Aircraft info/advice

[Barry]

Thanks in advance.

I'm looking into building an airplane kit. All the experience here could
probably help me as opposed to a blind search. I'm looking for a kit that
would be consider IFR flyable. Would probably lean towards four seat but a
my wife won't fly is probably not mandatory. I would like something that
would at least approach 200mph. And I would also like a quick build option.
Metal/composite probably doesn't matter. Price is a moderate issue. A
Lancair IV-P fully decked out would not be out of reach but truthfully more
than I would be probably willing to spend. I would like something considered
safe and practical. I don't need a plane with fighter like
characteristics. I would like add a full range of equipment that I would
feel would make it safer both VFR and IFR. ie GPS, Autopilot ( can you do
this in kits ?) and IFR capable. Am I asking too much?

Thanks for any advice of planes I may look into. I haven't flown in
several years so I apologize if some of my questions are stupid or outdated.
I would like to build now and the begin flying again especially as I
approach the time I would like to retire.

One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10. Any comments on
this? Really have not come across any other options.


Thanks

Barry

[Rich S.]

"Barry" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for any advice of planes I may look into. I haven't flown in
> several years so I apologize if some of my questions are stupid or
> outdated. I would like to build now and the begin flying again especially
> as I approach the time I would like to retire.
>
> One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10. Any comments
> on this? Really have not come across any other options.

Barry..........

You have made a good choice. If you really want to fly, go buy a used
Bonanza or Comanche.

Rich S.

[Kyle Boatright]

"Barry" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks in advance.
>
> I'm looking into building an airplane kit. All the experience here could
> probably help me as opposed to a blind search. I'm looking for a kit that
> would be consider IFR flyable. Would probably lean towards four seat but
> a my wife won't fly is probably not mandatory. I would like something
> that would at least approach 200mph. And I would also like a quick build
> option. Metal/composite probably doesn't matter. Price is a moderate
> issue. A Lancair IV-P fully decked out would not be out of reach but
> truthfully more than I would be probably willing to spend. I would like
> something considered safe and practical. I don't need a plane with
> fighter like characteristics. I would like add a full range of equipment
> that I would feel would make it safer both VFR and IFR. ie GPS, Autopilot
> ( can you do this in kits ?) and IFR capable. Am I asking too much?
>
> Thanks for any advice of planes I may look into. I haven't flown in
> several years so I apologize if some of my questions are stupid or
> outdated. I would like to build now and the begin flying again especially
> as I approach the time I would like to retire.
>
> One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10. Any comments
> on this? Really have not come across any other options.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Barry

The RV-10 appears to be *the* choice in that market. It fits all of your
criteria and has reasonable pattern speeds, unlike the Lancair. At Oshkosh
this year, my wife thought the Lancair was a really neat looking airplane.
I told her that it is fast too, but if you ever lost the engine, your
chances of surviving an off-airport landing would be greatly reduced
compared to something you could put on the ground at a significantly lower
speed. FYI, the listed stall speed of the RV-10 is 63 mph, with Lancair
listing a stall speed 10 mph higher for the IV or IVP. My gut feeling is
that the Lancair's stall speed is with the aircraft hanging on its prop at
full power, which ain't an option once the engine quits...

KB

[john smith]

Barry wrote:
> One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10. Any comments on
> this? Really have not come across any other options.


The really nice thing about the RV-10... it has lots of backseat leg
room. I am 6'-2"/6'-3", and I had inches to spare between my knees and
the front seat back.

[Michael]

> One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10.
> Any comments on this? Really have not come across any other options.

That's because there really are not many options in that class. You're
looking for a plane that is a useful traveling machine, not a toy.

The only problem with the RV-10 is that it hasn't had a chance to prove
itself yet - not many flying. On the other hand, it's been a long,
long time since Van came up with a dud. It will probably be OK. Most
of Van's designs don't carry enough fuel to be serious IFR machines (a
hard IFR flight generally calls for launching with at least 2 hours of
reserves) but I understand the RV-10 is going to have a 5+ hour range
so that should be OK.

You need to pay attention to landing speed, especially for an IFR
machine - anything that has to land much over 60 mph really needs two
engines. In the certified world, anything that has to land over 70 mph
is required to have two engines (and a certain minimum performance with
one shut down). All the slick efficient fast glass singles land at 70+
mph. I believe the RV-10 is just a bit over 60, so just on the upper
edge of tolerable if you want a fighting chance of surviving an engine
failure in IMC.

A friend of mine was looking to buy (not build) an experimental that
met pretty much your requirements. In the end, he compromised some on
speed and bought a Mooney. He just couldn't find anything sutiable in
the homebuilt arena that he could afford.

Michael

[Kevin O'Brien]

On 2005-08-08 16:57:27 -0400, "Barry" > said:

> IFR flyable.
> lean towards four seat ... not mandatory.
> approach 200mph.
> quick build option.
> Price is a moderate issue.
> A Lancair IV-P fully decked out would not be out of reach but
> truthfully more than I would be probably willing to spend.
> safe and practical.
> I don't need a plane with fighter like characteristics.

Barry, that is a good, logical list of requirements. Only you know,
though, how you prioritize them. For instance, some of the other
responces seemed to assume you would be flying hard IMC a lot. That's
not what I'm getting -- I'm getting you want to be legal to fly in the
system and current to shoot an approach if you need to to visit the
grandkids.

Bear in mind that instrument flying is a highly perishable skill. You
gotta be sharpening it all the time or it gets dull on you.

> I would like add a full range of equipment that I would feel would make
> it safer both VFR and IFR. ie GPS, Autopilot ( can you do this in kits
> ?) and IFR capable. Am I asking too much?

This is routine. Lancair Kit has had a lot of builders through their
(very excellent) Builder Assistance program, where they build major
parts of the plane on site with factory jigs and professional help as
required. And all but one of them (including Legacy FG builders, "the
bottom of the line") put in IFR panels.

The January 2005 Kitplanes has a breakdown on autopilots for experimentals.

> I haven't flown in several years

Then you need to budget time and training to improve the most important
piece of safety equipment -- the pilot.

> One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10. Any
> comments on this? Really have not come across any other options.

The Lancair ES meets all your requirements. The comments others have
made about a high landing speed are also true. You can keep it down a
bit by building it as light as you can. The canards are the same way,
high landing speeds.

Also, why do you want to go 200 per? Especially, once you retire? I
suggest, since you are going to want to sharpen your pilot skills
anyway, you get a couple of new charts and pull out your E6B. Then
flight plan the flight you usually make or a typical flight you know
you'd really take. Call 1-800-WX-BRIEF and use today's weather. Flight
plan the same flight at 100 (Skyhawk), 130 (Skylane), 160 (210) and 200
knots. There's a big difference between 100 and 200 but... unless your
usual flight is from New York to LA you'll find that you usually have
to give up a lot to get a fast cruise speed.

Aerocomp builds a number of kits that are ugly but strong and
surprisingly fast.

One advantage of the RV-10 that can be adduced from other Van's
products is, that it is likely to have good resale value. Kit aircraft
generally have poor resale value and sell for little more than the
value of the motor and other certified/TSOd parts.

However, there are few RV-10s out there. Bear in mind that even good
designers occasionally lay an egg (as Chris Heintz did with the CH810).

Several others have suggested that if you want to fly, not to build per
se, you may be better off buying a plane. A Cirrus SR22 meets most of
your requirements, and with the auto-like interior and the emergency
parachute, you might even get your wife into it.

cheers

-=K=-

Rule #1: Don't hit anything big.

[Barry]

Kecin, thanks for the info. I'll have to check out the Lancair and the
Aerocomop though I am not familiar with the latter. You are right, the
purpose of IFR is just in case. I would keep my skills up.

Unfortunately, I don't think anything short of a big piece of jewelery on
the other end of the trip would get my wife into the plane. Even then, once
she got it she would rather walk back.

Thanks

Barry



"Kevin O'Brien" <kevin@org-header-is-my-domain-name> wrote in message
news:2005081902353243658%kevin@orgheaderismydomain name...
> On 2005-08-08 16:57:27 -0400, "Barry" > said:
> Barry, that is a good, logical list of requirements. Only you know,
> though, how you prioritize them. For instance, some of the other responces
> seemed to assume you would be flying hard IMC a lot. That's not what I'm
> getting -- I'm getting you want to be legal to fly in the system and
> current to shoot an approach if you need to to visit the grandkids.
>
> Bear in mind that instrument flying is a highly perishable skill. You
> gotta be sharpening it all the time or it gets dull on you.
>
> This is routine. Lancair Kit has had a lot of builders through their (very
> excellent) Builder Assistance program, where they build major parts of the
> plane on site with factory jigs and professional help as required. And all
> but one of them (including Legacy FG builders, "the bottom of the line")
> put in IFR panels.
>
> The January 2005 Kitplanes has a breakdown on autopilots for
> experimentals.

>> One specific plane I have been looking at is Van's RV-10. Any comments
>> on this? Really have not come across any other options.
>
> The Lancair ES meets all your requirements. The comments others have made
> about a high landing speed are also true. You can keep it down a bit by
> building it as light as you can. The canards are the same way, high
> landing speeds.
>
> Aerocomp builds a number of kits that are ugly but strong and surprisingly
> fast.
>
> One advantage of the RV-10 that can be adduced from other Van's products
> is, that it is likely to have good resale value. Kit aircraft generally
> have poor resale value and sell for little more than the value of the
> motor and other certified/TSOd parts.
>
> However, there are few RV-10s out there. Bear in mind that even good
> designers occasionally lay an egg (as Chris Heintz did with the CH810).
>
> Several others have suggested that if you want to fly, not to build per
> se, you may be better off buying a plane. A Cirrus SR22 meets most of your
> requirements, and with the auto-like interior and the emergency parachute,
> you might even get your wife into it.
>
> cheers
>
> -=K=-
>
> Rule #1: Don't hit anything big.
>

[rons321]

The RV10 is probably the best choice you could get at this time. It has
about everything you asked for. Good Luck. Ron