Talk me out of buying a RV10

[CactusPilot]

Click bate worked?

Hello guys and gals. I'm new to the forum and after 30 years of flying someone else's aircraft for a living, I'm looking into purchasing an aircraft. I've been doing a ton of research and I always end up back at the Van's RV-10. I have 2 boys interested in flying and the oldest (20) is working on on PPL and I though it would be great to buy and airplane and fly together. Not just for training and building time, but taking family trips and making memories. The Van's RV-10 seems to be a fit for our needs. Any thoughts, advice or words of wisdom would be appreciated. If you have one for sale, I would be very interested also.

Thanks in advance!

 

[moespeeds]

No

 

[bkervaski]

I second @moespeeds, all in favor?

 

[dan.gagnon85]

I second @moespeeds, all in favor?

I think this is the right answer

 

[benjaman]

In favor. Do it.

Next question.

 

[bruceh]

Why not BUILD an RV-10 instead of buy? It's one life choice you won't regret doing.

 

[D-Dubya]

Why not BUILD an RV-10 instead of buy? It's one life choice you won't regret doing.

Or...BUY one used and then BUILD! Enjoy the time flying now with the family and build the exact one you want in the meanwhile. Of course, that's assuming that building is something you'd enjoy. Go to a weekend build school or help someone else with their project. If you find you can't wait for the next build session, there's your answer. If it seems like pure drudgery, then there's your other answer. It's just money. Well, a lot of money.

 

[Quotafiller]

fly !!! build only if you are bored silly and your time is worth fifty cents an hour

 

[Dugaru]

Build while flying. We’ve been doing it for 25 years!!

 

[dmattmul]

Build while flying. We’ve been doing it for 25 years!!

That's what it takes. The 10 is a monster to build!! Easily twice many hours as a 14, but worth it !! (The fiberglass cabin top is difficult)

 

[CactusPilot]

Why not BUILD an RV-10 instead of buy? It's one life choice you won't regret doing.

Man, I would love to, but it would take too long. I'm still actively flying for a major airline and my son is taking lessons now. From what I understand, it takes around 2300 hours to build a RV-10, that would take me over 5 years.

 

[dmattmul]

Man, I would love to, but it would take too long. I'm still actively flying for major airline and my son is taking lessons now. From what I understand, it takes around 2300 hours to build an RV-10, that would take me over 5 years.

2,300 hours is a pipe dream even for QB's. Wish it was true. You are being realistic.

 

[moespeeds]

I've built and bought. I'm mechanically inclined, and love working with my hands, but Just buy. Build later in life when you've got all the time in the world, but ALWAYS have something to fly!

 

[Ironflight]

If you can afford an RV-10 then start shopping - I can’t think of any reason not to! beware that they are pricey machines complete - but for family traveling, they are hard to beat. A finished one will serve you well as-is, or you can make it your own with modifications.

I always say that you should only build if you have a deep, burning desire - that you might not even understand - to build. If you want an airplane, buy an airplane. If you have to have a project…then build.

 

[lr172]

I love my 10. While i do fly it a lot with two people, i have done many family trips. It is an EXCELLENT cross country machine. Pleasure to fly, but not to the sporty level that two seaters are. I have done 5+ hour legs and was comfortable the whole time. Very stable IFR platform. I also have a 6. That is the plane i fly when I want to have an hour of fun. A much different flying experience. One the flip side, i am screaming to get out of it after 3 hours. It is just not that comfortable for longer flights. Much less stable, so autopilot is a requirement on x cty flights or ifr.

Also roomy. I pulled my rear seats and got the entire contents of my sons dorm room in that plane.

 

[Tall_Order]

Not just for training and building time, but taking family trips and making memories. The Van's RV-10 seems to be a fit for our needs. Any thoughts, advice or words of wisdom

Training and building time: 2 seater?

Family Trips: Business Class Airline... or perhaps rent a larger GA plane on those ones

You'll prob come out way ahead $$$ wise... unless you do a LOT of aviation family trips

 

[AviatorJ]

When I finish my 14, I’ll sell you my 10…. I’m just on the horizontal stab so it might be a few years. Or when I finish my F1 then I’ll sell you my 14…. That’s probably pushing a decade or so.

 

[woxofswa]

Buying Used: Van's RV-10 - KITPLANES

On a scale of 1–10, most owners rate it an 11.

www.kitplanes.com

 

[Dr_Dave_MT]

Man, I would love to, but it would take too long. I'm still actively flying for a major airline and my son is taking lessons now. From what I understand, it takes around 2300 hours to build a RV-10, that would take me over 5 years.

Man, I would love to, but it would take too long. I'm still actively flying for a major airline and my son is taking lessons now. From what I understand, it takes around 2300 hours to build a RV-10, that would take me over 5 years.

You know your gonna be 5-yrs older in 5 years anyway….

 

[kirkbauer]

Why not BUILD an RV-10 instead of buy? It's one life choice you won't regret doing.

I regret it right now (working on the doors!) but will probably be happy when it's done! Bought into an existing RV-10 and am flying it while I build my own.

 

[bkervaski]

@CactusPilot came to the wrong place for discouragement

 

[CactusPilot]

@CactusPilot came to the wrong place for discouragement

No, I appreciate all the comments. I've been away from GA flying for many years and always wanted to get back in to it. As a few have suggested, yes, I may build, while I fly with my son later when I retire, but I need a completed aircraft soon. I just dont want to miss out flying with him now as he is almost done with his PPL. He will need to build some hours and we can do "cross-countries" together visiting family accross the US.
I do have a (dormant) A&P License that may help me along the way as I get more comfortable to tinker again. Im looking forward to more input.
I was just contacted by a member that may have one for sale. He just finished it, his 2nd build and is awaiting FAA inspection. Getting excited again like the day I solo'ed.

 

[rocketman1988]

No, I appreciate all the comments. I've been away from GA flying for many years and always wanted to get back in to it. As a few have suggested, yes, I may build, while I fly with my son later when I retire, but I need a completed aircraft soon. I just dont want to miss out flying with him now as he is almost done with his PPL. He will need to build some hours and we can do "cross-countries" together visiting family accross the US.
I do have a (dormantl A&P License that may help me along the way as I get more comfortable to tinker again. Im looking forward to more input.
I was just contacted by a member that may have one for sale. He just finished it, his 2nd build and is awaiting FAA inspection. Getting excited again like the day I solo'ed.

One thing to note. When you are building time with your son, the key is building time; you do not need to be going 175 ktas. You can actually slow way down, burn less gas and more time…and you get to spend more time with your son!

 

[georgemohr]

Do all the things others have suggested, then just buy it anyway

 

[Ezburton]

Reminds my of Chick-Fil-A... Eat more chicken!

If money isn't an issue... I suspect the RV10 is a great plane (there is an RV12 for sale listed at $795,000 - but that might be a typo). There aren't a lot of 4 seat experimental aircraft... (all I can think of off the top of my head: Express, Moose, Velocity, RV10, Lancair IV, Foxtrot4, Sling, BD something....

I went with the Velocity for a few reasons... My 4 seat SE with fixed gear and an IO360 with a fixed pitch Catto prop cruises at 155 KTAS (that's 180 mph for you Vans guys...) , has a 1000 lb useful load, burns < 8 gph with 50 gallon capacity and costs $150-200k less than a -10. A Velocity XL is 5" wider than the SE, but you have to have a 6 cylinder motor and constant speed prop which adds to the expenses ($75k buy in, ~14gph, plus maintenance), but increases the cruise speed to >200 KTAS (230 mph in Vans speak). Even an after market Velocity Twin is less than or at least comparable in price to an RV10... just twice the maintenance and no improvement in cruise speed over the XL.

The drawbacks of the Velocity are the high takeoff/landing distances (they have no flaps), no grass runway operations due to the pusher prop, limited back seat visibility, hull insurance cost (probably about the same as an -10) and every time you land someone always walks up and want to talk about the plane, when all you want to do is go to the bathroom.

The Lancair IV and IVP will out perform an RV10 as well, but is nearly impossible to insure these days, which is why I think their prices are dropping.

So it depends on your mission and your money. The RV10 is definitely the most numerous of all. I suspect that is because Vans did kits right. But once it's built... you have to judge it by its numbers. However, there are intangibles to consider, like the support of the company and the builder community, which is another big advantage for Vans.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program...

 

[Tim 8-A]

I'm flying my 4th RV, I love projects but not long projects, buy it, fly it, make if your own. I Started with an 8a updated the paint, interior and Panel flew it 400 hours then sold it and moved into a 10, updated the panel and interior flew it for 8 years then sold it. Moved back into an 8a updated the panel, wife hates it I love it, so now I'm back in a 10. I've made changes to every one of them that's why I love Experimental, and they all have appreciated.

 

[Dr_Dave_MT]

Reminds my of Chick-Fil-A... Eat more chicken!

If money isn't an issue... I suspect the RV10 is a great plane (there is an RV12 for sale listed at $795,000 - but that might be a typo). There aren't a lot of 4 seat experimental aircraft... (all I can think of off the top of my head: Express, Moose, Velocity, RV10, Lancair IV, Foxtrot4, Sling, BD something....

I went with the Velocity for a few reasons... My 4 seat SE with fixed gear and an IO360 with a fixed pitch Catto prop cruises at 155 KTAS (that's 180 mph for you Vans guys...) , has a 1000 lb useful load, burns < 8 gph with 50 gallon capacity and costs $150-200k less than a -10. A Velocity XL is 5" wider than the SE, but you have to have a 6 cylinder motor and constant speed prop which adds to the expenses ($75k buy in, ~14gph, plus maintenance), but increases the cruise speed to >200 KTAS (230 mph in Vans speak). Even an after market Velocity Twin is less than or at least comparable in price to an RV10... just twice the maintenance and no improvement in cruise speed over the XL.

The drawbacks of the Velocity are the high takeoff/landing distances (they have no flaps), no grass runway operations due to the pusher prop, limited back seat visibility, hull insurance cost (probably about the same as an -10) and every time you land someone always walks up and want to talk about the plane, when all you want to do is go to the bathroom.

The Lancair IV and IVP will out perform an RV10 as well, but is nearly impossible to insure these days, which is why I think their prices are dropping.

So it depends on your mission and your money. The RV10 is definitely the most numerous of all. I suspect that is because Vans did kits right. But once it's built... you have to judge it by its numbers. However, there are intangibles to consider, like the support of the company and the builder community, which is another big advantage for Vans.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program...

Chick-Fil-A. Saw their Falcon 900 in a maintenance facility. The nose wheel door had written on it, in the Chick-Fil-A type style, “Moo Force One”

 

[RV7Guy]

I just purchased Myron's RV10 and only have about 6 hours in it. Loving the room and AC. We have a few trips planned and I'm sure we'll wish we had gotten a 10 many years ago. I've built two 7's and they are great but not roomy. I don't think you'll be disappointed going with a 10.

 

[Roadjunkie1]

Man, I would love to, but it would take too long. I'm still actively flying for a major airline and my son is taking lessons now. From what I understand, it takes around 2300 hours to build a RV-10, that would take me over 5 years.

Yeah. And.......well.............so?

 

[Taltruda]

Reminds my of Chick-Fil-A... Eat more chicken!

If money isn't an issue... I suspect the RV10 is a great plane (there is an RV12 for sale listed at $795,000 - but that might be a typo). There aren't a lot of 4 seat experimental aircraft... (all I can think of off the top of my head: Express, Moose, Velocity, RV10, Lancair IV, Foxtrot4, Sling, BD something....

I went with the Velocity for a few reasons... My 4 seat SE with fixed gear and an IO360 with a fixed pitch Catto prop cruises at 155 KTAS (that's 180 mph for you Vans guys...) , has a 1000 lb useful load, burns < 8 gph with 50 gallon capacity and costs $150-200k less than a -10. A Velocity XL is 5" wider than the SE, but you have to have a 6 cylinder motor and constant speed prop which adds to the expenses ($75k buy in, ~14gph, plus maintenance), but increases the cruise speed to >200 KTAS (230 mph in Vans speak). Even an after market Velocity Twin is less than or at least comparable in price to an RV10... just twice the maintenance and no improvement in cruise speed over the XL.

The drawbacks of the Velocity are the high takeoff/landing distances (they have no flaps), no grass runway operations due to the pusher prop, limited back seat visibility, hull insurance cost (probably about the same as an -10) and every time you land someone always walks up and want to talk about the plane, when all you want to do is go to the bathroom.

The Lancair IV and IVP will out perform an RV10 as well, but is nearly impossible to insure these days, which is why I think their prices are dropping.

So it depends on your mission and your money. The RV10 is definitely the most numerous of all. I suspect that is because Vans did kits right. But once it's built... you have to judge it by its numbers. However, there are intangibles to consider, like the support of the company and the builder community, which is another big advantage for Vans.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program...

While I haven’t flown a -10 yet, I hear they feel very similar to all the other RVs, which fly so sweet. They are balanced in pitch and roll, you can just go buzz around to watch the sunset.. or work the pattern, or fly formation.. the only Velocity that I flew was a gorgeous XL-RG with the 540. It was so heavy in roll, I thought I was fighting the autopilot. Huge takeoff roll, long landing, not really what I would call a “fun” airplane to fly. More like a long distance hauler. It didn’t climb well, and we were light on fuel with only two on board. Although it was 180 to 185 KTAS or so, the RVs seem to all go 170-180 knots. I was really hoping the Velocity flew better, but I was disappointed.. Can you land your Velocity in 25 knot x-winds? How about taking off? Or do you have to drag so much brake to stay straight?

 

[scarlson]

Click bate worked?

Hello guys and gals. I'm new to the forum and after 30 years of flying someone else's aircraft for a living, I'm looking into purchasing an aircraft. I've been doing a ton of research and I always end up back at the Van's RV-10. I have 2 boys interested in flying and the oldest (20) is working on on PPL and I though it would be great to buy and airplane and fly together. Not just for training and building time, but taking family trips and making memories. The Van's RV-10 seems to be a fit for our needs. Any thoughts, advice or words of wisdom would be appreciated. If you have one for sale, I would be very interested also.

Thanks in advance!

I owned a 10, wonderful airplane, flies like most 2 seat RV's. I sold it because, like most of us, I didn't fly as many cross country trips as originally planned. I'm back in a 2 seat RV and happy. It sounds like you need to define the mission a little better. Flying with your son while he builds time can be done with a 2 seater for a lot less money; insurance might also be an issue.

 

[Kyle Boatright]

While I haven’t flown a -10 yet, I hear they feel very similar to all the other RVs, which fly so sweet.

They fly well, but relative to the 2 seaters, they are heavy on the controls and not nearly as responsive. That's what you'd expect for a family cruiser, I think.

I will add that the -10 is a very easy to fly airplane. Stable, lands well, good takeoff performance.

 

[Ezburton]

While I haven’t flown a -10 yet, I hear they feel very similar to all the other RVs, which fly so sweet. They are balanced in pitch and roll, you can just go buzz around to watch the sunset.. or work the pattern, or fly formation.. the only Velocity that I flew was a gorgeous XL-RG with the 540. It was so heavy in roll, I thought I was fighting the autopilot. Huge takeoff roll, long landing, not really what I would call a “fun” airplane to fly. More like a long distance hauler. It didn’t climb well, and we were light on fuel with only two on board. Although it was 180 to 185 KTAS or so, the RVs seem to all go 170-180 knots. I was really hoping the Velocity flew better, but I was disappointed.. Can you land your Velocity in 25 knot x-winds? How about taking off? Or do you have to drag so much brake to stay straight?

I agree with all of this. The Velocity is the Family Truckster of canard aircraft. It is much more responsive than a Piper or Cessna, but not nearly as much as the Cozy and Long EZ (or RV). After the panel change to glass, I replaced the 35# lead acid battery in the nose with a 4# EarthX. This put me at the aft CG limit with me and no fuel (anything you add to this plane drives the CG forward... people, bags, fuel...). The handling qualities got much better.

I normally climb >1000 fpm at MSL and mid weights. The best performing Velocity (IMO) is the original with the hatch door. The flying qualities are better and the plane is faster. But wife wanted her own door and adjustable seats.

This weekend I landed at Cape May NJ with a 14 gusting to 24. The most I have landed this plane in was a >20 kt direct cross wind. Rudders are effective above 20 kts, and are normally enough to takeoff in a xwind without dragging a brake (cheat with the nose pointed off center and into the wind to avoid using the breaks prior 20kts). Landing in a crab and transition to wing down into the wind is challenging. Shortest field for takeoff and landing is about 2800' without exceeding maximum pucker factor. It would be shorter with a constant speed prop.

Again.. it depends on your mission. My Long EZ was a sports car which I traded in for a minivan which is just as fast, 1.5gph more, but with room for 4. Mission changed...

 

[BoydBirchler]

A low time well built and equipped RV10 will do what a Cirrus will do (if the RV has additional aux fuel tanks). It's cost is going to be half or less of what a low time Cirrus SR22 would be if equally equipped. The cost of insuring and maintaining will be substantially less. That is why they are pricy...

 

[RV-9erA]

You would probably be happier with something more efficient and less costly, like a well equipped RV-9A. I find two seats plus baggage space works 98% of the time!

 

[CactusPilot]

Thanks for the input gang. My mission is not only to build time and fly with my son's, but my wife is actually showing some interest about flying in our own and exploring different destinations. It would be great to be able have family trips in our own airplane with my son sitting in the left seat. The 10 seems to be a true cross-country bird with a proven record. I've had some suggesting the Sling STI, but I keep leaning towards the 10.

 

[rolivi]

If I ever switch from the 6A, it will be a Commander or a Saratoga. (one or both are herecy to write on this forum)

 

[RV-9erA]

Thanks for the input gang. My mission is not only to build time and fly with my son's, but my wife is actually showing some interest about flying in our own and exploring different destinations. It would be great to be able have family trips in our own airplane with my son sitting in the left seat. The 10 seems to be a true cross-country bird with a proven record. I've had some suggesting the Sling STI, but I keep leaning towards the 10.

Cactus Pilot -- maybe US Airways? Your post reminds me of how my wife discovered the joy of aviation starting in our early 20's. Photos below show Vivian's first flight with me in a rented PA-28-161 in 1982, then us buying our first Beechcraft C23 Sundowner in 1987, then Vivian earning her own pilot's license in 1992, and then her helping me build our Van's RV-9A from 2000 to 2004, and then us test flying our new ship with Vivian at my side on October 31, 2004. After that, traveling to many wonderful destinations across our country, and she's still flying with as much joy as her first flight even into our retirement!

 

[CactusPilot]

Cactus Pilot -- maybe US Airways? Your post reminds me of how my wife discovered the joy of aviation starting in our early 20's. Photos below show Vivian's first flight with me in a rented PA-28-161 in 1982, then us buying our first Beechcraft C23 Sundowner in 1987, then Vivian earning her own pilot's license in 1992, and then her helping me build our Van's RV-9A from 2000 to 2004, and then us test flying our new ship with Vivian at my side on October 31, 2004. After that, traveling to many wonderful destinations across our country, and she's still flying with as much joy as her first flight even into our retirement! TH

I am original “Cactus” pilot. Started with America West Airlines. Thanks for sharing. Wow, what a great progression. This is exactly what I had in mind. Those memories are etched in stone. I cant wait to have a similar story with my boys.

 

[F18Sailor]

I won't talk you out of a RV-10 if the money isn't an issue. I will say that my wife and I had a long conversation before I switched to shopping for an RV-7A or RV-9A and for now (no kids), we're very happy with the 9A. Its less about the hourly cost (fuel, oil, engine reserve), and more about the upfront cost. $200k gets you into a nice, albeit slightly older 2 seat RV. I haven't seen a 10 for a fly-away price of less than $300k, and most of those need something (higher time engine, dated avionics). $350-$400k is probably more realistic. We could afford it, but decided that money is better put towards trips and other activities. Yes, the -10 is comparable to a Cirrus in performance for ~1/2 the price, but still a big chunk of change, with the associated increase in insurance. I would go so far as to say your son is uninsurable in an RV-10 without you in the right seat until he gets 250hrs.

For reference, based on me (no accident history, most time is in an AA5B), RV-10, $300k hull:
200hrs TT, instrument rated, 0 time in type: $25,503/annum
250hrs TT, instrument rated, 0 time in type: $6,398.00/annum.

R-9A, $180K ground and flight:
200hrs TT, instrument rated, 0 time in type: $1667.00

Ask an insurance broker, but I suspect your son would be insurable in a 2 seater in much less time and for much lower cost. Rent (I know, blasphemy) a Cirrus or a Bonanza if you need to take the whole family!

 

[RV-9erA]

I won't talk you out of a RV-10 if the money isn't an issue. I will say that my wife and I had a long conversation before I switched to shopping for an RV-7A or RV-9A and for now (no kids), we're very happy with the 9A. Its less about the hourly cost (fuel, oil, engine reserve), and more about the upfront cost. $200k gets you into a nice, albeit slightly older 2 seat RV. I haven't seen a 10 for a fly-away price of less than $300k, and most of those need something (higher time engine, dated avionics). $350-$400k is probably more realistic. We could afford it, but decided that money is better put towards trips and other activities. Yes, the -10 is comparable to a Cirrus in performance for ~1/2 the price, but still a big chunk of change, with the associated increase in insurance. I would go so far as to say your son is uninsurable in an RV-10 without you in the right seat until he gets 250hrs.

For reference, based on me (no accident history, most time is in an AA5B), RV-10, $300k hull:
200hrs TT, instrument rated, 0 time in type: $25,503/annum
250hrs TT, instrument rated, 0 time in type: $6,398.00/annum.

R-9A, $180K ground and flight:
200hrs TT, instrument rated, 0 time in type: $1667.00

Ask an insurance broker, but I suspect your son would be insurable in a 2 seater in much less time and for much lower cost. Rent (I know, blasphemy) a Cirrus or a Bonanza if you need to take the whole family!

Or you could do this and save lots of money! And, with QuickBuild options, pre-punched, final-drilled holes on RV-10 kits, and with the many panel builders out there now, things could go a whole lot faster than it did for us on our 9'er (2500 hours and 4-years from dream to reality), but we built everything including the panel. Many kit builders use builder assistance centers, too. Another option is to find a builder wanting to sell a nearly completed airframe, then you add the engine, panel and paint job of your choice. Those are the pricey parts, so some builders simply don't have the funds to finish but have done a nice job on their airframe! Just noticed an RV-9A airframe on VAF that someone's looking to sell.

 

[RV-9erA]

Keep your dream alive -- and it will happen!

BTW, I meant to ask -- what type of equipment do you fly for American Airlines? Do you fly mostly domestic or international or both? And, what's the best part of your job and the part you don't like as much? It's nice to see an airline pilot still interested in GA. We know some that stopped even after retirement and some that still love it. However, It certainly makes for a better stick-n-rudder pilot! We enjoy watching Juan Browne of the blancolirio youtube channel for that reason.

 

[larrys]

I built a14A, It was so much fun I want to build another one.

 

[RV-9erA]

I built a14A, It was so much fun I want to build another one.

Like founder, Dick VanGrunsven of Van's Aircraft always says -- "you either get to build or got to build an RV". I was in the camp of "you got to build an RV" because the RV-9A kit had just been released in early 2000 when we started, but it was well wroth the effort and happy we didn't wait until after retirement. The RV-9 and 9A have entirely different wings (Roncz Airfoil), flaps (Fowler), ailerons (Frise Differential) and horizontal stabilizer (constant chord) than previous RV's at the time. And, all the control surfaces use stronger reinforced trailing edges, which the RV-3, RV-4, RV-6 and RV-8 don't use. Many design elements in the RV-9A were incorporated into the RV-10 and now into the RV-14A. The RV-9A flies much more like a larger aircraft and is very stable on cross-country flights, but my AP and ALT Hold features are nice to have! The RV-9A accelerates, climbs and flies faster than any certified GA airplane with the same engine (O-320). So, it was nice to see the best of the RV-9A design features incorporated into newer RV models.

 

[simpsontl48]

When I finish my 14, I’ll sell you my 10…. I’m just on the horizontal stab so it might be a few years. Or when I finish my F1 then I’ll sell you my 14…. That’s probably pushing a decade or so.

What is a good price range to look for when wanting to buy a well built existing RV 10?

 

[RV-9erA]

The riveted trailing edge on the RV-9’s rudder is not stronger or torsionally stiffer than the folded trailing edges on the other models noted above. Also the riveted trailing edge may exhibit ‘zipper’ failures after the first rivet fails (See the riveted TE rudder failures at OSH during the windstorm a few years ago).

An example: Except for the first few RV-7s, the RV-9 rudder is used on the RV-7s. The RV-9s rudder is fine when used on the -7 when the structural and airspeed design limits are strictly adhered to.

But … The RV-7s have experienced eight in-flight breakups due to fin/rudder flutter when Vne was exceeded. Note that the RV-9/7 rudder was originally designed for the RV-9, which has a Vne of 210 MPH TAS. The RV-8 and RV-7 have a Vne of 230 MPH TAS.

Because of this many RV-7s with the RV-9 rudder have beed retrofitted with RV-8 rudders to increase the strength and flutter margins.

The RV-8 rudder is superior to the RV-9 rudder when used on the RV-7 because the -8 rudder provides larger strength and flutter margins in case of an inadvertent excursion outside the published flight envelope:

- The -8 rudder has thicker skins (0.020") than the -9/-7 rudder (0.016"), making the -8 rudder stronger and stiffer.​

​

- The -8 rudder has a folded trailing edge, which makes the -8 rudder stiffer and stronger than the riveted trailing edge of the -9/-7 rudder. The riveted trailing edge may exhibit ‘zipper’ failures when the first rivet fails.​

​

- The -8 rudder has less area than the -9/-7 rudder, creating smaller unsteady (oscillatory) aerodynamic forces (which are an important item in the flutter equation) than the larger -9/-7 rudder.​

I've been flying and maintaining the RV-9A I built since 2004, and have NEVER heard of what you are claiming from any of Van's service bulletins or anywhere else! Why would there not be a service bulletins on this? However, I have heard of other RV models with the "bent trialing edge" control surfaces (RV-3, RV-4, RV-6) commonly cracking on their trailing edges, and there are Vans service bulletins on that. There's a nice stiff aluminum wedge as part of the trailing edges on all RV-9A control surfaces, including the rudder, so "zipper tearing" seem HIGHLY unlikely, so I call BS on that. However, one must always respect your VNE and VNO speeds, and some pilots don't and pay the price. The RV-9A is also non-aerobatic and that needs to be respected, as well.

 

[JMiller]

I've been flying and maintaining the RV-9A I built since 2004, and have NEVER heard of what you are claiming from any of Van's service bulletins or anywhere else! Why would there not be a service bulletins on this? However, I have heard of other RV models with the "bent trialing edge" control surfaces (RV-3, RV-4, RV-6) commonly cracking on their trailing edges, and there are Vans service bulletins on that. There's a nice stiff aluminum wedge as part of the trailing edges on all RV-9A control surfaces, including the rudder, so "zipper tearing" seem HIGHLY unlikely, so I call BS on that. However, one must always respect your VNE and VNO speeds, and some pilots don't and pay the price. The RV-9A is also non-aerobatic and that needs to be respected, as well.

This thread has a lot of discussion of the folded versus riveted trailing edge.

...

...

vansairforce.net

 

[swjohnsey]

If I had that kind of money I would by a nice IFR Mooney with IO-360 and an old Citabria. Teach the boys to fly then sell the Citabria and take my wife to Australia.

 

[RV-9erA]

This thread has a lot of discussion of the folded versus riveted trailing edge.

...

...

vansairforce.net

Would you accept exceeding airframe design limits as being okay? These accidents are all RV-7's performing aerobatics, and they also read much the same as this one below. Also, how do we know the control surfaces were balanced properly after construction and paint? This oversight and exceeding VNE has brought down many other certified airplanes too over the years! Watch this NASA Piper Comanche tail flutter test video below and become a believer.

"There were no indications of any pre-existing cracks or anomalies with the airframe structures, and no pre-accident anomalies were observed that would have precluded normal control of the airplane.

Probable Cause: The pilot’s improper aerobatic maneuver leading to an airspeed that exceeded the airplane’s design limits, which resulted in rudder flutter and an in-flight breakup."

 

[RV-9erA]

I’m sorry there are some holes in your vast knowledge of RVs. It happens to the best of us!

Unfortunately, Van’s doesn't address everything in their Service Notes, Service Letters or Service Bulletins. And when they do, it’s sometimes not in a timely fashion. For example, back in 2004 Ken Krueger wrote the article titled "FLYING HIGH AND FAST: Another Reason Why More Power Is Not Always a Good Thing" and it was published in the sixth issue of the 2004 RVator. In that article Van’s effectively changed their Vne definition from IAS to TAS. Many years later Van’s issued an SN for the RV-14 stating Vne is in TAS, and included similar info in the POH for the RV-12s. But Van's did not issue any SN, SL or SB denoting the change for the legacy RVs. It wasn’t until October 2023 that Van’s issued changes to Section 15 of the PLANS that noted that Vne is in TAS now instead of IAS for the legacy RVs. It is available under the “Safety and Service Info” section of their website.

As far as the zippered rudders go that you called BS on, as I mentioned in my post, there were a few rudders that had torn rivets at the trailing edge that failed during the windstorm a few years ago at OSH. There were posts here on VAF with info and pics.

Vans Aircraft always has when it concerns "safety of flight". Performing aerobatics above VNE is clearly pilot error for exceeding design limits of the airframe. Regarding Vans service bulletin timeliness -- just look at the last service bulletin regarding the outboard hinge brackets on the horizontal stabilizer. My RV-9A looked really good (no cracks), but many especially aerobatic RV-8's and RV-7's showed cracks and needed this modification. With my old Beechcraft, it would sometimes take years to see a critical service bulletin or AD. Whereas, Vans is VERY fast when it comes to flight safety! Have you owned any certified aircraft yourself? And, did you build your RV or buy it?