RV airplanes are built by individuals and each individual decides whether or not to install a stall warning device. Many RVs built from other the RV-10 kits, have stall warning devices.gasman said:WHY IS IT THAT THE "10" IS VANS ONLY MODEL WITH A STALL WARNING DEVICE INSTALLED?
I've never flown an RV-9 or -10, but the short wing RVs that I've flown had essentially zero stall warning. There was a very tiny burble about a knot before the stall, but it was so small that you wouldn't notice it unless you were looking for it. There have been a number of fatal RV accidents that may have been due to low altitude stalls.gasman said:WHY IS IT THAT THE "10" IS VANS ONLY MODEL WITH A STALL WARNING DEVICE INSTALLED?
DeltaRomeo said:Love mine in the -6 and wouldn't dream of not having it - it's my primary landing instrument. Gives me consistant landings in all configurations and conditions.
Best,
Doug
jlfernan said:The RV-10 does not have an AOA unit, it's just a stall warning with a vane mounted in the wing and a piezo buzzer in the cockpit.
Yes BUT WHY? Why is it standard on the -10 and not the Dash less than ten models.rvbuilder2002 said:Actually, both of the RV-10 prototypes have an Sport model AOA installed. If you mean what is supplied in the standard kit you are correct, it comes with a vane switch style stall warning sensor.
dav1111 said:The RV-10 stall with my IO-540 and MT prop is so predictable and
recognizable in level flight that it is hard for me to understand how
any reasonably competent pilot who has put the RV-10 through full flight
testing would ever need the stall warning device.
The RV-10 does not have the same wing as the other RV models. You cannot compare them.jonbakerok said:By recognizable, I assume you mean the high angle of attack. I haven't flow the 10, but since it has the same wing as the others, I bet it doesn't shudder any more than the others -- which is basically not at all until it's too late.
PJSeipel said:The RV-10 does not have the same wing as the other RV models. You cannot compare them.
PJ Seipel
RV-10 #40032
Pilots don't come to hardship with regards to stalling in level flight. Usually they stall when their attention is elsewhere in some maneuver other than level flight. For this reason I would NOT suggest that the provided Van's stall warning is a waste of time or recommend that folks NOT install it. Good pilots should recognize the stall in the C-172 also, but Cessna and the FAA see fit to install one of these tabs, for those less than "reasonably competent" pilots.dav1111 said:If I had it to do over again I would not have installed the
stall warning as it is a waste of time and does little to help with
stall warning. If you have it set right on the money and can't tell
that you are way too slow you are a really bad pilot. If you have it
set just a little bit high and fly a no power approach with full flaps
it is going to sound off long before your wheels touch down in a full
flare power off landing which can cause some passengers a little
concern. Set a little low it does nothing until after you have already
started recovery from a full stall.
The RV-10 stall with my IO-540 and MT prop is so predictable and
recognizable in level flight that it is hard for me to understand how
any reasonably competent pilot who has put the RV-10 through full flight
testing would ever need the stall warning device.
In addition, unless you round off the edges of the stall warning blade
you WILL catch your shirt on it and bend it, which then makes it useless
until you test and re-test where it needs to be bent to get it right on
the money. Ask me how I know!!
I'm betting quite a few guys who have stalled and spun at low altitude thought this way too. It is very easy to convince ourselves we are better than all those dumb smucks who crashed, but they probably thought they were pretty good too. It is easy to get distracted, and miss something that logically should be obvious (stick force and mushy controls at high AOA, leading to stall, or low voltage light on aircraft with electrically-dependent engine, resulting in engine failure, etc). Don't assume that you will always be perfectly alert. You won't.ASI works for me and keeping bank angles under 30 degrees below 500 feet. I thank Van's for thinking about our safety however.
MichRV10 said:It's amazing how everyone tries to compare the 10 to 172's, or what other spam cans they can think of, but let me assure non RV-10 pilots that you are comparing apples to grapes. Two different planes altogether.
I have flown everything from Cessna 140 to Citation Bravo, and the 10 is in a league of it's own. The most affordable finest flying single engine aircraft on the market. See ya at Sun n Fun. Yes I'm flying my 10 to Lakeland.
75Hrs and still ticking.
Kevin Horton said:I'm betting quite a few guys who have stalled and spun at low altitude thought this way too. It is very easy to convince ourselves we are better than all those dumb smucks who crashed, but they probably thought they were pretty good too. It is easy to get distracted, and miss something that logically should be obvious (stick force and mushy controls at high AOA, leading to stall, or low voltage light on aircraft with electrically-dependent engine, resulting in engine failure, etc). Don't assume that you will always be perfectly alert. You won't.
If the RV-10 lacks good natural stall warning, then it would be prudent to install some sort of aural artificial stall warning. It should be aural stall warning, as you might not be looking at the light or AOA indicator if you inadvertently stall.
rv6ejguy said:I'm always locked on the ASI below 500 feet and l fly granny patterns at 85-90 knots until I'm on final. Most RV stall accidents have been from yankin' and banking down low at low AS or departure stalls with crazy deck angles. You just can't stall at 85 knots with low bank angles in an RV or even with lots of inattention letting it slip to 65 for that matter.
I'd be more worried about buying the farm flying night VFR or over the rocks which is why I don't.
If you think all the warnings in the world will save you from this sort of accident, you might want to read up on the USAF C5 crash last year. 3 pilots, AOA, GPWS and ASI and they still stalled it and crashed. Bad, bad piloting and CRM.
Yes, I could make the same mistake but I've had my scare and it's totally imprinted on me- forever.
During all the listed scenerios, the ASI works entirely normally. The advantage of an aural stall warning during these situations would be just that, that it is aural and will warn you if your attention is diverted.kentb said:...The ASI may not help you out if:
Your at a high alt airport.
Your at high temp.
Your engine is out and your making an off airport landing.
An ultralight appears in front of you on short final.
You have a bird strike on short final...
kentb said:The members of VAF will be sympathetic to your family.
The ASI may not help you out if:
Your at a high alt airport.
Your at high temp.
Your engine is out and your making an off airport landing.
An ultralight appears in front of you on short final.
You have a bird strike on short final.
There are just to many possibilities to list.
Play it safe, have as much help as you can get. Having a stall warning may not save you, but it might.
Kent
"Tongue depressor" stall vanes work by sensing the movement of the airflow's stagnation point, which moves as the AOA changes. At low AOA the stagnation point is ahead of the stall vane, so is pushed back or down. At high AOA the stagnation point is behind the vane, so it is pushed forward or up. Thus it should, in theory, provide a stall warning at the same AOA, no matter what the g loading, angle of bank, CG, etc. However, the AOA at stall would probably be affected by the flap angle and the amount of power produced by the engine. The builder should do testing to investigate these effects to ensure that the stall warning was adequate in the worst case condition.rv6ejguy said:Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, vane type stall warning systems are insensitive to G/ bank angle influences in stall speed. I haven't tried an experiment with this. Maybe someone who has, can tell us?
Not sure what is in the box that all the hoses plug into, but the cost may be more than $85.00. But even if it is cheaper in parts cost, there is still the cost to manufacture and test each unit. I know that they are all tested, because I have taken a tour of their factory. The other think that people forget about is the development cost of a product. This cost is recouped over the life of the product, so each unit has to have some of that cost in it.gasman said:The AOA SPORT is priced at $875.00. It has been out for about 10 years. The cost to mfg this product is about (just a guess) $85.00.
Would you pay $400.00 for this item? Maybe AFS would sell many more if they would just be realistic in their price.
The unit just reads pressure at two locations and sounds a voice alarm at a given spread. This is RADIO SHACK stuff!!!!!
The LRI is simple and is all around a better system at 1/2 the price. But it is still to high priced. It should be about $200.00
So, what would you pay for a Angle Of Attack system? The next best thing to seatbelts.![]()
Warren
How do you propose to convert pressure readings to AOA? It isn't a simple conversion. The amount of fuel you would burn during the flight testing to test out different algorithms would probably be more than the cost of an AOA system with a proven algorithm.RV8RIVETER said:I agree AOA systems seem pretty high. I had been toying with the idea of building my own, since are you are really doing is measuring a difference in pressure between two points.
Kevin Horton said:How do you propose to convert pressure readings to AOA? It isn't a simple conversion. The amount of fuel you would burn during the flight testing to test out different algorithms would probably be more than the cost of an AOA system with a proven algorithm.