10 vs the rest

[N8Higgies]

Everyone,

I have a situation. I just finished pilot training in Oklahoma. We will be moving to Charleston SC in six months or so where I will be stationed next. I had about 90 hours before I started pilot training, and got about 170 more split evenly between the T-6 and T-1 (Beech 400) in pilot training. As soon as the paperwork goes through, I will have my instrument, commercial, and multi-engine ratings. So total time is about 260 hours or so with 170 hours in complex/retractable gear. My follow on assignment is the C-17, so I'll be getting more complex hours in the future.

I want to buy a nice four place (or larger) airplane that has decent fuel economy, and cruises around 200 mph or so (faster than that is also acceptable). I'd like to have a roomy interior for cross countries, and decent payload for people/baggage.

These are the airplanes I've been interested in: RV-10, all the velocity models, Piper Saratogas, the A36 Bonanza, the Cirrus, and the Diamond. The RV-10 seems like it would be one of the cheapest of the kit builts to insure, maintain, and operate. The velocity might be about the same, but I've never seen one, so I don't know about the interior space. The Saratoga and Bonanza would have the most room, but don't they burn a little more fuel at a little slower pace? The Diamond is definitely a little slow compared to the others, but probably the cheapest to insure, and some of the best visibility-plus it's a stick. Bottom line, I've got a lot of ideas bouncing around in my head and need some direction.

I guess my one main question is this: How did everyone decide on the RV-10? Did you look at any of the ones I mentioned when you were deciding? What are the advantages and disadvantages when compared with the other planes? I realize this is an RV forum, so the opinions are biased, but you all must have had these same questions before making your decision. A little help?

I apologize for the lengthy post, but I've been hoping for my own airplane for a long time, and don't want to regret my decision. Thanks in advance.

Nate

[Vlad]

There was a comparative analysys done by Scott Schmidt. I posted his figures on foreign forum to assist some decision-makers. Check it out there are some nice comparisons in favor of RV-10.

http://www.reaa.ru/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1230601211

Also Mike Much put useful tables on his website http://www.2muchflying.com/rv-10specs.html

[orchidman]

Nate,
If you want to see a -10 about 3 to 5 months from flying, come on down and I will give you the tour and give you my thoughts in person. I looked at and even took a demo ride in a Velocity but chose the -10.

I am just SE of KOKC and work on the west side of the field, which may tell you who I currently work for. Ex KC-135 and E-3 driver.

[Top_prop]

First I'd suggest you consider the issues of buying over building.

Then compare what you can find for sale with what you can afford (not probably too much if you are an 0-2 with a family or desire a family).

I'm building because its my dream to do it myself, and I know I couldn't afford to fly a certified GA plane that would content my need for speed, utility, and to tinker.

Like you the Tax payers take care of my general need to fly, now I'm working on taking the family with me and spending time doing a 'project' with the kids is a hopeful use in the future (my boy is three... he's only good for filling rows of holes with rivets ... right now! )

[RV10inOz]

Building your own is great, but if thats not for you and you can find a well built RV-10 that is equiped how you want it, then go for it.

The next best option is an A36 or V35B Bonanza, but most are probably older than you and when you see the insides of them and thats under the skins you will be amazed!

here are some pics of a mates A36 restoration http://www.pirep.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8215

If you have an A36 the thing is a great 4 seater plus heaps of gear. A V35B is a great 3 seater and heaps of gear or great for mum (mom for you lot) two kids and heaps of gear.

As for running costs, the RV will flog either, and is 15-20% better on fuel than the Beech for the same TAS. Not sure about the maintaining of a Experimental over there if you are not the builder, here its then to a LAME, but often you can do the work and they inspect and sign out.

Either way......... the RV-10 is the way to go.

Now lets look at purchase price for a near new RV-10 that is how you want it V a near new G36 Bo........ OK you have the option of renting it out, but will you really do that and for twice the money??? No I dont think so.

As for the others in your selection of GA a/c........... enough said

Cheers from a biased Aussie!

DB

[lbgjb]

Complex question with many choices. Best is to fly what you might be interested in and see what you like. Choices involve sticks, side controllers and yoke. In that class should add C 210. Biggest issue is how much $$ you want to spend. If all the planes were priced nearly the same, fastest with the most room might be the best. Cirrus and 10 have comparable room, and with long range tanks, 10 will fly longer than Cirrus, but a little slower. The A36 really doesn't have any more room for front seat passengers. The problem is that it's very difficult to compare a RV10 bought new for 200-250k(and less than that if you build it) and a Cirrus at 600k and Bonanza for at least that amount. You need to compare used planes (newest 210 is 22 years old!!) with their unique problems against new 10 to compare correctly. Hard to beat the 10 for combination of speed, range, initial cost and cost of operation, and comfort. Personally the only goodie that the Cirrus has is parachute, but it's about a 400k parachute!!!! Also, check on insurance--your low time, especially GA aircraft time will make many of these planes expensive for you to insure. larry b

[jonbakerok]

Everyone thinks they need 4 seats when they buy their first plane, but most guys can count on their fingers the number of times those seats were filled. My first plane was a Cherokee. In the three years I owned it, there was someone in the back exactly twice. And I had two teenagers at the time.

The 10 is a great plane. I wouldn't even put the others you mentioned in the same class with it. But the fact that you're in the service tells me you aren't sitting on bags of money.

You could pick up a used RV6A or RV7A for less than half what you'll pay for any of the planes you mentioned. It will go faster on almost half the fuel, with more payload than most 4 place planes. And it'll be a heck of a lot easier to find than a used RV10.

[JDRhodes]

Hey Nate -

Insurance is not a factor on any that you mention. All - including the RV - will cost about the same to insure / dollar of coverage. Remember, though, that a $250,000 airplane costs 2.5X as much to insure as a $100,000 airplane! Think $1.50 - $2.00 per $100 of hull value for a rule of thumb insurance guess.

It's cool that as a 260 hour total time pilot with probably less than 100 multi-engine, Uncle Sam's handing you the keys to a C-17! In the civilan world, you'd need 1500 hours and 1000 multi to even be considered as copilot on that Beechjet 400. I imagine the Air Force has had you thinking flight training every waking minute and maybe even dreaming it at night.

Thanks for serving - good luck!

[scarlson]

BTW my son, Chris Carlson, is a C-17 pilot in Charleston. Good luck on your new assignment. I've owned 5 RV's including a 10. They're all great planes, but I think the 2 seat RV's are a bit ahead of the 10, although designed for a significantly different mission. The specs and flying qualities of the 10 are great. The one criticism I have is that the plane seems a bit fragile. Perhaps it's a result of always trying to wring out the greatest performance from an airframe at the lowest weight. Anyway, the 2 seaters seem to be more solid and great fun to fly. It might be heresy on this forum, but I'm exploring the purchase of a Velocity XL.

[Auburntsts]

The one criticism I have is that the plane seems a bit fragile.

Just curious as to what lead you to make that statement? Really looking to see if in hindsight you have some areas of concern (other than the doors which are a known weak spot in the design) or suggestions for us that are still building that we might want to address now rather than later.