Ready to pursue dream

[DustMaker]

as a builder of one of the less common kits
Scott

Watcha buildin

 

[Swede]

Hmm, looks like some posts were deleted... Must have drifted from the topic.

The more I look at the RV series, the more impressed I am. Other AC may be cheaper, or faster, but I don't think they have the support and the available networking of Van's.

I'm down to the RV7 or RV8. Basically tandem vs side/side seating. I'm trying to talk my wife into tandem, and so be able to enjoy that awesome panoramic view, although not so awesome in the back seat!

There's an excellent forum for RV's:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/index.php

So much info, my head is spinning a bit. This looks to be one of those projects where it is best to start plugging away on the easy stuff (empennage), and absorb by osmosis enough knowledge to make sound decisions on powerplant, airframe mods, and avionics.

 

[DustMaker]

Hmm, looks like some posts were deleted... Must have drifted from the topic.

but I don't think they have the support and the available networking of Van's.

mmmm - know you are set on aluminum, but have to make point where needed - 1700 canards flyin and the support is there, i know, i'm part of that support network

 

[Swede]

mmmm - know you are set on aluminum, but have to make point where needed - 1700 canards flyin and the support is there, i know, i'm part of that support network

I don't disagree. Most of the composite designs out there are works of art. They are lighter and more efficient than aluminum. I've had Lancair lust for years. It's too bad they seem to have evolved into a high-priced, high-powered company. At least from what I've gathered, they dropped their original design. Their "low-end" Legacy uses a lousy IO-550! What happened to the 160 HP Lancairs?

I do like the canards... I just prefer the traditional configuration a bit more.

In the end, my decision is based mostly upon my own background as a metal guy. It's probably like a wood and fabric mechanic from the 1920's being asked to work on newfangled aluminum plane in 1935. There's going to be some resistance! Aluminum is just what I'm used to.

 

[DustMaker]

just correcting info on the support issue - i can see you are an aluminum comfy kinda person

 

[Huggyu2]

RV-7?? Nahhh... he wants a tandem airplane, I'll bet.

 

[jbDC9]

I'm down to the RV7 or RV8. Basically tandem vs side/side seating. I'm trying to talk my wife into tandem, and so be able to enjoy that awesome panoramic view, although not so awesome in the back seat!

Tandem seats rule! Seriously, if you want tandem seats, build what you want, go with an RV-8. How often will your wife be flying with you anyway? Most likely, not much. My wife actually prefers riding in the back on the rare occasion she flies with me in a rental Citabria... seems a bit roomier than a 172 or Cherokee. She hates riding right seat in a spam can, it's just too crowded.

I'm working on a Quick Build RV-8 myself; been at it for a year and a half or so, maybe done next spring? I hope... If you have or can get the extra $8,000 for the QB, I highly recommend it, it was money well spent to have the wings and fuselage structure basically complete. And even with a QB kit, there's still plenty of work to do.

From what I can see, the RV series has the best bang for the buck when compared to a Lancair or Glasair... those glass birds are just waaay too expensive; plus, they're tri-gear with itty bitty wheels, wouldn't do well on grass; side-by-side seats... no thanks. For me, the RV-8 is as perfect as it gets - tandem seat taildragger, goes both fast and slow, aerobatic... my own little fighter plane. Now I just gotta finish it...

 

[MAJIC9]

something that isnt' exactly emphasized as much as it should -- the people (builders). For me, one of the joys of building was meeting all the great folks who are also building or already flying. Everyone I've met so far has been very helpful and great to hang out.

 

[DustMaker]

From what I can see, the RV series has the best bang for the buck when compared to a Lancair or Glasair... those glass birds are just waaay too expensive; plus, they're tri-gear with itty bitty wheels, wouldn't do well on grass;

well - the cozy airframe is 16,000 and 2+2 seating and for my money - way more bang for the buck than any RV - heh heh heh

 

[Swede]

Moved in...

I have worked harder the last few days than I have in a decade. Probably 20 to 30 pickup + flatbed trailer loads. The new owners of our old house were breathing down our necks, so it ended in a 18 hour manual labor marathon. Middle age sucks, my back and legs are killing me!

The new hangar is utterly full of junk right now, and I need a serious industrial-sized air mover (TX heat) but other than that, the worst is over.

Tandem vs. side/side - jbDC9 is right on, just need to convince the wife that even when dual, the view out both sides (and the fact that we won't be bonking elbows) overrules the benefits of side/side. RV8 Quick-build it's probably going to be. There are some very active RV8 builders in the N TX area, and the networking will be fun.

Engine - I'm thinking one of the Lyc or clones, IO-360 or maybe even the IO-390, and one of the new composite CS props, will work well. Van's does have a lead time on some of their kits, so I need to time delivery to allow the kit to arrive when the hangar is cleared out and work is ready to commence.

I really appreciate the input from everyone here. It'll be a few months before things settle down a bit, but I'm looking forward to actually creating things rather than just thinking about it.

 

[jbDC9]

Van's does have a lead time on some of their kits, so I need to time delivery to allow the kit to arrive when the hangar is cleared out and work is ready to commence.

Yep, the lead time on the QB kits can be rather lengthy... so here's a thought: get started on the tail kit. You'll need a roughly $1000 tool kit to get started, and the empennage kit itself costs $1425, but you can build it on a simple work bench in a corner of your hangar; take your time with it while waiting for the QB wings and fuse to show up. No jigs are needed; took me 14 hrs to build the vertical stab. You can have a finished part in one weekend... pretty cool stuff.

 

[DustMaker]

three weeks ago i helped carry quite a bit of an RV from a hangar to the trailer of a new Plane builder. this was the third transfer of this particular kit.

80 or so percent of these birds are not finished - i would search an unfinished kit out to really get a jump start.

 

[Swede]

three weeks ago i helped carry quite a bit of an RV from a hangar to the trailer of a new Plane builder. this was the third transfer of this particular kit.

80 or so percent of these birds are not finished - i would search an unfinished kit out to really get a jump start.

Aren't there 51% - rule issues with kits like these? In other words, will the feds NOT issue a "repairman certificate" for the airframe if I grab a kit that has changed hands (and been worked on) once or twice? To me, half the allure is being able to do my own maintenance and annual inspections.

 

[MAJIC9]

Aren't there 51% - rule issues with kits like these? In other words, will the feds NOT issue a "repairman certificate" for the airframe if I grab a kit that has changed hands (and been worked on) once or twice?

No issues, and yes you can get a repairman's cert. in a situation like that. It's one of more common misunderstandings of the 51% rule.

 

[DustMaker]

I really like the build - but - can understand those that do not or the project appears too intimidating. Also, do not like waste. there is no problem with finishing a plane that others have started and the internet has made the process of finding these uncompleted projects much easier.

one note - it is often polite to take the finished bird back to whom you purchased it and are benefiting from their labor of love and give them a ride in it. often they just had to stop because of medical reasons