RV-6, RV-7 vs RV-10 feel...

pierre smith · #1 06-23-2007, 06:40 AM

Mornin' all,
I borrowed a 180 HP Skyhawk yesterday to take the wife and sons to Eagle Neck live-in community near Savannah and what a heavy, whale-like airplane....whew...gimme my RV back

I couldn't help but wonder how the -10 feels compared to the -6's and -7's. From you guys that have flown both the -10 and the 6's and 7's, how does the 10 compare? Is it close or closer to the feel of a 172 or a larger RV? I can't help but believe that Van would never let any of his designs feel so ponderous.

Reason is, we're considering moving to a -10 possibly. It's just gotta feel better.

Thanks,
Pierre

DeltaRomeo · #2 06-23-2007, 07:07 AM

Good morning, Pierre!

I have flown Alex DeDominicis' RV-10 from the left seat and a buddy's RV-7 in addition to my RV-6, and my feelings mirrored yours. In my experience the RV-10 flew nothing like the RV-6 at all, but more like the C-182 I trained in a bit back in the 90's. It's just such a different size and mission that it can't be that similar in feel. They are very different animals.

I would venture a guess that someone who only has RV-10 experience would think, while flying the RV-6 for the first time, that it was a lot more 'twitchy' than they expected.

Hard to get the whole family in the -6....and that's where the -10 shines

.

I could see owning a -10 as well as a dirt simple -4 in order to cover the entire 'flying spectrum', so to speak.

b,
d

Quote:

Originally Posted by pierre smith

Mornin' all,
I borrowed a 180 HP Skyhawk yesterday to take the wife and sons to Eagle Neck live-in community near Savannah and what a heavy, whale-like airplane....whew...gimme my RV back

I couldn't help but wonder how the -10 feels compared to the -6's and -7's. From you guys that have flown both the -10 and the 6's and 7's, how does the 10 compare? Is it close or closer to the feel of a 172 or a larger RV? I can't help but believe that Van would never let any of his designs feel so ponderous.

Reason is, we're considering moving to a -10 possibly. It's just gotta feel better.

Thanks,
Pierre

rv6ejguy · #3 06-23-2007, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pierre smith

I couldn't help but wonder how the -10 feels compared to the -6's and -7's. From you guys that have flown both the -10 and the 6's and 7's, how does the 10 compare? Is it close or closer to the feel of a 172 or a larger RV?

If my -10 flies like a 172, I'm selling it! I had the dubious pleasure of flying a 172 for the first time last year. It has the worst roll response and feel of any airplane I have ever flown- including a DC-3! Yuk is all I can say. I was actually laughing it was so hideous.

rvbuilder2002 · #4 06-23-2007, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeltaRomeo

Good morning, Pierre!

I have flown Alex DeDominicis' RV-10 from the left seat and a buddy's RV-7 in addition to my RV-6, and my feelings mirrored yours. In my experience the RV-10 flew nothing like the RV-6 at all, but more like the C-182 I trained in a bit back in the 90's. It's just such a different size and mission that it can't be that similar in feel. They are very different animals.

I would venture a guess that someone who only has RV-10 experience would think, while flying the RV-6 for the first time, that it was a lot more 'twitchy' than they expected.

Hard to get the whole family in the -6....and that's where the -10 shines

.

I could see owning a -10 as well as a dirt simple -4 in order to cover the entire 'flying spectrum', so to speak.

b,
d

I have to respectfully disagree with Doug (can you get away with that when it is his forum

)

I agree that the control forces are heavier than an RV-6 or 7 (they were intended to be, its not an aerobatic airplane), I feel that they are still lighter than the typical certificated 4 place. Particularly at pattern speeds. And they are much more responsive. Just like the other RV's, there is lots of control authority available. Landing in gusty conditions an RV-10, you would never hit the aileron control stops like you can in many certificated airplanes.
If flying solo or with only the front seats filled, the elevator forces in the landing flair are a bit heavy (by RV standards), particularly if you have nearly full fuel. With a more midrange CG I think the elevator forces are quite nice.

BTW... try landing a C182 solo with full flaps. It is no different.

DeltaRomeo · #5 06-23-2007, 09:45 AM

Scott's comments are probably more accurate, as the time I flew Alex's 10 it was dead calm. My data set is small comparing the two, and Scott has more than likely flown every model.

b,d

Ironflight · #6 06-23-2007, 09:57 AM

I enjoyed a little stick time in Vic's -10 out at LOE last year, and the way I have put it to others is that flying the -10 is like driving a four-door Jaguar....yes,you know its bigger and heavier than a "sport's" mode, but the responsiveness and precision is evident with every control input. If (when?) I need a four-place airplane, the -10 will be at the top of the list....

(But I doubt that the Val will ever leave my stable!)

Paul

Martin Sutter · #7 06-23-2007, 10:13 AM

I had the pleasure to fly Alex DeDominicis RV10 from Fort Worth to Oshkosh and back last summer. Compared to my RV6 and RV7A wich I have flown for a total of 2,500hrs the 10 is a substantially heftier airplane and feels that way. However it is by no means sluggish or cumbersome and still has that wonderful RV control harmony. Yes, roll rate is slower, more like a RV9A but much more like an RV6 or 7 than a Cessna 172 or 182. I was amazed how close the performance parameters are to the two seat RV's. Pattern speeds are also very similar. The 10 is probably a more stable instrument platform than the two seaters but none the less a delightful airplane to fly.

Martin Sutter
Building and flying RV's since 1988

attson · #8 06-23-2007, 10:50 AM

I owned a 1978 C182 for years. I built both RV6A and RV10, both are flying. I do RV transition training (6, 7, 9, 10). The 10 control is certainly heavier and more stable than the 6,7,9. Due to the push rod controls the 10 responses are very precise and almost instantaneous unliked the slight lag in C182 (cable controls).

The 10 is VERY roomy and excellent platform for x country and instrument flights. Unless you are in acro flights once you fly the 10 there is no going back to the other RV models even if you do not fly with more 2 people. Very similar to HDTV and conventional TV.

Yes we all strive to build simple, less expensive RVs but my guess is if you build a 10 in the end you will get carry away and have all the bells and whistles known to men and planes.

go out build one you will regret it why you did not do it sooner.

Son RV10 N172KT

pierre smith · #9 06-24-2007, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by attson

I owned a 1978 C182 for years. I built both RV6A and RV10, both are flying. I do RV transition training (6, 7, 9, 10).
Yes we all strive to build simple, less expensive RVs but my guess is if you build a 10 in the end you will get carry away and have all the bells and whistles known to men and planes.

go out build one you will regret it why you did not do it sooner.

Son RV10 N172KT

Thanks much everybody, I just knew the 10 had to feel and fly better than the "other" spam cans. BTW...Son, you need to get listed here as a transition training instructor. Last week I had a gent down from San Francisco since Seagar was booked up 'til late August.

Regards,
Pierre