What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Wife sat in RV for the first time and is concerned

P

Peter_J_Weller

I'm New Here
We were out at the airport just lurking on a nice day :D and I took her by a few of the hangers that I knew had RV's. One gentleman offered for her to get into a 7 slider. We have been planning on building a 7a for a few months now. She had a hard time getting in and out.
The questions I have are

1. Will 2 people between 200 and 250 fit in the 7A?

2. Anybody with a 9A or 7A in Colorado let both my wife and I sit in it together to see if it is that tight?

3. I would like her to experience a flight in a 9A or 7A to make sure she is interested in continuing this adventure.
 
Most all home-builts are difficult to get in and out of until you learn how. After a few time it becomes routine.
 
Welcome to VAF

Mel has it right. It takes 3-4 times before you get a "routine". You are gonna have plenty of room once you get used to what you got in a 7 - 9A. Most of the time I tell new passengers to just stand on the seats (I put a towel down) and use the rails & seat back to lower themselves in.
 
Last edited:
Like they say above, there is no gracefull way to enter and exit an RV 6,7 &9 no matter how big or small you are.

As far as the builder goes, you will be in an out of there a million times so you will find the best way to do it. Others need a little coaching but eventually you will get that speech memorized as well.

Once your down in the seat, there is ample room, but you will be rubbing shoulders.

Before I had my fuse to the point where I could sit in it, I really questioned if I would fit with a passenger comfortably. It made me realize that I need to loose weight in order to fit better. Since then I have lost around 50 lbs and need to loose allot more. This airplane is kind of my motivation for doing so. Not that I won't fit, but to make it easier and more comfortable on me and my passenger.
 
Where in Colorado?

SW corner? NW Corner? Denver?

A 6A is the same size side by side so that will work as well.
 
Same issue

I have basically the same issue and fly an RV-6A. It is a matter of practice so to speak. I don't have any problem, but my wife does. The other issue is sitting in there for 2-4 hours at a time starts to get to her.
 
<<She had a hard time getting in and out......Will 2 people between 200 and 250 fit in the 7A?>>

Track down an RV-8 and try it on. Each individual cockpit is wider. Passenger has a tubular front seatback crossbar for a handhold, as well as cockpit rails on both sides for pushup. You can take it a step further and add a rollbar/great-big-assist-handle to the front seatback. This is the rollbar assembly for my fastback -8. Hopefully it will never be used as a rollbar, but I bet it will see a lot of use helping my bride climb in and out.

 
Last edited:
A test fit is how I got "approved" for the -8

My wife didn't like the idea of having to sit behind me at first. We'd flown in 172's and 152's, so she knows what rubbing shoulders is about. We're not big either, I'm 185 and she's about 130. (Don't tell her I just put that on here for the world to see!!!:eek: ). I decided I was going to build an RV, and told her she could decide between -7 or -8, but I also let her know I really wanted the -8. At first she said "Tandem? No way. I want to sit beside, not behind you." At Oshkosh I got her to sit in the back of the demo -8 (Dilbert?). She climbed right in sat down and said, "Oh yeah, I like this. There is a ton of room in here. If you can put a pillow on the back seat headrest it would be perfect! Build the -8." That's when I knew I'd married the right one!:D

YMMV
 
My wife told me to build which ever one I want, since it's my project. After she sat in both an 8 and a 7, she congratulated me on making the right choice from both the asthetics and passenger comfort standpoints. I've ridden in a few RVs and the 8s definatley have more passenger room.

Guy
 
Tandem vs. SBS

vmirv8bldr said:
My wife didn't like the idea of having to sit behind me at first. We'd flown in 172's and 152's, so she knows what rubbing shoulders is about. We're not big either, I'm 185 and she's about 130. (Don't tell her I just put that on here for the world to see!!!:eek: ). I decided I was going to build an RV, and told her she could decide between -7 or -8, but I also let her know I really wanted the -8. At first she said "Tandem? No way. I want to sit beside, not behind you." At Oshkosh I got her to sit in the back of the demo -8 (Dilbert?). She climbed right in sat down and said, "Oh yeah, I like this. There is a ton of room in here. If you can put a pillow on the back seat headrest it would be perfect! Build the -8." That's when I knew I'd married the right one!:D

YMMV
Click to expand...

Great post - this should be filed under "Newbie FAQ - Tandem vs. SBS!"

Mike Calhoon
Gig Harbor, WA
RV7 emp. (but probably switching to -8)
 
i am 270 and my instructor was 260. we flew a rv 6a with no problem!!!
no shoulder rubing! we wouldn't have fit in my 172 cessna! without being real close friends LOL
you'll fit
oh yeah, we were both 6' and taller. fit nice!
 
VETE76 said:
i am 270 and my instructor was 260. we flew a rv 6a with no problem!!!
no shoulder rubing! we wouldn't have fit in my 172 cessna! without being real close friends LOL
you'll fit
oh yeah, we were both 6' and taller. fit nice!
Click to expand...

Hmmmm........1075 for the plane, 180 for 30 gallons of fuel, 530 for pilot and instructor, 25 for misc stuff in the baggage compartment and cabin.......

..........1810 lbs ready for instructional flying.

Wow................I know how my RV-6 flies at that weight (and where the CG is located, especially with less fuel :eek:)....it ain't pretty.......
 
Last edited:
<<..that's a beautiful piece of work!>>

Thank you Bob, you're too kind.

A word on that rollbar, before too many copies spring up. Thanks to the generous work of another RV builder, I know the arrangement will not withstand a conservative upset goal, ie, a simultaneous 3G down and 1.5G fore-aft load at 1800 lbs. It will deform at the junctions where the three main tubes come together. In reality I expect the raised turtledeck, slightly stronger canopy assembly, and the vertical tail to play some role, but an element of chance remains. It can be done better. Enough said.
 
Thanks for the Help

The all up weight concerned me then the comment about less fuel is understood.

Two hours anywhere with any woman is quite an accomplishment without a "10-100".

RV-8 is in the Discussion right now.

So We are in the Denver Metro area willing to take a trip anywhere to try the sitting procedure on both a 7A and an 8/8A

Peter J. Weller
 
VETE76 said:
i am 270 and my instructor was 260. we flew a rv 6a with no problem!!!
no shoulder rubing! we wouldn't have fit in my 172 cessna! without being real close friends LOL
you'll fit
oh yeah, we were both 6' and taller. fit nice!
Click to expand...

Either my shoulders are extra wide or yours are extra narrow. I weigh 240 and rub shoulders with almost anyone who flies with me in my 7A...my 2 cents is that two big people in a side by side (6,7,9) is a close fit.
 
Bob Brown said:
Either my shoulders are extra wide or yours are extra narrow. I weigh 240 and rub shoulders with almost anyone who flies with me in my 7A...my 2 cents is that two big people in a side by side (6,7,9) is a close fit.
Click to expand...
I agree. 2 people over 200# is going to be a VERY snug fit on a side-by-side. Heck, 2 people at 180# is already a very snug fit. Van's numbers for width of fuselage are somewhat misleading because the aft canopy decks really cut into shoulder room, and that's where the width matters.
 
I think that you will find (at least I do) that s-b-s RVs with "tilt-up" canopies are easier to get into and out of. This is because you can readily lean on the rather robust turn-over structure while accessing the cockpit - plus you can really get a good hold of the cockpit side longerons and turn-over structure when hauling your derriere up and down the wing walk and into and out of the cockpit. The "Slider" canopies on s-b-s RVs are too flimsy to use for support when fully open and you cannot grab onto the flimsy canopy structure for support - you really need a pair of those skull-crunching (in an accident) hand hold grips on the front canopy bow. . I am fortunate to fly both types and find the "tilt-up" canopy version to be much easier to access.
 
260 lbs and 300lbs in RV7A, Full fuel, Baggage....No Problem.

I am 260 lbs and am almost done with my 7A. I fit fine but I haven't flown it of course; however, last week I met a gentleman flying his RV7A and we got talking. He said he was also 260 lbs and his friend was around 300 lbs. He said except for having a tough time pulling the stick back far enough they were both snug but comfortable. He said with full fuel and some baggage the plane climbs out fine. They were over gross and I don't suggest flying that heavy but thats what he told me FYI.
 
[email protected] said:
I am 260 lbs and am almost done with my 7A. I fit fine but I haven't flown it of course; however, last week I met a gentleman flying his RV7A and we got talking. He said he was also 260 lbs and his friend was around 300 lbs. He said except for having a tough time pulling the stick back far enough they were both snug but comfortable. He said with full fuel and some baggage the plane climbs out fine. They were over gross and I don't suggest flying that heavy but thats what he told me FYI.
Click to expand...

The airplanes probably do fly decently at high weights IF you have a constant speed prop. Mine has a cruise pitched prop and an 0-320, and the climb rate is way down on a 90 degree day at my gross weight of 1675 lbs.

Even more noticable than the climb rate reduction is the reduction in climb angle.
 
[email protected] said:
I am 260 lbs and am almost done with my 7A. I fit fine but I haven't flown it of course; however, last week I met a gentleman flying his RV7A and we got talking. He said he was also 260 lbs and his friend was around 300 lbs. He said except for having a tough time pulling the stick back far enough they were both snug but comfortable. He said with full fuel and some baggage the plane climbs out fine. They were over gross and I don't suggest flying that heavy but thats what he told me FYI.
Click to expand...

"Climbing out" isn't the problem with a -6 or -7 being way over gross. An RV could probably out climb a 172 even if vastly overloaded.

If the gentleman ran the W/B with the numbers you referenced (especially with low fuel), he would find the real danger of flying our planes way heavy. The CG can end up well outside the aft limits, and while the plane will still climb, pitch stability will be neutral or even divergent. That is not good.

It may be a good thing the fellow had a hard time pulling the stick all the way back. Stall an RV with the CG "way back there" and recovery may not be possible. Landings also get very interesting with an aft CG.....

I have flown my RV-6 with the CG out of aft limits, and it resulted in my total respect for Vans' suggested CG limits. Busting the aft CG limit wasn't intentional, but as soon as the plane pitched up following takeoff I knew I had a handful and that I had never flown an RV that was that uncomfortable. I asked Mike Seager about flying the -6 with an aft CG since he has hundreds of hours flying across the continent heavily loaded, and he said with an aft CG, you "have to fly the plane all the time".

Steve, once you are ready to fly your plane, please give the W/B schedule a very hard look, especially with full baggage, a passenger your size, and low fuel. Your -7A is capable of providing great service to you, but a healthy-sized pilot has to recognize that payload isn't unlimited if the plane is to be kept within design and safe limits.

You are also a prime candidate for a constant speed prop. :)
 
Last edited:
Brantel said:
Since then I have lost around 50 lbs and need to loose allot more. This airplane is kind of my motivation for doing so. Not that I won't fit, but to make it easier and more comfortable on me and my passenger.
Click to expand...

Way to go!

I need to loose a few myself. I hope to keep a medical for a long time and that effort starts now.
 
Sam Buchanan said:
Hmmmm........1075 for the plane, 180 for 30 gallons of fuel, 530 for pilot and instructor, 25 for misc stuff in the baggage compartment and cabin.......

..........1810 lbs ready for instructional flying.

Wow................I know how my RV-6 flies at that weight (and where the CG is located, especially with less fuel :eek:)....it ain't pretty.......
Click to expand...

he took most of the fuel out before we took off.
 
Having had a pretty good sized passenger a time or two, and not being petite myself the RV is comfortable except during winter. Add a sweatshirt and a jacket on both people and it starts getting tight. For nicer weather it is no problem.
 
Weight & balance question

Sam Buchanan;223133 Stall an RV with the CG "way back there" and recovery may not be possible. Landings also get [I said:
very[/I] interesting with an aft CG.....

I have flown my RV-6 with the CG out of aft limits, and it resulted in my total respect for Vans' suggested CG limits. Busting the aft CG limit wasn't intentional, but as soon as the plane pitched up following takeoff I knew I had a handful and that I had never flown an RV that was that uncomfortable. I asked Mike Seager about flying the -6 with an aft CG since he has hundreds of hours flying across the continent heavily loaded, and he said with an aft CG, you "have to fly the plane all the time".

Steve, once you are ready to fly your plane, please give the W/B schedule a very hard look, especially with full baggage, a passenger your size, and low fuel. Your -7A is capable of providing great service to you, but a healthy-sized pilot has to recognize that payload isn't unlimited if the plane is to be kept within design and safe limits.
Click to expand...

My RV6A is a bit less than 1" forward of the CG range without a pilot. 67.8 empty with a design range of 68.7 - 76.8

With light weight pilots, heavier pilots/passenger, and no fuel/full fuel, the weight and balance works out very well; and the slightly forward empty weight appears beneifical. I do have an 0-360, Hartzell CS prop, and the older (heavy) starter. Happily, the battery is aft of the firewall as in older plans.

This is an inspection (DAR) type question. I've seen where DAR's question an empty weight that's out of the flying CG bounds; and I've also seen samples from DAR's, where the empty plane also had a forward CG, and the proper W/B with pilot and fuel was hi-lighted.

Looking at the weight and balance sheet for many " empty" RV's, I see that most are within the limits, and a few are a bit forward when empty. I don't want this to be a problem for "inspection". And I really prefer not to be switching to light weight starters, adding oxygen tanks behind the seats, or more; if there is really no problem to start with. I'd like some opinions -- please.

L.Adamson -- RV6A
 
L.Adamson said:
...This is an inspection (DAR) type question. I've seen where DAR's question an empty weight that's out of the flying CG bounds;...
Click to expand...
If that is the case, I would seriously question the competence of the DAR. What in the world does it matter what the W&B of an aircraft sitting in the hangar is?

By this criterion, I seriously doubt if any glider in the world would be considered airworthy.

What matters is the W&B as loaded for flight.
 
Last edited:
I really hate to be the guy to say it, but when I see numbers like 300 pounds being thrown around I gotta wonder why not just lose some weight? The plane will fly better, you'll fit better, your doctor will get off your back about it, etc. I know it's not easy, but c'mon, neither is learning to fly! :D
 
VETE76 said:
i am 270 and my instructor was 260. we flew a rv 6a with no problem!!!
no shoulder rubing! we wouldn't have fit in my 172 cessna! without being real close friends LOL
you'll fit
oh yeah, we were both 6' and taller. fit nice!
Click to expand...

Sam Buchanan said:
Hmmmm........1075 for the plane, 180 for 30 gallons of fuel, 530 for pilot and instructor, 25 for misc stuff in the baggage compartment and cabin.......

..........1810 lbs ready for instructional flying.

Wow................I know how my RV-6 flies at that weight (and where the CG is located, especially with less fuel :eek:)....it ain't pretty.......
Click to expand...

VETE76 said:
he took most of the fuel out before we took off.
Click to expand...

That makes the CG shift more toward the aft limit. Hopefully that particular -6A started out with the CG located well forward.

I have to wonder how often weight and balance data is consulted when RV's are heavily loaded. The "if you can get the canopy closed it will fly" rule may work most of the time.....as long the plane isn't unintentionally stalled.
 
szicree said:
I really hate to be the guy to say it, but when I see numbers like 300 pounds being thrown around I gotta wonder why not just lose some weight? The plane will fly better, you'll fit better, your doctor will get off your back about it, etc. I know it's not easy, but c'mon, neither is learning to fly! :D
Click to expand...

Between the wife and I, we are now good for an extra seven gallons of 100LL. We figure that it's us or fuel. At least it's an incentive! :)

L.Adamson
 
Peter_J_Weller said:
We were out at the airport just lurking on a nice day :D and I took her by a few of the hangers that I knew had RV's. One gentleman offered for her to get into a 7 slider. We have been planning on building a 7a for a few months now. She had a hard time getting in and out.
The questions I have are

1. Will 2 people between 200 and 250 fit in the 7A?

2. Anybody with a 9A or 7A in Colorado let both my wife and I sit in it together to see if it is that tight?

3. I would like her to experience a flight in a 9A or 7A to make sure she is interested in continuing this adventure.
Click to expand...
Yea home builts are like sports cars. Yes two taller wider folks can fit but its tight. I don't know or will ask age and physical condition,. Flexibility and other ailments we all get like arthritis can make crawling and scrambling in and out over the did and down the wing a challenge even for me and I'm in my 40's.

That is a great idea to get her a demo flight. But the fact is when I was a CFI some of my students had to upgrade to the C172 for training because the C152 was not going to hack it. I would never think about sending you away from an RV, but have to say planes with high-wings & doors are a better deal, for ease of entering and exiting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top