Charles in SC
Well Known Member
Maybe I missed it. What Mooney do you have?
As a fellow single engine, fixed gear, overwater nutbag, it appears we have a situation on our hands that needs rectifying... wheels that fold away on a fast two seat RV.
If Roy can do it, then surely Van's can, as they are both up there in demigod aeroplane guru status.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zto0uqU93Tg
I'm about two months from wrapping the -7 up, so as much as I swore and declared at times during the build process I would wouldn't build another one (especially the day I drilled into my finger with that #40 bit), I'd be the second person to put in the order for the RG model. I'd only be second because I would be attempting to be courteous to the OP of this thread, as he currently doesn't have an RV at all.
Tom.
Maybe I missed it. What Mooney do you have?
Maybe you need something like this???
Agreed. I thing a retractable RV would be fantastic! However it needs to be designed from the ground up to be a retractable and not just a conversion to be truly successful. I doubt Vans will ever do it because it goes against their quick and simple to build core values. Retract would require more expense and more build time.
Core values aren?t cheap and quick to build... would place it more on safety and simplicity.
As someone stated on your POA thread, doesn?t sound like the RV is right for you. Maybe you can find a solid Lancair if you want to get into expirementals.
their quick and simple to build core values.
...would place it more on safety and simplicity.
I admit that Vans has gotten very serious about safety and hence why I am considering the type and not some other. Perhaps I should have included that in my statement. However I am not wrong with what I said. Vans' emphasis on simplicity is to make the airplane quicker to build. It's also to make the airplane lighter and therefor better performing.
Some might say Total Performance....
If safety is to be an issue, then the most Important factors are landing and take off speeds. I don?t think that the Mooney can match them. Just a few knots extra speed adds an enormous amount of additional energy to be dissipated.
Again considering safety, I prefer a sliding canopy. I acknowledge that with considerable deceleration forces the canopy will likely be jammed. I can?t see any benefit in a tilt up canopy, but that is merely my preference. That being the case, I have secured the front of the canopy with quick release pip pins rather than bolts. Mine are actually from an old ejection seat so are probably up to the design standard, but they are easily available. In event of any kind of questionable forced landing I have the option of ejecting the canopy just prior to touching down either water, trees or wherever.
Finally as someone else said, an old, Mooney versus a superbly designed aircraft with everything new. Neither of my rv?s has even a used Adele clamp, and I think most RV builders are the same.
I have done a fair amount of flying in Mooneys over the years from wood wing ones to a couple of 231s and taught an instrument rating in a 20f. They are fine airplanes and would be proud to own any of them. With all that said my memory said the 20f was about 145 knots. Maybe I did not remember that correctly. Does your wife know how old your Mooney is?
To my way of thinking, the Vans community is a huge value added. Great folks, good fun, and help with whatever you need. Not sure if the Mooney community has anything comparable.
Just another point to consider.
The slow landing speeds is a very attractive feature of the RV. The longer I fly, the more I prioritize safety above much else. Slow slow speed control and touchdown really does make a difference. A good stall characteristic is also a big plus.
Mine bucks like a mule first, doesn?t drop a wing, and recovers quickly.
I continue to think that the wing design on the 9 is a miracle of engineering.
Safety, I was a passenger in a accident in a RV6. We wound up upside down on the sliding canopy, with fuel pouring out the wings.
I think Sam's post today about the recent recognition of Van by the AOPA Air Safety Institute would help to answer the original question posted in this thread.