RV-7A And Low Time Pilots

[jrsites]

A friend of mine who is a low-time pilot will likely be partnering with my on my project. I'd been on the fence between a 7A and a 9A, but had recently decided on the 7A.

I'm by no means an old salt (approaching 300 hours total time), but because I had plenty of opportunity to fly my Dad's 6A, I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to fly the 7A. My friend/prospective building partner, however, has in the neighborhood of 75 hours total time and has never flown anything but 172s. I've flown with him and he is a good pilot. But a good pilot in a 172 does not necessarily mean one would be comfortable in a fast, responsive airplane with high wing loading and the resulting high power-off descent rates.

Should I have any concern about how comfortable he would be flying the 7A? Would he be fine with a transition training course?

 

[Dgamble]

But a good pilot in a 172 does not necessarily mean one would be comfortable in a fast, responsive airplane with high wing loading and the resulting high power-off descent rates.

Also consider that his low time is going to have a significant impact on your insurance costs.

 

[Low Pass]

A friend of mine who is a low-time pilot will likely be partnering with my on my project. I'd been on the fence between a 7A and a 9A, but had recently decided on the 7A.

I'm by no means an old salt (approaching 300 hours total time), but because I had plenty of opportunity to fly my Dad's 6A, I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to fly the 7A. My friend/prospective building partner, however, has in the neighborhood of 75 hours total time and has never flown anything but 172s. I've flown with him and he is a good pilot. But a good pilot in a 172 does not necessarily mean one would be comfortable in a fast, responsive airplane with high wing loading and the resulting high power-off descent rates.

Should I have any concern about how comfortable he would be flying the 7A? Would he be fine with a transition training course?

Too many unknowns with this amount of information. Every pilot has different natural abilities, learning capabilities and coordination. But I would also say that the average pilot I've worked with could be taught to safely fly an RV after some amount of transition training.

If you're making the call on whether or not your buddy comes on board as a partner, then you set the standard for acceptance. Find an unbiased, qualified source for evaluating the guy. Maybe your dad?

As for the insurance cost, factor it into your partnership agreement - however you want it structured. See AOPA for some very good written agreements on co-ownership. Assume nothing with an aircraft partnership.

 

[Radomir]

transition course would be a good start.. but I wouldn't necessarily stop at that you can't have too many hours in type. how about doing a course, then flying with you until feeling comfortable to take it up solo? it doesn't take that much time to transition, so it'll be all about how comfortable he feels with the plane after having some dual time in it. the more the merrier.

 

[terrykohler]

This post brings up an interesting point. When I started construction of my 9A, I joined EAA and found that many builders (there were 60+ projects ongoing in my chapter at the time) were either low time or no time pilots. At the same time, many were building what could arguably be called some of the highest performing singles on the market. I recall that when I finished (hadn't flown much during build period), my insurance required only a two hour checkout. Tack this onto a 1 hour BFR and 2 hour instrument competency, and you can see where someone transitioning from a low powered single might be doing a lot of his test flying behind the curve. After all of the recent posts on safety, acro and formation flying, perhaps we should be focusing on pilotage and basic flying skills. I recall one of my flight instructors from some 30 years ago telling me that I'd need about 500+ hours in model to be in command.rather than just in control.

 

[sglaeser]

Just like me

I had around 90 hours in Cessna 172s and less than 10 spread between Diamond Stars and Katanas before jumping in my 7A. It's all about the learning curve, something each of us encounter any time we step inside a different model of aircraft.

Without self discovery and/or transition training, none of us would be flying RVs.

 

[pierre smith]

Yes

Should I have any concern about how comfortable he would be flying the 7A? Would he be fine with a transition training course?

My partner had only flown 172's and a Cherokee a few hours and had 250 total hours when we finished our 6A. After a couple of hours he went out and flies it safely and well. I have given Transition training to a young guy with only 80 hours total and with three hours of training and 20-25 landings he was comfortable. A lot depends on his ability but transition training should definitely be part of the program. Since you're in Kansas, you're not too far from Texas where there are a couple of good transition trainers.

Other guys with hundreds of hours and no recent time take a lot more to get comfortable, so it goes both ways.

Regards,

 

[Scott Will]

I had exactly 108 hours TT (solely in C152 and C172's) when I went to see Pierre and his RV-6A. I had not flown in about 1.5 years prior to that because of building the 7A and having a new daughter.

Just over 2 hours in Pierre's RV and he declared me "good to go". Still I decided to stick around for more the next day (for good measure).

Fast foward a few weeks and the time came to fly my own plane. Let me tell you - the RV-7A is a pleasure to fly. I was very comfortable and to this day I am amazed with its handling qualities. It almost makes you look good, especially on landing. I feel more comfortable and safer in the RV than any under-powered spam can I rented.

Would definitely recommend transition because there you learn it's basically a "three finger airplane"... meaning the controls are so responsive, but not overly... whereas in the Cessna you move the yoke and wait for something to happen.

Anyways, I love my plane, a 7A.

 

[robertahegy]

I think if your partner is proficient at keeping the nose gear up un landings and takeoffs, that will be a plus. The 7A handles a lot like a nimble and fast Cherokee. The controls are light, but not loose. There is a nice amount of backpressure so you get good "road feel".

I've seen good low time pilots and bad high timers. You have to be comfy. But I don't think a bad pilot is any safer in a 9 or a 7 or a 172. Do consider good transition training with someone like Mike or Alex.

If you want to get into sport aerobatics, go for the 7A.

Roberta

 

[Caveman]

If you want to get into sport aerobatics, go for the 7A.

Roberta

May I ask, "Why the A model"?

 

[lostpilot28]

Huh?

Don't know if it'll make you feel any better, but the military puts guys with less time than your friend in airplanes with much higher performance and wing loading than an RV-7.

Just to point it out, the wing loading in a 172 is about the same as an RV-7A.

It's all about training...

 

[John Clark]

Just to point it out, the wing loading in a 172 is about the same as an RV-7A. It's all about training...

True about the wing loading but remember that the power/weight ratio is a little different. RVs are wonderfully honest airplanes but one needs to be familliar and current to keep up.

I fully understand the why and how, but it concerns me when someone says "I haven't flown for X years while I was building my airplane. This sets up a "double whammy" a non-current pilot and an unproven airplane.

John Clark
RV8 N18U
KSBA

 

[robertahegy]

To Joe,

Since he was on the fence for a 9A or 7A, I recommended the 7A for sport aerobatics.

Roberta

 

[Caveman]

To Joe,

Since he was on the fence for a 9A or 7A, I recommended the 7A for sport aerobatics.

Roberta

Ahhh! Gotcha. Thanks.

 

[lostpilot28]

I fully understand the why and how, but it concerns me when someone says "I haven't flown for X years while I was building my airplane. This sets up a "double whammy" a non-current pilot and an unproven airplane.

I agree completely. I supposed my last statement should've been "it's all about training and being current".

 

[gmcjetpilot]

Easy

Training Training Training Training Training Training, skill. (know thy self ) Also a Piper or Grumman Yankee/Tiger (low wings) are more like a RV than a Cessna. Low wings can float more, but speed control negates that. ALL that matters is being safe, proficient. Even the FAR's have a separate endorsements for Tail Dragger and High Performance planes. Regardless of HP and fixed prop and gear, RV's are always high performance. Get training. You will just need more. Any military example is folks that have been trained both on the ground and air FULL TIME. This is a hobby for most, be safe please.

 

[andymeyer]

Military...

lostpilot28...
Yes, the military puts guys with much less time into aircraft with far more performance, but also remember, those military guys are typically already very strong performers at thier peak mental age, etc... In addition, military training is very structured and done in a very controlled environment. I would easily put any military fighter pilot with 300 hours against any non-military pilot with 3-10 times as much time. The military guy will have more situational awareness, more airmanship, and more knowledge about the envelope of his aircraft and how it flies both inside and out of it. Every flight in a military aircraft is training... It starts and is critiqued from the briefing until engine shutdown. If your lights are not set correctly, you will hear about it; if you aren't on the centerline taxiing, you will hear about it; if you have a slightly angling final approach, you will hear about it; how you say what you say on the radio... you will hear about it. The military training is based on years of a very structured approach to training - the civilian world isn't...
In addition, the military guys have an ejection seat, a host of people on the radio to deal with issues, and a finger on the bellybutton (a phone number) of the manufacturer if there is a serious problem that isn't covered in the checklist. Oh yeah, the military guys have checklists written in blood, memorized, practiced in simulators, etc... What are your CAPS (critical action procedures - or boldface) for your aircraft? Most military guys write them from memory once a week to once a month to stay sharp and ready for when things go wrong.

As far as low timers getting in high performance aircraft - it's just ensuring that they have the proper tranistion training. I've had FBO's check me out and sign me off in aircraft without doing a single emergency procedure - never even talking about a gear failure, engine failure, electronics failure, fire, etc... I go through and make sure that I am proficient with recovering a problem aircraft before I consider myself proficient and safe. Practice makes proficiency... I think there are 100 hours pilots who can get in an RV and be safe and proficient in a couple of hours. I also think that there are airline pilots who need 10, 20, or more hours in the same RV to be as safe. it depends on ther person...

Andy

 

[lostpilot28]

Sheesh

Andy,
You said the word "training" 5 times. Man, you guys need to go back and read the posts you're replying to. I said in my initial post that "it's all about training".

As far as pitting a military fighter pilot with 300 hours against a GA pilot with 3 times more, I really think I could prove you're wrong - You didn't specify in what type of aircraft! I have known several military pilots that are like fish-out-of-water in a Cessna (because they don't train in them). But, give ANYONE enough training and they can fly jets. No, maybe the physical fitness of some folks isn't that of a 20-something year old, but we're not talking about pulling high-G's...we're just talking about being proficient and flying the airplane well.

 

[andymeyer]

Lostpilot28,
Yes, training... I know that you stated that, and you are right... Most people are a fish out of water until they get sufficient training to get up to speed. I feel that it's critical for people to get sufficient training to be comfortable, safe, and proficient in any aircraft that they choose to fly.

No, not everyone can fly military jets... I have seen numerous people either wash out of training, or make it through training and never get up to speed on the aircraft they are flying. I've seen guys with hundreds and thousands of hours fall behind fast moving, complex, high task loading, dynamic environment aircraft. It (a) kills some, (b) others realize that they are unable to keep up and hang thier wings up, and (c) some lose thier wings for stupidity or failing to understand and comply with (b). I've seen it happen too many times. Yes, you did caveat with the term "enough." Some people will needs thier wings from God before they are proficient and safe to fly some aircraft.

Training is the critical element - We both strongly agree on that... I would just hate to see some people read the comment "... the military puts guys with less time than your friend in airplanes with much higher performance and wing loading than an RV-7" and believe that, as many pilots do, that they are gods gift to aviation and go kill themselves in an RV. I've seen too many accident reports where an individual believes that they are "good enough" of a pilot to fly "such and such aircraft" and go mort themselves. Wasn't there just a Cirrus that hit a building, a Kennedy that went in the drink, a couple of actors that... That was the primary reason for my direction of my post to you... I hope you did not take any offense - heck, we agree on what we are saying.

Andy

 

[lostpilot28]

Andy,
No offense taken at all. I hear what you're saying, too.

I was just trying to avert the original poster's fears of his friend flying an RV. As long as he's had enough training to be proficient, he'll be fine. And that training may only be a few hours long.

My cavalier statement about anyone with enough training being able to fly jets is basically true, but that doesn't mean they should.

 

[jonbakerok]

Build a simple plane

RV's make lousy trainers but if your friend already has his ticket, transitioning into a 7A won't be a problem. They're not difficult to fly. I only had 300 hours myself.

I think one mistake some (of us) low-timers make is that they build their dream hot-rod with every bell and whistle and forget that they're going to be the test pilot. It's no fun dialing in a bunch of aftermarket engine goodies while you're still trying to figure out how to land the silly thing.

If you're both low-time and not named "Yeager", why not make it easy on yourself and build a simple plane? Use a bone-stock engine and a relatively standard panel. And a nose wheel. You'll save a wad of cash, you'll get comfortabe flying it a lot quicker, and the only way anyone will ever know you're not the fastest RV in town is if you race them.