd seat

I've had to rethink my flying plans since life plans (and economy) changed. Like many of you... I am thinking about low cost flyers... which was I think the impetus for DR's discussion herein. However, everyone quickly poo-poos the two seat problem by the stat that MOST flights are solo. I wouldn't argue that... but I will tell you... NOT having the ability to take my boys flying in anything but a spam can is not an option. They may only comprise 5 or 10% of my flights in the future... but I will not deny them and myself the pleasure of taking them up in OUR plane. For medical reasons I'm pretty much eyeing LSA. I've also almost got myself talked into V-dub power as a possibility. Looking for options currently. For all the "Religious" reasons previously mentioned... gosh I wish it were a Van's... but at this point the closest thing on the horizon is the CX-5.

Doug... I respect the out of the box thinking... but for some of us that second little seat is pretty dang important.

DJ
 
Nothing cheap about the 12

The discussion is around the reality that we need a CHEAP around the patch flyer. The 12 isn't even close on the economics. Doug's got some great ideas, but I think we're thinking half the cost of a 12.
 
Steve Ashby said:
I hope I am not perceived as a party pooper, but there are several proven designs that would fit Doug's criteria. The Kolb Firestar is an excellent design [ed. Not all metal. dr] that has been flying for a generation with great success. A kit with engine package can be had for about $21k. As an added bonus, you can take a (small to medium) passenger riding tandem. With the pusher motor, viz is great, enhancing the free flight experience. Am I way off base?
Click to expand...

The Doug Reeves DR-15 [sounds like a mower!](RV-15) is an excellent idea. As far as a Kolb Firestar goes...I logged 1.3 yesterday and got to see a wonderful sunset at 50 mph/500 ft agl. 3 gals of gas...cost of flight was at or near $15.00! Got my flying fix for the week. Now to wait for the winds to calm down!
 
Last edited:
2-Seat Legal Eagle and Firestar's Materials

If you really like the LE but want a two-seater, the Double Eagle is that plane. Same designer, same type of construction, using a full VW instead of the 1/2 VW of the Legal Eagle. Similar performance. Vne is 102 or 103 mph.

If you like the Firestar but want all metal, well it's mostly all metal. The structure is all metal, covered with fabric. The cabin is a fiberglass shell that's attached to the steel tube cage. Typically available used for under $10k. Good value.

I owned one years ago. Nice plane, noisy, and a lot of glare on the windscreen. Flew fine.

Dave
 
I am interested.....

I think that at some point I'll need to switch to LSA for medical reasons as well as economy. I hope that I have a few years left with my 9A and have been looking into the Carbon Cub as my next plane.
I don't like the expense of the CC and would like a cheaper way to go, but at 250lb I'll need at least 1.5 seats in my new plane.

Kent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top