Thanks but no thanks. My CFI has given me a good checkout, and he knows his stuff.
This ?NO 360!!? Policy stems from one thing and only one thing. Vans did not want big engines in the RV9A for fear of it competing with the more expensive kits. When the secret came out that a bigger engine makes this airplane a 200+ knot airplane they came up with this true airspeed policy which, ask any aerospace engineer, is completely bogus. The airplane knows IAS only.
Think about it ? if the airplane suddenly now knows true airspeed, why is the limit not tied to true airspeed OR groundspeed, whichever it hits first?
I am all ears; please do tell, why not base the speed limit on groundspeed if it was simply due to flutter?
WARNING: Snowflake feelings will be melted here. Important Safety Message Follows
Earl,
TIME TO LISTEN CAREFULLY
You have been receiving polite, far too polite advice on your outstanding levels of stupidity.
I am Australian and we are less polite, rather more blunt and to be frank about it, we call a spade a spade. You are being a pharquing idiot.
You have had some of the more experienced pilots and engineers in the Vans community try nicely to not jeopardise the people who live under where you fly, or any pax you may take. Frankly you, I could not care less about. But the rest of us on planet earth would rather take our chances with coronavirus than fly with you.
TIME TO PULL YA HEAD IN. PRINT THIS THREAD AND GIVE IT TO YOUR CFI.
Where is Paul Dye when you need him, he would tell you this far more politely than I can. But your CFI is clearly as stupid as you are.
So far Vans factory engineering folk have contributed, test pilots, and as an engineer who has built planes, assists in building and flown thousands of hours in them.....my qualifications to comment on this topic are at the lower end of the qual list.
VNE as IAS is very much a limitation with a small margin, however RV models, all of them, have a limitation with respect to VNE as TAS because of flutter.
Vans builds in a small margin, and this allows for builder variation in mass balancing etc.....and who knows what else. Maybe Scott can expand on that, but Van's have written about this many years ago. Flutter is often impossible to stop. Well it can be self correcting, and i am sure you would agree that is bad.
Unless you are operating under some carefully planned test flying program your flying and your attitude would constitute reckless flying and I suspect the FAA have a position on this.
I would ground that plane and have it inspected by someone who knows how to do a thorough analysis of the overspeed, and implement an additional inspection regime for every annual inspection. And by the way publish the N number so nobody buys it thinking it is a perfect airframe.
Feel free to call me a F'wit, a w@nker, or any other term that us Aussies could not give a $h!t about........I dont care. But some poor American might be severely disadvantaged permanently by your level of stupidity and pig headedness.
Do you have a wife, child or mother? Stop being so selfish.
PS: Doug R or any mods...... this is a stern dressing down for a serious safety breach, please do not delete or edit it.