My Vans RV conundrum.

[Davy8or]

Originally Posted by AviatorJ

Some might say Total Performance....

That is in fact what Vans says. It's their marketing tag line it seems.

[Davy8or]

Originally Posted by Brent

If safety is to be an issue, then the most Important factors are landing and take off speeds. I don?t think that the Mooney can match them. Just a few knots extra speed adds an enormous amount of additional energy to be dissipated.

Thanks Brent! Great input. The slow landing speeds is a very attractive feature of the RV. The longer I fly, the more I prioritize safety above much else. Slow slow speed control and touchdown really does make a difference. A good stall characteristic is also a big plus. I don't know much about the RV spin characteristic. Do people regularly spin RVs?

Again considering safety, I prefer a sliding canopy. I acknowledge that with considerable deceleration forces the canopy will likely be jammed. I can?t see any benefit in a tilt up canopy, but that is merely my preference. That being the case, I have secured the front of the canopy with quick release pip pins rather than bolts. Mine are actually from an old ejection seat so are probably up to the design standard, but they are easily available. In event of any kind of questionable forced landing I have the option of ejecting the canopy just prior to touching down either water, trees or wherever.

The big benefit to the tip up is the view! I've sat in both the tip up and the slider and the tip up is amazing. It is a nicer view than the slider. The "ejection" slider is an interesting concept. Clearly others have been thinking about the problem of flip overs and being trapped. I guess I'm not just a "hater", or over paranoid. There must be an issue at least to some degree. To what degree I don't know, it might be nothing. When I get some time soon I have a lot of NTSB reports to go over.

Has anyone ever actually ejected a slider canopy in flight?

Finally as someone else said, an old, Mooney versus a superbly designed aircraft with everything new. Neither of my rv?s has even a used Adele clamp, and I think most RV builders are the same.

This is another big draw. While I won't be building and so whatever RV I would have would be used with some number of years on it, but it would be a **** of a lot newer than my Mooney! My Mooney first took to the skies in August of 1966!

[Davy8or]

Originally Posted by Charles in SC

I have done a fair amount of flying in Mooneys over the years from wood wing ones to a couple of 231s and taught an instrument rating in a 20f. They are fine airplanes and would be proud to own any of them. With all that said my memory said the 20f was about 145 knots. Maybe I did not remember that correctly. Does your wife know how old your Mooney is?

Yep, I plan 145kts for cruise. It will do better if I want to burn more gas and run ROP. Yes my wife is aware of the age of my plane. I bitch about it sometimes. She trusts it only because I do the work on it and I am deeply involved in it's maintenance and upgrades.

We've been together 37 years and in that time she has seen me work on, restore and maintain numerous vehicles, many vintage and one dating back to 1947. So me and old vehicles have a long love hate relationship. I love vintage dearly, but I get fed up and every ten years I buy a brand new car ordered just the way I want it. I also only buy either new or near new boats and Jet Skis.

I'm getting fed up with my old airplane. I really want a new one, but that's not going to happen anytime soon. Newer is the best I can hope for and E/AB offers the newest ones I can afford.

[edneff]

To my way of thinking, the Vans community is a huge value added. Great folks, good fun, and help with whatever you need. Not sure if the Mooney community has anything comparable.

Just another point to consider.

[Davy8or]

Originally Posted by edneff

To my way of thinking, the Vans community is a huge value added. Great folks, good fun, and help with whatever you need. Not sure if the Mooney community has anything comparable.

Just another point to consider.

The Mooney community has something similar, only smaller. A great group (mostly, you know every group has few quirks if you know what I mean. ) They can be found at Mooneyspace.com. Lots of technical info available there as well as the usual fly ins, formation groups and meet ups. Many of us over there work on our own planes, so there are lots of how to's and photos of the guts and bolts, but since we don't actually build the planes, it's no where near as technical oriented, or diverse in project problems as here.

The Mooney factory is of help, but it's no Vans. Where the real help comes from is four or five awesome Mooney Service Centers around the country. They will get you the knowledge you need free on the phone. So it is similar, but I suspect that the Vans community is wider and deeper.

[Dugaru]

Originally Posted by Davy8or

The slow landing speeds is a very attractive feature of the RV. The longer I fly, the more I prioritize safety above much else. Slow slow speed control and touchdown really does make a difference. A good stall characteristic is also a big plus.

You’re on the right track with the -9. Its slow speed handling is even better than my Warrior’s was, and that’s saying something. An accelerated stall can bite any aircraft quickly, but you’d have to WORK to unintentionally stall a 9 at low speed. Mine bucks like a mule first, doesn’t drop a wing, and recovers quickly.

I continue to think that the wing design on the 9 is a miracle of engineering.

[bruceh]

Originally Posted by Dugaru

Mine bucks like a mule first, doesn?t drop a wing, and recovers quickly.

I continue to think that the wing design on the 9 is a miracle of engineering.

The name for the miracle of engineering is John Roncz, who designed the airfoil. Google him for an interesting read.

At my most recent flight review (with PCHunt), we did some stalls and held it in the stall for an extended time. Talk about a bucking mule, that was exactly what it was doing - stalling, recovering, stalling, recovering all why we tried to keep the stick all the way back. That wing wants to fly more than it wants to stall.

[precession]

This is a long (but enjoyable) thread, so I’m not sure if it was mentioned, but I found the M20F stall speed listed at 54 kts (62 mph), whereas an 0320-equipped RV-9 is listed at 50 mph (at gross).

The Mooney has the vaunted steel tube roll cage surrounding the occupants. Given that, I think if I were going in with no engine and you gave me the choice to be in either a Mooney or an RV, I’d have to pick the Mooney. I think the steel roll cage more than offsets the @12 mph higher landing speed. Given the flip-over chances, I think it’s a no-brainer if it were a water landing. Is the lower stall speed enough to tip the scales towards the RV for a solid earth landing? I don’t think so. The RV has a pretty good chance of flipping on land also, whereas I’d guess the Mooney has less chance. And if you do flip in the Mooney, you’ll have the roll cage overhead, whereas in the RV you’ll only have a canopy and roll bar. Going into the trees in an RV or a Mooney? Have to pick the Mooney.

Nevertheless, I feel pretty safe and happy in the RV, largely because of the simplicity, handling, modern design and superior performance. One of my fears is the mid-air I never saw coming. The RV visibility is incredible (and my head is on the swivel), which makes me feel better than when I’m in a production aircraft (particularly a high wing). Given the RV’s low stall speed, balance, and advance stall-warnings and resistance, I have little fear of inadvertently stalling, and when I do stall (intentionally) it recovers like a dream. The power to weight ratio gives great climb performance - which is a safety factor. And I’m so glad I don’t have to even think about retractable landing gear when taking off or landing - yet I'm cruising faster than single-engine production retracts.

Does your Mooney live outside or in? Most RVs like living inside, which is a pretty significant increased expense compared to living on the ramp – another consideration. As mentioned above, the RV is probably louder than the Mooney by a decent margin. I'd prefer a quieter ride, even though I'm using ANR headsets.

Suggest you take that ride in a -9A. Hard to grasp the differences otherwise. Remember, you can get a ride at the Van’s factory too. Could make for a nice trip to Oregon in your Mooney.

Davey8or, it sounds like a bunch of the aged and niggling panel issues, as well as other old-airplane maintenance/repair expenses, have got you a little irritated with your current ride right now, and caused the urge for some fresh new technology. Can’t blame you for that. But maybe the answer might be to take the money you’d put toward a $100K RV-9 toward a panel upgrade in the Mooney instead (Aspen Glass, other?)? Or maybe toward another Mooney with a cool panel for $100K?

Love RVs, but that Mooney looks pretty nice too. When you can find something to like about most airplanes, the grass is always greener in some respects.

[Edit: I think your discussion with your wife is starting to come to me: "Honey, you know how I said I was considering that scary 'experimental' for $100K, but you said you didn't feel comfortable with it? Well, I've had a chance to think it over and come to realize you and our family are my first priority. Therefore, I've decided to put the $100K towards a new (used) Mooney that will be more modern and therefore safer than our current ride. I'm putting you first, because that's the kind of guy I am." ]

[Larryskydives]

First, I went from a Piper Arrow to a RV6. Absolutely loved the RV6, great little plane, fun and fast. You are limited to how much baggage you can carry. I would keep my legs to 2 1/2 to three hours. Not much room to really stretch out (6'1"). Being light, get bounced around pretty good in IFR weather for the most part. Maintenance and repair parts very affordable compared to certified aircraft.

Safety, I was a passenger in a accident in a RV6. We wound up upside down on the sliding canopy, with fuel pouring out the wings. I don't believe it would have been any different in tip up. I was able to kick the canopy enough at the rear to make a hole between the fuselage that we could get out. Both walked away with a few bumps. Really got me thinking about upside down in the water.

But with that, I continued to fly my RV6 with no concerns. If we went through life think about all the bad things that could happen, we would have to live in a bubble.

What ever you do, currency and profiency is the key. Also, keep the aircraft in the best condition possible. Fix any issue when it occurs. Don't let them build up. Chain of events to accidents! Get good training and continue learning. Don't do anything stupid with passengers! Do that when you are by yourself, if you have to do stupid things!

Here is a pic of what we walked away from. I was very impressed with the integrity of the cabin strength. And the should harness did loosen due to the deformation of the fuselage. But not a lot, still kept me in my seat.

Have now sold the RV6. I needed more seats, and bought a Bonanza. Cost more for upkeep but really enjoying it also. Nice to have the extra seat and room and still go 165kts!

[IMG][/IMG]

[Kyle Boatright]

Originally Posted by Larryskydives

Safety, I was a passenger in a accident in a RV6. We wound up upside down on the sliding canopy, with fuel pouring out the wings.

If you don't mind me asking, what caused the accident?