What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Love the Vans RV

Piggyboy343

I'm New Here
Hey everyone. Finally at 48 I'm getting my private pilots license (only about 26 hours so far) and am looking at Vans RV (9, 10 or 12)as my first plane. Been wanting to get my license for awhile and finally have the time and money to do it. I don't want to make a career out of it. I'm a time and point in my life that I don't have to work and want to enjoy some nice flying, maybe get a job at an airport and hang around what I enjoy. I got the majority of my hours on a Cessna 162 and one time in a 182 so I don't have a wealth of info on what's out there and what I might like, I just know I didn't like the 162, too **** cramped (6' and 205) and no adjustability. Not really jazzed about the 172's either. I have motorcycles and cars that are immaculate and every Cessna I see, it looks like it's had a rough life. I know that's probably not the right way to look at it but that's how I see it. Every Vans AC looks like someone took their time on it and put some pride in it. I don't see a lot of weathered Vans out there.

I know that a lot of the Vans have Rotax engines that spin pretty fast and they sound like they're pretty reliable since everyone is sticking a 912 in 'em. What is the red 'spar pin' button for? I know one model has removable wings (12?) but don't know why it's in the other ones. I see mixture leaning levers in some airplanes and not others so I'm wondering if the majority of the 912 don't need it, is that the allure of them? I like the glass cockpits but am not opposed to steam gauges, just wondering if electronics are just as reliable.

I know I'll learn a lot from just reading forums and I'm basically in my 'sponge' stage, asking questions about everything and trying to learn as much as I can from anyone who'll entertain me or allow me to pester them about tedious 'what's that' questions. There's tons I don't know and I hope to learn a lot with everyones knowledge here.

Thanks for letting me ramble on, I'm glad I'm here.
 
Colorado rvs

Lots of rvs in Colorado. I?m in longmont with an rv6a. If you are close I can show it to you. Rv people are pretty friendly so find one and pick their brain. KLMO probably has twenty of various models flying and ten under construction. Call me at 303-772-2202 if you want to talk.
 
I know that a lot of the Vans have Rotax engines that spin pretty fast and they sound like they're pretty reliable since everyone is sticking a 912 in 'em. What is the red 'spar pin' button for? I know one model has removable wings (12?) but don't know why it's in the other ones.
The Rotax is used in the RV-12. Ours has been dead reliable for over 450 hours so far. No oil burn, good fuel economy. The spar pin button is a warning indicator, there to tell you if the wing spar pins are not properly locked in place. The wings are removable... but I think very, very few people remove them more often than once a year for the condition inspection.

I see mixture leaning levers in some airplanes and not others so I'm wondering if the majority of the 912 don't need it, is that the allure of them? I like the glass cockpits but am not opposed to steam gauges, just wondering if electronics are just as reliable.
The 912 does not have a mixture control, or carb heat. The carbs are auto compensating for altitude... pretty much. You'll find people on both sides of the steam vs. glass debate, of course, but modern electronics are winning in most cases.

Have fun!
 
Welcome. The 12 is the only model with a spar pin light on the panel. If you see a pic of a Vans with the red spare pin light on the panel, you're looking at a 12. The 12 is also the only model that uses the Rotax engine. I don't believe the Rotax would go into any of the other models without a ton of work and headache.

Any of the models would probably work for you, I think the cockpit on the 12 feels a bit less cramped to me than 7/9 cockpit. The 14 is of course roomier still as is the 10.

The Rotax engines don't have a mixture control so you won't see a mixture knob on very many 12's. Eliminating the mixture any of the other models is possible as well, but would require installing the correct combination of components and systems to make it work. The Rotax engines on the other hand come out of the box already built that way.

If you're interested in seeing an RV or two up close, you might want to reach out to your local EAA chapter and let them know your interested in learning more about the RV's. Fair warning though, if anyone offers you a free ride, it will likely turn out to be the most expensive free ride you ever had. ;)
 
I have a 9A at KGXY and can't say enough good things about it. Two people in the cockpit your size is tight, but I do it all the time.
 
Learning

Riley
Welcome to the sky!
I fly a -9A and am building a -10.
Yes, the 10 is roomier than the 9A, but more expensive to run.
Note all that has been said about the 12 and the Rotax engine.
I flew one to Oshkosh from Oregon this year and gained a lot of respect for the aircraft. Not nearly as capable or fast as my 9A, but a joy to fly.

My suggestion: finish your training in a Cessna (not the 162.....there?s a reason they?re discontinued)... and get rides in a number of different RVs.

Be aware, none of them are good beginner?s airplanes (except for maybe the 12)
RVs are high performance aircraft and everything happens a lot faster than in a Cessna or Cherokee. Build some hours as you let your dreams mature.
That way you will know what you want.
 
Don't be frightened of any of the RV's, they are all pussycats:)
I'd never flown one, first was a F1 Rocket, then a 7 followed by what I ended up buying, an 8, all conventional u/c of course. Find a decent instructor and build a solid level of instruction. The RV's are a very basic design that's been around for a long time, it works, enjoy any of their fleet:)
 
My advice is define your mission a bit more (number of seats, cargo, acro, IFR, x/c vs local, E-LSA vs E-AB, etc). The 9, 10, and 12 are vastly different airplanes designed for different missions. All are easy to fly and features like the panel are really non-issues.
 
Do you see a lot of Vans that are IFR planes? You could pretty much make any aircraft IFR capable couldn't you? I'm not tackling that right now, maybe in a couple years at least, no rush..





My advice is define your mission a bit more (number of seats, cargo, acro, IFR, x/c vs local, E-LSA vs E-AB, etc). The 9, 10, and 12 are vastly different airplanes designed for different missions. All are easy to fly and features like the panel are really non-issues.
 
I don?t know the fraction that are equipped for IFR. Certainly the -10, whose mission is x/c, are probably mostly ifr equipped.
BTW, you didn?t say: Are you thinking about buying a used RV, or building one?
 
Thoughts....

Welcome, Sir! I started flying in the mid-90's but life's priorities have conspired to keep me a low-time pilot. (Getting back into it.) I started on an RV-6A but decided a -9A was better suited for me. I'm not much into aerobatics but if that's what you want - I recommend a -7A. The -12 was introduced a few years after I started my -9A. It looks like a great aircraft - mostly pulled rivets. Sit in one before committing to it just to make sure you fit. All-in-all, I think an RV-14A might be the aircraft for you.... Although it is not aerobatic, I'm under the impression that it is roomier and with lower longerons and improved visibility. Of course, I'm 6'-1"/185 lbs and I find my RV-9 fuselage to be adequate for my girth (same fuse as the -7). Of course there's always the RV-8(A)...also the RV-3 and -4 if you want to build "old school"....

Good luck! Let us know what you decide!
 
Something to consider in our neck of the woods, is high altitude operations.

The 912 engine in the RV-12 could be marginal in the mountains. Any LSA aircraft is limited in this regard not just the 12. Can it fly? Yes, but you start out flying at the edge of the envelope and there?s not much room beyond the edge. There?s just not enough power to pull you out of trouble should you get there. Again, this is not an RV-12 problem, but more of an LSA problem.

The 12 is an easier aircraft to build, but the 9/7/8/14 have much better performance for high altitude operations and safety in those conditions.
 
Something to consider in our neck of the woods, is high altitude operations.

The 912 engine in the RV-12 could be marginal in the mountains. Any LSA aircraft is limited in this regard not just the 12. Can it fly? Yes, but you start out flying at the edge of the envelope and there?s not much room beyond the edge. There?s just not enough power to pull you out of trouble should you get there. Again, this is not an RV-12 problem, but more of an LSA problem.

The 12 is an easier aircraft to build, but the 9/7/8/14 have much better performance for high altitude operations and safety in those conditions.

I would say it is more an issue with any airplane that would not be classed as high performance (not just LSA). The RV-12 and most of the single engine certified aircraft that are near the bottom end of the performance spectrum but still not Sport Pilot legal (C-150, 172, Cher 140, etc) are similar. In fact when compared to them, the RV-12 will usually out perform them in a side by side comparison.
Now when comparing the 12 to the other RV's..... then there is definitely a big advantage going to them when flying at higher altitudes.
 
I would say it is more an issue with any airplane that would not be classed as high performance (not just LSA). The RV-12 and most of the single engine certified aircraft that are near the bottom end of the performance spectrum but still not Sport Pilot legal (C-150, 172, Cher 140, etc) are similar. In fact when compared to them, the RV-12 will usually out perform them in a side by side comparison.
Now when comparing the 12 to the other RV's..... then there is definitely a big advantage going to them when flying at higher altitudes.

Thanks Scott,

You?re totally correct. The 12 Is certainly competitive with 172 performance out here and that?s saying something. Of course the 172 is god knows how many years old, smells like my grandmothers old couch and can?t even compete with he avionics and systems in the 12.

Plus the 12 is a really fun build with minimum head scratching; even for this old head.

As a matter of fact the new 12 trainer made it to Santa Fe for the AOPA flyin a couple of years ago and I had to drool....

Bob
 
You might be wanting to look more, into a RV-12 for sale used, that was built E-AB with an engine with more horsepower, maybe with a Ul-350IS in it, or something that is turbocharged in the Rotax series, a 914 UL.

Boost makes up for everything you might lose at high density altitudes.

The RV-12 is easy to fly. So easy, that I bought one with low hours on everything (167) and I am taking my pilot lessons in one as a student pilot.

Just remember, flying in mountains is a whole different ballgame. If you can swing it, look into the RV-12 IS model version, that is fully fuel injected with the 912 IS motor. It seems less elevation challenged than the Legacy model with dual carbs and the 912 ULS motor.
 
You might be wanting to look more, into a RV-12 for sale used, that was built E-AB with an engine with more horsepower, maybe with a Ul-350IS in it, or something that is turbocharged in the Rotax series, a 914 UL.

Boost makes up for everything you might lose at high density altitudes.

The RV-12 is easy to fly. So easy, that I bought one with low hours on everything (167) and I am taking my pilot lessons in one as a student pilot.

Just remember, flying in mountains is a whole different ballgame. If you can swing it, look into the RV-12 IS model version, that is fully fuel injected with the 912 IS motor. It seems less elevation challenged than the Legacy model with dual carbs and the 912 ULS motor.

big difference in picking through the passes at 12,5 with little climb performance vs sailing over the rocks at FL180. If you want to fly west out of denver, you want a turbo. IFR? you need a turbo.
 
Back
Top