Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:54 AM - Re: Maneuvers (Kelly McMullen)
2. 10:36 AM - Re: Maneuvers (Bob Turner)
3. 12:59 PM - Re: Re: Maneuvers (Kelly McMullen)
4. 02:43 PM - Re: Maneuvers (Bob Turner)
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 |
|
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:
> 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@myrv10.com
> <mailto:Tim@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.
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 |
|
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 wont 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
Message 3
| 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 |
|
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:
>
> 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 wont 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 4
| 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 |
|
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.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=490973#490973
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! --
|