RV-15 Specifications (updated 7/21 9pm CST w/ specs by dr)

[Amadeus]

What are specs for the RV-15? Has a stall speed been listed? Take off and landing distances? I can't find any details.




Preliminary Specs online:

RV-15 Back Country, the RV Way - Van's Aircraft Total Performance RV Kit Planes

www.vansaircraft.com

[ed. Preliminary Specs

Mothership: "We’re still refining the RV-15 kit, so we don’t have complete specifications. But here’s what we know so far.

• Useful load: 900+ lbs
• Stall speed: less than 45 knots
• Cruise speed: 140 knots
• Takeoff and landing distance: less than 400 feet
• Horsepower: 175-215 HP
• Current engine: Lycoming IO-390-EXP119, 215 HP"

v/r,dr]

 

[bkervaski]

There aren't any published yet, the fuselage still hash to be finalized and they are still tweaking the emp.

 

[Desert Rat]

$20,000 for a wing kit to a plane that doesn't have any of the other kits finalized, doesn't have published performance numbers, and is sold by a company that left a bunch of people holding the bag during a bankruptcy a couple of years ago? If this was anybody but Vans they'd be run out of town.

 

[JonJay]

Per AI :
Faith is generally defined as a strong belief or trust in something or someone, often without requiring concrete proof. It can refer to belief in a higher power, a set of religious or philosophical principles, or even a deep-seated confidence in one's own abilities or the promises of others.

 

[rocketman1988]

$20,000 for a wing kit to a plane that doesn't have any of the other kits finalized, doesn't have published performance numbers, and is sold by a company that left a bunch of people holding the bag during a bankruptcy a couple of years ago? If this was anybody but Vans they'd be run out of town.

Well, the people in line behind and in front of me don’t seem to have any issues…

 

[N8DAV8R]

Per AI :
Faith is generally defined as a strong belief or trust in something or someone, often without requiring concrete proof. It can refer to belief in a higher power, a set of religious or philosophical principles, or even a deep-seated confidence in one's own abilities or the promises of others.

Exactly right. Leap of faith has been the phrase of the day for me. Really, that's been true since I started my -12. I get a kick out seeing a few others more focused on stuff shoveling.

 

[scsmith]

Per AI :
Faith is generally defined as a strong belief or trust in something or someone, often without requiring concrete proof. It can refer to belief in a higher power, a set of religious or philosophical principles, or even a deep-seated confidence in one's own abilities or the promises of others.

Faith will be well-placed in the RV-15. It will have a range of capabilities that would not be able to be matched by any other airplane. The stall speed won't be the lowest, but will be low enough. The top speed won't be the highest, but it will be higher than most anything else that has comparable low-speed capabilities. Cavernous cargo bay.
Flying qualities will be classic Vans, adapted to the Utility mission. Ease of assembly, FWF and electrical kits, kit support, all will be comparable or better than the most recent of Vans kits.

 

[Nuisance]

I understand that it is too soon to know speeds etc . Do we have wingspan, wing area, length, height, etc anywhere?

Thanks, John

 

[Utah-Jay]

Rans shortened the wing on the S-21 (I flew the original 30’ wing) and they got faster, but of course lost lift. We all know more lift allows for a slower stall. I bet Vans shortens the wing from the “original” RV-15 that was previously at OSH. The -15 gear is groundbreaking, shortening the wing for more speed seems counter to a STOL type landing gear system. I hope they keep the wing length.

 

[gkochers]

Rans shortened the wing on the S-21 (I flew the original 30’ wing) and they got faster, but of course lost lift. We all know more lift allows for a slower stall. I bet Vans shortens the wing from the “original” RV-15 that was previously at OSH. The -15 gear is groundbreaking, shortening the wing for more speed seems counter to a STOL type landing gear system. I hope they keep the wing length.

The wing is final.

 

[mhcrowder]

The wing is shorter than the original designed wing, but with the integrated flap VG’s the stall speed didn’t change according to the designers.

 

[Utah-Jay]

The wing is final.

Yep…. Shorter as stated in the post above.

Shoulda kept the longer wing AND added the VG’s. That would have been the best of both worlds rather than a compromise

 

[DeltaRomeo]

Preliminary Specs online:

RV-15 Back Country, the RV Way - Van's Aircraft Total Performance RV Kit Planes

www.vansaircraft.com

Preliminary Specs
We’re still refining the RV-15 kit, so we don’t have complete specifications. But here’s what we know so far.

• Useful load: 900+ lbs
• Stall speed: less than 45 knots
• Cruise speed: 140 knots
• Takeoff and landing distance: less than 400 feet
• Horsepower: 175-215 HP
• Current engine: Lycoming IO-390-EXP119, 215 HP

 

[Ironflight]

Yep…. Shorter as stated in the post above.

Shoulda kept the longer wing AND added the VG’s. That would have been the best of both worlds rather than a compromise

Actually, I’ve flown it in several configurations, and “best” is a relative term…best for what? Teh current wing gives a nice roll rate and feel - the longer was a bit heavier. If you’re trying to make it “STOLier”, I’d ask why? I can land the airplane (and take it back off) in any distance that most pilots will ever actually use. Will it win at Valdez? Probably not…..but most of those winners are one trick ponies.

 

[dbhill916]

Totally agree w/ IronFlight. In order to use "best", "worst", etc., you can only talk about one value being measured. If you have more than one dimension, the concept of "greater than" and "less than" are mathematically meaningless. With respect to the wing length debate, take a look at the cruise:stall ratio; 140/45 = 3.1. IIRC, most airplanes only have a cruise:stall around 2 or so. I think the trick of hiding the VG's inside the flap recess was ingenious.

 

[Finley Atherton]

Interesting comparison to the RV 9.

RV 15 stall less than 45 knots. RV 9 stall 43.5 knots at gross (38 knots solo).
RV 15 cruise 140 knots. RV 9 75% cruise 163 knots.
RV 15 take off and land less then 400 ft. RV 9 gross weight take off 475 ft, land 450 ft. (300 ft and 300 ft solo).

What’s all the fuss about??? (tongue firmly in cheek)

 

[Utah-Jay]

Actually, I’ve flown it in several configurations, and “best” is a relative term…best for what? Teh current wing gives a nice roll rate and feel - the longer was a bit heavier. If you’re trying to make it “STOLier”, I’d ask why? I can land the airplane (and take it back off) in any distance that most pilots will ever actually use. Will it win at Valdez? Probably not…..but most of those winners are one trick ponies.

Thanks for the reply, I am not a STOL competitor, but I am a fisherman and go into strips as short as 700’ in Idaho so I like plenty of margin for error. My personal minimums are landing/takeoff (whichever is longer) times 2 plus 100’. So yes I like a lot of lift. I am not really into roll rate, I have seen you discuss it previously. As long as I can be at “canyon speed” and make a tight 180 I am happy. I recently finished a Bearhawk build, loving it…. But a few of us have been knocking around the idea of a group build and the -15 has always had my attention.

I am headed to Oshkosh Wednesday (plane is already there) and look forward to seeing the “new” -15

 

[plehrke]

With this wing discussion, I am Curious how long it will take for an entrepreneur to take a few ribs worth of length out of the wingspan and “rocket” it to 160 kts to open the market to Tailwind and Monocoupe people.

 

[Ironflight]

Thanks for the reply, I am not a STOL competitor, but I am a fisherman and go into strips as short at 700’ in Idaho so I like plenty of margin for error. My personal minimums are landing/takeoff (whichever is longer) times 2 plus 100’. So yes I like a lot of lift. I am not really into roll rate, I have seen you discuss it previously. As long as I can be at “canyon speed” and make a tight 180 I am happy. I recently finished a Bearhawk build, loving it…. But a few of us have been knocking around the idea of a group build and the -15 has always had my attention.

I am headed to Oshkosh Wednesday (plane is already there) and looks forward to seeing the “new” -15

I think you’ve got a good handle on your personal requirements….many folks don’t! I’m guessing that when the final specs come out, you’ll find tat the -15 will meet them based on teh flying I’ve done with it. I’ve flown several of the BearHawk models into small places like you talk about, and the -15 is well capable of the same performance. the nice thing about the “RV-like” handling qualities is if you’re maneuvering in that canyon and have to come around the corner, level the wings and flair all at the same time to make you’re spot….its like a much smaller airplane at that moment!

 

[Dugaru]

Interesting comparison to the RV 9.

RV 15 stall less than 45 knots. RV 9 stall 43.5 knots at gross (38 knots solo).
RV 15 cruise 140 knots. RV 9 75% cruise 163 knots.
RV 15 take off and land less then 400 ft. RV 9 gross weight take off 475 ft, land 450 ft. (300 ft and 300 ft solo).

What’s all the fuss about??? (tongue firmly in cheek)

To be fair, I can only get 161KTAS out of my 9A. But it’s only 160hp, as God intended.

In all seriousness, the -9’s wing is a true marvel.

 

[AeroEngineer]

...“best” is a relative term…best for what?

RVs have always been jacks-of-all-trades. Not THE fastest, not THE slowest, not THE most aerobatic, not THE most fuel-efficient, not THE highest useful load, but pretty dang good at all of those things. I appreciate the restraint shown by Van and his successors, their unwillingness to crank any of the dials all the way in one direction.

I am curious how long it will take for an entrepreneur to take a few ribs worth of length out of the wingspan and rocket” it to 160 kts...

I would bet on someone adding slats and drooping ailerons (and maybe MORE rib-bays of wing) to make it slower, before someone clips the wing to make it faster. But who knows. We'll see.

And it's too bad that Mike Patey is making another Draco, otherwise he might have time to make a super RV-15... Hopefully someday.

 

[KMMUflyer]

I think a lot of people are missing the part about the landing gear. Incredibly strong and forgiving.
Something the other RVs don't do as well.
Chuck

 

[ryoung]

Anybody know the wingspan with the final wing. Need to know if it will fit my hanger.

 

[scsmith]

I think the trick of hiding the VG's inside the flap recess was ingenious.

Installing VGs on the flap leading edge was researched by Jim Ross (James C. Ross) at NASA Ames Research Center a number of years ago (mid 1990's I think). He tested them on a T-39 (Saberliner) in the NFAC 40 x 80 ft wind tunnel.

 

[riobison]

Interesting comparison to the RV 9.

RV 15 stall less than 45 knots. RV 9 stall 43.5 knots at gross (38 knots solo).
RV 15 cruise 140 knots. RV 9 75% cruise 163 knots.
RV 15 take off and land less then 400 ft. RV 9 gross weight take off 475 ft, land 450 ft. (300 ft and 300 ft solo).

What’s all the fuss about??? (tongue firmly in cheek)

Yes, the 9 does this with a 160 up.

Not sure if Vans specs are with a FP or Csp?

The 9 does appear to be smaller on the cabin space.

Im thinking some of us are already there.

Especially you guys with 180 or 200 hp and a csp prop on your 9. Your already exceeding most if not all of the 15s numbers.

 

[Desert Rat]

...I think the trick of hiding the VG's inside the flap recess was ingenious...

Clever for sure, but not exactly a new idea. I've seen that on a few airplanes over the years. Here's a picture I grabbed off the interweb showing them on a Malibu (I think?)

 

[theduff]

Asked above and by me back in January in the thread of The Clipped Wing 15….. could somebody at AirVenture ask or measure the dang wing and tell us what the actual wing span is on the production wing. Like others if this is to become a next project I’d like to know if it will fit in my Hangar as currently configured .

 

[543TB]

Asked above and by me back in January in the thread of The Clipped Wing 15….. could somebody at AirVenture ask or measure the dang wing and tell us what the actual wing span is on the production wing. Like others if this is to become a next project I’d like to know if it will fit in my Hangar as currently configured .

We just went over and used an iPhone app to judge the distance, it's a bit over 32 feet, but I assume it will end up a bit wider with the fuselage modifications.

 

[theduff]

We just went over and used an iPhone app to judge the distance, it's a bit over 32 feet, but I assume it will end up a bit wider with the fuselage modifications.

Thank You !! My hanger will accommodate a max of 34’ as currently configured so sounds like it might work .

 

[ksauce]

I noticed the engineering prototype is not primed. Makes sense as it's probably a short lifespan. But does anyone know if the aluminum is 2024 or 6061?

 

[N427EF]

The useful load on a 9 is around 700lb depending on what is installed. The RV-15 is expected to be around 900.
I did’t ask but my guess is that most skin and thinner material is 2024 alclad from what I can tell and engineered structural pieces are 6064 just like the rest of them.
Reporting from Osh

 

[Canadian_JOY]

I'll toss in a sidebar comment... No, I'm not an RV guy, so let's start with that!

When I read all of the above comments I keep coming back to my own aircraft, a Glasair Sportsman. It hits numbers very similar to those of the RV15. Dirty stall at 42kts, cruise at 135kts on 180hp with a c/s prop, 900+lbs useful load, and will get in and out of darned near anywhere I'd want to risk taking it. Wingspan is 35'.

These numbers make for a very, very capable aircraft. As others have mentioned, it's not the best heavy hauler (although the Carbon Sportsman boosts true useful load by typically 150lbs but one wants the IO390 to haul that extra weight). It's not the fastest airplane in the world, and it's not going to win at Valdez. But it does EVERYTHING well enough to qualify it as a 98% airplane... It will perform 98% of the missions that most regular folks would need it to perform.

The RV15 will almost certainly be a 95%+ airplane for most folks. As every aircraft represents a set of design compromises, it looks like Vans have hit the sweet spot in their design choices. I wish the model and its builders/owners well. If they are even half as happy with their RV15 as I am with my Sportsman, the RV15 will be a raging market success.

 

[Ironflight]

I'll toss in a sidebar comment... No, I'm not an RV guy, so let's start with that!

When I read all of the above comments I keep coming back to my own aircraft, a Glasair Sportsman. It hits numbers very similar to those of the RV15. Dirty stall at 42kts, cruise at 135kts on 180hp with a c/s prop, 900+lbs useful load, and will get in and out of darned near anywhere I'd want to risk taking it. Wingspan is 35'.

These numbers make for a very, very capable aircraft. As others have mentioned, it's not the best heavy hauler (although the Carbon Sportsman boosts true useful load by typically 150lbs but one wants the IO390 to haul that extra weight). It's not the fastest airplane in the world, and it's not going to win at Valdez. But it does EVERYTHING well enough to qualify it as a 98% airplane... It will perform 98% of the missions that most regular folks would need it to perform.

The RV15 will almost certainly be a 95%+ airplane for most folks. As every aircraft represents a set of design compromises, it looks like Vans have hit the sweet spot in their design choices. I wish the model and its builders/owners well. If they are even half as happy with their RV15 as I am with my Sportsman, the RV15 will be a raging market success.

Nico Mark - you get it exactly!! And since the Sportsman kits are currently unavailable……

 

[theduff]

Asked above and by me back in January in the thread of The Clipped Wing 15….. could somebody at AirVenture ask or measure the dang wing and tell us what the actual wing span is on the production wing. Like others if this is to become a next project I’d like to know if it will fit in my Hangar as currently configured .

Ok have something semi-official. I had my buddy Frank ( Performance Propeller fame) go buy Vans booth and ask the question : What is the production wings span ? He said they were caught off guard because none of their literature had the number. After some scrambling one of Vans employees got out his calculator and determined that the production wing will have a span of…… 33 feet 3 inches !!

 

[N8DAV8R]

Ok have something semi-official. I had my buddy Frank ( Performance Propeller fame) go buy Vans booth and ask the question : What is the production wings span ? He said they were caught off guard because none of their literature had the number. After some scrambling one of Vans employees got out his calculator and determined that the production wing will have a span of…… 33 feet 3 inches !!

Any chance you can get a follow up question through? Length of the individual wings when/as constructed? I'm thinking through garage configurations. The -12 had long stub spars so the wingspan alone does not answer this question.

 

[Overshoot]

I'll toss in a sidebar comment... No, I'm not an RV guy, so let's start with that!

When I read all of the above comments I keep coming back to my own aircraft, a Glasair Sportsman. It hits numbers very similar to those of the RV15. Dirty stall at 42kts, cruise at 135kts on 180hp with a c/s prop, 900+lbs useful load, and will get in and out of darned near anywhere I'd want to risk taking it. Wingspan is 35'.

These numbers make for a very, very capable aircraft. As others have mentioned, it's not the best heavy hauler (although the Carbon Sportsman boosts true useful load by typically 150lbs but one wants the IO390 to haul that extra weight). It's not the fastest airplane in the world, and it's not going to win at Valdez. But it does EVERYTHING well enough to qualify it as a 98% airplane... It will perform 98% of the missions that most regular folks would need it to perform.

The RV15 will almost certainly be a 95%+ airplane for most folks. As every aircraft represents a set of design compromises, it looks like Vans have hit the sweet spot in their design choices. I wish the model and its builders/owners well. If they are even half as happy with their RV15 as I am with my Sportsman, the RV15 will be a raging market success.

This is what gives me pause about the RV15. The beautiful Glasair Sportsman failed in the US market with essentially the same specs, plus features that the 15 doesn’t have (folding wings, swappable landing gear config, cargo door, etc). People built them in two weeks, flying in a month, yet they didn’t resonate in places like Alaska. With today’s costs, and uncertainty on fuel, tariffs, and engines, why is the 15 going to do better?

Thank goodness for early adopters who are willing to discover and work though the changes, and like you, I hope the airplane does well, but the so-called “back country” market is an enigma.

 

[N8DAV8R]

This is what gives me pause about the RV15. The beautiful Glasair Sportsman failed in the US market with essentially the same specs, plus features that the 15 doesn’t have (folding wings, swappable landing gear config, cargo door, etc). People built them in two weeks, flying in a month, yet they didn’t resonate in places like Alaska. With today’s costs, and uncertainty on fuel, tariffs, and engines, why is the 15 going to do better?

Thank goodness for early adopters who are willing to discover and work though the changes, and like you, I hope the airplane does well, but the so-called “back country” market is an enigma.

I gave the Sportsman serious consideration a few times before and during my -12 build. The build scenario with builder assist was always a drag on me getting excited about it. It felt more like purchasing an airplane than building an airplane. Options added up fast, with the payment timing happening even faster. I think the build and pay as you go scenario for the RV-15 is attractive to the builder mentality.

Agree with the focus on 'back-country' for the RV-15 being an enigma. It's all the rage, but trends change. I don't have much interest in back country and STOL, but the RV-15 seems like the basis for an outstanding airplane that will also fit a broader use. Last night the wife and I were watching the latest videos, while she threw mission questions at me about it. It seems like it will fit an 'empty nest' scenario we are facing that lines up with a reasonable timeline to finish the plane and travel better than we could in my -12.

 

[JonJay]

The few people I know that have a Sportsman LOVE them. I looked at them hard and just couldn’t get over the looks. Silly, but they look sleek and fast and are truly a good looking airplane. The 15 looks utilitarian, rugged, strong, and capable. In reality, the Sportsman is probably all of those things too, but it just didn’t appeal to me.
I’ve flown Cubs; J3’s, Super Cubs, Cubcrafters, etc… and, although extremely capable, the handling left a lot to be desired when I am used to the Bucker and RV. Great airplanes, just no appealing to me.
So, specifications aside, the 15 should check my boxes. Ya, maybe not as high performance in the STOL capability as some, but fits my mission.
I am trusting in folks that have flown it, like Paul Dye, that say it is an “RV”…..
Paul - you deserve a commission!

 

[N10KE]

Keep in mind the person behind the Sportsman “two weeks to taxi” program is now in charge at Van’s.

 

[Full Throttle]

Keep in mind the person behind the Sportsman “two weeks to taxi” program is now in charge at Van’s.

So, Is that good or bad........................?

 

[N10KE]

So, Is that good or bad........................?

I don’t have a perspective on that. It was more a comment to the posters who said they didn’t want to “build” a Sportsman because of that program.

 

[Jetmart]

Any mention of width of cockpit?

 

[sblack]

RVs have always been jacks-of-all-trades. Not THE fastest, not THE slowest, not THE most aerobatic, not THE most fuel-efficient, not THE highest useful load, but pretty dang good at all of those things. I appreciate the restraint shown by Van and his successors, their unwillingness to crank any of the dials all the way in one direction.



I would bet on someone adding slats and drooping ailerons (and maybe MORE rib-bays of wing) to make it slower, before someone clips the wing to make it faster. But who knows. We'll see.

And it's too bad that Mike Patey is making another Draco, otherwise he might have time to make a super RV-15... Hopefully someday.

You can't just add slats like fender flares on a car. Slats increase the stall AoA. To be able to use that you need a higher ground attitude or you need to change the wing incidence. Otherwise they won't work. You see planes with slats added on at the Osh and SnF stol demos and on takeoff they are planting the tailwheel trying desperately to magically increase the ground attitude to get the benefit of the slats but they can't. They might as well not even have them. Then you might, depending on the margin you have, need to increase the tail area to be able to get to the higher AoA at fwd CG. If the tail was oversized to begin with maybe not, but the RV15 will be pretty optimized because these guys know what they are doing. So adding slats will be pretty useless. That's not to say that people won't try it of course.

 

[sblack]

I'll toss in a sidebar comment... No, I'm not an RV guy, so let's start with that!

When I read all of the above comments I keep coming back to my own aircraft, a Glasair Sportsman. It hits numbers very similar to those of the RV15. Dirty stall at 42kts, cruise at 135kts on 180hp with a c/s prop, 900+lbs useful load, and will get in and out of darned near anywhere I'd want to risk taking it. Wingspan is 35'.

These numbers make for a very, very capable aircraft. As others have mentioned, it's not the best heavy hauler (although the Carbon Sportsman boosts true useful load by typically 150lbs but one wants the IO390 to haul that extra weight). It's not the fastest airplane in the world, and it's not going to win at Valdez. But it does EVERYTHING well enough to qualify it as a 98% airplane... It will perform 98% of the missions that most regular folks would need it to perform.

The RV15 will almost certainly be a 95%+ airplane for most folks. As every aircraft represents a set of design compromises, it looks like Vans have hit the sweet spot in their design choices. I wish the model and its builders/owners well. If they are even half as happy with their RV15 as I am with my Sportsman, the RV15 will be a raging market success.

The RV15 will have way better handling qualities than the Sportsman. The Sportsman has a long wing and tiny ailerons and high aileron cable friction. So the roll forces are heavy and the response is slow. The tail is undersized, or perhaps it is that it is placed right down in the wing wake so pitch stability is weak (and on the glastar at least you run out of elevator in the flare hence the VGs all along the stab), so roll forces are high and pitch forces are low, which is backwards. Control harmony sucks.

The 15 will almost certainly have the well balanced responsive controls that we have come to expect. They took their time, hired a professional test pilot, tweaked and adjusted and tuned until they got it right. They won't have to glue all kinds of aero fixes to it like the glastar/sportsman (strakes, VGs, those shovel things) in order to try to overcome its shortcomings. Those guys didn't have the budget to resize the tail or redesign the wing - they were stuck with what they had. I'm sure I'll get flamed by the glastar people and it's predictable. Everyone loves their airplane and they get used to what they fly a lot. And it's a pretty airplane and fast and has a good load. But any objective assessment by someone who has a handling qualities background will find these shortcomings obvious.

 

[edhunter]

The RV15 will have way better handling qualities than the Sportsman. The Sportsman has a long wing and tiny ailerons and high aileron cable friction. So the roll forces are heavy and the response is slow. The tail is undersized, or perhaps it is that it is placed right down in the wing wake so pitch stability is weak (and on the glastar at least you run out of elevator in the flare hence the VGs all along the stab), so roll forces are high and pitch forces are low, which is backwards. Control harmony sucks.

The 15 will almost certainly have the well balanced responsive controls that we have come to expect. They took their time, hired a professional test pilot, tweaked and adjusted and tuned until they got it right. They won't have to glue all kinds of aero fixes to it like the glastar/sportsman (strakes, VGs, those shovel things) in order to try to overcome its shortcomings. Those guys didn't have the budget to resize the tail or redesign the wing - they were stuck with what they had. I'm sure I'll get flamed by the glastar people and it's predictable. Everyone loves their airplane and they get used to what they fly a lot. And it's a pretty airplane and fast and has a good load. But any objective assessment by someone who has a handling qualities background will find these shortcomings obvious.

I pretty much agree with all of this. I had and flew a beautiful RV9 for two years. I0-320 with WW constant speed prop. Almost perfect airplane! My wife is still annoyed that I sold it. . Now I fly a Glastar with 0-360, SDS EFI, GT ground adjustable prop, fully IFR equipped w all glass. 135kn TAS. 45kn stall. Yes it’s heavier on the roll forces, but it’s honest. And way more stable than the -9 in bumps. My wife’s 65# dog fits in back, AND I can add a couple bags. Not possible with the 9. It’s not quite a Sportsman, it’s not what the -15 will be, but I’ve got less than 120k in it. And that is something impossible with the Sportsman or the -15!

 

[ksauce]

Any mention of width of cockpit?

The spec sheet shows 47" for cockpit width.

 

[543TB]

This is what gives me pause about the RV15. The beautiful Glasair Sportsman failed in the US market with essentially the same specs, plus features that the 15 doesn’t have (folding wings, swappable landing gear config, cargo door, etc). People built them in two weeks, flying in a month, yet they didn’t resonate in places like Alaska. With today’s costs, and uncertainty on fuel, tariffs, and engines, why is the 15 going to do better?

Thank goodness for early adopters who are willing to discover and work though the changes, and like you, I hope the airplane does well, but the so-called “back country” market is an enigma.

We looked at the Sportsman years ago at OSH. Tried to look, anyway. I guess we didn't appear to have deep enough pockets because the reps were barely interested in entertaining our questions or letting us see the aircraft. They wouldn't really give us a final price either. Ultimately, we decided the fuse construction didn't feel durable enough given the abuse we've seen metal planes absorb over the decades. And yes, the two week to taxi program seemed tailored to those better at signing checks than driving rivets. The 15 compares favorably on that front, for sure.

 

[sblack]

Yes, the 9 does this with a 160 up.

Not sure if Vans specs are with a FP or Csp?

The 9 does appear to be smaller on the cabin space.

Im thinking some of us are already there.

Especially you guys with 180 or 200 hp and a csp prop on your 9. Your already exceeding most if not all of the 15s numbers.

I’m not sure why anyone is comparing the rv9 with the 15. Totally different missions and totally different payload and power requirements. Apples and turnips.

 

[Nuisance]

Any chance you can get a follow up question through? Length of the individual wings when/as constructed? I'm thinking through garage configurations. The -12 had long stub spars so the wingspan alone does not answer this question.

I doubt the 15 willl have stub spars. A high wing strut braced wing ends at the cabin. It basically hinges off the side of the cabin, and the strut holds it in place. Cessnas, and my super cub, are exactly this way. That means there are no spars in the head space in the cabin, which shows in the pictures we have seen.

So if you take the 33' wingspan, subtract 4 feet for the cabin, and divide by two, you get the total length of a wing at 14.5'

John

 

[N8DAV8R]

I doubt the 15 willl have stub spars. A high wing strut braced wing ends at the cabin. It basically hinges off the side of the cabin, and the strut holds it in place. Cessnas, and my super cub, are exactly this way. That means there are no spars in the head space in the cabin, which shows in the pictures we have seen.

So if you take the 33' wingspan, subtract 4 feet for the cabin, and divide by two, you get the total length of a wing at 14.5'

John

Yeah, that's about what I am expecting by doing the same estimation. Will fit much better in my 2 car garage. I was just hoping for some confirmation of how the wing/fuse interface is designed without making the assumption it's the same as every other strut based high wing.