[Tom Martin]

In the january edition of kitplanes there is an excellent article regarding the new EVO wing that Team Rocket is offering for sale. This is the first commercially available taper wing for this type of aircraft and having flown the airplane myself I can say that it is truly an EVOlution of the hersey bar wing that we are all familiar with. The standard F1 and Harmon rocket wings are essentially modified RV4 wings but this this new wing is completely different.
It expands an already excellent high speed to low speed ration that the van's wing offers. This wing will stall slower than a RV4!!! I think that what this does is open up rocket performance for the guys who were a bit intimidated by the higher landing speeds of standard rockets. This new wing is a winner!!!! I am working on one this winter for myself and it should fly this spring, I can hardly wait til Oshkosh!

Tom Martin

 

[Tom Martin]

I have flown the plane and side by side with anther standard wing rocket it stalled at least 10 knots slower. It has real ground effect when you are close to the runway, something that I have not enjoyed for a few years.

 

[f1rocket]

I hope it works for you, Tom, but I suspect those stall speed numbers in Kitplanes were nonsense. Even with the flap, one of my engineering bosses calculated the coefficient of lift that a wing of that area lifting that weight would have to develop and came up with a large number...almost 3, I think.

That's probably not going to happen, at least not with our present knowledge of physics.

I notice that this is your first post and your post is unsigned. It's sad that there's RV'ers out there that hold a real grudge against anything Rocket related. The EVO does what it does, but I suspect numbers won't convince you anyway.

 

[Alex]

EVO wing specs

Is there a link for specs on the EVO wing, or can someone provide the following:

wing area (specify whether includes center section area)
span
stall speed
flap type and approx % span

thanks!

 

[f1rocket]

Is there a link for specs on the EVO wing, or can someone provide the following:

wing area (specify whether includes center section area)
span
stall speed
flap type and approx % span

thanks!

Feel free to contact Mark Frederick at Team Rocket directly at [email protected]. I'm sure he would be more than happy to talk to you about EVO wing performance.

BTW, I do not have the EVO on my Rocket. I had to draw a line in the checkbook somewhere.

 

[gmcjetpilot]

Be cool my babies, cool.....

Proof in the putting.

I am always suspicious of flight test numbers. Van's numbers have prove to be reliable. I know Mark of Team Rocket and not familiar with his flight test data gathering skills, but he comes of as honest and no BS.

When I read the early reports of the EVO wing I recalled there was nothing earth shaking and there was not wild claim being made, either at the top end or bottom end. Now I read his last flight test and claiming +10mph on the top (from RV winged Rockets) and 4-5mph slower on the bottom from RV's.

He did not give exact numbers on the bottom but made some approx comparison to a local RV-8. No weights where given. A RV-8 stall varies from 51-58 mph based on solo-gross wt (from Van's). I am not saying Mark is not correct, but there is some blank spots.

If any one wants to know call him, he will give you the straight scoop. He also did not say if it was power on or off. ON a previous report the test pilot said it stalled about 4-5 knots slower than before (F1 with RV wing) and about where his RV-4 stalled. Since RV-4's stall about 3-4 mph slower than the RV-8 there seems to be a consistent opinion by two different pilots, that it stalls at a reasonable and comparable speed to RV's. Again no weights given but assume solo.

A heavy RV-8 with two up vs. Mark solo in a F1 Evo winged, w/ slotted flap, may very well stall at a slower speed than the RV-8, but he did not give an exact number, so 4 to 5 mph may be 2-3 mph or 0-1 mph slower? Again no weights where given or exact numbers, which would be nice.

I have meet and talked to Mark at Team Rocket, and he is a real straight shooter, smart and seems devoid of BS. The new wing does use HIGH lift devices, I recall slotted flaps, so it is possible.


Van's RV wings do well because it is the venerable 23013.5 NACA airfoil (except the RV-9/10); This AF is used on dozens of famous, popular and well regarded planes. It is just the right balance of weight, power and wing loading on the RV that gives the excellent hi/lo range. The flap is a simple hinged affair. Not that it is bad, it is just what it is, simple.

Now the F-1 tapered wing can develop high Cd and higher critical angles of attacks with high lift devices. Can it achieve lower stall than most RV stall speed's? May be. Could be. George

 

[f1rocket]

Mark's Reply

Mark doesn't subscribe to this forum, but he sent me this response to post on his behalf.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Did my early stall testing next to Stu McCurdy's RV8 (180HP/CS prop) and Richard Smith's RV4 (Not sure which engine/prop). Both are good examples of their types. All planes were solo, assume 1/2 fuel (1600LBS/1200 for the -4?). Looked like 4MPH slower compared to Stu's plane, and maybe 2MPH slower compared to Richard's.

The results were repeatable that day, and believe me, we were ALL surprised.

Best to ask Stu if he remembers, but I think he had full flaps in and I had 1/2...

Highly scientific testing process: simply fly as slow as ya can -- let's see who stalls first. No limit on power use, but I can say I wasn't using much (CAFE testing uses 15"/1500) -- I recall I was using less that that. I know our process was not really scientific, but Van gives good numbers, and I wanted a comparison.

So, whatever number you believe an RV8/RV4 stalls at, at any reasonable given gross weight, I would suggest that the F1 stalls slower, or equal to. Pilot skill is a factor here.

Stall qualities: Here is a data point that is not often looked at: some planes have a particularly vicious stall, and the pilot is well recommended to stay far from that maneuver, lest the ground rise up and smite him. The stall in the 23013.5 winged RVs is not in this category, but it's not the mushing break of a Cessna either. The Evo has more of a mushing break, and the flow re-attaches immediately when asked. It is NOT like the 23013.5 on the RV, with its expected semi-sharp break -- the Evo gives plenty of warning, otherwise known as a pre-stall buffet.

Summary: Bragging, in this business, will get you thrown out; aviation takes place in a very small world. The Evo does what I say it will, as surprising as that may seem to some of you. It also looks good while doing it! If you want to make some comparison flights, c'mon down and we'll see if I'm right.

Wing area: If a particular plane has a 23' wing span, and a 58" chord (use 60" to make the math easy), that plane is said to have 115 square feet of wing area. Thus I would suggest any measurement of wing area on any aircraft includes the center section. I can try to find out flap data if required; it is a slotted type -- not Fowler, or plain, type. As for published stall speed, I feel safe saying it is -2MPH from the RV4, which is advertised as having a 54MPH stall at gross weight. I'll stick with 52MPH, or ~44KT, at gross weight (2100LBS).

Of course, these higher efficiency numbers allow the Evo to cruise alongside my RV buddies while buring less fuel. I've done this too many times -- there is no arguing; references are available. This REALLY gets 'em whining. I won't get into the altitude performance of the ship here, unless someone wants to know...but going non-stop from Nellis AFB (Las Vegas) to Taylor TX and landing with +VFR reserves should give a hint.

Illegitimus non Carborundum!
Mark
----------------------------------------------------------

My advice is to stay as far away from Rockets as you possibly can. DO NOT BUILD ONE! They are bad handling, poor performing, uncomfortable, gas hogs ripped off from Van's design. Why anyone would want one is beyond me.

 

[tin man]

I believe Mark raced his rocket at Reno (sport class) with both the straight wing and the EVO wing. A quick check of the archived speeds would be interesting for real world comparasons.
Tom
RV3
2000 hours,

 

[rv8ch]

EVO stall

Did my early stall testing next to Stu McCurdy's RV8 (180HP/CS prop) and Richard Smith's RV4 (Not sure which engine/prop). Both are good examples of their types. All planes were solo, assume 1/2 fuel (1600LBS/1200 for the -4?). Looked like 4MPH slower compared to Stu's plane, and maybe 2MPH slower compared to Richard's.

Stu's 8 has strakes too, which he told me reduced his stall speed several knots.

Since I bought my seat belts from the F1Boss, I wonder if I'll get a couple of tenths of a knot reduced stall speed?

Ya gotta love those rockets!

 

[Tom Martin]

Here is what the airplane looks like from behind. It is unique and very well proportioned.

[/URL][/IMG]
And this is what it looks like when you are flying. This plane draws a crowd like my RV4 did 12 years ago and my first rocket did eight years ago.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[osxuser]

So when do we get the side-by-side? Actually got me drooling with that aft shot. I'd love to be able to afford to build a rocket. -7 first, -7 second, F1 Evo third? Maybe, I guess i'm a repeat builder without even starting my first one .

 

[gmcjetpilot]

Side by Side Rocket

So when do we get the side-by-side? Actually got me drooling with that aft shot. I'd love to be able to afford to build a rocket. -7 first, -7 second, F1 Evo third? Maybe, I guess i'm a repeat builder without even starting my first one .

They have a Side by Side: http://www.international-hpa.com/products.html

Don't know the status. It has been quite for years. The drawings are not that appealing. I saw the super 6 once, a harmon-ized RV-6 (stretch fuselage and clipped wing) and it looked nice..G

 

[Gary Wilcox]

Evo Wing on a RV7

Seeing how well the EVO wing performs on a Rocket, some quick calculations in the brain bucket tell me it could be retrofit for a RV 7A, 200hp. This would produce a wonderfull side by side aircraft. There would be some spar box mods and wing stub mods to be done, but seem completely reasonable to do. Time to get rid of the vans wing and bring the rv's up to date.

Gary Wilcox

 

[Kevin Horton]

Mark doesn't subscribe to this forum, but he sent me this response to post on his behalf.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Wing area: If a particular plane has a 23' wing span, and a 58" chord (use 60" to make the math easy), that plane is said to have 115 square feet of wing area. Thus I would suggest any measurement of wing area on any aircraft includes the center section. I can try to find out flap data if required; it is a slotted type -- not Fowler, or plain, type.

The traditional definition of wing area includes the center section - i.e. area of the fuselage that is between the wing leading and trailing edges. I can't justify why things are done this way, but that is the way it has been done for many, many decades.

The slotted flaps probably help quite a bit here, as compared to the plain flaps on short-wing RVs. They are more complicated, and probably heavier, but the air coming through a well designed slot helps keep the airflow attached to the top of the flap at large flap angles.

 

[RV7Guy]

Seeing how well the EVO wing performs on a Rocket, some quick calculations in the brain bucket tell me it could be retrofit for a RV 7A, 200hp. This would produce a wonderfull side by side aircraft. There would be some spar box mods and wing stub mods to be done, but seem completely reasonable to do. Time to get rid of the vans wing and bring the rv's up to date.

Gary Wilcox

There is an M1 Rocket coming out that is a side by side, even offered with a tricycle gear. Looks like great performance.

Darwin N. Barrie
RV-7 N717EE

 

[Kevin Horton]

I notice that this is your first post and your post is unsigned. It's sad that there's RV'ers out there that hold a real grudge against anything Rocket related. The EVO does what it does, but I suspect numbers won't convince you anyway.

Easy there. Mr. Vanplane, who ever he is, was right on the mark. The stall speed given in the Kitplanes article (40 kt), is clearly way too low, if it is at gross weight (2100 lb), and if it was CAS. The numbers in Kitplane imply a maximum lift coefficient of over 3.7. To put this in perspective, Van's numbers for the RV-8 imply a CL max of 1.8.

If they've got an airfoil and flap system with a CL max of over 3, they could make millions of dollars selling the design to Boeing or Airbus.

So, maybe the wing area (104 ft^2, calculated from the claimed wing loading) is off a bit. Maybe the stall speed was at a very low weight. Maybe it is in IAS, not CAS. I strongly suspect it is 40 kt IAS, in which case it is meaningless. You can have very large airspeed errors at the stall. I've flown a C182 that will indicate 0 IAS at the stall, if you use a lot of power.

Mark says the EVO Rocket has a stall speed lower than an RV-8 or -4. I'll take him at his word. But there is no way it has a 40 kt CAS stall speed at 2100 lb gross weight. If they want to use stall speeds in IAS in the marketing material, it should be clearly indicated as IAS.

 

[gmcjetpilot]

What do you know about the M1

There is an M1 Rocket coming out that is a side by side, even offered with a tricycle gear. Looks like great performance.

Darwin N. Barrie
RV-7 N717EE

WHO is coming out with the M1? When?

I think you missed my post a few above:

http://www.international-hpa.com/products.html

DO you know something specific? When is it coming out. It seems like it has been 4 years since HPA put this on there site and I have seen nothing. HPA makes the quick-build kits for Team Rocket and other companies. I also think they produce the EVO wing. No one is marketing the side by side M1 and the only think I see are the sketches, no planes.

George