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 Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-14-2006, 09:00 AM
jantar jantar is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lee, NH
Posts: 46
Question QB - how much time did you really save?

I need to place an order for wings, but I still have not decided if I should go with QB or SB. How much time did you really save going with a QB. Did anyone do a real world analysis, meaning counting hours?

What else did you take into account when making this decision?

SB and QB comments very appreciated?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-14-2006, 09:11 AM
ww2planes ww2planes is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 269
Default

If you like long manotanas hours of rivet banging and taking thousands of chances of putting dents and or smilies from a rivet set in the skins then go slow build. If you want to fly and only back rivet a few places here and there go Quick Build. Slow wings and a quick fuse sold me. The future holds only QB. For me it was not only the time but it was about how much I enjoy smashing rivets. I found that I am not that keen on riveting and it was worth it to spend the extra. Good luck.
__________________
Bill Abbott
DBA Aerogizmos
N-7BA
Flying someday
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-14-2006, 09:41 AM
robertahegy's Avatar
robertahegy robertahegy is offline
Moderator/Tech Counselor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: East Troy, WI
Posts: 1,983
Default

Looking back at my logs, I spent about 60 hrs on each QB wing. That included installing Duckworks landing lights, the wing tip with nut plates, the lights and lenses in the tips, wiring, and pitot tube. I think the QB is the way to go and probably cut building time by 60-70%. Maybe an average speed builder can tells us how many hours they spent on slowbuild wings doing comparable things.

Roberta
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-14-2006, 09:44 AM
jcoloccia jcoloccia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,110
Default

If I had it to do again, and take this with a grain of salt because I haven't started on the fuselage yet, but I would go slow build fuselage and QB wings. The wings, as far as I can tell, are BORING.

Thing is, though, except for the fuel tanks it doesn't seem like you get much bang for the buck with QB wings. Just looking through all of the assembly steps, it doesn't look like there's more than a couple of months worth of work there if you work on it every night. Mine are going slow but that's only because I've been busy at work and only putting 2 or 3 hours into it a week.
__________________
John Coloccia
www.ballofshame.com
Former builder, but still lurking 'cause you're a pretty cool bunch...

Last edited by jcoloccia : 05-14-2006 at 09:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-14-2006, 10:20 AM
osxuser's Avatar
osxuser osxuser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pasadena CA
Posts: 2,484
Default

I enjoy riveting, so slobuild for me.
__________________
Stephen Samuelian, CFII, A&P IA, CTO
RV4 wing in Jig @ KPOC
RV7 emp built
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-14-2006, 11:08 AM
DickDe DickDe is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 201
Default

It depends on what kind of work you like to do. I like sheet metal work so slow build is the only way since a QB minimizes those tasks. Wiring and plumbing is not my favorite work and, unfortunately, there is no way short of contracting out the work to complete an airplane by avoiding those chores. For your info I built an early drill your own RV6 doing everything slow build myself including spars in 4000 hours in 4 years. I will be a repeat offender and QB will NOT be a consideration as I enjoy the shopwork. My RV6 will provide a flyable airplane while I build however so I will not be "ground bound" while building. Obviously, saving time was not an issue. and, since I am retired, it still isn't.

Dick DeCramer
N500DD 120+ hours
Northfield, MN
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-14-2006, 11:35 AM
N916K's Avatar
N916K N916K is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tehachapi, CA
Posts: 538
Default Depends on your experience as to how much you save

Quote:
Originally Posted by jantar
I need to place an order for wings, but I still have not decided if I should go with QB or SB. How much time did you really save going with a QB. Did anyone do a real world analysis, meaning counting hours?

What else did you take into account when making this decision?

SB and QB comments very appreciated?
I watched two RV7 QB's being built next to my slowbuild RV9. One 7 was being built by a builder that had already built an RV4 the other by a first time builder. What I noticed was for an experienced builder the QB's save quite a bit of time. I'm not sure how much time they save a new builder. I've seen quite a few first time QB builders just stare at their plane trying to figure out what to do next, they just didn't have the momentum and confidence of building all the easy parts. I started my slowbuild 9 after the two QB 7's where started, I flew my 9 about 4 months after the experience 7 builder. The first time 7 QB builder should be doing an engine start soon, more than a year after I flew my plane. Now to be fare I was working on my plane more that the new builder.

Now if you really want to go with at least one part as a QB, go with the wings. The fuselage isn't as repetative as the wings and I think it's easier to match the QB quality in the fuselage than the wings.

I'm working on a Harmon Rocket right now, it's so far off the scale in amount of work compared to either the SB or QB of the prepunched planes that that I now view my prepunched SB 9 as a QB airplane.
__________________
Cam
Santa Ana, CA
RV-9 at KFUL
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-14-2006, 11:41 AM
vlittle's Avatar
vlittle vlittle is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Victoria, Canada
Posts: 2,247
Default slow/fast

I chose slow-build wings and fast-build fuse.

The rationale was that I would have trouble finding a bucking buddy (true), and that the fuse needed more help for riveting (also true).

In my project, I probably had a total of 8 hours of bucking buddy help. It would have been easier to have more help, of course. Thats one reason the project took so long... I made special fixtures and developed procedures for single-person riveting.

I also found the wings tedious to build (ribs, ribs and more ribs).

Next time, it will be QB the whole way, so I can concentrate on the fun stuff (panel, wiring).

Vern
9A
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-14-2006, 01:47 PM
RV7ator RV7ator is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,007
Default

You'll get more gain on the calendar per $ of QB with the fuse. Yes, wings are repetitious, but that's why you can knock 'em out quick. Besides piles of identical or nearly so parts, one is a mirror of the other. Use production batch processing and mindset, and you'll blow right through the wings. Unless you're short, fat, or comic book hero muscular, you can do most of your own riveting except for the top skins; each wing required just 3 hours of bucking buddy. The fuse drags on forever because nearly every part is a learning experience not to be repeated, except left/right oftentimes, and there are more parts to the fuse than hamburgers sold by Mickie D's. If the QB fuse has the tailcone complete and the rear deck riveted, that eliminates the most difficult fit-up tasks on the whole airframe. My SB wings took 300 hours total. SB fuse is at 550, but it is maybe 150 hours past equaling the QB as delivered. Ya pays yer money and takes yer choice. Ken Scott once opined that QB everything saves ~400 hours, but I think that would be more like 5-600 hours if you've never built and airplane.

John Siebold
Flying 7
-7 airframe complete

Last edited by RV7ator : 05-14-2006 at 01:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-14-2006, 02:11 PM
walter's Avatar
walter walter is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mansfield TX
Posts: 339
Default

I wanted to spend more time on stuff I like to work on, electronics.
I wanted to spend less time doing things twice, like the wings.
I didn't mind doing things once, like the fuselage.
And I wanted to build the plane in under two years.
I went QB wings and SB fuselage. If I had to do it over I would
go QB all the way and get flying faster and concentrate on the electronics
again. For the money and time, and time is money, you can't beat
the price of a QB, if you have a full time job. If you are retired and
building the airplane is your job then SB all the way and enjoy it.
__________________
Walter Tondu
Flying RV-8A - Fastback, IO-390, G3X Touch, 74 HRT
Prior RV-7A Build Log
Reply With Quote
Reply



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 01:32 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.