VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Now that the RV-12 is out the door, what should the next RV be?
Nothing for now - focus on efficiency, cut costs and prices, survive. 209 30.20%
A factory-built version of the RV-12 36 5.20%
The RV-11 Motorglider 120 17.34%
An amphibian 54 7.80%
An updated single-seater 111 16.04%
A twin, using the new IO-233 or Rotax engines 71 10.26%
A turboprop 36 5.20%
A jet! 55 7.95%
Voters: 692. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #221  
Old 05-12-2012, 07:31 PM
Mike S's Avatar
Mike S Mike S is offline
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton Airpark, NV A34
Posts: 15,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlittle View Post

This might sound like a joke, but for us arthritic baby boomers, comfort is starting to be the biggest feature.
I hear you on that.

Another big feature is us boomer ourselves.........
__________________
Mike Starkey
VAF 909

Rv-10, N210LM.

Flying as of 12/4/2010

Phase 1 done, 2/4/2011

Sold after 240+ wonderful hours of flight.

"Flying the airplane is more important than radioing your plight to a person on the ground incapable of understanding or doing anything about it."
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 05-12-2012, 07:52 PM
dicel87's Avatar
dicel87 dicel87 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 182
Default

Something between the size of a 9 and a 10. There are a lot of folks, in my opinion anyway, who want a little bit more than a 9 but not nearly as much as a 10 in terms of size and dollars required.

- It should incorporate all the latest and greatest CNC stuff and build manual/instructions that Vans is using for the 12
- Non-acrobatic, cross country cruiser
- Room for 2 adults and a couple of little ones in a smallish back seat.
- It should be designed for an engine up to 200HP
- Gross weight in the neighborhood of about 2200 lbs
- RV10 style engine mount/nose gear design for nose draggers and option for tail dragger configuration.
- RV10 style gull wing door top but re-engineered to address all the issues
- Pre-built fuel tanks (aluminum or some other suitable material)
- Designed from the start for an optional BRS installation.
- And...yes I am going to say it....pulled rivet construction.
- Designate it the RV-14.
__________________
Scott

Happy to be a 2012 and 2013 VAF supporter
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 05-14-2012, 08:55 AM
kentb's Avatar
kentb kentb is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canby, Oregon
Posts: 1,786
Default I was by Vans last week.....

They had an open house for the local EAA chapters (free pizza and conversation with lots of RV folks). While walking around in the demonstrator hangar, I asked a prominent member of the VAN's staff about what was behind the locked door leading to there development shop. He said that he couldn't discuss what they were working on next.
I ask about the rumors of the RV14 and he would not confirm any such plane, but he also didn't deny it either.

I think that it might be a jet power high wing bush plane.

Kent
__________________
Kent Byerley
RV9A N94KJ - IO320, CS, tipup
AFS 3500, TT AP, FLYING....
Canby, Or
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 12-08-2012, 02:54 PM
the_other_dougreeves the_other_dougreeves is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas, TX (ADS)
Posts: 2,180
Default

Having seen the SubSonex, I would consider changing my vote. That is cool.



__________________
Doug "The Other Doug Reeves" Reeves
CTSW N621CT - SOLD but not forgotten
Home Bases LBX, BZN
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 12-08-2012, 02:57 PM
Geico266's Avatar
Geico266 Geico266 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Huskerland, USA
Posts: 5,862
Default

30 min flight time?

But it would be cool.
__________________
RV-7 : In the hangar
RV-10 : In the hangar
RV-12 : Built and sold
RV-44 : 4 place helicopter on order.
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 12-08-2012, 05:38 PM
AirShowFan's Avatar
AirShowFan AirShowFan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 119
Default

I hadn't seen this thread before. Thanks Doug for bumping it back up.

Interesting how, in the years since this thread was created, Vans has introduced some of the things people here were asking for, e.g. "something between the RV-9 and the -10 in size" (i.e. the -14) and a factory-built RV-12.

As cool as a jet RV would be, it would probably be too impractical to be worth the development. Small jets gobble up ridiculous amounts of fuel. Anyone else catch the AOPA Pilot article about the reborn BD-5J? That airplane will burn its ~30gal tanks in less than an hour. I can't imagine Vans saying "All our airplanes have a range of several hundred miles, except for this one...". But yeah, a jet would be dang cool. As much as I love RVs, when I was in high school it was BD jets that I drew in my notebooks...

But unfortunately, I don't think a jet would belong in the RV lineage. Same thing for a STOL bushplane or an amphibian (let alone the fact that the market for such an airplane would probably not be very large). Then again, in the past, four-seaters and LSAs seemed like they would stick out like a sore thumb in the RV family, yet here they are. So who knows.

I would place my bet on a really efficient motorglider, maybe like an RV-12 with a really big wing. And I see potential for an RV-12 with a slower wing (bigger, curvier, with slats) sacrificing some speed on the high end for really terrific STOL performance, like an RV-12 bushplane. (Maybe a builder will try that someday, along with a tailwheel). I guess these RV-12 variants would be similar to how the RV-9 is a variant of the -7.

Along similar lines, a lot of people have wondered if an RV-3 could be modified to become an LSA. It would basically need a much lower top speed (attainable with a low-pitch prop and/or with a placard prohibiting high-RPM power settings for more than 5min) and a slightly lower landing speed (bigger flaps? VGs?). Or maybe re-engineer the RV-3 to use a Rotax engine and a slower wing. But I'm not sure if that market is there, either. At Oshkosh, Van said that it's not even worth upgrading the RV-3 kit with all the easy-to-build features in the newer kits, so they'll probably not try to squeeze any more out of the -3.

Does Vans offer engine mounts and other parts for putting IO-540 engines into two-seaters like the RV-7 and -8 and -14? If not, do you think they ever will? Maybe they could offer them, along with other Rocket-style parts like thicker skins and so on for the higher speeds. That doesn't seem like too much of a stretch from their current airplanes. "Total Performance", right?

Last edited by AirShowFan : 02-05-2013 at 12:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 12-08-2012, 05:57 PM
rgmwa rgmwa is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dicel87 View Post
Something between the size of a 9 and a 10. There are a lot of folks, in my opinion anyway, who want a little bit more than a 9 but not nearly as much as a 10 in terms of size and dollars required.

- It should incorporate all the latest and greatest CNC stuff and build manual/instructions that Vans is using for the 12
- Non-acrobatic, cross country cruiser
- Room for 2 adults and a couple of little ones in a smallish back seat.
- It should be designed for an engine up to 200HP
- Gross weight in the neighborhood of about 2200 lbs
- RV10 style engine mount/nose gear design for nose draggers and option for tail dragger configuration.
- RV10 style gull wing door top but re-engineered to address all the issues
- Pre-built fuel tanks (aluminum or some other suitable material)
- Designed from the start for an optional BRS installation.
- And...yes I am going to say it....pulled rivet construction.
- Designate it the RV-14.
Pretty good guess! Not 100%, but close enough.
__________________
rgmwa
RV-12LR 912ULS
120346
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 12-08-2012, 10:17 PM
dicel87's Avatar
dicel87 dicel87 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 182
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgmwa View Post
Pretty good guess! Not 100%, but close enough.
I got the first one and the last one right at least.

But while I'm dusting off the ole crystal ball, I had this thought.....

The 7 and the 9 fuselage are basically the same. The big difference is the wing (and horizontal stab). The 7 does acro, the 9 does not. The 7 takes bigger engines, the 9 was designed with less HP in mind.

So, what if Vans next thing is merely designing the 9 qualities into the 14 and giving the same choice in the 14 airframe that they offer with the 7 or 9?

Works like this, you order the tail section then the fuselage and then you decide what wing/engine combo you want....the shorter, faster acro wing paired with the IO-390, or the longer, non-acro wing paired with the garden variety O-360.

I think if that EAA sponsored ruling about no medical for less that 200 HP comes to fruition, that this would make a "pick your flavor" 14 an even more attractive option.

Putting the crystal ball away for the evening.
__________________
Scott

Happy to be a 2012 and 2013 VAF supporter
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 12-08-2012, 10:20 PM
the_other_dougreeves the_other_dougreeves is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas, TX (ADS)
Posts: 2,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geico266 View Post
30 min flight time?

But it would be cool.
I'm guessing 2:00 to 2:30 to empty tanks for the "production" Subsonex. Second prototype will have 42 gal usable, and the TJ-100 burns about 22 gal the first hour, 15 to 18 after that, depending on power setting and altitude. PBS claims specific fuel consumption of less than 1.2 for power settings between 50% and 75% thrust for the uprated engine.

I've seen the TJ-100 on Bob Carlton's glider. It's pretty simple, has fairly simple operations but is a bit noisy. For those who want to "go to 11", there is already an uprated TJ-100A with 250 lb thrust.

BTW, I think the Sonex guys understand - a smoke system will be standard on the "production" kit It would be cool....

TODR
__________________
Doug "The Other Doug Reeves" Reeves
CTSW N621CT - SOLD but not forgotten
Home Bases LBX, BZN
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 12-09-2012, 02:58 AM
Bill_H's Avatar
Bill_H Bill_H is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Marshall TX (KASL)
Posts: 1,783
Default

Taildragger RV-12 with slider canopy! OK, I know, impossible with the Forward-of-the-spar seating but still nice to think about. And, injected.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:15 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.