On Thursday, the 6th of August at about 2:30, Ken Scott of Van’s took me up for a demo flight in N412RV.
For the record, my pilot experience is rather limited, (less than 100 hr – mainly Cessna’s), dated (soloed in 1983), and my last stick time was over a year ago in a TH-67. My goal is to have a fun aircraft that I would be comfortable with my kids using it to learn to fly. Talking with Van, reading the Sport Aviation and Kit Planes articles in addition to all the pilot reports here on VAF, all indicated that the 12 would be a good candidate for this mission. Reading and listening is however not experiencing. Would responsive be another word for twitchy? Would light weight be another way of saying flimsy? Would low fuel consumption translate to poor performance? After failing to get rides at Sun N Fun for the past two years (yes I do act slowly), I made the trip out to Oregon for the ride (and also for a family wedding celebration).
The day was overcast with some bumpiness. The fit (i.e. room inside) was better than a 172. By my calculation, the aircraft was near its max gross weight of 1320, and a significant portion of useful load was from the people in it – we would not have fit in a 150. Take-off was with partial flaps. I can’t estimate the amount of runway used in feet, but it was ‘not very much’. The VSI on the Dynon indicated 900 feet per minute with flaps up. Impressive. Forward visibility was good in the climb. The aircraft felt steady and solid despite the bumpiness – not flimsy. We leveled off below the clouds at about 2000 ft msl and with a little less than full throttle (didn’t get the number) the airspeed settled at a comfortable 110 KIAS. Again exactly what has been previously reported. The view out was outstanding. Began feeling out the controls; it was simply amazing. The aircraft moved with the stick with very very very little delay from stick input to aircraft response and the aircraft’s response was totally proportionate to the amount of input. Tiny stick movement (pitch and roll) equaled slow aircraft movement (technically acceleration but that is for another day fellow gearheads). Large stick movement equaled fast aircraft movement. Center the controls and everything stops - now. Not twitchy at all. I think this would be great for my kids and me. The lack of delay between the input and the aircraft’s action made it very easy to be in synch, which in turn made it easy to control but without being boring. So that is what the difference is between responsive and twitchy: prompt proportionate controls. Who knew? Rudder? Same way. Low speed (i.e. stall horn blaring) retained the responsiveness of the controls but appeared (Ken flew this segment) to require more input for the same rate with the maximum rate being correspondingly reduced but still substantial. Stall was unexciting. Landing was unexciting. Roll out was again ‘not very much’.
In short, my experience was just like what everyone else has reported. The only difference is that, for me, it was in first person. Now if I can just get over thinking about the $60K. That’s right, it is an investment not an expense. Yes, that is definitely it.
Dave
For the record, my pilot experience is rather limited, (less than 100 hr – mainly Cessna’s), dated (soloed in 1983), and my last stick time was over a year ago in a TH-67. My goal is to have a fun aircraft that I would be comfortable with my kids using it to learn to fly. Talking with Van, reading the Sport Aviation and Kit Planes articles in addition to all the pilot reports here on VAF, all indicated that the 12 would be a good candidate for this mission. Reading and listening is however not experiencing. Would responsive be another word for twitchy? Would light weight be another way of saying flimsy? Would low fuel consumption translate to poor performance? After failing to get rides at Sun N Fun for the past two years (yes I do act slowly), I made the trip out to Oregon for the ride (and also for a family wedding celebration).
The day was overcast with some bumpiness. The fit (i.e. room inside) was better than a 172. By my calculation, the aircraft was near its max gross weight of 1320, and a significant portion of useful load was from the people in it – we would not have fit in a 150. Take-off was with partial flaps. I can’t estimate the amount of runway used in feet, but it was ‘not very much’. The VSI on the Dynon indicated 900 feet per minute with flaps up. Impressive. Forward visibility was good in the climb. The aircraft felt steady and solid despite the bumpiness – not flimsy. We leveled off below the clouds at about 2000 ft msl and with a little less than full throttle (didn’t get the number) the airspeed settled at a comfortable 110 KIAS. Again exactly what has been previously reported. The view out was outstanding. Began feeling out the controls; it was simply amazing. The aircraft moved with the stick with very very very little delay from stick input to aircraft response and the aircraft’s response was totally proportionate to the amount of input. Tiny stick movement (pitch and roll) equaled slow aircraft movement (technically acceleration but that is for another day fellow gearheads). Large stick movement equaled fast aircraft movement. Center the controls and everything stops - now. Not twitchy at all. I think this would be great for my kids and me. The lack of delay between the input and the aircraft’s action made it very easy to be in synch, which in turn made it easy to control but without being boring. So that is what the difference is between responsive and twitchy: prompt proportionate controls. Who knew? Rudder? Same way. Low speed (i.e. stall horn blaring) retained the responsiveness of the controls but appeared (Ken flew this segment) to require more input for the same rate with the maximum rate being correspondingly reduced but still substantial. Stall was unexciting. Landing was unexciting. Roll out was again ‘not very much’.
In short, my experience was just like what everyone else has reported. The only difference is that, for me, it was in first person. Now if I can just get over thinking about the $60K. That’s right, it is an investment not an expense. Yes, that is definitely it.
Dave
Last edited:
