[szutowiczrv10]

I recently read an article saying that if you really wanted to travel cross country with a four seater plane with luggage, you would be better off getting a six seater plane, and they also said no four seater's out there are able to handle four people, let alone the luggage.

Has anyone flown fully loaded and able to carry luggage + Four full size adults?
How did the -10 Perform?

 

[iwannarv]

I can't speak for the -10, but my family owns a Cessna 182. I have many hours in this airplane, some of it being 4 people (me being the smallest at 135lbs) and full luggage. The 182 did great! No problem takeoff, landing, or anything else. The 260hp IO470 helps a bit with the power, but it is the same horsepower as most -10s out there. I don't think I have ever heard anything bad about a 182 when fully loaded. It truly is a great airplane. I wouldn't think a -10 would be much different.

 

[John Clark]

It is all in the math...

I recently read an article saying that if you really wanted to travel cross country with a four seater plane with luggage, you would be better off getting a six seater plane, and they also said no four seater's out there are able to handle four people, let alone the luggage.

In the large view the article is correct. I too, have owned a Cessna 182. A fine airplane and one of the better haulers around. But 4 "average people and baggage" no can do. Using Cessna's numbers the useful load remaining with full fuel is 703 pounds. Using Van's numbers the useful load with full fuel in the '10' is 718. Now lets take a look at that number. In the airline business we used 180 pounds for the average passenger, so 180 X 4 =720. You are at max gross with no bags. The only true 4 place and bags airplane I have ever owned was a B-55 Baron with the 5th and 6th seats removed.

My point is that you have to run the numbers and make your decision.

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

 

[Jeffreymd]

i built my -10 to seat 5 and i uped my gross wt by 50lbs to 2750lbs gross. i'm going to call my DAR this week and see if i can up it another 250lbs to 3000lbs gross. i've carried 5 adults with no luggage and the -10 performs great. yea, you could tell there were 5 adults in it but it was still faster than most 6 place aircraft. i maxed mine out during my testing phase with sand bags(actually, i was a bit over) and all went well. it's actually nicer when you have folks in the back becuase the -10 is a nose heavy airplane. jeff n2733k

 

[vic syracuse]

Just some thoughts and opinions on operating at higher gross weights, which have been discussed in a number of other threads in these forums. I have over 500 hours on the RV-10 now, under a lot of different loading scenarios. Yes, you can put 4 full sized adults in it and go fly. Do you want to max out the baggage and the fuel at the same time? I think that is a question that each individual pilot will need to answer. Will it carry the load? Yes. Under normal situations, standard temps, etc. What one needs to think about are the exceptions such as: what happens if the engine misses a beat, is the runway long enough to abort, how will the engine handle the prolonged climb in the heat, is the field smooth pavement or rough grass, how does the CG move as fuel is burned off, what about turbulence, what about the long term effects on the airframe/landing gear from operating over the recommended gross weights, along with a plethora of other questions.
And at the top of the list I would submit that the passengers are putting their faith in our judgment. Probably none of them have agreed to be test "passengers."
Please fly safely. We have a pretty good sized fleet of RV-10's out there now, and so far, so good. Let's not disrupt that track record. We will all pay.
I understand some of you who are wanting to build really want to know if it is a true 4-place airplane. As someone else mentioned regarding the C-182, which is probably one of the more honest 4-place airplanes around, and having owned a C-182 for a number of years, Ithink the RV-10 is a real 4 place airplane. But like any airplane, including the airliners, everything is a trade off---- people, fuel, baggage---- and there are limits.

Vic

 

[gasman]

Yes, It was worth repeating............Plus you need to ask Vans, not the DAR.

 

[dav1111]

RV-10 at Gross

I have only two flights on my RV-10 (out of 145 hours) that one might consider at or slightly above gross weight. Another RV-10 builder, his wife, and mine, departed Las Vegas (VGT) with baggage compartment full (estimated 100+ lbs) for a flight to LOE2006. No problems whatsoever in early October. Takeoff, landing, handling and climbout was very near normal.

Second Flight was with my wife and two daughters and everthing three women could stuff in the airplane. Weight wise it was every bit as heavy as the Vegas-LOE flight. Departure was from KLBB (3200 MSL) and landing at KAPA (5885 MSL). About the same but at KAPA I dropped off one daughter and her bag and departed about noon in late July for OSH2007. At 5885 MSL my takeoff roll was at least 3000 feet and climb out was way down. Denisty alltitude was over 10000 feet and if I departed KAPA at gross weight I would have made sure it was an early morning flight in the summertime.

I have over 1200 hours in three differnt early model C-182's and have flown them with pilot and four jumpers out of 3200 MSL hard surface and grass strips more times than I can count without any problems. The C-182's I flew could carry more than my RV-10 but I would NEVER go back to a C-182 for the extra couple of hundred pounds it might carry. I am not talking legal weight in a C-182, only what it will actually carry.

If you plan on carring 4 200 plus pound persons and 100 + pounds of baggage in your RV-10 with full fuel you are going to be streching the envelope and if you plan on it at mountain strips in the summer time, all I can say is it better be a really long strip and pleanty of room to climb out before uphill terrain, and do it early in the morning, or you are asking for trouble.

You couldn't pry my RV-10 out of my hands for ANY certified airplane built today, unless it was an even trade for one of those $400,000 plus airplanes that I could sale and build another RV-10.

 

[doctornigel]

CG is the real killer in a heavily loaded plane.

Given enough runway and departure obstacle clearance, weight is not the factor. You are putting more stress on your airplane but it'll do it.

Get outta CG, even at below gross, and you may die.

 

[Jeffreymd]

you nailed it with the outta cg thang. that would be bad. i just ran some numbers. if you were to certify yours for 3000lbs gross. this is what you could carry and still be within limits. 2- 235lb men in the front seats, 2- 200lb men in the back seats, 50lbs of stuff, and 60gal of fuel. the total comes to 2999lb gross wt. again, your still within the limits. it's a rear cg of 115.82. you know what they say......america's only getting fatter, so you better plan for it, hehe jeff

 

[rdoerr01]

I registered mine for 2900 lbs and we did the tests all the way to 2900 in our phase 1 testing. Like Vic says, you have to first understand W & B and work out many different loading configuration to ensure you are with C.G. My 2900 test was 200 lb pilot, 300 lb in co-pilot seat, 200lb in each rear seat and 50 Lb in the baggage compartment and full fuel (60Gal = 360 lb) and empty weight of 1587 lb. The plane was still climbing at 400 - 500 ft/min on a 102 degree day. Take off distance was around the half way point on a 2600 ft runway. Please remember "just because it can haul it, doesn't mean you should!". I just wanted to explorer and test the envelope of what I registered my airplane for.

Thanks
Ray Doerr
N519RV (Hobbs = 296)

 

[paul330]

I'm sorry, but some of you guys are basically playing russian roulette with your lives and those of your passengers. In the UK, we are not permitted to increase the GW above the recommended and for a very good reason. It is nothing to do with performance but structural integrity. The aircraft is tested to certified parameters (+4g to -2g or thereabouts). If you increase the weight, you MAY never have a problem. However, one day you MAY be skirting a CB and hit a big jolt and a wing MAY fall off. At higher weights also, the fatigue damage will be greater than planned, reducing life. You MAY inadvertantly become the fleet leader. Bear in mind also that we are amateur builders and, if we were honest, there is probably the odd rivet we are not particularly proud of! Whilst there MAY be some justification in upping the weights of an aerobatic aircraft for normal cruise flying, there is none for doing so on the -10 or -9. I'm pretty sure VANS did an article on this some time ago.

This aircraft is not designed to have trans-continental range. As someone mentioned, no certified aircraft can take fuel fuel, full baggage and full pax - it's not how aircraft are designed. At recommended weights the -10 will take 4 good size adults, 100lb baggage and a 3/4 fuel load. Do a 2.5 hour leg, stop for a break, do another 2.5 hour leg and you have covered 1000 miles in a day. Or take the back seats out and go on holiday with 2 of you, 300lb of baggage and the kitchen sink, come back on the speed a bit and (if your bladder and butt can take it) go 1000 miles at a stretch. To my mind, that IS a true 4 seater. Certainly I know of nothing else around in it's class that will beat that.

To be honest, I don't understand how anybody would insure an aircraft that is declared at over the designer's max weight but I guess things are different in the US of A!

I haven't been at the homebuild game long but Vic has and he makes very similar points. Listen to him - from my short exposure, he seems to be "the man"!