R

Rick of Austin

Well Known Member
This is a tough choice. Much of the enjoyment of building came from the ability to build it how we want with a variety of engines, equipment etc which also gave us much lattitude in how much the flying airplane cost in out of pocket dollars. With good scrounging I can get a -7 flying for probably $35k by using standard kits and buying a flying homebuilt like a $25K Pitts to part out for the engine etc.
Can we do somethig like this with the -12?
Its very likely I would fail my medical, if not this time then next, for reasons that do not impare my flying abilities so the -12 is very appealing.
But all kits are close to $60K which is a bit more than I can justify.
How much leeway do we have? Can we buy the airframe kits then piecemeal the fwf forward and instruments? I know of a Rotax engine for sale that was in a Zenith 601s that would save some money and so on down the line.
Does an E-lsa have to only meet the specs, or does it really have to be exactly like the plans show?
Thanks
 
To qualify for E-LSA it needs to be built per the planes, using all of the kits supplied by Vans.

All the kits delivered to TX, paint, shop consumables (no tools), some misc, etc. is in excess of $68K.

How about a partner?
 
Last edited:
Register as E-AB or E-LSA

If you register the RV-12 as Experimental-Amateur Built, then you can build it anyway that you want with any engine and any radios. There are advantages and disadvantages to either way of registering. E-LSA will have higher resale value because the new owner can be assured that the plane has been built to meet ASTM standards. And the new owner can do the annual conditions inspections (after completing a 2 day class) and save money. And if registered as E-LSA, you only have to fly off 5 hours before carrying passengers, whereas E-AB is 40 hours.
Joe
 
If you want to dab with an inexpensive E-AB that is also LSA rated, you may want to have a look at the SONEX. I am coming from doing just that and concluded that the RV-12 although about twice as expensive was better adapted to my needs and capabilities. The 40 hours of flight test for E-ABs are quite justified and you just need to follow the Sonextalk group on Yahoo to understand why. There are risks and annoyances associated to E-ABs that are eliminated by the restrictions brought by the E-LSA standard. For example, I like the choice of the Rotax engine for the RV-12. In a Sonex you can use a much cheaper engine based on VW technology, however this engine comes as a kit. Guess what: part of your 40 hours will be dedicated to checking your CHT and EGT and tinkering with the cooling vents, adjusting the carb needles etc... There is also a Yahoo group dedicated to this engine, the Aerovee: go there and check the many issues that the builders have to face - this is the difference betwee a $6K VW engine and a $20K+ Rotax. I am not judging the quality of the Sonex/Aerovee which I believe is quite good for the price, this is just to illustrate the difference between E-AB and E-LSA. If you love to tinker, go E-AB, if you love to tinker but love flying even more, go to E-LSA/RV-12. Not enough money? take a partner, you will have the RV-12 for the price of a Sonex.
Just my 2 cents... while I am looking for a partner to build an RV-12 ;-)
 
Excellent

Thanks all, I was slow to realize it was eligible to be built as an experimental and meet the 51% rule. Thats the way to go for me.
We get the latitude to build and equip it for our individual needs and can still do the annuals as the builder or by an A&P.
Not let see, what engine is really best for the -12 ? :)
Rick
 
Rick of Austin said:
Thanks all, I was slow to realize it was eligible to be built as an experimental and meet the 51% rule.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure the jury is in regarding the -12 meeting the 51% rule.....

The timing was such that the FAA had suspended evaluating new kits, and I'm not sure Van's ever submitted for an evaluation.

Can any of the DAR's comment?
 
Rick of Austin said:
Thanks all, I was slow to realize it was eligible to be built as an experimental and meet the 51% rule. Thats the way to go for me.
We get the latitude to build and equip it for our individual needs and can still do the annuals as the builder or by an A&P.
Not let see, what engine is really best for the -12 ? :)
Rick
Click to expand...

I would try and find a good used 912s first, but there are several VW conversions I like if the 912 is out of your price range.

I know Steve and Linda Bennett, Great Plains Engine owners. They are great people to know, and very helpful for you to get the correct engine package.

http://www.greatplainsas.com/
 
Last edited:
Kit builder's rule of thumb...

1/3 for the airframe
1/3 for the instruments and misc. stuff
1/3 for the engine

You could save money on the airframe, if you built from scratch. I have a friend who scratch built a Sonex and still had something like $35 to $40K in it for the first flight.
 
Geico266 said:
Scott, would an 80 HP be acceptable? It's rare I run WOT.
Click to expand...

I am assuming you mean 80 HP Rotax 912?

I understand the question regarding not running WOT for most operations anyway, but we need to look a little deeper to compare.

In some respects an RV-12 with a 912S (100 HP) variant engine and a fixed pitch prop isn't really flying with a 100 HP engine. Even when the prop is pitched more as a climb prop you will still only get about 5300 + RPM or so during climb. The engine needs to be turned 5800 (max. 5 minutes at takeoff) at low altitudes to actually produce 100 hp. So we are already required to compromise as far as what the takeoff and climb performance could be if we could use all of the power(if LSA would allow constant speed propellers the climb of an RV-12 would be insane with all of the wing it has). Once we get leveled off in cruise flight and the rpm is not loaded down the compromise becomes much less (compared to the potential performance if a constant speed prop were used).

What I am trying to say is that an RV-12 with an 80 hp 912 would have an even bigger compromise in take-off and climb compared to one with the 912S. You would probably not notice a very big difference in actual cruise performance. The other RV models have a cruise speed spread of 7-8 MPH between 160 and 180 HP engines (the same 20 hp difference). I would imagine that the spread on an RV-12 with 80 vs 100 HP the cruise speed wouldn't differ by any more than 5 MPH, but as I tried to describe above, the take-off and climb performance would be quite different. I think a 80 HP 912 powered RV-12 would be a disappointing performer in the summer when flying at two up weights. Think of it this way...would you be happy if your RV-12 climbed about the same as a C-150? Maybe some people would, but considering the cost and the building effort I think I would just go buy a much lower priced C-150. It wouldn't be sport pilot qualified though so that would be a trade off.
 
ddurakovich said:
I'm not sure the jury is in regarding the -12 meeting the 51% rule.....
The timing was such that the FAA had suspended evaluating new kits, and I'm not sure Van's ever submitted for an evaluation.
Can any of the DAR's comment?
Click to expand...

At least one RV-12 has been certificated in the experimental amateur-built category. The builder was Mr. Richard Vangrunsven. Look up N912DV.
 
Its very likely I would fail my medical, if not this time then next, for reasons that do not impare my flying abilities so the -12 is very appealing.


I'm not sure, but if you go the E-AB route you may no longer be in the LSA catagory and medical may then be required.
 
RV-12 is the only E-LSA kit

To my knowledge, Van's Aircraft is the only manufacturer that sells an E-LSA kit, the RV-12. And the RV-12 is the only home-built airplane that can be registered as E-LSA. I heard that the Ran's S-19 can be registered as E-LSA if you build it at Ran's factory under their supervision. One can buy a S-LSA and change the registration to E-LSA if desired. Many other kit aircraft can be flown by sport pilots under LSA rules. But those aircraft must be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Joe
 
Terminology!

RDOG said:
I'm not sure, but if you go the E-AB route you may no longer be in the LSA catagory and medical may then be required.
Click to expand...

You will NEVER be in the "LSA Category." To be in the LSA Category, you must have an S-LSA. All others will be in the "Experimental" category.

An amateur-built RV-12 may be flown by a sport pilot (driver's license medical) as long as there are no modifications done that take the aircraft out of light-sport parameters.
 
Mich48041 said:
To my knowledge, Van's Aircraft is the only manufacturer that sells an E-LSA kit, the RV-12. And the RV-12 is the only home-built airplane that can be registered as E-LSA. I heard that the Ran's S-19 can be registered as E-LSA if you build it at Ran's factory under their supervision. One can buy a S-LSA and change the registration to E-LSA if desired. Many other kit aircraft can be flown by sport pilots under LSA rules. But those aircraft must be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Joe
Click to expand...
I'm not aware of the "E-LSA S-19". But you are correct on the other counts.
 
Mel said:
You will NEVER be in the "LSA Category." To be in the LSA Category, you must have an S-LSA. All others will be in the "Experimental" category.

An amateur-built RV-12 may be flown by a sport pilot (driver's license medical) as long as there are no modifications done that take the aircraft out of light-sport parameters.
Click to expand...

It is my understanding that to have an experimental LSA certified airplane, it must be demonstrated that the machine meets all the requirements of the LSA regulation.

Why couldn't the RV-12 be AB and demonstrated to meet the LSA requirements?
 
David-aviator said:
It is my understanding that to have an experimental LSA certified airplane, it must be demonstrated that the machine meets all the requirements of the LSA regulation.

Why couldn't the RV-12 be AB and demonstrated to meet the LSA requirements?
Click to expand...

That's actually what Mel means - the type of certification the plane has and whether it meets the definition of LSA are mostly two different things. I say "mostly" - the only time they are (kind of) related is when you're talking about the two "Light Sport Aircraft" categories of AW certificates. ELSA is essentially just an addition to the Experimental category (along with amateur built, exhibition, etc., with some extra rules specific to LSA) and SLSA is new type altogether (I think of it as a poor-man's Standard category).
These two are the only certification types that require the plane physically meet the definition of an LSA - weight, speed, etc. The others, such as Experimental Amateur Built are under no such restriction, but there's nothing preventing an EAB aircraft from fitting within the LSA parameters physically. So those types of certification are available also.

But for the pilot, what certification the plane actually has doesn't matter (that's just what makes the _plane_ legal). The only restriction on the (sport) pilot is that the plane physically fit within the LSA parameters (speed, weight, etc). Apart from that, the plane can be EAB, E/SLSA, Standard category, Exhibition, etc.
Finally, it is true that the _aircraft_ certification can impose it's own restrictions on how it can be used (i.e. commercial operation for EAB, purpose of flight for Exhibition etc) but except for that as long as it's got a valid AW cert., registration and etc., an SP can fly it _if_ it fits within the definition of an LSA.

Strange but true (if I've related this correctly that is)....

LS
 
Mel said:
At least one RV-12 has been certificated in the experimental amateur-built category. The builder was Mr. Richard Vangrunsven. Look up N912DV.
Click to expand...
Given that it was registered last year, can we assume it was built from the existing kit as supplied by Van's, and that it meets the 51% rule?
 
as long as it meets the definition of LSA

It does not matter whether the RV-12 is registered as E-Ab or E-LSA, it can be flown by a Sport Pilot as long as it meets the definition of LSA. If the E-AB RV-12 had a constant speed propeller or weighs more than 1320 pounds or cruises more than 120 knots or stalls at too high of a speed, then it no longer meets the definition of LSA and a private pilot license is required with a medical.
It does not matter how an aircraft is registered, whether it be standard type certificated or E-AB or E-LSA or S-LSA, as long as it meets the definition of LSA, it can be flown by a Sport Pilot.
Joe
 
ASSUME?

ddurakovich said:
Given that it was registered last year, can we assume it was built from the existing kit as supplied by Van's, and that it meets the 51% rule?
Click to expand...

First, I would be careful in assuming anything. The aircraft (N912DV) was certificated after 9/30/09 so it had to comply with the latest rules.
As far as I know, it WAS built from the existing kit.
I have personally evaluated the kit and found it to meet the new regulations with approximately a 5% margin. Of course if you change anything, that will add to the margin.
Since the kit is not yet on the "approved kit list" it is still up to you to convince your inspector that it meets the requirements. But in my opinion, that shouldn't be a problem.
 
Thanks all, Mel, especially, great information.....plus

As an experimental airplane builder who wouldn't change stuff! Personally I wouldn't put a pop rivet in any internal structural application where there is access for AN rivets, It just looks more airplane-like. PLus there is the option of using pulled CS rivets for the skins, etc, ect.
I am going to order one and go the EAB route. Wish me luck.
Rick
 
Rick of Austin said:
As an experimental airplane builder who wouldn't change stuff! Personally I wouldn't put a pop rivet in any internal structural application where there is access for AN rivets, It just looks more airplane-like. PLus there is the option of using pulled CS rivets for the skins, etc, ect.
I am going to order one and go the EAB route. Wish me luck.
Rick
Click to expand...
Good luck Rick.
BTW, If I were to build a -12, one of the things I would do is use flush, pulled rivets; and of course solid rivets where practical. At these speeds, I don't think you would see a noticeable speed increase, but flush rivets are easier to paint and/or clean. Just a personal thing.
 
Thanks Mel, I thought so but worth the qustion!

For me one of the strong advantages of an E-LSA is the ability for maintenance by multiple people (or to pass on that ability if you sell) for just the cost/time of a few classes.

Bob
 
bhassel said:
Thanks Mel, I thought so but worth the qustion!
For me one of the strong advantages of an E-LSA is the ability for maintenance by multiple people (or to pass on that ability if you sell) for just the cost/time of a few classes.
Bob
Click to expand...

Remember anyone can maintain an experimental aircraft. The only reason for the repairman certificate is to perform the annual condition inspection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.