What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Is There An ATC recognized "type" for Rocket?

Toobuilder

Toobuilder

Well Known Member
When contacting ATC, we are often asked for "Type and equipment" so that the aircraft can be grouped by performance and capability. "Charlie 172 slant Golf" is universally recognized by ATC. I've noticed that "Experimental Harmon Rocket..." is not. A buddy told me that the Glassair Super II has an "approved" type. Does the Rocket have a recognized type?
 
Good question and Im interested to hear what RV'ers are doing.

For years, I've always used "Experimental N...." I would think there's enough RV's out there that ATC would recognize them with no problem.
 
ICAO designation for a Harmon Rocket is 'HROC'. That's what goes on my flight plans and logbook.
 
Infidel said:
Good question and Im interested to hear what RV'ers are doing.

For years, I've always used "Experimental N...." I would think there's enough RV's out there that ATC would recognize them with no problem.
Click to expand...

ATC definitely recognizes the various models of RV in thir computers, and have for quite awhile.
 
Ironflight said:
ATC definitely recognizes the various models of RV in thir computers, and have for quite awhile.
Click to expand...

I certainly would think so by now. I bring it up because I've spent a bunch of time reviewing my recent cross country flight legs on Flight Aware and the performance category is often way off when the airplane is grouped in with "experimental". Not that it hurts my ego by being listed as a 120 knot airplane, but I'd like to make it easier for ATC to work me into the system.

Looks like HROC it is.

Thanks everyone.
 
HROC

In Canada the code for filing is HROC. I gave up trying to explain that it is a Team Rocket F1 years ago.
Once in the air, ATC refers to it as a Harmon Rocket for other traffic. Quick, simple and everybody understands what they are looking for, most importantly.
 
Last edited:
Interesting... On the ICAO site there's also an RV4T type... Listed as Turboprop powered...
 
Ther are 2 Rocket designations

Harmon Rocket uses HROC; Team Rocket uses TRF1. You can use HXB2 if you want to remain a bit more anonymous.

Carry on!
Mark
 
The FAA changed thier guidance for ATC check-in purposes too; from the AIM:

Breezy Six One Three Romeo Experimental (omit
?Experimental? after initial contact).
 
Experimental

Breezy Six One Three Romeo Experimental (omit
“Experimental” after initial contact).
Click to expand...

I may be doing it wrong but I believe that is only for initial contact to a control tower. I never use "experimental" when talking to ATC for flight following, etc.
 
Last edited:
Well, if you Rocket people are going to be like Glasair and Lancair people and not use Experimental call sign, then please enunciate well.

Couple of years ago, I found myself sharing the pattern with an invisible Aeronca. Made a couple of T&Gs trying to spot the plane - clearly a very stealthy and fast Aeronca, but only saw another RV. Finally realized it was the RV who couldn't speak well, but needed to let us know he was actually in a Rocket.
 
Last edited:
Low Pass said:
Well, if you Rocket people are going to be like Glasair and Lancair people and not use Experimental call sign, then please enunciate well.

Couple of years ago, I found myself sharing the pattern with an invisible Aeronca. Made a couple of T&Gs trying to spot the plane - clearly a very stealthy and fast Aeronca, but only saw another RV. Finally realized it was the RV who couldn't speak well, but needed to let us know he was actually in a Rocket.
Click to expand...

I don't see it as such a vanity issue as a safety one. I fly out of a field with a fair number of experimentals, including a number of RVs, Pittses, and other types. I have seen days when three or four different types (more than one of each) of experimental were in the pattern and/or arriving and it would have been helpful for keeping track of who was making which call if the pilots had identified their types rather than just saying "experimental."
 
A bit of thread drift....

Low Pass said:
Well, if you Rocket people are going to be like Glasair and Lancair people and not use Experimental call sign, then please enunciate well.

Snip

"You Rocket people"? Really? Would you care to rephrase that?

By saying type, you now can understand the performance of the ship in the pattern with you; "experimental" doesn't provide you with any useful parameters. Example: thinking you heard Aeronca, you looked for a slow and low as opposed to a fast-climbing ship. That fact that you heard it wrong gives you no basis for you to bash the guy. Heck, if you heard him wrong, maybe he DID say "Experimental Rocket" so you would know what sort of plane was in the pattern with you. Much safer that way, don't ya think?

Last I understood, radio calls at uncontrolled airports were not 'required' in any case. I can fly my Aeronca there as much as I want, but I have to be aware that most others will expect a radio call, but that won't ever happen with that particular ship: no electrics!

In the immortal words of Sgt. Hulka, "Lighten up, Francis!"

Carry on!
Mark
Click to expand...
 
F1Boss said:
Low Pass said:
Well, if you Rocket people are going to be like Glasair and Lancair people and not use Experimental call sign, then please enunciate well.

Snip

"You Rocket people"? Really? Would you care to rephrase that?

By saying type, you now can understand the performance of the ship in the pattern with you; "experimental" doesn't provide you with any useful parameters. Example: thinking you heard Aeronca, you looked for a slow and low as opposed to a fast-climbing ship. That fact that you heard it wrong gives you no basis for you to bash the guy. Heck, if you heard him wrong, maybe he DID say "Experimental Rocket" so you would know what sort of plane was in the pattern with you. Much safer that way, don't ya think?

Last I understood, radio calls at uncontrolled airports were not 'required' in any case. I can fly my Aeronca there as much as I want, but I have to be aware that most others will expect a radio call, but that won't ever happen with that particular ship: no electrics!

In the immortal words of Sgt. Hulka, "Lighten up, Francis!"

Carry on!
Mark
Click to expand...
Didn't say anything about using the radio. As a former owner of a non-electric '46 Cub, I understand very clearly the role of people who may not use the radio. Just asking you Rocket people to speak clearly while relaying what I thought to be a slightly funny story about confusing that fast and sleek Rocket with an Aeronca.

Come on Mark, lighten up - it was a little funny. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Code

If you want to be grouped accordingly use HXB/(insert equipment letter) in the US when asked type of aircraft or when you file.

HROC for ICAO
 
Last edited:
Yen said:
I can't find the RV4 in the ICAO 8643 Does anyone know what it is?
Click to expand...
It is RV4 or RV4T depending if turbocharged. You can find it within the ICAO 8643 SEARCH PAGE. Type RV4 or RV4T in the TYPE DESIGNATOR and there it is.

You can also go to the MANUFACTURERS NAME page, scroll down till you reach VANS and click on VANS. All VANS ICAO designations are there. You will notice they are the same as for the FAA.

:cool:
 
Warning - Sarcasm inside

Why not keep it simple and use RV8 as the type. They look close enough to each other and I can't imagine the performance is significantly different.....

:p:p:p:p

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