Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By hatzflyer
#1240096
Vans aircraft are excellent all round aircraft as witnessed by their popularity.

Vans has a reputation for honesty with regard to his performance claims for his aircraft and I think that is largely justified .

I find his claims for landing distances un realistic though, 200ft for the RV4...yes FEET not yards.

What sort of figures do others achieve on landing and top speed for various model/engine combinations ?
User avatar
By ianfallon
#1240103
It's funny you should post this because my initial impression of the RV is that cruise speed, climb and takeoff distance seem bang on the money but I don't think I could land as short as the figures claim. Perhaps it includes a headwind and a lot of judicious braking :)

Then again I have only a small number of hrs on the RV so not qualified to comment really yet.
User avatar
By ianfallon
#1240104
160mph indicated cruise on 150hp (fixed pitch) at around 2300-2400 rpm (at low level) :D
1800ft/min climb 1-up :D
T/O run - not sure but it's pretty short.
Landing so far not sure but I'd estimate 300-400m (not really braking) but I am a novice
By aerofurb
#1240123
The RV-6 I co-built/owned/operated was (well, still is!) powered by a 200hp IO-360-A1A (angle valve) and a Hartzell CS prop (ex Pitts engine and ex Bulldog prop).

25"/2500 cruise gave 162 KIAS, sustained climb at MAUW was 1750 FPM.

Stall speed was about the same as a PA38 - 48 KIAS clean, 42 KIAS full flap.

Landing and stopped on tarmac without really, really trying was consistently <250m. Take off much the same.

Image



Our present RV, an RV-12, is a little less in cruise, climb, stall, landing and take off and fuel burn than the 6.... :D [That said, rate of roll is damned good - Joe Singleton reckons his as good as his RV-4s were - we just can't go all the way round ... :( ]

Image




Apologies for gratuitous photographs :wink:
User avatar
By flybymike
#1240139
I'm always baffled by what Vans seem to know about aircraft design which other manufacturers seem not to know.
User avatar
By ianfallon
#1240170
I think, at least regarding the RV4, the point of compromise to get the performance is load-lifting and endurance. Yes you can take a passenger and a small amount of luggage and 2.5-3 hrs endurance but a PA28 Warrior has the same engine (as ours) and you get 4 seats and longer endurance. I think of it as Warrior = Ford Focus, RV4 = Lotus Elise.

Aerobatics-wise, C of G limits effectively limit it to 1-up only (or 1+child and half fuel).

On the other side - look at the front profile of the RV4 - very slippery hence the speed :D

Image

So there are your compromises - but a pretty good trade off IMHO especially when you throw in the lovely crisp handling :D

Nice photos aerofurb - I was flying with Joe in the RV4 the other day hopefully I'll have a roll-rate demo in the RV12 soon :D
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
#1240177
[quote="ianfallon"]IWarrior = Ford Focus, RV4 = Lotus Elise.
/quote]

I was thinking I would quite fancy an RV but if they are like a Lotus then I will have to forgo that!

:D
User avatar
By ianfallon
#1240179
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:I was thinking I would quite fancy an RV but if they are like a Lotus then I will have to forgo that!
:D


In terms of space inside, to be fair the RV4 (and 3!) is the 'tight' one, the others are a bit more roomy.
By Andy Hill
#1240190
I find his claims for landing distances un realistic though, 200ft for the RV4...yes FEET not yards.
What sort of figures do others achieve on landing and top speed for various model/engine combinations ?
Firstly, my reading of their website gives 300' at Solo Weight, and 425' at Gross Weight.

NB these are unfactored, from touchdown not 50'. As stated in any performance figures, they could be the best obtained from a skilled test pilot, using brand new brakes / tyres on a dry surface, and with no regard for airmanship / longevity of components.

I would think landing an RV-4 at 1160lbs, stall speed 48mph (42kts), and stamping on the brakes as hard as you could without tipping over, would clearly stop in less than 100m from touchdown.

RV-8 1400lbs / 51mph / 350' again I would say realistic :wink:
User avatar
By DBo
#1240192
hatzflyer wrote:
I find his claims for landing distances un realistic though, 200ft for the RV4...yes FEET not yards.



I just checked on the Vans website & he's quoting 300 ft. Van used to operate his RV3 off a 600ft strip at his family home. If you download "The RV story" Movie from http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/download/Videos/RVStory.zip you'll see various models taking off & landing; its about 25 minutes in. I did read somewhere (probably the RVator) that he doesn't recommend landing like that as he comes in very slow & carrying a lot of power, chops the power to dump the aircraft on the numbers & then gets on the brakes ASAP.

We have an RV-9a with a Wilksch 120 hp diesel & a 2-blade MT VP prop. We operate very comfortably without braking from a strip that's 600m long from hedge to fence. A 400m runway at a licensed airfield is comfortably long enough (clear overrun & approach)….

Dave
Last edited by DBo on Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By nallen
#1240200
According to self-same site, the RV3, which is lighter and stalls slower, requires 50ft more space in which to land... Any rationale for that, or is perhaps a degree of estimating going on here?
User avatar
By DBo
#1240214
nallen wrote:According to self-same site, the RV3, which is lighter and stalls slower, requires 50ft more space in which to land... Any rationale for that, or is perhaps a degree of estimating going on here?


I'd imagine that its not the easiest thing to measure (particularly the exact touchdown spot) & subject to quite a lot of variability. If Van did the test flights on the RV-3 & 4 (which seems quite likely) then he'd have had a fair amount more practice before he did the short landings on the -4.
User avatar
By ianfallon
#1240239
Yes my 300-400m very very rough / conservative estimate is based on runway length required with a hedge just before the threshold at Hinton (27 grass). Factoring in some better technique, more braking and non-novice skill level I think you could cut that down quite a lot.