What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Over gross ?

The g limits of 3.8 for normal and 4.4 for utility are arbitrary numbers. They have been determined by years of experience to provide a reasonable margin for every day operation by your average pilot. If you are over gross and your limit becomes 3.6g for example, i would not expect your airplane to be falling out of the sky. Now do that and fly at Vne in gusty conditions at aft cg and yank hard on the stick......As in the case of the guy who did long distance flights in a 4, or the rutan voyager, these margins can be eaten into if due diligence is exercised. However since the vast majority of us do NOT have a sound grasp of all the technical principles involved, we have to ask ourselves if we are equipped to push these limits.

In industry we fly outside of weight and cg limits during certification flight testing regularly. Our pilots have an army of stress, systems and handling qualities specialists to guide them and a lot of training to allow them to do it safely. Can you do it without that support and training? Perhaps, to a degree, you can. I.e. Flying on a calm day in the cg range but 50 lbs over gross, knowing you have slightly less structural margin, and modifying your flight profile accordingly, is a risk you are comfortable with. On the other hand you can probably pull the wings off an RV from inside the weight/cg envelope if you really really want to.

To the gent from the u.k. who said that he had read many accident reports where a crashed occurred due to being over gross, I don't doubt it. But there numerous other accident scenarios where people exceeded any number of other limits of their skills/knowledge with the same result, be it crosswinds, weather, aerobatics (within the wtcg env) or anything else. Some pilots get in trouble doing things that others can do safely.

It all comes down to your level of technical understanding and your comfort level with risk. It can be done, to a degree, if you are careful and you know what you are doing. If you aren't and you don't you can kill yourself.
 
Yes, but not far over the published Vne *and* at max G at the same time.


That right there shows either a lack of understanding of the concept, or you just worded your point poorly. Additional load that was equally distributed through the structure of the airplane, say as paint, I agree would have a small effect that could be approximated by extrapolating (it wouldn't be perfectly accurate because the wings carry their own weight and the fuselage doesn't, like your mention of the tip tanks). But additional load that is concentrated in any one area, is no different in the cockpit with heavy upholstery, or on the firewall with a heavy engine.

With no access to the engineering analysis done by Van on the aircraft so you could know what's been over-designed and what is near its limit, you can't say that adding 100 lb to any one area is either safe or prudent. Add it to your cabin, and it's "only" a 5% increase in your gross weight, but it's a 25% increase in loading on your seat structure (assuming 50lb per seat, and 200lb standard passenger) when you hit turbulence. If you want to extrapolate, your G-limit is now down to 3G.

Information I found for the RV4 is Vne 210, Vno 180, Va 135.
I would say that 260 is far in excess of 210. and of course much further from 180. A separate issue is that Reno racing is at a higher true airspeed, moderate turbulence is routine, and G loads on the turns can be relatively high.
 
Information I found for the RV4 is Vne 210, Vno 180, Va 135.
I would say that 260 is far in excess of 210. and of course much further from 180. A separate issue is that Reno racing is at a higher true airspeed, moderate turbulence is routine, and G loads on the turns can be relatively high.

Sure. But 260mph in 1G flight isn't especially "risky" apart from flutter. Keep in mind that G-loading and speed are not coupled, except that G comes on a lot faster for the same control deflection at increased speeds. Apart from that, 4G at 260mph isn't any more stressful on the airframe than 4G at 140mph.
 
Speed

Sure. But 260mph in 1G flight isn't especially "risky" apart from flutter. Keep in mind that G-loading and speed are not coupled, except that G comes on a lot faster for the same control deflection at increased speeds. Apart from that, 4G at 260mph isn't any more stressful on the airframe than 4G at 140mph.

OK lets see if I have this right-ALWAYS slow to maneuvering speed in turbulence, except when racing, when 260 in moderate(or greater)turbulence is ok.
The Reno 2014 fatal will repeat over and over again in the future if the Reno races survive.
 
Back
Top