Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:06 AM - Re: RV-9A v. Lightening (jackb911)
2. 09:32 PM - Re: Re: RV-9A v. Lightening (Brian Whittingham)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-9A v. Lightening |
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "jackb911" <jackb911@yahoo.com>
John,
I'm sure that the decision is not easy. I managed to get some time in both an RV6
and an Esqual. (The Esqual is very similar to the Lightning and was sold by
the Lightning folks, but it looks like they no longer support it. However, the
Esqual continues to be sold and supported in Europe. The European people are
advertising for a new US dealer).
On a cross country platform it is my opinion that the Lightning will not be as
stable or as fast as the RV. But then it won't burn as much fuel either. Your
mpg in the Lightning should be better. Balanced control surfaces on the RV were
great, the Esqual and I suspect the Lightning not as good. Either plane might
be able to be tweaked. You might tweak the Lightning to higher speeds than normal,
but the RV9 can likewise be tweaked higher. Stability for cross country
was better in the RV than the Esqual; I suspect primarily due to a combination
of wing loading and overall increased weight and well harmonized control input.
In IFR, I would rather be in the Vans.
Mile for mile, the Lightning should fly at a lower fuel cost. Engine maintenance
- I haven't talked with enough Jabiru people to feel like I have a good comparison.
It is easy to take the Lycoming O-360 to several places near home no matter
where you live for needed attention. The Jabiru doesn't have the same options.
It continues to suffer from heating issues but seems to be a great little
engine and is very smooth. An alternative to the Jabiru might be the Rotax
912 or 914. Almost all of the Esquals flying in Europe use the Rotax with favorable
results. But again, even with the Rotax there are not as many service options.
The Vans has thousands of RV's flying and years of experience. The Lightning is
new with good potential, but little track record (The Esqual has several years
of favorable track record in Europe and a few in the US).
I would guess that you should be able to get the Lightning in the air faster with
less build time. If you would rather be flying than building then the Lightning
seems to have the advantage. On structural strength my nod goes to the RV
especially if aerobatics are considered. The RV has maybe a 1/4 to 1/3 more
baggage area available.
The Esqual is a less complex aircraft for flying, better suited for low time pilots.
The low handling speeds were great! I'm not sure if the Lightning can get
as close to the lower handling speeds, but if so that would be a nice positive.
The looks of the Lightning are impressive! With the right paint job I think that
it (and the Esqual) are my favorites on curb appeal.
Bottom line? The decision will come down to pilot preference. Both planes appear
to be good planes. One has a long track record, the other is just starting
to build one. Before you decide, you should definitely spend some time flying
in both, research the power plant pros and cons, and consider what support you
might need for your plane down the road and will it be there. Don't get so caught
up in your dreams that you overlook the realities of how each plane flies
today. After you have listened to me and everyone else, it is your money, time,
and life that are on the line.
Just another opinion out of many.
Good luck!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=55330#55330
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-9A v. Lightening |
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Brian Whittingham" <dashvii@hotmail.com>
IMile for mile, the Lightning should fly at a lower fuel cost. Engine
maintenance - I haven't talked with enough Jabiru people to feel like I have
a good comparison. It is easy to take the Lycoming O-360 to several places
near home no matter where you live for needed attention. The Jabiru doesn't
have the same options. It continues to suffer from heating issues but seems
to be a great little engine and is very smooth. An alternative to the Jabiru
might be the Rotax 912 or 914. Almost all of the Esquals flying in Europe
use the Rotax with favorable results. But again, even with the Rotax there
are not as many service options.
The Vans has thousands of RV's flying and years of experience. The Lightning
is new with good potential, but little track record (The Esqual has several
years of favorable track record in Europe and a few in the US).
I would guess that you should be able to get the Lightning in the air faster
with less build time. If you would rather be flying than building then the
Lightning seems to have the advantage. On structural strength my nod goes to
the RV especially if aerobatics are considered. The RV has maybe a 1/4 to
1/3 more baggage area available.
The Esqual is a less complex aircraft for flying, better suited for low time
pilots. The low handling speeds were great! I'm not sure if the Lightning
can get as close to the lower handling speeds, but if so that would be a
nice positive.
John,
I have not flown an RV-6, although I plan to get some time in one before
too long. I have flown both the Lightning and Esqual though. It is my
underdstanding that the Esqual company has sold out and possibly reforming
another company to market the Esqual. Right now in Shelbyville there are
two Esquals which are being built. These will be the last two built here
unless they start making new kits again. Although I have not flown the RV6,
Nick that test flew the first Lightning has flown both. So I do have some
basis for comparison here. Nick relayed that the RV-6 was less stable in
roll than the Lightning. The pitch is fairly comparable. Fuel burn at 75%
cruise is about 5.5 gph on the Lightning. This is a 120hp engine that will
give you a cruise of 185mph which is almost identical to a 150hp RV. So I
would have to say that the Lightning would be better for cross-country
flying. The only way that I would deviate from that is if you needed a lot
of cargo room. You're probably not going to get a couple of suit cases in
there, but then again you won't get a whole lot in the RV either. If we
ever made the Lightning with the 180hp 8 cylinder Jabiru it would be faster
than any of the RV series of aircraft.
On a 1500 mile + trip from TN to Arizona the ride was smoother than an
Esqual and the only turbulence was where you'd expect it and it wasn't more
than minor chop. The Lightning does have slightly reclined seating and I
think that for long trips, fashioning some sort of headrest would be more
comfortable as I kept wanting to bend my neck forward so that my head was up
straight. We covered the last 500 miles in 2 hours 45 minutes which
averages out to about 181mph. The control feel for the Lightning is totally
different than the Esqual is. The controls are counterweighted and the
inputs have more of a solid and fluid feel to them. In IFR conditions the
Lightning does not have static wicks and therefore could be a no-go if
flying around thunderstorms.
Jack was right that finding a person to work on the Jabiru engine might be a
little harder to find. There is an engine seminar program here in
Shelbyville that can be taken. Then there are kits that can be sent out for
overhaul or you can bring it in for overhaul. The Jabiru requires little
maintenance other than the normal oil change. It is much cheaper to
overhaul than either a Lycoming or Continental.
We have had several people "convert" to at least looking at the Lightning
over the RV series simply due to the short build times. I would look
carefully at the structural strength. The Lightning is not considered an
aerobatic aircraft, so if that is a consideration then you might want to
look at the RV. On the other hand the Lightning wing had an Ultimate Load
Factor that will surpass over 95% of aircraft that are built today. The
Lightning comes in just slightly faster than a standard Esqual, but less
than 10mph faster if I remember correctly. I come in at 70mph in the
Lightning and rotate around 60. So that is a pretty slow speed. The
Lightning, however does fly much differently than the Esqual. You aim for a
landing point and if you are on speed then you land where you want. The
Esqual would float forever. The Lightning does not. I would rate the
Lightning as harder to fly than the Esqual, but not difficult. It isn't any
harder to fly than an RV6. I would not put a low time pilot in one without
getting some transition training.
One last thought. The RV is metal, and the Lightning is composite. You
don't get the curves with the metal. It is a different kind of construction
as well. If you want to fly fast in a short amount of time and have great
looks and superb handling I'd go with the lightning. If you want a little
longer to get in the air and fly a few knots faster with up to twice the
fuel burn and still good handling, I'd go with the RV.
Just my observations, Brian W.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|