RV-9A Versus RV-12?

[Righty]

I couldn't seem to find any discussion of my specific question in the archives, though I am sure the thought has come up for many a RV-9A-minded builder. The question has been on my mind since the development of the 12 first began.

I am in the very slow process of building my 9A standard kit. I can say with some certitude that I would be very likely to choose the 12 were I at the stage of choosing which kit to build today. It's not that I don't think the 9A is an excellant airplane or that I don't like building, it's just that the 12 didn't exist when I started the 9.

I am considering getting my 9A wings to a good stopping point and selling off the project to start a 12. This might seem rash to some, but the 12 seems to fit my mission profile even better than the 9. I enjoy building, but I'm not a big experimenter and I like the well-defined path that the 12 builder must take. Also, it is likely that I could start a 12 now and finish it before I would finish the 9A I'm already working on.

Anyone else have this line of thinking? Anyone actually take this path?

 

[Lionclaw]

The 12 does seem to be a nice ship, and it's amazing how fast people have been putting it together.

If you compared a comparably equipped 9A and 12 I think the build cost would be a wash, with the 9A taking far longer to build. I think you could build a basic VFR 9A with a midtime engine for a good bit less than the 12. Considering there seems to be a lot of sub 100k LSAs on the market, I'm not sure what sort of resale value the 12 will hold.

I guess it comes down to tolerance for tedium and mission needs.

If you want a nice E-LSA soon, the 12 is great. If you want to tinker and customize, want to go fast, and don't mind the extra build time, the 9A is a good way to go

I can't say I haven't thought about the 12, but right now the 9A is the bird for me

 

[N941WR]

Aaron,

It really comes down to what you wwant to do with the finished plane.

I once owned a '41 T-Craft and loved the plane. It was a blast to fly, good for landing on out of the way grass fields, low cost, etc.

What I learned was that I wanted a plane that could go into those grass fields and allow me to load it up with another person, 100 lbs of stuff, and go some place quickly. That 95 MPH stuff gets old but I do miss cruising around at 1000' AGL.

That was how my mission requirements changed. Thus I don't think I would be happy with a -12. If the -12 fits what YOU want, don't wait, sell the -9A kit now and pick up a -12. Heck, you might be able to swap kits with someone.

 

[Righty]

Bill, I think you hit the nail on the head with your comment about "what I want to do with the finished plane." I guess I should temper my "certitude" comment about going with the 12 if I were making the choice today. The reality is that I am on the fence. I am really keen on the 9, but to be honest with myself, I have to recognize that the thought of jumping ship for the 12 is in my thoughts. I find myself vacillating on the question. The attraction to the 12 may actually be based more on the desire for simplicity and a faster build than the mission. The reason I have not taken the plunge is that I keep coming back to the 9 due to its superior performance and hauling capability.

 

[N941WR]

... I find myself vacillating on the question. The attraction to the 12 may actually be based more on the desire for simplicity and a faster build than the mission. The reason I have not taken the plunge is that I keep coming back to the 9 due to its superior performance and hauling capability.

Don't switch, you will still spend a lot of time and money on the -12 only to be working on it thinking it is less than what you really want.

(BTW, I think the -12 is a really good airplane, just designed for a different mission than the -9.)

It might be time to take a builder's vacation. I took two months off and it was my wife who pushed me to get back to work on it. Don't give up on it, just keep chipping and enjoy the time working with your hands.

 

[DaveWelch]

9 vs. 12

Hey,
If you're confident that you can maintain your Class III physical and can afford the fuel, stay with your -9 (assuming you can commit to building it). It should do all the same things, but much faster, tho with more gal/hr cost also. I was building a 7a until it became obvious that a Class III is no longer in my future, so I let it expire. Mission is the key, certainly IFR is only possible with the -9. Once the LSA decision is made, or made for you, the -12 becomes an easy choice IMHO.
All the Best,
Dave.

 

[Righty]

Hey,
If you're confident that you can maintain your Class III physical and can afford the fuel, stay with your -9 (assuming you can commit to building it). It should do all the same things, but much faster, tho with more gal/hr cost also. I was building a 7a until it became obvious that a Class III is no longer in my future, so I let it expire. Mission is the key, certainly IFR is only possible with the -9. Once the LSA decision is made, or made for you, the -12 becomes an easy choice IMHO.
All the Best,
Dave.

The Class III issue is definitely a consideration, even though I currently have no reason to think that my med certificate is at risk. But we all know how life can come at you fast. It would be a shame if some medical issue came up that would still allow me to be a safe pilot, but would cause automatic denial under the current draconian regs. LSA allows one to make a more reasoned assessment of their fitness to pilot, assuming you don't get burned by the 'gotcha' clause if your medical gets denied or revoked.

Don't switch, you will still spend a lot of time and money on the -12 only to be working on it thinking it is less than what you really want.

(BTW, I think the -12 is a really good airplane, just designed for a different mission than the -9.)

It might be time to take a builder's vacation. I took two months off and it was my wife who pushed me to get back to work on it. Don't give up on it, just keep chipping and enjoy the time working with your hands.

Bill,

I agree with a lot of what your saying here, but I have to admit that some of the non-performance considerations to the mission are interesting, specifically no Class III (more of a long term consideration hopefully), trailerability, or at least wing-removability, and cost of ownership. I can see maybe trailering the 12 on a seasonal basis and keeping it on tie-down when weather is good and usage is frequent. Or even keeping it in a hanger, wing removal allows potentially more airplanes to fit, resulting in rental fees being split more ways. Either way this would greatly reduce storage costs. In these regards, the 12 sort of breaks the mission mold by bringing in some factors that are not even a possiblity with the 9.

As for a builder's vacation, I think I have the opposite problem. My project was forceably put on hold a while back by the addition of a shipping container's worth of my in-laws stuff being moved into my 'shop'. Needless to say, it's hard to work on the airplane when a bunch of boxes are in the way. This followed by distraction from some other projects and obligations led to about a 2 year hiatus and a lot of mental frustration with regard to the airplane not progressing. The more time that passed, it seemed that a mental block was developing and it felt like I would never get back to the project. Finally, a few months back I was able to pull my head out and get the shop back in order. Things have been progressing at a reasonable pace since then and I couldn't be happier to be back at work on it!

 

[frankh]

For me

This is a bit like how I went from my old Zenair Zodiac to the 7a...Ignoring the IFR requirement for a moment, I really wanted an airplane that would go places..The old Zodiac would kill me with its lack of speed, In fact the 7a is considerably more fuel efficient on a mile per gallon basis.

Running into headwinds is always a chore but when that happened in the Zodiac it was incredibly painful!

Having said that, if I were happy puttering around the patch and cross countries say up to 100 miles the Zodiac would have been just fine.

Frank

 

[n2prise]

Why the RV-9A was correct for me...

Aaron,

The mission is the key. I don't know if you have visited my web site or not. The day after my airplane came out of the paint shop was my first long cross country - - to Oshkosh 2005. I also went in 2006 and took a friend and two sets of camping equipment. But for now, just read about the trip to OSH 2005 and see if you have similar feelings as seen at the beginning of this web page:

http://www.n2prise.org/rv9a151.htm

There is plenty to see at my site about building the airplane and lots of photos about flights after the airplane was completed. There are even videos with intercom audio of the air traffic controllers and our conversations in the cockpit of flying into and out of Oshkosh in 2006. I hope you have a high-speed internet connection. You will need it for the videos, which can be downloaded and saved if you like.

 

[Righty]

Jerry,

Nice website. I have been there on occasion before. I can't say that I have ambitions to go to Osh, but I can definately see the value in being able to cover a lot of ground quickly. Of course, I try not to be in too much of a hurry to get anywhere when I go flying. I'm more of a tooling around sort of pilot.

Sure, there are other planes out there that would fit this mission, but one of my initial primary motivators was the desire to build my own airplane. When I embarked upon this, I was not even a pilot and have never even taken a single flight lesson. My research led me to Vans since they make kits for metal airplanes and seemed to be the best company. It also helps a bit that I live close to the factory and am a member of chapter 105. So Vans was the company and the 9 seemed to best fit my mission requirements.

Things have changed a bit since then. I now have a PPL and have more of a feel for the kind of flying that I might do. Of course, my C-150 perspective may tend to narrow my view. It is sometimes hard to imagine what the possibilites will be with a 9. I guess it just makes your world a lot smaller.

So now, here I am trying to ask myself honestly, "If I were to be back at the decision stage today, which model would I choose?" It can be hard to be objective and honest with one's self in this kind of internal discussion when you already have a lot invested in a certain path.

 

[L.Adamson]

Jerry,
snipped
I'm more of a tooling around sort of pilot.
snipped

So now, here I am trying to ask myself honestly, "If I were to be back at the decision stage today, which model would I choose?" It can be hard to be objective and honest with one's self in this kind of internal discussion when you already have a lot invested in a certain path.

Who knows...........

You may find that you'll get bored with just tooling around, and want to take off for some good cross country fun! I know I do!

And if that's the case, the 9 will be a lot better!

L.Adamson --- RV6A