Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:01 AM - Re: RV7-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 05/11/07 (William Bell)
2. 01:11 PM - Initial biuld decisions (Rafael)
3. 01:32 PM - Re: Initial biuld decisions (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
4. 03:13 PM - Re: Initial biuld decisions (Mark Taylor)
5. 04:00 PM - Re: Initial biuld decisions (Frank Stringham)
6. 06:48 PM - Re: RV7A vs RV9A (Richard E. Tasker)
7. 07:42 PM - Re: RV7A vs RV9ARV7A vs RV9A (Carl Peters)
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: RV7-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 05/11/07 |
I am building an RV-7A and the Vne speeds can be found in the
construction manual in Section 15, Final Inspection and Flight Test,
in the Flutter Testing paragraphs. Mine are on page 15-20 although
the pages could be different for other manuals. According to the
construction manual, RV 7/7A/8/8A the Vne is 230 statute miles per
hour and 190 statute mph for the RV-9A.
On May 12, 2007, at 2:57 AM, RV7-List Digest Server wrote:
> *
>
> =================================================
> Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> =================================================
>
> Today's complete RV7-List Digest can also be found in either of the
> two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest
> formatted
> in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked
> Indexes
> and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII
> version
> of the RV7-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
> such as Notepad or with a web browser.
>
> HTML Version:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?
> Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 07-05-11&Archive=RV7
>
> Text Version:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?
> Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 07-05-11&Archive=RV7
>
>
> ===============================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ===============================================
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> RV7-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Fri 05/11/07: 2
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 04:46 AM - Re: RV7A vs RV9A (Rafael)
> 2. 06:30 AM - Re: RV7A vs RV9A (Paul Watson)
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:46:05 AM PST US
> From: "Rafael" <rafael@gforcecable.com>
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: RV7A vs RV9A
>
>
> Thank you very much for this and other replies to my inquiry.
>
> Carl's statement, "just be very cognizant of Vne" raised my
> eyebrows a bit.
> I looked for Vne numbers for the 7A and the 9A in Van's website,
> but could
> not find them.
>
> Does anyone have the Vne numbers on the 7A and 9A.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rafael
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Peters
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:20 PM
> Subject: Re: RV7-List: RV7A vs RV9A
>
>
> Both will give you immense joy. Last year, I pondered the same Q's.
> Both
> have the same fuselage, but empennage and especially the wings are
> different.
> That being said...
>
> RV-9 pros - Perhaps a little more stable IFR platform. Better glide
> ratio. Lands at lower trainer like speeds. Personally, I like the
> aesthetics of the longer wing. Largest engine (O-320/150-160hp) is
> ubiquitous on the used (and new) market.
>
> RV-7 pros - Aerobatics of the "gentleman" type. This was my biggest
> hurdle - do I potentially want to do some down the road?? I decided
> not,
> but you always have the potential with the -7 (though I know folks who
> have admitted doing rolls and even loops in the -9, but great care is
> needed to avoid overloading the frame as with any utility category
> craft). A little faster with a bigger engine, but also a little more
> fuel burn for that increased speed (research I've done shows a
> slightly
> throttled back RV-7/O-360/180hp flying the same speed as an
> RV-9/O-320/160hp will have almost the exact fuel burn. This was also
> corroborated by a Van's engineer to me. Dan Checkoway's wonderful
> machine excepted : ) ). Bigger engine choices - though not really a
> big
> deal. Quite a few RV-9's with O-360's - just be very cognizant of
> Vne.
> Possible resale advantage with the RV-7 due to higher popularity and
> aerobatic capability.
>
> I chose the -9 for a cross-country platform and lack of interest in
> aerobatics, and frankly I like its looks more with the higher
> stance on
> the tri-gear and longer wing. Really try and get a ride in each, and
> play with some aerobatics in the -7. If there is a chance you want to
> yank and bank, your decision is made (though a demo ride in a -9
> showed
> it could be jerked around just fine short of defined aerobatics).
> As an
> IFR platform, a good autopilot will help for the small decrease in
> stability - many folks have used their -7's IFR/Xcountry successfully.
>
> Carl
> RV-9A wings
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:30:28 AM PST US
> From: "Paul Watson" <pwatsonfnp@comcast.net>
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: RV7A vs RV9A
>
>
> RV7 Vne is 230mph. Not sure about the9.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rafael
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 4:45 AM
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: RV7A vs RV9A
>
>
> Thank you very much for this and other replies to my inquiry.
>
> Carl's statement, "just be very cognizant of Vne" raised my
> eyebrows a bit.
> I looked for Vne numbers for the 7A and the 9A in Van's website,
> but could
> not find them.
>
> Does anyone have the Vne numbers on the 7A and 9A.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rafael
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Peters
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:20 PM
> Subject: Re: RV7-List: RV7A vs RV9A
>
>
> Both will give you immense joy. Last year, I pondered the same Q's.
> Both
> have the same fuselage, but empennage and especially the wings are
> different.
> That being said...
>
> RV-9 pros - Perhaps a little more stable IFR platform. Better glide
> ratio. Lands at lower trainer like speeds. Personally, I like the
> aesthetics of the longer wing. Largest engine (O-320/150-160hp) is
> ubiquitous on the used (and new) market.
>
> RV-7 pros - Aerobatics of the "gentleman" type. This was my biggest
> hurdle - do I potentially want to do some down the road?? I decided
> not,
> but you always have the potential with the -7 (though I know folks who
> have admitted doing rolls and even loops in the -9, but great care is
> needed to avoid overloading the frame as with any utility category
> craft). A little faster with a bigger engine, but also a little more
> fuel burn for that increased speed (research I've done shows a
> slightly
> throttled back RV-7/O-360/180hp flying the same speed as an
> RV-9/O-320/160hp will have almost the exact fuel burn. This was also
> corroborated by a Van's engineer to me. Dan Checkoway's wonderful
> machine excepted : ) ). Bigger engine choices - though not really a
> big
> deal. Quite a few RV-9's with O-360's - just be very cognizant of
> Vne.
> Possible resale advantage with the RV-7 due to higher popularity and
> aerobatic capability.
>
> I chose the -9 for a cross-country platform and lack of interest in
> aerobatics, and frankly I like its looks more with the higher
> stance on
> the tri-gear and longer wing. Really try and get a ride in each, and
> play with some aerobatics in the -7. If there is a chance you want to
> yank and bank, your decision is made (though a demo ride in a -9
> showed
> it could be jerked around just fine short of defined aerobatics).
> As an
> IFR platform, a good autopilot will help for the small decrease in
> stability - many folks have used their -7's IFR/Xcountry successfully.
>
> Carl
> RV-9A wings
>
>
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: | Initial biuld decisions |
First of all, I thank all who provided me with input in making the decision
between a 9A and 7A. I have decided to build the 7A. It has not been an
easy decision. Basically the balance tilted towards the 7 after considering
the Vne and the added performance with the 360 engine.
Now I would like help with a couple of other decisions. First, IO-360 vs
O-360. I was leaning heavily towards the injected engine, carburetor heat
being the issue. However, after attending an EAA meeting this morning and
talking to an RV-8 builder with a beautiful 8A with an O-360, I'm no longer
sure. What advantages does the fuel injection have? Performance?
Reliability? Ease of installation? Maintenance? Any other? I believe cost
and weight penalty are close for either engine.
The other decision is between Constant Speed and Fixed Pitch prop. It is my
understanding that the CS will provided better takeoff and climb figures and
marginally better cruise performance. I'm wondering if this performance is
worth the extra $6500 or so for the CS. I'm leaning towards the FP
implementation, but I would like to hear comments.
Thanks and best regards to all,
Rafael
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 |
|
| Subject: | Initial biuld decisions |
FI is more efficient and shows up most when running lean of peak (LOP).
this can be a saving in the order of 1.5GPH at cruise. Carb heat is the
big one, not really required on the FI but Vans does have a rudimentry
warm air system...Just in case.
FP vs CS...depends on if the extra 300FPM its worth it to ya....Resale
value is higher of course with a CS...and there is the "cool"
factor...:).. I belive stopping distances are improved with the CS as
well.
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rafael
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 1:11 PM
Subject: RV7-List: Initial biuld decisions
First of all, I thank all who provided me with input in making the
decision between a 9A and 7A. I have decided to build the 7A. It has
not been an easy decision. Basically the balance tilted towards the 7
after considering the Vne and the added performance with the 360 engine.
Now I would like help with a couple of other decisions. First, IO-360
vs O-360. I was leaning heavily towards the injected engine, carburetor
heat being the issue. However, after attending an EAA meeting this
morning and talking to an RV-8 builder with a beautiful 8A with an
O-360, I'm no longer sure. What advantages does the fuel injection
have? Performance? Reliability? Ease of installation? Maintenance?
Any other? I believe cost and weight penalty are close for either
engine.
The other decision is between Constant Speed and Fixed Pitch prop. It
is my understanding that the CS will provided better takeoff and climb
figures and marginally better cruise performance. I'm wondering if this
performance is worth the extra $6500 or so for the CS. I'm leaning
towards the FP implementation, but I would like to hear comments.
Thanks and best regards to all,
Rafael
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 |
|
| Subject: | Initial biuld decisions |
I went with a constant speed prop for my IOF-360. It's great for descents t
oo as you don't have to worry about overspeeding your engine. Just push the
nose forward and go for it! When you throttle back with a constant speed p
rop, it's like putting the brakes on which is also nice coming into the pat
tern at warp factor 7. Just before you enter, throttle back and you'll be a
t pattern speed before you know it. Mine's a three blade MT BTW. It's not a
s fast in cruise.
Mark
www.4sierratango.com
From: rafael@gforcecable.comTo: rv9-list@matronics.com; rv7-list@matronics.
comSubject: RV7-List: Initial biuld decisionsDate: Sat, 12 May 2007 16:10:3
2 -0400
First of all, I thank all who provided me with input in making the decision
between a 9A and 7A. I have decided to build the 7A. It has not been an
easy decision. Basically the balance tilted towards the 7 after considerin
g the Vne and the added performance with the 360 engine.
Now I would like help with a couple of other decisions. First, IO-360 vs O
-360. I was leaning heavily towards the injected engine, carburetor heat b
eing the issue. However, after attending an EAA meeting this morning and t
alking to an RV-8 builder with a beautiful 8A with an O-360, I=92m no longe
r sure. What advantages does the fuel injection have? Performance? Relia
bility? Ease of installation? Maintenance? Any other? I believe cost and
weight penalty are close for either engine.
The other decision is between Constant Speed and Fixed Pitch prop. It is m
y understanding that the CS will provided better takeoff and climb figures
and marginally better cruise performance. I=92m wondering if this performa
nce is worth the extra $6500 or so for the CS. I=92m leaning towards the F
P implementation, but I would like to hear comments.
Thanks and best regards to all,
Rafael
Message 5
| 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: | Initial biuld decisions |
Rafeal
When I started my project (Sept 2004) I wasn't sure what I wanted. But as
the project unfolded I decided (very slowly) to turn a Van's
quick/light/simple flyer into a mega buck high speed/leading edge
technically/very costly RV7A......ECI Titan IO360/cold air
induction/FI/EI/ALL GLASS-Electric Panel/WhirlWind 200RV CS prop/custom
interior.................$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. I just coundn't
resist...........Now if I build another RV It is going to be built
simple/light weight/night VFR/less costly......
I know those that are flying can give better stats on the difference in the
all important velocity factor between a simple and complex
craft.....but....I believe one would get as much utiliy out of a less costly
simple plane as compared to the 777 that some of us are trying to build.
Good Luck in your build/decided on your mission/and have fun!!!!
Frank @ SGU RV7A 'NDY"
>From: "Rafael" <rafael@gforcecable.com>
>To: <rv9-list@matronics.com>, <rv7-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV7-List: Initial biuld decisions
>Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 16:10:32 -0400
>
>First of all, I thank all who provided me with input in making the decision
>between a 9A and 7A. I have decided to build the 7A. It has not been an
>easy decision. Basically the balance tilted towards the 7 after
>considering
>the Vne and the added performance with the 360 engine.
>
>
>Now I would like help with a couple of other decisions. First, IO-360 vs
>O-360. I was leaning heavily towards the injected engine, carburetor heat
>being the issue. However, after attending an EAA meeting this morning and
>talking to an RV-8 builder with a beautiful 8A with an O-360, I'm no longer
>sure. What advantages does the fuel injection have? Performance?
>Reliability? Ease of installation? Maintenance? Any other? I believe
>cost
>and weight penalty are close for either engine.
>
>
>The other decision is between Constant Speed and Fixed Pitch prop. It is
>my
>understanding that the CS will provided better takeoff and climb figures
>and
>marginally better cruise performance. I'm wondering if this performance is
>worth the extra $6500 or so for the CS. I'm leaning towards the FP
>implementation, but I would like to hear comments.
>
>
>Thanks and best regards to all,
>
>
>Rafael
>
_________________________________________________________________
Catch suspicious messages before you open themwith Windows Live Hotmail.
Message 6
| 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 don't know what it is for the 9/9A, but it has to be higher than your
number as the top speed (solo) with a 160hp engine is listed as
197mph.on Van's website. I am quite sure that Van would not list a top
speed higher than Vne!
Dick Tasker
William Bell wrote:
>
> I am building an RV-7A and the Vne speeds can be found in the
> construction manual in Section 15, Final Inspection and Flight Test,
> in the Flutter Testing paragraphs. Mine are on page 15-20 although
> the pages could be different for other manuals. According to the
> construction manual, RV 7/7A/8/8A the Vne is 230 statute miles per
> hour and 190 statute mph for the RV-9A.
--
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
--
Message 7
| 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: RV7A vs RV9ARV7A vs RV9A |
RV-9 Vne is 210 mph. Here is a link from Van's discussing Vne and
flutter - http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/hp_limts.pdf .
Carl
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! --
|