Ironflight

Ironflight

VAF Moderator / Line Boy
Mentor
Louise and I have been out in Reno for the past few days, hard at work on the final details to get our new house project started. We came out on SWA (?when you absolutely, positively have to be there?"), so I hadn?t flown anything for almost five days, and it was beginning to show ? I was a grump, and knew it. Fortunately, our good friend Dayton Murdock had offered to let me fly his beautiful red RV-4 whenever I had the chance, and seeing how that would complete my ?set? of all the RV-models (*), it was hard to pass up the opportunity on a calm sunny morning in Carson City. Louise snapped this picture to prove just how much my mood was improved with a little stick time!
P1030043.JPG


So I have now flown the RV-1,3,4,6,7,8,9,10,12, and 14 ? the whole set. Well?(*)except for that pesky -5. I happen to know that it is undergoing a little restoration by Van?s Chief Engineer ? Hey Rian, need a test pilot when it?s finished?! :rolleyes:

Many, many thanks to Dayton for letting me borrow his outstanding RV-4 this morning. While I still think that the -3 is my all-time favorite (of the line) when it comes to the pure enjoyment of flight, the -4 was definitely up there near the top.

?You?ve got a real winner here Dayton! And I really like the tailwheel?.?
P1030063.JPG


Paul
 
Yes, thank you, Dayton!

We were both happier for the rest of the day. Paul really does show his endorphine-withdrawl effects when he hasn't flown for several days! :eek:
 
Nice Plane

Dayton has been up to Corvallis Oregon and I had the chance to have lunch with him and drool over his RV-4. His Daughter was starting a Master's program at Oregon State at the time.

Its sure is pretty..:)

Frank
 
Yup. I saw this airplane at Twin Oaks a few years ago. My plane was flying, but not painted. This airplane solidified my decision for a red paint job.
 
Two Thoughts...

Paul, that is quite an accomplishment. Congratulations! 1) I wonder how many other pilots can say they have flown them all. I would think Van certainly qualifies (!) but who else?

2) Secondly, I think you could really brag if you had flown all the "A" models, too. That would be 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A...or have you already done that? Inquiring minds would like to know. :)
 
rv7boy said:
Paul, that is quite an accomplishment. Congratulations! 1) I wonder how many other pilots can say they have flown them all. I would think Van certainly qualifies (!) but who else?

2) Secondly, I think you could really brag if you had flown all the "A" models, too. That would be 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A...or have you already done that? Inquiring minds would like to know. :)
Click to expand...

You know, all the side by side two-seaters tend to blend together (especially the nose-draggers, which are all pretty well behaved), but the best I can recall, yup - have those too. Jerry VanG let me fly his -8A last fall, so that's the set.

If you want to know who could possibly have them all, you coudl start with the RV-1 pilot list (which is pretty short), and go from there!
 
Dang Paul, you beat me to it... :D Anyone want to let me borrow their RV-3 for a trip around the patch...? :eek: So far I've been able to snivel, I mean had the opportunity to fly, the RV-1, RV-4, RV-6, RV-6A, RV-7, RV-7A, RV-8A, RV-9A, RV-10, RV-12, and RV-14...

So I guess to be technically correct, I'd need the 3, 5, 8, and 9 too... :rolleyes: So Van is probably the only guy with ALL of them... I think Kahuna has got almost all of them too IIRC...
 
Joe Blank said:
Dang Paul, you beat me to it... :D Anyone want to let me borrow their RV-3 for a trip around the patch...? :eek: So far I've been able to snivel, I mean had the opportunity to fly, the RV-1, RV-4, RV-6, RV-6A, RV-7, RV-7A, RV-8A, RV-9A, RV-10, RV-12, and RV-14...

So I guess to be technically correct, I'd need the 3, 5, 8, and 9 too... :rolleyes: So Van is probably the only guy with ALL of them... I think Kahuna has got almost all of them too IIRC...
Click to expand...

OK, so you and me have to get Rian to finish up that -5 for us Joe....
 
RV6

Hey Paul

I know you already have a bunch of time in a 6, but if you promise to teach mine to behave when it lands, I will let you fly it. :)
 
...and to think, I had that airplane in my hangar for a few weeks with the keys in it and permission to fly it. Next time Dayton, next time.....
 
Joe Blank said:
Dang Paul, you beat me to it... :D Anyone want to let me borrow their RV-3 for a trip around the patch...?
Click to expand...

I will be standing in line behind you Joe.

I've flown every model (T dragger and trike, where applicable)) except for the RV-3 and RV-5 (don't have the RV-1 either, but my chance at that has come and gone).
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
I will be standing in line behind you Joe.

I've flown every model (T dragger and trike, where applicable)) except for the RV-3 and RV-5 (don't have the RV-1 either, but my chance at that has come and gone).
Click to expand...

OK Scott, you and I can guilt Rian into getting that -5 flyable when he has time. :rolleyes: Then we'll look for a -3 to borrow... :D Next time were at OSH, we'll borrow the -1 for an hour...
 
I am missing the 3, 12, and 14. I have however driven a few rivets on a 14. Does that count?
Paul, I think you should add some rockets to that list, HRII, F1, and the F1 EVO.
 
RV-6T

I think I've got one you haven't flown.

The RV-6T was the RV-9 prototype that was lost in Arkansas on its way to Sun'n Fun so long ago. I saw it at it's debut in Oshkosh. It was officially registered with the FAA as an RV-6T, not a "9" and not an "A." I believe the subtle differences may have been in the size/shape of the horizontal stab and elevator, and perhaps in the size/configuration of the fuselage at the wing intersection.

It was tricycle gear but it was not identified as an A on it's certificate. (The details escape me, but I seem to recall the reason for the "6" registration was that it was fabricated from a "6" fuselage, and then the Jon Roncz airfoil, longer wingspan wing and straight, non-swept horizontal stabilizer were designed and fabricated, thus resulting in the RV-9(A) prototype. Seems like it was easier to certificate it as a "6T" than a "9A" because that would make the production "9A" versions "different." Confused? I probably am, too!) 8^)

Joe B. or Rian or Ken or certainly Van would know.

A little bit of RV history trivia. :eek:
 
Last edited:
rv7boy said:
I think I've got one you haven't flown.

The RV-6T was the RV-9 prototype
Click to expand...

The RV-6T started out as an actual RV-6A configuration airplane that was built when the new primary category was introduced by the FAA, to investigate possibly producing production airplanes. It never developed into anything and the airplane was damaged in a fuel starvation accident (long story with many jokes later on about it being the raspberry patch special, etc.) and put in storage. When the RV-9 design was under way, the decision was made to use the fuselage and emp. from the RV-6T to build a proof of concept airplane. So, it was once again flying under its original airworthiness cert. but with a different set of wings.

I flew the RV-6T some, but not until after it had been rebuilt as the RV9 proof of concept airplane.

But wait there's more....

There was also an RV-6B
It was the prototype for the Nigerian Air Beetle (google it to find out what was different from a normal RV-6).
It flew for quite a few years as the trigear RV-6B, until it was converted to a tail dragger to become a replacement for the aging RV-6 prototype in the roll of transition trainer.
Anyone who ever took transition training with Mike Seager in the Red RV-6 was actually flying the RV-6B. The airplane is now on static display in the Evergreen Air museum

So, thanks for the reminder of two other RV models I have flown, though the RV-6T was after it had actually been rebuilt as an RV-9A but I flew the RV-6B in both configurations.
 
Louise Hose said:
Not really. You could cough up $4k (or $6k) and fly the "other" one: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=772749#post772749 (I see Joe has already offered to ferry it!)
Click to expand...

That's an idea, but to me it wouldn't be the same.

I am familiar with the airplane and have had conversations with Van about it. From what I understand, it had some significant changes incorporated (when compared to the one Van built). Not that that is bad, just that it is not the same airplane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.