Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Maneuvers

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kellym



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:30 am    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

I know that most 2 place RVs are considered designed for aerobatic
maneuvers, and the RV-10 is not. However, having looked for awhile, I
find nothing indicating where that line is drawn. Not even sure where
such information might be found.
I would "assume" that most or all commercial maneuvers are acceptable
for the 10. Then comes what may or may not have been tested with regard
to spins. I haven't found anything that explicitly says they are
prohibited, or something less. I'm guessing that during the development
Vans may have done a little testing, but just don't find any guidance.
I'm not looking to do any thing beyond commercial maneuvers, just would
like to have more information on what to try to avoid. Perhaps some of
the early builders may have more information?


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bcondrey



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 580

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 7:06 am    Post subject: Re: Maneuvers Reply with quote

The previous version of the Vans website had a lot more info about the development and testing of the -10. I don’t recall details, but the yellow factory -10 was outfitted for a spin chute to support their testing. I recall it mentioned that the -10 recovered nicely and the spin recovery chute was never needed. Maybe a call to Van’s would answer your questions.

Bob


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tim Olson



Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2870

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 7:18 am    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

I don't really have any references to cite, just things I've heard for
years on the email list.

I'd always heard that Van's did test the RV-10 for spins, and either
it was found that it required a spin chute for guaranteed recovery, or
that when they tested it they had a spin chute. I don't have the
details on it, unfortunately. But I did hear that they do not state
that spins were approved in the RV-10, so I've never spun mine.

I had not heard the same thing regarding the RV-14, so I've done
spins in that plane, although I've never let it wind up more
than a couple turns. The RV-14 does recover very easily if you're
only into it for a couple turns, but the rudder seems significantly
larger overall than the -10.

I'm not sure where the line is drawn, but I am guessing it is
really just based on G loading. The RV-10, from the Van's site
shows +3.8/-1.5G for standard category limitations.

The many of the other 2 seat RV's show +6.0/-3.0G when in the
aerobatic category, and the overall design was for the utility
category of +4.4/-1.75G.

All that is from this link:
https://www.vansaircraft.com/flying-an-rv/

So my guess is the G-loading is really the only significant difference,
with the exception of course that perhaps the RV-10 doesn't spin
recover as well. I am sure the RV-10 could potentially perform
many of the same maneuvers that you would do in an RV-14, but
you would be very close to the margins with the RV-10 even when
done correctly for some of them, so it wouldn't be advised.
I've been to at least 4.1G in the RV-14, for instance, and that
would be over the limit for the RV-10.

Tim


On 8/19/19 9:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
Quote:


I know that most 2 place RVs are considered designed for aerobatic
maneuvers, and the RV-10 is not. However, having looked for awhile, I
find nothing indicating where that line is drawn. Not even sure where
such information might be found.
I would "assume" that most or all commercial maneuvers are acceptable
for the 10. Then comes what may or may not have been tested with regard
to spins. I haven't found anything that explicitly says they are
prohibited, or something less. I'm guessing that during the development
Vans may have done a little testing, but just don't find any guidance.
I'm not looking to do any thing beyond commercial maneuvers, just would
like to have more information on what to try to avoid. Perhaps some of
the early builders may have more information?


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
philperry9



Joined: 23 Nov 2011
Posts: 379

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:07 am    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

Thanks to The WayBack Machine, I have attached is a .pdf (that I created) from the old Van's website.  It contains information on the development of the RV-10 and there is a photo of the prototype aircraft with a spin chute attached to it.  I don't see any information on the tests, but there is proof that it was adapted with a chute for testing.

I'm really providing the .pdf so this information is not lost forever.  There's some good info in there that we will find useful until the final -10 is no longer airworthy.  It was basically a blog on 8 pages of their site, so there may be a couple of spots in their narrative where the text appears to be disjointed.
I'll keep poking around to see if I can find anything definitive on the spin testing results (or anything else significant).
Phil
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:23 AM Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com (Tim(at)myrv10.com)> wrote:

Quote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>

I don't really have any references to cite, just things I've heard for
years on the email list.

I'd always heard that Van's did test the RV-10 for spins, and either
it was found that it required a spin chute for guaranteed recovery, or
that when they tested it they had a spin chute.  I don't have the
details on it, unfortunately.  But I did hear that they do not state
that spins were approved in the RV-10, so I've never spun mine.

I had not heard the same thing regarding the RV-14, so I've done
spins in that plane, although I've never let it wind up more
than a couple turns.  The RV-14 does recover very easily if you're
only into it for a couple turns, but the rudder seems significantly
larger overall than the -10.

I'm not sure where the line is drawn, but I am guessing it is
really just based on G loading.  The RV-10, from the Van's site
shows +3.8/-1.5G for standard category limitations.

The many of the other 2 seat RV's show +6.0/-3.0G when in the
aerobatic category, and the overall design was for the utility
category of +4.4/-1.75G.

All that is from this link:
https://www.vansaircraft.com/flying-an-rv/

So my guess is the G-loading is really the only significant difference,
with the exception of course that perhaps the RV-10 doesn't spin
recover as well.   I am sure the RV-10 could potentially perform
many of the same maneuvers that you would do in an RV-14, but
you would be very close to the margins with the RV-10 even when
done correctly for some of them, so it wouldn't be advised.
I've been to at least 4.1G in the RV-14, for instance, and that
would be over the limit for the RV-10.

Tim




On 8/19/19 9:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com (kellym(at)aviating.com)>
>
> I know that most 2 place RVs are considered designed for aerobatic
> maneuvers, and the RV-10 is not. However, having looked for awhile, I
> find nothing indicating where that line is drawn. Not even sure where
> such information might be found.
> I would "assume" that most or all commercial maneuvers are acceptable
> for the 10. Then comes what may or may not have been tested with regard
> to spins. I haven't found anything that explicitly says they are
> prohibited, or something less. I'm guessing that during the development
> Vans may have done a little testing, but just don't find any guidance.
> I'm not looking to do any thing beyond commercial maneuvers, just would
> like to have more information on what to try to avoid. Perhaps some of
> the early builders may have more information?


===========
-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===========
FORUMS -
eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
===========
WIKI -
errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
===========
b Site -
          -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===========




--

Phil Perry, EAA Lifetime #834284
President, EAA Chapter 59 - Waco, Texas
EAA—The Spirit of Aviation


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List



VansRV10_Development.pdf
 Description:

Download
 Filename:  VansRV10_Development.pdf
 Filesize:  1.03 MB
 Downloaded:  631 Time(s)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tim Olson



Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2870

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:35 am    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

Thanks for posting the .pdf Phil, I've saved it myself so that we have
at least a couple copies of it.
Tim

On 8/19/19 11:05 AM, Phil Perry wrote:
Quote:
Thanks to The WayBack Machine, I have attached is a .pdf (that I
created) from the old Van's website.  It contains information on the
development of the RV-10 and there is a photo of the prototype aircraft
with a spin chute attached to it.  I don't see any information on the
tests, but there is proof that it was adapted with a chute for testing.

I'm really providing the .pdf so this information is not lost forever.
There's some good info in there that we will find useful until the final
-10 is no longer airworthy.  It was basically a blog on 8 pages of their
site, so there may be a couple of spots in their narrative where the
text appears to be disjointed.

I'll keep poking around to see if I can find anything definitive on the
spin testing results (or anything else significant).

Phil




- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kellym



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 12:23 pm    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

Thanks Phil. Good material.
Kelly

On 8/19/2019 9:05 AM, Phil Perry wrote:
Quote:
Thanks to The WayBack Machine, I have attached is a .pdf (that I
created) from the old Van's website.  It contains information on the
development of the RV-10 and there is a photo of the prototype aircraft
with a spin chute attached to it.  I don't see any information on the
tests, but there is proof that it was adapted with a chute for testing.

I'm really providing the .pdf so this information is not lost forever.
There's some good info in there that we will find useful until the final
-10 is no longer airworthy.  It was basically a blog on 8 pages of their
site, so there may be a couple of spots in their narrative where the
text appears to be disjointed.

I'll keep poking around to see if I can find anything definitive on the
spin testing results (or anything else significant).

Phil




On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:23 AM Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com
<mailto:Tim(at)myrv10.com>> wrote:



I don't really have any references to cite, just things I've heard for
years on the email list.

I'd always heard that Van's did test the RV-10 for spins, and either
it was found that it required a spin chute for guaranteed recovery, or
that when they tested it they had a spin chute.  I don't have the
details on it, unfortunately.  But I did hear that they do not state
that spins were approved in the RV-10, so I've never spun mine.

I had not heard the same thing regarding the RV-14, so I've done
spins in that plane, although I've never let it wind up more
than a couple turns.  The RV-14 does recover very easily if you're
only into it for a couple turns, but the rudder seems significantly
larger overall than the -10.

I'm not sure where the line is drawn, but I am guessing it is
really just based on G loading.  The RV-10, from the Van's site
shows +3.8/-1.5G for standard category limitations.

The many of the other 2 seat RV's show +6.0/-3.0G when in the
aerobatic category, and the overall design was for the utility
category of +4.4/-1.75G.

All that is from this link:
https://www.vansaircraft.com/flying-an-rv/

So my guess is the G-loading is really the only significant difference,
with the exception of course that perhaps the RV-10 doesn't spin
recover as well.   I am sure the RV-10 could potentially perform
many of the same maneuvers that you would do in an RV-14, but
you would be very close to the margins with the RV-10 even when
done correctly for some of them, so it wouldn't be advised.
I've been to at least 4.1G in the RV-14, for instance, and that
would be over the limit for the RV-10.

Tim




On 8/19/19 9:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
<kellym(at)aviating.com <mailto:kellym(at)aviating.com>>
>
> I know that most 2 place RVs are considered designed for aerobatic
> maneuvers, and the RV-10 is not. However, having looked for
awhile, I
> find nothing indicating where that line is drawn. Not even sure
where
> such information might be found.
> I would "assume" that most or all commercial maneuvers are
acceptable
> for the 10. Then comes what may or may not have been tested with
regard
> to spins. I haven't found anything that explicitly says they are
> prohibited, or something less. I'm guessing that during the
development
> Vans may have done a little testing, but just don't find any
guidance.
> I'm not looking to do any thing beyond commercial maneuvers, just
would
> like to have more information on what to try to avoid. Perhaps
some of
> the early builders may have more information?


===========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===========
FORUMS -
eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
===========
WIKI -
errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
===========
b Site -
          -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===========





--

*/Phil Perry, /*EAA Lifetime #834284

President, EAA Chapter 59 - Waco, Texas____

EAA—/The Spirit of Aviation/



- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kellym



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:54 am    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

Phil found and pointed me to a very interesting discussion on VAF from
12 years ago:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=86829

Also, in the current issue of AOPA Pilot Barry Schiff has an interesting
article on what he had to demonstrate to a CAA examiner for spins on his
CFI ride many moons ago. Enlightened me as to the many different ways to
get into a spin.

On 8/19/2019 9:05 AM, Phil Perry wrote:
Quote:
Thanks to The WayBack Machine, I have attached is a .pdf (that I
created) from the old Van's website.  It contains information on the
development of the RV-10 and there is a photo of the prototype aircraft
with a spin chute attached to it.  I don't see any information on the
tests, but there is proof that it was adapted with a chute for testing.

I'm really providing the .pdf so this information is not lost forever.
There's some good info in there that we will find useful until the final
-10 is no longer airworthy.  It was basically a blog on 8 pages of their
site, so there may be a couple of spots in their narrative where the
text appears to be disjointed.

I'll keep poking around to see if I can find anything definitive on the
spin testing results (or anything else significant).

Phil




On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:23 AM Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com
<mailto:Tim(at)myrv10.com>> wrote:



I don't really have any references to cite, just things I've heard for
years on the email list.

I'd always heard that Van's did test the RV-10 for spins, and either
it was found that it required a spin chute for guaranteed recovery, or
that when they tested it they had a spin chute.  I don't have the
details on it, unfortunately.  But I did hear that they do not state
that spins were approved in the RV-10, so I've never spun mine.

I had not heard the same thing regarding the RV-14, so I've done
spins in that plane, although I've never let it wind up more
than a couple turns.  The RV-14 does recover very easily if you're
only into it for a couple turns, but the rudder seems significantly
larger overall than the -10.

I'm not sure where the line is drawn, but I am guessing it is
really just based on G loading.  The RV-10, from the Van's site
shows +3.8/-1.5G for standard category limitations.


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bob Turner



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 881
Location: Castro Valley, CA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:35 am    Post subject: Re: Maneuvers Reply with quote

I suspect Vans is just following FAA rules for standard airplanes here. The -10 design load limit of 3.8+ is the same as Normal category. Normal category airplanes can be used for all the required commercial maneuvers, but, I think, the faa won’t approve anything less than Utility class for spins.

- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kellym



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:59 am    Post subject: Maneuvers Reply with quote

I am sure you are correct. I am just a little surprised that there is
virtually no mention in any of the literature as to what Van's considers
acceptable vs unacceptable. Seems like it would help limit their liability.

On 8/20/2019 10:35 AM, Bob Turner wrote:
Quote:


I suspect Vans is just following FAA rules for standard airplanes here. The -10 design load limit of 3.8+ is the same as Normal category. Normal category airplanes can be used for all the required commercial maneuvers, but, I think, the faa won’t approve anything less than Utility class for spins.

--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB




Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=490968#490968











- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bob Turner



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 881
Location: Castro Valley, CA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Maneuvers Reply with quote

I am not a lawyer. But I suspect that saying nothing is in their legal best interest. Remember, that legally, Vans is not an airplane manufacturer; they are a parts supplier. You and I are the manufacturer. Publishing anything at all opens them up to a claim that they are acting as a manufacturer, and the potential liability that goes with that.

- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group