What's new
Van's Air Force

The definitive Van's Aircraft support community! Buying, building or flying an RV? Join our exclusive family of mentors and enthusiasts!

Revised RV-10

Michael Wellenzohn

Michael Wellenzohn

Well Known Member
In an kitplane article they write about Van’s was also showing a heavily revised RV-10, the actual first prototype, at the show… does anyone has more insight what changes have been introduced?

Mike
 
What I noticed was a 3-blade prop, new Evoke paint job, and a bunch of interior options including much of the Aerosport lines and upgraded pedals. The fuel valve was not stock but not Andair.
 
Michael Wellenzohn said:
In an kitplane article they write about Van’s was also showing a heavily revised RV-10, the actual first prototype, at the show… does anyone has more insight what changes have been introduced?

Mike
Click to expand...

They poured a bunch of money and effort into the interior, paint, and possibly the panel. Also they added a 3 blade prop and split the lower cowl into 2 halves for easier removal/installation around the 3 blade prop. The airplane now presents as a high end example of the type, rather than a somewhat plain and shopworn 20 year old prototype.
 
Here are some photos.
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20240723_164257887.jpg
    PXL_20240723_164257887.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 333
  • PXL_20240723_164252801.jpg
    PXL_20240723_164252801.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 359
  • PXL_20240723_164204116.jpg
    PXL_20240723_164204116.jpg
    2.9 MB · Views: 364
  • PXL_20240723_164103522.jpg
    PXL_20240723_164103522.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 381
kirkbauer said:
What I noticed was a 3-blade prop, new Evoke paint job, and a bunch of interior options including much of the Aerosport lines and upgraded pedals. The fuel valve was not stock but not Andair.
Click to expand...
It is an evoke paint scheme design, but the actual paint job was done by the in-house crew that paints all of the production RV-12’s.
 
The fuel valve looks like it is a Newton design instead of the Andair design. I hope the supplier can produce in a more reliable rate than Andair
 
71459 said:
The quality of the paint may be good, but the colors and paint scheme is an eyesore. When will we climb out of the "any random set of swoopy lines" rut?
Click to expand...

The colors and paint scheme are what’s popular right now - seems many newly painted aircraft look like that. It’s flashy and people spending a good percentage of a $400K bill apparently want flashy!

To each their own!!!
 
I like it very much. The interior is great and the paint looks good in the pictures. Makes me want a 10!
 
Michael Wellenzohn said:
Thanks all so no structural changes or aerodynamic improvements.
Click to expand...
If so, which appears to be the case (with all development efforts going into the RV-15), I think Vans is missing an opportunity. I know a G2 RV-10 with +200lbs GW increase, extended range fuel as standard and build time improvements would be a wind. Possibly spending some effort on improving the flutter margin and converting Vne from TAS to IAS would be worthwhile as well.
 
I flew that ship with Mike Seager for a checkout and high performance sign off back when it was straight out of the factory and enough hours that the motor was replaced shortly after. It was truly basic! A lot of people got checked out in that ship. Nice to see it decked out like some of the best.
 
“…Possibly spending some effort on improving the flutter margin and converting Vne from TAS to IAS would be worthwhile as well.”

The margin is there to keep you safe.

What reason would you have to use IAS for Vne? Would you prefer a chart based on altitude for your IAS limit instead of one TAS number?
 
rocketman1988 said:
“…Possibly spending some effort on improving the flutter margin and converting Vne from TAS to IAS would be worthwhile as well.”

The margin is there to keep you safe.

What reason would you have to use IAS for Vne? Would you prefer a chart based on altitude for your IAS limit instead of one TAS number?
Click to expand...
I understand the current margin is there to keep you safe. I'm suggesting increasing it, to allow for turbocharging in the -10. I recognize that is a fair bit of effort, and honestly probably not worth it from Van's perspective (fair bit of risk, and they probably won't sell more kits). Personally I'd rather have the +200lb GW increase, given how most 10's are fitted out these days, in order to keep the airframe a true 4 seater with the factory 60 gallon tanks.

As to Vne in IAS vs. TAS, typically for light GA aircraft that don't travel in the flight levels, Vne is given in IAS. Cirrus do the same for the SR22T, but amend it for higher altitudes (page 30 of this POH: https://takeflightsandiego.com/assets/documents/SR22T G5 POH.pdf). That's a holdover from lack of instrumentation to give you TAS, but I'm sure you know that.
 
Yeah, flutter analysis would be more than a little work, and very little return on investment.

So if IAS Vne is a holdover due to lack of instrumentation, as you say, why perpetuate it?

As has been detailed many times in many forums, aircraft design is ALWAYS a compromise. Van struck a wonderful balance but it is still a compromise. If you are looking for an aircraft with a high top speed and flight into the higher altitudes, the solution is to find a different aircraft that was designed FOR that mission.

Someone once said that the best way to increase the speed of a C-172 was to sell it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top