Jesse
Well Known Member
I've spent the last month or so getting used to the RV-9A. Great little plane. Incredibly efficient. Very simple (with carb and ground adjustable prop). A little tight for my 6'1" and 245lbs, but not bad. We don't have real seats yet, which has been the biggest pain, which will hopefully change tomorrow. The -9A is incredibly docile and lands like a glider (compared to the other planes I've flown, none of which is a glider). It's amazing that approaching at 58KIAS it still floats for a couple of hundred feet. I now have the instruments all working since relocating the magnetometer further from the seatbelt cables, so I can use the heading on the GRT to control the TT Digiflight II VSGV, while I use the altitude on the GRT to control the same. The Garmin 400W running through the GRT is a fantastic way to fly approaches. The NavWorx ADS600-B (just added today) gives me traffic and weather on the GRT WS screens. It just can't seem to get any better (yeah, I know, imagine if I had the SV GRT screens. That wasn't in the budget).
Then, to prepart for a trip tomorrow, we pulled the RV-10 out of the T-hangar and dusted it off for a turn around the patch. WOW! I never realized how roomy and comfortable it was until spending that much time in a -9A. Yeah, I know that I'm burning 25 at takeoff versus 14 in the -9A. I know I'm getting 15nm/gal versus almost 30 in the -9A, but it is so incredibly comfortable. After getting out of the -10, I told my friend, "so this is why the RV-14 was designed." I did sit in the -14. It wasn't as roomy and comfortable as the -10, but certainly better than the -9A.
They are planes for different missions, without a doubt, although not as different as an RV-8 and a Zenith CH-801 as I posted about earlier today. They are both fantastic planes. I am finally realizing why so many people went with GRT even before they had synthetic vision, but in the -10, I wouldn't give up my Dynon SV with all of the bells and whistles and the VP-200 for all the tea in...wherever they make tea.
Van's really has done an incredible job of designing a lineup that fills a huge spectrum of needs. I'm very glad that the RV-10 and the RV-9A are both in my hangar.
Then, to prepart for a trip tomorrow, we pulled the RV-10 out of the T-hangar and dusted it off for a turn around the patch. WOW! I never realized how roomy and comfortable it was until spending that much time in a -9A. Yeah, I know that I'm burning 25 at takeoff versus 14 in the -9A. I know I'm getting 15nm/gal versus almost 30 in the -9A, but it is so incredibly comfortable. After getting out of the -10, I told my friend, "so this is why the RV-14 was designed." I did sit in the -14. It wasn't as roomy and comfortable as the -10, but certainly better than the -9A.
They are planes for different missions, without a doubt, although not as different as an RV-8 and a Zenith CH-801 as I posted about earlier today. They are both fantastic planes. I am finally realizing why so many people went with GRT even before they had synthetic vision, but in the -10, I wouldn't give up my Dynon SV with all of the bells and whistles and the VP-200 for all the tea in...wherever they make tea.
Van's really has done an incredible job of designing a lineup that fills a huge spectrum of needs. I'm very glad that the RV-10 and the RV-9A are both in my hangar.
