RV flight is good

[David-aviator]

One blade and the trusty Lycoming comes to life. The thing may be mechanical but it has a life and it's sound is reassuring when it wakes up. That sound is power, the stuff that makes flight possible for we wingless humans.

Checklist reviewed and compete. Short taxi to open space, throttle up and Lycoming responds with more sound and power and now movement!

Fifty-five knots, stick back and the machine gracefully lifts off and is flying, accelerating and climbing without hesitation. At 100 knots, steep left climbing turn and in no time, roll out on downwind still at 100 knots and accelerating. Power back, way back to slow to 80 knots for flap extension. Base leg, turn to final, 60 knots and on the runway in about 2 minutes total.

Did 2 of those plus a short tour checking for enemy aircraft (none observed) and back, parked in the hangar in 24 minutes. Total fuel burn, just under 2 gallons. Do that three times a week and it will keep anyone proficient and all for less than 6 gallons of fuel. That's stretching the fuel budget and getting something in return. Anyone can fly straight and level, it's the take offs and landings that require some thought, practice and practice does make for perfect - sometimes - 2 squeakers today.

RV FLIGHT IS GOOD, indeed VERY GOOD. It doesn't get any better if you love to fly.

[luddite42]

Originally Posted by David-aviator

Fifty-five knots, stick back and the machine gracefully lifts off and is flying...

Isn't the best technique in the "A" models to raise the nosewheel, hold an attitude, and let the plane lift off on its own when ready?

[rhill]

How much more fuel burn would you have for three TO & landings? Once taxi ,run up are out of the way.

[David-aviator]

Originally Posted by luddite42

Isn't the best technique in the "A" models to raise the nosewheel, hold an attitude, and let the plane lift off on its own when ready?

It is a matter of technique and best technique is a matter of opinion.

My technique is full aft stick during taxi and moderate back pressure to unload the NG on take off. It has worked well flying off of grass and hard surface.

I once had the airplane break ground much too early during take off with Subby H6 and a CS prop. It is possible to hang the airplane quite nose high on power alone and there you sit in ground effect about 5 knots below stall and wonder what to do next...it is a dicey, unnecessary situation to be in. In that instance, relaxing back pressure just a smidgen let the airplane accelerate to fly without touching down. Perhaps the perfect soft field take off but certainly not a normal every day operation.

[David-aviator]

Originally Posted by rhill

How much more fuel burn would you have for three TO & landings? Once taxi ,run up are out of the way.

I rechecked the start and end fuel numbers from yesterday and the burn was 1.6 gallons. Start was 22.3, end was 20.7, so it was an economical flight.

An extra t.o. and landing (touch and go) might have burned a half gallon more.

Today I had a different mission needing to buy some bolts for the hanger door so it was arranged a good friend would provide transport from Spirit Airport to Lowe's, plus we had lunch. After that it was off to KSET to buy some fuel and then stop at another airport for a chat with another friend working on a RV-6A, H4 Subby. And then home - total Hobbs 1.2, burn 6.8 gallons. Now that is not wheels up to wheels down but block to block. The thing burns only 1 gph during taxi.

I recorded some mileage numbers recently flying at 2000' msl, LOP by about 20F.
At 7 gph it is 22.71 mpg;
At 6.4 gph it is 23.75 mpg;
At 5 gph it is 27 mpg.

True airspeeds were 159 - 152- 135 mph respectively. Not shabby at all.

I need to do one at 4 gph to see if best L/D is in that area of speed. I believe fuel mileage will drop off when on the back side of the curve.

The RV is a remarkable airplane. It's normal speed envelope is quite wide and provides for all kinds of satisfactory flying. I do know at the top end at 8500, this thing will crank out 202 mph on 12 gph which comes in at 16 mpg.
So there's something here for everyone.

[L.Adamson]

Originally Posted by David-aviator

It is a matter of technique and best technique is a matter of opinion.

My technique is full aft stick during taxi and moderate back pressure to unload the NG on take off. It has worked well flying off of grass and hard surface.

I once had the airplane break ground much too early during take off with Subby H6 and a CS prop. It is possible to hang the airplane quite nose high on power alone and there you sit in ground effect about 5 knots below stall and wonder what to do next...it is a dicey, unnecessary situation to be in. In that instance, relaxing back pressure just a smidgen let the airplane accelerate to fly without touching down. Perhaps the perfect soft field take off but certainly not a normal every day operation.

I do the same with my 6A, for the exact same reasons, or at least close to it. I start with full back, and then relax pressure as airspeed builds. It sit's a bit nose high to start with, and will takeoff prematurely sometimes. There are certain airspeeds that I am more comfortable with..........for a full rotation. I like to get the nosewheel off the ground, but force it from just taking off.

And like you say, it is a matter of opinion. I've seen this discussed quite often.

L.Adamson --- RV6A