[RV_Tom]

Hello all.

Tom Longfellow here from Monticello, Fl. near Tallahassee.
I have always wanted to fly, so this year I have started the journey.

I am almost done building my hanger at 74FL

I hope to start my PPL training and BUILDING AN RV as soon as I finish the hanger.

Heres my concern/question.... I like trigear not taildraggers (sorry)
Will the nose gear of a 9a or 7a hold up to flying from a grass strip everyday?
With the recent posts of nose gear failures, I have some concern.

How many RV A's are flying from grass everyday?

Am I worrying about nothing or should I be concerned??
I am not asking to get into the specifics of the nose gear again, just an overall idea if the RV would be a good choice for me.

Thanks for any imput..

Great site..nice to find a 'nice' forum..


Tom Longfellow
Happy holidays

 

[Highflight]

You might check with Roberta Hegy here on the forum. She lives at an airpark with a grass strip and has been flying from it for (I think) over a couple of years.

I'm sure there are many others who fly a lot from grass strips with -A models. It's just that, like any news, all you ever hear about are the failures and almost never about the successes.

 

[Build9A]

my $.02

I think the nosewheel is fine for grass. I don't have any numbers, but lots of folks live and fly A models off of grass. I have landed on a couple fairly rough fields with my 9A and haven't had a problem. I am more "aware" and careful after reading some of the posts on this issue. Build the fairings with a little extra clearance and hold the nose off on landing until it comes down on it's own and you should be OK. We haven't talked much about taildragger incidents in this forum, but your insurance quotes will tell that story. I fly to Quitman, GA once in awhile. If you are interested, I'll divert to 74FL on my way sometime and show you the 9A up close. jack

 

[johnp]

nosegear rv's

another data point --

the guy that got me started building flies a 6a out of kittie hill, tx
(leander, 77t). i've flown his 6a in and out of there. he's been
flying it for about 5 years, no real problems. i'm building a 7a.

as others have said, either one is good.

 

[Bob Axsom]

Think Hard About It

THe RV is a hot airplane, the nose gear is known to be more vulnerable to bad landings than production aircraft and you don't even know how to fly let alone have finese in landing. Unfortunately in order to develop the skill you have to experience tha variety of bad landings and their causes, effects and recoveries. I cannot imagine a new pilot landing and never making an error that could damage the nose gear of an "A" model RV. My guess it the RV-9A would be the better short term choice and the RV-7A is what you would wish you had later on. I land my RV-6A on grass occassionally but it is not something I do with great joy because I never know what hidden holes are out there. Having read this and you still want to press ahead then go on, they are both fine airplanes but you should know the demands on your skill going in and the smaller margine of forgiveness for abuse provided by the RV. If you do, it there will be some OH SH**! landings but if you get them out of your system without damage and maintain your grass strip well you will make a life altering transition and be happy with either plane.

Bob Axsom

 

[alpinelakespilot2000]

My guess it the RV-9A would be the better short term choice and the RV-7A is what you would wish you had later on.

Bob Axsom

OK, Bob, I'll bite. Why would this be?

 

[rv9aviator]

I wouldn't worry too much about your abilities after getting your pilot's license. I could probably handle cross winds and soft fields better right after I passed my test than I can now. The problem comes in when you don't fly for an extended period while building. I will fly my RV-9A from a grass strip and yes I have concerns but I am still going for it anyway.

Also, the only other plane I might wish I would have built is an RV-10 since I want to travel and not do aerobatics. The cost difference will make me feel much better about my choice.

 

[RV_Tom]

I fly to Quitman, GA once in awhile. If you are interested, I'll divert to 74FL on my way sometime and show you the 9A up close. jack

Jack.. Thanks for the info man!!

let me know when you are headed to quitman sometime.. it would be great to see your 9


Tom

 

[Build9A]

not me

you can pry my 9A from my cold dead hands..... some of the young whipper snappers feel that the 9A is a trainer. With a 160hp it's not a trainer, but it's fairly easy to fly. Actually flies better and better control than any trainer I've flown. 7A's are great airplanes, but I'll forgo the 15 mph and the upside down capabilties and the additional cost of the 0-360. Well........, it would be cool to do a few rolls and loops once in awhile. Build any RV( ), you can't go wrong.

 

[Highflight]

I'll bite back

The 7 series is going to fly faster, climb faster, and allow airbatics where the 9 won't.
If there was no difference between the 7 and 9, then Van wouldn't have to go to the trouble of offering both.

On the other hand, flying and climbing faster means burning more fuel so we all takes our pick and flys what we got.

Once you make your choice, don't look back and don't have any second thoughts.

 

[RV_Tom]

I cannot imagine a new pilot landing and never making an error that could damage the nose gear of an "A" model RV.
Bob Axsom

Thanks for the reply Bob..

I realize that I would not want to train in the RV.. I will bounce some172's for a while while I build..


Thanks

Tom

 

[alpinelakespilot2000]

I am almost done building my hanger at 74FL

Hi Tom--Out of curiosity, are you building the hangar yourself or is it being built for you? I'm in the process of planning to build a pole-building hangar that looks to be about the size you are building and am curious about what I'll be getting into. Once the poles are set vertically (which I will probably have done professionally) I have no problem doing the rest myself, but I'm still curious about material vs. labor costs, etc. If you have any more info. about your hangar size (w/d/h) or other thoughts and have time to send them via private mail or email, I'd sure appreciate it.

You might check a number of earlier threads about training in an RV. I don't think anyone would suggest that transitioning to an RV after your PPL would be any problem, but I think a pretty strong consensus exists for getting all your bad landings out of the way in someone else's plane. In any case, it sounds like you are talking about building and learning to fly at the same time, so that should not be an issue.

Happy holidays and good luck.

 

[Bob Axsom]

The man is a reacher

OK, Bob, I'll bite. Why would this be?

The thread starter obviously is reaching well beyond his immediate grasp already and is vascilating between an RV-9A and a RV-7A. I am sure he would be safer with the RV-9A right now but the impression I get is he will want more power and more speed when he has flown for a few years. Just a guess really.

Bob Axsom

 

[terrykohler]

The endless debate of RV9 vs. RV7 continues to miss what I feel are the most important attributes of the 9-it's airfoil and wingspan. With a lower stall speed and slower roll rate, the plane is an exceptional platform for instrument flight. While the other RV models can certainly be utilized for IFR, the 9 just makes it easier-both in level flight and on precision approaches. The tradeoff for this added stability is lack of aerobatic ability in the 9. Just something else to consider when making your choice. One other point made many years ago by a friend and long time owner of a CT210: "So many pilots talk about their love of flying, and somehow in the same sentence manage to squeeze in a comment wishing for more speed. If they really loved flying that much, wouldn't a slower plane make more sense"?

 

[robertahegy]

Hey, Tom!!

I've been flying off a small grass strip (1700 ft) for about 14 years. I love grass. I've been flying my 7A here for nearly two years now without any problems. I drove a Cherokee for 12 years, transitioned to a taildragger Searey, and now my 7A. Our strip has a few whoop-de doos, goes uphill one way and down the other.

Properly assembled and piloted, an RV-A can go just about anywhere short of where tundra tires would be appropriate. If you think you will want to do loops and rolls, build a 7A. Both the 9 and 7 are fine airplanes and speed is close for both, surely within 20 mph, similarly equipped. I find my 7A is extremely stable on long flights, even without an autopilot.

The 7A handles a lot like my Cherokee, just faster and more nimble. It goes where I point it and does what I tell it. I have not flown a 9. I transitioned in Van's 6A with Mike Seager. My 7A is the only 7A I have ever flown and I am the only person ever to pilot it (I loved the test flight, what a rush). The 7 has just enough control back pressure that you don't feel like the stick is disconnected. Very well balanced controls that make me feel like I am a part of the plane.

Anyway, I guess you get my meaning, I love the airplane. I say "go for it" as far as you building and working on your private. My suggestion is learn in a Cherokee and get some taildragger time mixed in as well. Flying a taildragger really gets you to use your feet and really sharpens your crosswind landings. The real trick is to learn proper techniques and don't get sloppy. A Cherokee you can fly in your sleep. An RV needs a little more attention. Yes, an RV nosegear is smaller and more fragile than some airplanes. Misuse of an RV nosegear may divorce it from the airplane. But it's a lot sturdier than a Long Easy's. I'd take my 7A anywhere a 7 or a 6 or a 9 will go, and, quite possibly, places they can't.

When you're ready, get some good transition training from someone like Mike Seager. Flying with Mike was a great experience for me and got me on the right track for properly flying my 7A.

Best of luck with your project and RV experience,

Roberta

 

[RV_Tom]

Hanger info for alpinelakespilot2000

I'm still curious about material vs. labor costs, etc. If you have any more info. about your hangar size (w/d/h) or other thoughts and have time to send them via private mail or email, I'd sure appreciate it.
.

The hanger is 40'wide x 32'deep outside dia. 12' high.. the door opening is 38.5' wide (i think) I am doing all the work myself.. I had plans drawn to satisfy the windload and building inspectors here in FL. It is not a big hanger, but I can not afford a big plane anyway!!

I would be happy to send you the 1 page plan by snail mail if you want.

Email me at longfellow_tom at yahoo dot com with your address..

Thanks for the input about the RV

T

 

[Bryan Wood]

9A nosewheel

Hello Tom,

Since your asking for opinions I'll go ahead and give one. While there are many qualified people on this list who can offer opinions on this subject my experience couldn't be tailered more directly at your question. I fly a 9A which you are specifically asking about and I was a relatively low time pilot when mine was finally ready to fly. The local FSDO will not allow first flights over the area where I live so when it was time to do final assembly I rented a hanger at a privately owned but public use airport that has a beautiful grass runway and paved taxi ways that was located about 40 miles outside of city. All of my Phase 1 was done out of this strip and then all the flying that I could get away with over the next several months was all conducted off of this grass strip. Being low time and having insurance requirements Mike Seager gave me transition training in the factory 9A prior to me ever getting into my airplane to fly. I have landed it every time in a way that protects the nosewheel and unless you have flown with Mike Seager you cannot appreciate how much he stresses the importance of this. So imagine my surprise when landing at a very familar field that used to be my home field and having a problem with not the landing but with parking! For some reason and I don't know why the "A" drivers are very reluctant to believe this and want to offer advice to me on airspeed management on final and not to bounce and reland, etc. I posted pictures on another post on the topic and expressed concern, but also stating that I would continue to land on grass strips. For some reason there is serious denial of the possability for nose gear failure on these airplanes. I respect the knowledge and experience as pilots of these folks who have potentially greater skills and significantly more hours than me, but my incident happened while parking and seems to be discounted as if I had a bad landing. While I would never allow somebody to taxi over the hole that got my front end in an RV-A if I could stop them, I would bet that nobody would taxi theirs over this same hole to prove that their nose gear leg will hold up! If you were to find my post involving this incident you will see a photo that is attached showing the hole with an airport guide sitting in it to give reference to the size. You will see that it was very small and a similar one could easily hide in a grass runway. Now with all of this said I'll address the question you ask directly. Would I build an RV-9A if the primary strip would be grass? Without question the answer is "Yes," but with full knowlegde that there is additional risk. The airplane is simply wonderful in just about anything you do with it . The odds apparently are very much in favor that you will never have one of these incidents, but the risk is higher than if you do not land on grass. I wouldn't trade my airplane because of this, and I will envy you having your RV-9A in your own hanger on your private strip vs. renting the corner of a hanger under the wing of a Cessna 210 and being grateful to share the $750 month rent to the county. My advice is to get started and enjoy the process.

Lastly, I have re-written this reply several times trying to avoid being contraversial but still making the point that the reply was attempting to address. I even thought about sending a private reply but thought that the denial issue is really doing nobody any good and thought that the post just might help some to get past this. Just once I want to say this louder, but remember I'm not trying to fight about it, just get the point accross. "I BROKE MINE WHILE PARKING."

Regards,
Bryan 9A

 

[RV_Tom]

Parking

Thanks Bryan for the reply. I did see your post about your incident.

After reading that whole thread, I started to wonder about the grass + RV idea.


Thank you for posting.. everyones input is appreciated.

Everything has risks I guess.. Hell I dropped a truss on my head and nearly killed myself building the hanger.. I'm still here


Thanks again Bryan

 

[Deuskid]

. We haven't talked much about taildragger incidents in this forum, but your insurance quotes will tell that story. jack

Newbie here trying to learn. What will insurance quotes reveal? Which costs more? Which is better on grass?

I only joined this forum today and saw the forums on taildragger v. tri but haven't gone to read it yet. I will - I promise.

Also, is there a 'newbie' thread [that is what I was looking for originally but couldn't find one].

thanks,

John

 

[Deuskid]

The endless debate of RV9 vs. RV7 continues to miss what I feel are the most important attributes of the 9-it's airfoil and wingspan. With a lower stall speed and slower roll rate, the plane is an exceptional platform for instrument flight. While the other RV models can certainly be utilized for IFR, the 9 just makes it easier-both in level flight and on precision approaches. The tradeoff for this added stability is lack of aerobatic ability in the 9. Just something else to consider when making your choice. One other point made many years ago by a friend and long time owner of a CT210: "So many pilots talk about their love of flying, and somehow in the same sentence manage to squeeze in a comment wishing for more speed. If they really loved flying that much, wouldn't a slower plane make more sense"?

Would a 10 be an equally good platform for IFR as the 9? I guess my question is, except for seating and engine size what are the difference between the 9 and 10 [another newbie question i know].

thanks

John

 

[Build9A]

higher

Taildragger insurance is higher. I guess because of the ground loop incidents. On the other side they might be better on grass or rough strips. I'm sure others have strong opinions here and there has been similar discussions on other threads. Actually there is a category on this forum at the home page about 2/3 of the way down titled "Nosegear vs. Taildragger". There should be some good info there.

 

[RV_Tom]

Thanks Everyone

Thanks a bunch everyone for the replies.

I am pretty convinced that I can use the 9 or 7 off grass with the right training!!

I am sure I will start building as soon as my control tower gives me the green light



Thanks again everyone

Tom