If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
(AllTheGoodUseridsAreGone wrote)
Apart from the "Metal" requirement, you've described the Vision plans-built. (It's composite.) See http://www.visionaircraft.com Their website quickly grew rather tiresome. Hope their plane is better designed than that darn web page. http://www.visionaircraft.com Montblack |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Charlie" wrote in message .. . If you can revise your cruise requirements downward slightly, you might look at the Sonex. Charlie Yep, I looked long and hard at the Sonex - a great little plane! The info pack and especially the flying video with Tony Spicer are compelling. However, by all accounts the Sonex is a "sport plane" (and apparently a very good one!) but many builders/flyers (and the factory) note that it's "neutrally stable" and not really made for cross-country. That's not meant to be critical - it's actually an attribute for its' intended mission - just doesn't fit my needs since I'm really looking for economical distance travelling...8-( I'm really up against what I'm sure many of you have gone through - and that is the requirements of She Who Must Be Obeyed 8-)... I'm thinking along the lines of Beech Sundowner for comfort and simplicity but with an extra 40-50 knots - she's thinking Business Class on Cathay Pacific. A compromise is going to be difficult! Bill |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"John Oliveira" wrote in message ... If you can afford it, write vans the check. You won't be sorry. John Oliveira "AINut" wrote in message ... Look at the Mustang II, like we have. URL for the company he http://www.mustangaero.com/ Kits or plans. The Mustang looks really interesting - more than I need in terms of performance and looks like it would take a LONG time to build - but that's okay. Seems anything worthwhile WILL take forever. I wish Vans had something more of a "mixed" approach - i.e. fabricate what you want and buy the rest "ala carte" - but if that doesn't fit their business model, so be it - I can understand that. I'll keep thinking it over - but it would be good therapy if I could at least bend up some used beer cans in the meantime 8-)... Actually, the "perfect" solution (to keep the wife happy) would probably be a Canadair CRJ-200 converted for private use with a "tastefully redone interior". Meanwhile, I'll start bending some parts soon (likely for the Mustang) just to keep busy.... Thanks for all the input! Netgeek wrote: I've been searching quite a bit for something equivalent or similar to an RV-9 but available as a plans-built. So far - no luck (seems that Van has done too good a job 8-)... Basic requirements are - well - same as an RV-9: Metal, 2-seat (not tandem), power from O-200/O-235/IO-240/O-320 - minimum cruise around 150-175mph, range approximately 500-600 NM+, very stable (non-aerobatic) Anybody here know of such a thing - or is it time to write Van a check 8-)...? Thanks for any input. Bill |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Netgeek" wrote in
: "Charlie" wrote in message .. . If you can revise your cruise requirements downward slightly, you might look at the Sonex. Charlie Yep, I looked long and hard at the Sonex - a great little plane! The info pack and especially the flying video with Tony Spicer are compelling. However, by all accounts the Sonex is a "sport plane" (and apparently a very good one!) but many builders/flyers (and the factory) note that it's "neutrally stable" and not really made for cross-country. That's not meant to be critical - it's actually an attribute for its' intended mission - just doesn't fit my needs since I'm really looking for economical distance travelling...8-( I'm really up against what I'm sure many of you have gone through - and that is the requirements of She Who Must Be Obeyed 8-)... I'm thinking along the lines of Beech Sundowner for comfort and simplicity but with an extra 40-50 knots - she's thinking Business Class on Cathay Pacific. A compromise is going to be difficult! Bill You should fly in a Sonex before you dismiss it. A Sonex with a Jab 3300 cruises near 160mph. I don't think a RV-9 is even possitively stable. A Sonex is very easy to fly, you can hold the stick between your knees for a bit if nessasary and you could easily ignore the rudder except for landing in crosswinds. How long distance is your distance? -- -- ET :-) "A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."---- Douglas Adams |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Netgeek wrote:
"John Oliveira" wrote in message ... If you can afford it, write vans the check. You won't be sorry. John Oliveira "AINut" wrote in message ... Look at the Mustang II, like we have. URL for the company he http://www.mustangaero.com/ Kits or plans. The Mustang looks really interesting - more than I need in terms of performance and looks like it would take a LONG time to build - but that's okay. Seems anything worthwhile WILL take forever. I wish Vans had something more of a "mixed" approach - i.e. fabricate what you want and buy the rest "ala carte" - but if that doesn't fit their business model, so be it - I can understand that. I'll keep thinking it over - but it would be good therapy if I could at least bend up some used beer cans in the meantime 8-)... Actually, the "perfect" solution (to keep the wife happy) would probably be a Canadair CRJ-200 converted for private use with a "tastefully redone interior". Meanwhile, I'll start bending some parts soon (likely for the Mustang) just to keep busy.... Thanks for all the input! Apologies for the convoluted order of posts.... If your requirements include non-acro/very stable, the M-II really ain't your plane. I haven't flown a -9, but I have flown several -4's (currently own one), -6's & an -8. I've also flown several M-II's & Thorps. All have more or less neutral stability. They are all great flying planes but aren't designed for your mission. The -9A was designed from the beginning for pilots with no tailwheel time & limited experience in trainers like C-150's Pipers, etc. It's reported to be much more stable than the other RV's & rumor in the RV world is that all the Van's employees take the -9A on trips if they get to pick. How about the long winged Sonex? (But you really should just write that check to Van's. Unless you are a consummate scrounger, you'll likely spend very nearly as much for a scratch built plane before you are done & believe me, there's plenty left to do with a kit.) Charlie Netgeek wrote: I've been searching quite a bit for something equivalent or similar to an RV-9 but available as a plans-built. So far - no luck (seems that Van has done too good a job 8-)... Basic requirements are - well - same as an RV-9: Metal, 2-seat (not tandem), power from O-200/O-235/IO-240/O-320 - minimum cruise around 150-175mph, range approximately 500-600 NM+, very stable (non-aerobatic) Anybody here know of such a thing - or is it time to write Van a check 8-)...? Thanks for any input. Bill |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Charlie" wrote in message .. . Apologies for the convoluted order of posts.... If your requirements include non-acro/very stable, the M-II really ain't your plane. I haven't flown a -9, but I have flown several -4's (currently own one), -6's & an -8. I've also flown several M-II's & Thorps. All have more or less neutral stability. They are all great flying planes but aren't designed for your mission. The -9A was designed from the beginning for pilots with no tailwheel time & limited experience in trainers like C-150's Pipers, etc. It's reported to be much more stable than the other RV's & rumor in the RV world is that all the Van's employees take the -9A on trips if they get to pick. How about the long winged Sonex? (But you really should just write that check to Van's. Unless you are a consummate scrounger, you'll likely spend very nearly as much for a scratch built plane before you are done & believe me, there's plenty left to do with a kit.) Well, I certainly appreciate all the input from you guys! Looks like we're back to square one. By that I mean - in looking around, the RV9 seemed like the perfect plane for what I'd like to do and the mission - was hoping I could find a plans-built equivalent that would allow me to "sneak up on it" and start small (and cheap). The Sonex was tempting - but realistically is meant for something else. The M-II is probably more slippery, higher performance, and with a longer build time than I'd hoped (but what a great plane!). So, I'm back where I started - the RV-9 looks like the right plane for my needs (and lack of talent - in both piloting and building 8-)... I guess Van is going to get a check after all. I did read somewhere exactly what Charlie said - the RV9 is the most stable platform that Van has offered, great for IFR (even though that's not my intent for now). So, time to bite the bullet, fatten up the piggy-bank and face the inevitable - although that's not too onerous 8-)... Thanks again! Bill - Probably a future RV9 builder................. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Netgeek wrote...
So, I'm back where I started - the RV-9 looks like the right plane for my needs (and lack of talent - in both piloting and building 8-)... As has been posted already, the -9 plans might be sufficient for scratch-building one. The -4 plans are (or were when I got mine). If you think you lack building skills, however, be advised that scratch building one requires alot more skill than building from a kit. The initial parts cost is less, but you'll almost certainly screw up more parts, and it's going to take a LOT longer. Dave 'my kit took long enough' Hyde RV-4 N416RV, first flight 21 Jan 04. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Hyde" wrote in message ... As has been posted already, the -9 plans might be sufficient for scratch-building one. The -4 plans are (or were when I got mine). If you think you lack building skills, however, be advised that scratch building one requires alot more skill than building from a kit. The initial parts cost is less, but you'll almost certainly screw up more parts, and it's going to take a LOT longer. I think the decision has been pretty much made - to build an RV9 from a kit. My delusions about building from plans have been pretty well shattered for now - maybe next time (in a different life). Even so - I'll bet a few beers that it will take me longer than most others and I'll figure out how to to screw it up better than most 8-). Time will tell - fortunately I've got lots of time (I think - and hope!). |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Netgeek" wrote Yep, I looked long and hard at the Sonex - a great little plane! The info pack and especially the flying video with Tony Spicer are compelling. However, by all accounts the Sonex is a "sport plane" (and apparently a very good one!) but many builders/flyers (and the factory) note that it's "neutrally stable" and not really made for cross-country. Slap an autopilot in it, for less than $2000, and it would be "real" stable. -- Jim in NC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
want to trade 601 plans for 701 plans | [email protected] | Home Built | 0 | January 27th 05 07:50 PM |
Unused plans question | Doc Font | Home Built | 0 | December 8th 04 09:16 PM |
Modifying Vision plans for retractable gear... | Chris | Home Built | 1 | February 27th 04 09:23 PM |
Plans Built Glider | Jim Culp | Soaring | 6 | September 8th 03 10:14 AM |
Plans Built Glider? | Eggs | Soaring | 3 | September 6th 03 10:21 PM |