[RNB]

Coming from a C172, what is unique or different in a 10? I did a demo, what sticks with me is the advice to keep the stick all the way back on the ground to minimize nose gear pressure. What else is unique to a 10? Explain as if to a competent properly rated pilot, not the obvious "it is faster" kind of stuff.

Thanks.

 

[Kyle Boatright]

The stick forces get really high if you don’t trim appropriately for the flap setting. Dropping the flaps gives a huge nose down pitching moment and raising them is the opposite. Executing a go-around makes for some real stick, flap, and trim work for 10 seconds or so.

Otherwise it is a very easy airplane to fly.

 

[mburch]

Coming from a C172, what is unique or different in a 10? I did a demo, what sticks with me is the advice to keep the stick all the way back on the ground to minimize nose gear pressure.

That's good advice for a lot of airplanes with less-than-tractor-like nosegear, not just the RV-10, but I understand what you're asking.

It's been a while since I've flown either type, but I think it's fair to say that the RV-10 will exhibit less pre-stall buffet than the Cessna.

And, an improperly-latched door is a minor annoyance in a 172 but a very serious problem in an RV-10.

 

[kirkbauer]

I concur with some other items -- trimming is especially important on landing and you'd better have the doors shut properly.

From a flying perspective, lots of right rudder on takeoff (like any high-performance aircraft) but I find that I rarely have to use the rudder other than takeoff and landing.

The most significant in-flight difference I notice is that the RV10 is very pitch sensitive.

 

[Carl Froehlich]

If the plane you buy does not have the Plane Around cam door latch system, get it.

PlaneAround LLC RETROFIT 180 DEGREE KIT

RV-10 doors that currently only turn 90 to 110 degrees. Enables cam to pull the door in with extra pin engagement. Allows one to two inches of optional pin extension This kit will outfit two RV-10 doors and comes with replacement handle gear racks (shown in photo). This kit also includes Delrin...

planearound.com

Carl

 

[AV8ER]

1. RV-10 and castering nose wheel/differential braking - biggest part of the transition is to figure out how to keep from dragging the brakes and wearing the pads out on the -10 during taxi. Every time the cowl is off I check the brake reservoir level as the brakes are critical.

2. Loading - when the -10 is near its forward cg range you will run out of elevator on landing. I don’t recall the Cessna doing this.

3. Doors as noted above plus: Keep them closed on the ground unless you are loading or unloading. A stiff breeze puts a significant load on their hinges. I never taxi with the -10 doors cracked open for air movement although some folks do, I don’t recommend it.

4. Lean of peak operation, constant speed prop, cruising over 9k, oxygen, all things the -10 is capable of bringing into your cross country flying that the 172 never did for me.

 

[Mike S]

Coming from a C172, what is unique or different in a 10?

Thanks.

Comfort---sheer comfort on long flights.

 

[rocketman1988]

I concur with some other items -- trimming is especially important on landing and you'd better have the doors shut properly.

From a flying perspective, lots of right rudder on takeoff (like any high-performance aircraft) but I find that I rarely have to use the rudder other than takeoff and landing.

The most significant in-flight difference I notice is that the RV10 is very pitch sensitive.

It isn’t if it has speed trim installed.

 

[RNB]

It isn’t if it has speed trim installed.

What is speed trim?

 

[rocketman1988]

What is speed trim?

The elevator trim is slowed as speed increases.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

2. Loading - when the -10 is near its forward cg range you will run out of elevator on landing. I don’t recall the Cessna doing this.



.

Any Cessna designed to actually carry a load such as the C – 182 or C-205/206 are no different.
Landing a 182 slow with full flaps when solo makes the RV-10 seem easy.

 

[RNB]

The elevator trim is slowed as speed increases.

I have not heard of such a thing. In what manner is such a thing implemented in an RV10? Is it software that gets paid attention to at install? Only via AP or also via trim switch? Brand limited by anything?

 

[BobTurner]

I have not heard of such a thing. In what manner is such a thing implemented in an RV10? Is it software that gets paid attention to at install? Only via AP or also via trim switch? Brand limited by anything?

There are a number of solutions to this issue (for landing/take off you wish the electric trim ran faster; for cruise, you wish it ran slower), ranging from a fast/slow speed manual switch, to a programable box that adjusts trim speed (slower) as airspeed changes (increases). Most use pulse width modulation so the motors get a full 12 volt pulse to get them going. Some EFIS boxes have this built in, I think. My Trio Pro autopilot will do it, even when the servos are off. And yes, without it, the trim is touchy in cruise (you need a very quick jab to get a fine adjustment).

 

[Mike S]

I have not heard of such a thing. In what manner is such a thing implemented in an RV10? Is it software that gets paid attention to at install? Only via AP or also via trim switch? Brand limited by anything?

I installed a TCW Safety Trim unit in our 10, made the high speed trim a big nothingburger.

Safety-Trim Intelligent Servo Controller - TCW Technologies

Safety-Trim is an electronic speed controller designed specifically to operate the electric servo trim tabs found on many experimental category aircraft.

www.tcwtech.com

Used this in the new plane, works great, but not airspeed activated.

The Matronics Governor Mk III

 

[rocketman1988]

There are a number of solutions to this issue (for landing/take off you wish the electric trim ran faster; for cruise, you wish it ran slower), ranging from a fast/slow speed manual switch, to a programable box that adjusts trim speed (slower) as airspeed changes (increases). Most use pulse width modulation so the motors get a full 12 volt pulse to get them going. Some EFIS boxes have this built in, I think. My Trio Pro autopilot will do it, even when the servos are off. And yes, without it, the trim is touchy in cruise (you need a very quick jab to get a fine adjustment).

Note that some do NOT use PWM and instead, reduce the voltage to the trim servo which slows it down. Unfortunately, with reduced voltage, the servo runs at reduced power and may not be able to move the tab at higher speeds.

 

[Carl Froehlich]

There are a number of solutions to this issue (for landing/take off you wish the electric trim ran faster; for cruise, you wish it ran slower), ranging from a fast/slow speed manual switch, to a programable box that adjusts trim speed (slower) as airspeed changes (increases). Most use pulse width modulation so the motors get a full 12 volt pulse to get them going. Some EFIS boxes have this built in, I think. My Trio Pro autopilot will do it, even when the servos are off. And yes, without it, the trim is touchy in cruise (you need a very quick jab to get a fine adjustment).

The Dynon SkyView has this feature (different trim speeds for different airspeeds). I tried a reduced trim speed in cruise but found it was just as easy to keep the trim speed at 100% across the board and just bump the top hat as needed.

Carl

 

[Mike S]

Note that some do NOT use PWM and instead, reduce the voltage to the trim servo which slows it down. Unfortunately, with reduced voltage, the servo runs at reduced power and may not be able to move the tab at higher speeds.

The Matronics unit is PWM.

 

[dmattmul]

I have not heard of such a thing. In what manner is such a thing implemented in an RV10? Is it software that gets paid attention to at install? Only via AP or also via trim switch? Brand limited by anything?

Garmin uses it in the G3X system. See pics of pitch speeds fast and slow at designated airspeed. Work well ! (RV-10 and 14 fairly pitch sensitive)

 

[Mike Meehan]

Coming from a C172, what is unique or different in a 10? I did a demo, what sticks with me is the advice to keep the stick all the way back on the ground to minimize nose gear pressure. What else is unique to a 10? Explain as if to a competent properly rated pilot, not the obvious "it is faster" kind of stuff.

Thanks.

 

[Mike Meehan]

In our -10, I find that it really does not want to stall. With full flaps it only starts to hint at stalling in the low 50 kts and doesn’t stall until around 48 kts. I think this is pretty normal for most of them. Also, having a control stick and not a yolk gives you limited range of motion if you have passengers who are a bit bigger or with wider legs.

 

[Auburntsts]

2. Loading - when the -10 is near its forward cg range you will run out of elevator on landing. I don’t recall the Cessna doing this.

I fly near the forward edge of the envelope quite frequently and in my experience it’s possible to run out of pitch trim but not pitch authority—ever. Speaking of flying with a forward CG, when solo I fly with a minimum of 40lbs of ballast in the baggage compartment in the form of a 5gal plastic collapsible water cube. I use water so I can easily add or dump weight as needed.

 

[Carl Froehlich]

I fly near the forward edge of the envelope quite frequently and in my experience it’s possible to run out of pitch trim but not pitch authority—ever. Speaking of flying with a forward CG, when solo I fly with a minimum of 40lbs of ballast in the baggage compartment in the form of a 5gal plastic collapsible water cube. I use water so I can easily add or dump weight as needed.

Here battery selection and mounting location(s) is key.

I found two PC-625s mounted in the normal aft location to be a very good compromise for W&B - but this should reflect how you use the plane. For me this worked well for solo as well as four real people and 100 pounds of baggage. I note however four real people tended to translate to two 200+ pound people in the front, two ~140 pound people in the back and luggage. If you want to put two large bubbas in the back then you need to consider other options.

If you want to mount your Earthex on the firewall and nothing in the back you will need to get out your calculator and figure out where you will add weight. Same goes for air conditioning (as the opposite effect).

What I find useful is taking the W&B from an RV similar to what I’m building (same model, same engine, same prop, etc.) and a sharp pencil to manipulate the base data and reflect what you want to do, then evaluate the outcome. I did this on the last project (RV-8) to decide one battery mounted in the forward baggage well and one mounted in the normal aft location.

Carl

 

[rocketman1988]

Note that about everything you load in an rv-10 move the cg aft. In a lot of cases, this will mean that you will reach aft cg limits before you reach gross weight, limiting your max weight. As Carl said, putting bigger folks in front will help but may not be enough.

As my engine makes near 300hp, I went with the heavier MTV-9 prop. I also went with dual EarthX batteries in the stock location. This leads to a solo cg right on the forward cg limit. I typically carry ballast in this situation to move the cg back. The airplane has no issues carrying the ballast and it flies even better around center cg. As others have said, collapsible water cubes work really well to hold ballast. In this configuration, I will almost always reach gross weight before aft cg limit, and am able to utilize all of the aircraft's performance.

 

[rocketman1988]

It seems that for most RV's a W&B strategy is needed to gain maximum loads and improve the "feel" of the airframe. RV's that have the CG's more forward just feels "awkward or clumsy?". CG's more aft feel more agile (Keeping it within the limits). For the 10 there are multiple ways to alter CG as some have referenced including composite props, (Mine is ~ 24 lbs. lighter than a 2 bladed metal prop) using no pad mount alternator (Would not recommend this but the new Monks Work alternator is significantly lighter than the B&C pad mount) The use of Earth X batteries reduces aft weight but many are going with A/C to help this. I added O2 to give me slightly more weight to the rear. One weight shifting techniques that you will need to investigate is the use of Sky-Tec's lightweight starter. (Current needed to perform a start higher than most starters due to its design) You can even save a few lbs. forward by going with a 40-amp alternator (Load dependent) in place of the 60 amp. Best advise out there is obtain a few 10's W&B and find out the details of the equipment and then modify to your desired equipment keeping into consideration the more passengers and baggage added the CG always moves aft.

Below is my theoretical W&B for the 10. I did the same for the 14 and it was very close. (The arm for the fuel is not per Vans data but uses a variable arm dependent on amount of fuel, FYI)

I am not sure why you would want to make the nose lighter on an RV-10; there is no practical way to move the cg forward when loading, therefore, you WILL reach the aft cg limit before you reach the gross weight if you have a light nose in an RV-10.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

I am not sure why you would want to make the nose lighter on an RV-10; there is no practical way to move the cg forward when loading, therefore, you WILL reach the aft cg limit before you reach the gross weight if you have a light nose in an RV-10.

THIS ^^^^^

Altering an RV-10 CG for better flying qualities when flying at lighter weights or only front seats filled will (not, might) effect the utility capability that the airplane was originally designed for.
I am confused why people that do so, chose to build an RV-10. They either lack understanding of what they are doing, or they should have built a different airplane.
Temporary ballast in the baggage area is the proper solution when loading produces a far fwd CG.

 

[airguy]

THIS ^^^^^

I am confused why people that do so, chose to build an RV-10. They either lack understanding of what they are doing, or they should have built a different airplane.

Far too many people today are building 10's simply because they are "the biggest and the best" without really considering the design goal of the airplane, or their realistic mission profile. "I want" has taken over from "I need".

 

[dmattmul]

I am not sure why you would want to make the nose lighter on an RV-10; there is no practical way to move the cg forward when loading, therefore, you WILL reach the aft cg limit before you reach the gross weight if you have a light nose in an RV-10.

I was only TRYING to point out that you can alter weights fore and aft with changes to your equipment. This requires a strategy and understanding one's mission. Later if a strategy changes you can easily go with a heavier prop, heavier alternators, etc. Let's take it at that, I'm sure everyone has better things to do.

 

[dmattmul]

THIS ^^^^^

Altering an RV-10 CG for better flying qualities when flying at lighter weights or only front seats filled will (not, might) effect the utility capability that the airplane was originally designed for.
I am confused why people that do so, chose to build an RV-10. They either lack understanding of what they are doing, or they should have built a different airplane.
Temporary ballast in the baggage area is the proper solution when loading produces a far fwd CG.

No, the 10 is perfect for what I need, but thanks for the concern (With room to fit comfortably 2 people in the front and 2 grandchildren and a decent baggage area) Or which is more likely 2 people in the front and 2 scooters in the back plus a decent baggage area.

 

[dmattmul]

One of my goals was to not need to add weight to the airframe to control W&B. (Something about hurting performance) If I need to I will. My airframe my preference. We work to take a pound or two off very hard, why add 50 pounds of water if you don't need to for 90% for one's mission profiles? Of course one needs to plan for the worst. Will my nose come out to be 330 lbs., doubtful but need to have a plan. Judging by multiple W&B's I've seen it might, so I need to understand what that implies. One needs a strategy. Unless I fat fingered a number or captured the incorrect XLS here are my typical scenarios. I am ok with these. (If I did not fat finger a number)

 

[BobTurner]

….Below is my theoretical W&B for the 10. I did the same for the 14 and it was very close. (The arm for the fuel is not per Vans data but uses a variable arm dependent on amount of fuel, FYI)

Would you mind posting (or PM) your fuel arm vs fuel weight data or algorithm? (RV10). I’d like to incorporate this in my W&B spreadsheet. Are these numbers measured or calculated?

 

[RNB]

Well, what I seem to be getting here is how some RV10 pilots geek out over the performance envelop edge case re:W&B

 

[rocketman1988]

I was only TRYING to point out that you can alter weights fore and aft with changes to your equipment. This requires a strategy and understanding one's mission. Later if a strategy changes you can easily go with a heavier prop, heavier alternators, etc. Let's take it at that, I'm sure everyone has better things to do.

Didn’t mean to offend, sorry.

The point was that it very difficult to move the cg forward in the -10, and very easy to move it aft. You are correct though, your airframe your choice.

 

[Kyle Boatright]

Well, what I seem to be getting here is how some RV10 pilots geek out over the performance envelop edge case re:W&B

Not really. A forward CG really hinders your ability to fly slow or flare without needing to apply a fair amount of muscle to the stick. So people put ballast in the back when flying 1 or 2 up. On the other hand, with 4 people in the airplane and baggage, you can exceed the aft CG limit. So the compromise is to use ballast to manage the forward CG and to keep close track of the CG when you're flying with 4 and baggage. All airplanes have limitations, Managing around those isn't pedantry

 

[Auburntsts]

I use my EFB’s W&B function (GarminPilot in my case) to calculate W&B. It’s fast and easy to use and I can “what if” to my hearts desire. My 10 is pretty stock so as a result I made no build decisions with W&B in mind. Using ballast as required is simple and gives tremendous flexibility without compromising performance.

 

[BobTurner]

Well, what I seem to be getting here is how some RV10 pilots geek out over the performance envelop edge case re:W&B

Not sure I would say ‘geek out’, but maybe that’s the right word. e.g., I know there are some unknown errors in my empty cg calculation (scale accuracy mostly, reading tape measures, etc) so why not improve those I can? What I do not know is how much tolerance Vans built into their recommended numbers. What I do know is that if I take off close to a cg limit, then fly for a few hours, I’ll be landing out of cg limits. So my wt&B spreadsheet automatically calculates zero fuel cg, and flags it if it’s out of limits. Is this ‘geeking it out’? If so, I plead guilty.

 

[BobTurner]

Measured and then some calculations (On my 14A (same wing) with another OCD engineer checking it on his 14) cell should read =108.9-((C15-5)*(1.22/45)) with C15 being total gals on board. If one sees a flaw let us know. This should also work for the ER tanks by Sky Design?

Would appreciate a PM or post here (Uless there is a specific post I missed) Nose, left and right wheel weights (For a 10) and equipment used. (prop, alternators, mods)

Like I've said just trying to make a plan using my preferences for how I want to load the 10.

Thanks

I have sent you a ‘conversation’, which I guess is the new PM.

 

[lr172]

2. Loading - when the -10 is near its forward cg range you will run out of elevator on landing. I don’t recall the Cessna doing this.

My 10 requires AFT ballast with just me on board, so I frequently fly at the extreme FWD CG position. I have NEVER run out of elevator in the landing or flaring phase and i often come with an aggressive decent rate and pull hard to flare. It is a bit alarming on your first few flights, as the nose is pointed way down on final, but will have full control authority. In case you were referring to trim, I also have plenty of up trim available there as well to fly final hands off.

AV8ER, I recommend checking your rigging or control system, as I am pretty confident that Van would not design a plane with inadequate elev authority anywhere in the prescribed envelope, as that is just plain dangerous. You can get in real trouble landing without enough ele to arrest your decent. If it is a trim issue. you CAN re-rig that to allow the necessary up trim for hands off, though I don't typically use full up trim as it creates A LOT of push force on a go around. It is just a balancing issue, as you need very little down trim available. However, the factory manual is not really correct for setting up the trim system and will make it harder to get a balance. Tim olsens site offers a MUCH better alternative for rigging the ele trim.

Larry

 

[thodgdon]

Note that about everything you load in an rv-10 move the cg aft. In a lot of cases, this will mean that you will reach aft cg limits before you reach gross weight, limiting your max weight. As Carl said, putting bigger folks in front will help but may not be enough.

As my engine makes near 300hp, I went with the heavier MTV-9 prop. I also went with dual EarthX batteries in the stock location. This leads to a solo cg right on the forward cg limit. I typically carry ballast in this situation to move the cg back. The airplane has no issues carrying the ballast and it flies even better around center cg. As others have said, collapsible water cubes work really well to hold ballast. In this configuration, I will almost always reach gross weight before aft cg limit, and am able to utilize all of the aircraft's performance.

For ballast, we’ve always flown around with a small-ish parts box strapped down in the baggage area, containing just about every part we could replace on a remote ramp - and a tool set limited to those tools needed for a ramp repair