Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:01 AM - Re: Anyone here? (racerjerry)
2. 09:23 AM - Re: Re: Anyone here? (William DeLacey)
3. 10:36 AM - Re: Re: Anyone here? (Konrad/Conny)
4. 10:53 AM - Re: Anyone here? (racerjerry)
5. 11:39 AM - Re: Re: Anyone here? (Jms)
6. 04:17 PM - Re: Re: Anyone here? (Steve Koziol)
7. 06:07 PM - Re: Re: Anyone here? (Perry Yaremchuk)
8. 06:12 PM - Re: Re: Anyone here? (Ralph Cloud)
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: Anyone here? |
Possibly when a few more builders discover that an RV-9 can be built to fit within
FAA Light Sport Aircraft limitations (single occupant with a REAL aircraft
engine), we will see a greater following on this list.
--------
Jerry King
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335257#335257
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: Anyone here? |
Interesting concept.
I would like a little more info on how you plan to pull it off. Van's empty weight
is about 1000 lbs. Leaving 320 for pilot and fuel- - - - wow.
Cleaver ideas are appreciated.
On Mar 28, 2011, at 6:31 AM, racerjerry wrote:
>
> Possibly when a few more builders discover that an RV-9 can be built to fit within
FAA Light Sport Aircraft limitations (single occupant with a REAL aircraft
engine), we will see a greater following on this list.
>
> --------
> Jerry King
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335257#335257
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Anyone here? |
Hi Jerry,
Oh really, but wouldn't the RV-9 be a tad too heavy and/or a tad too
fast for the LSA class?
Konrad
do not archive
On Mar 28, 2011, at 7:31 AM, racerjerry wrote:
>
> Possibly when a few more builders discover that an RV-9 can be built
> to fit within FAA Light Sport Aircraft limitations (single occupant
> with a REAL aircraft engine), we will see a greater following on
> this list.
>
> --------
> Jerry King
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335257#335257
>
>
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: | Re: Anyone here? |
Hello whd 721.
I am not yet building either, but as you said, RV-9 as a LSA is certainly an interesting
concept. Several discussions of in-process and completed projects appear
at vansairforce.net; in both RV-9, RV-12 and RV General Discussion forums.
Both sides of the coin are discussed with input from a highly qualified DAR.
Remember that the aircraft would need to be built lightly to FIT within the
LSA limitations, much like a Cub, but not registered as an LSA. You would definitely
be giving up the second seat.
Start here and dont skip page 2.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=67700&highlight=lsa
OR
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=6736&highlight=RV9+LSA
--------
Jerry King
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335292#335292
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: | Re: Anyone here? |
Don't get caught! Yes that will work.
Sent from my Iphone.
This is the single greatest piece of technology ever!!!!!!
On Mar 28, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeLacey <whd721@msn.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting concept.
>
> I would like a little more info on how you plan to pull it off. Van's empty
weight is about 1000 lbs. Leaving 320 for pilot and fuel- - - - wow.
>
> Cleaver ideas are appreciated.
>
> On Mar 28, 2011, at 6:31 AM, racerjerry wrote:
>
>>
>> Possibly when a few more builders discover that an RV-9 can be built to fit
within FAA Light Sport Aircraft limitations (single occupant with a REAL aircraft
engine), we will see a greater following on this list.
>>
>> --------
>> Jerry King
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335257#335257
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Anyone here? |
I am probably a bit short sighted, but why would someone want to go through
all the hassels ofand costs of=C2-reworking an RV 9 to change the plane
from its design=C2-goals to something that will fall short in load carryi
ng ability and many other areas when van has designed the RV 12 specificaly
for that purpose.=C2-
=C2-
Personally, I enjoy my 9A the way it is.
=C2-
Best of luck.
=C2-
Steve=C2-
--- On Mon, 3/28/11, Jms <smbluthing@volexpress.com> wrote:
From: Jms <smbluthing@volexpress.com>
Subject: Re: RV9-List: Re: Anyone here?
Don't get caught!=C2- Yes that will work.=EE=90-
Sent from my Iphone.
This is the single greatest piece of technology ever!!!!!!
On Mar 28, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeLacey <whd721@msn.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting concept.
>
> I would like a little more info on how you plan to pull it off.=C2- Van
's empty weight is about 1000 lbs.=C2- Leaving 320 for pilot and fuel- -
- -=C2- =C2- =C2- wow.=C2-=C2-=C2-
>
> Cleaver ideas are appreciated.
>
> On Mar 28, 2011, at 6:31 AM, racerjerry wrote:
>
>>
>> Possibly when a few more builders discover that an RV-9 can be built to
fit within FAA Light Sport Aircraft limitations (single occupant with a REA
L aircraft engine), we will see a greater following on this list.
>>
>> --------
>> Jerry King
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335257#335257
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
S WEB FORUMS -
on Web Site -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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: Anyone here? |
Hmmm, spend $80,000 on a plane that is pretty much an illegal oddity, with
a
resale value about half that of a 'real' RV-9.
Not a smart investment compared to a RV12 or another LSA that has been
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to meet the criteria.
(But hey, it's a nearly free country, go pound a square peg ina round hole
if you must.:-)
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Steve Koziol <biovail2001@yahoo.com> wrote
:
> I am probably a bit short sighted, but why would someone want to go throu
gh
> all the hassels ofand costs of reworking an RV 9 to change the plane from
> its design goals to something that will fall short in load carrying abili
ty
> and many other areas when van has designed the RV 12 specificaly for that
> purpose.
>
> Personally, I enjoy my 9A the way it is.
>
> Best of luck.
>
> Steve
>
> --- On *Mon, 3/28/11, Jms <smbluthing@volexpress.com>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Jms <smbluthing@volexpress.com>
> Subject: Re: RV9-List: Re: Anyone here?
> To: "rv9-list@matronics.com" <rv9-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, March 28, 2011, 2:09 PM
>
mc562.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=smbluthing@volexpress.com>
> >
>
> Don't get caught! Yes that will work.=EE=90-
>
> Sent from my Iphone.
>
> This is the single greatest piece of technology ever!!!!!!
>
> On Mar 28, 2011, at 11:47 AM, William DeLacey <whd721@msn.com<http://us.m
c562.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=whd721@msn.com>>
> wrote:
>
us.mc562.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=whd721@msn.com>
> >
> >
> > Interesting concept.
> >
> > I would like a little more info on how you plan to pull it off. Van's
> empty weight is about 1000 lbs. Leaving 320 for pilot and fuel- - - -
> wow.
> >
> > Cleaver ideas are appreciated.
> >
> > On Mar 28, 2011, at 6:31 AM, racerjerry wrote:
> >
tp://us.mc562.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=gki@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
> >
> >>
> >> Possibly when a few more builders discover that an RV-9 can be built t
o
> fit within FAA Light Sport Aircraft limitations (single occupant with a R
EAL
> aircraft engine), we will see a greater following on this list.
> >>
> >> --------
> >> Jerry King
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Read this topic online here:
> >>
> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=335257#335257
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > nbsp; --> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web
> Site -http://www===================
===
>
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV9-L%C2%A0--%3E+%3CA+href=>
>
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
Message 8
| 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: Anyone here? |
Ok, RV9 as a LSA. First, to qualify, when the Airworthiness Certificate
is issued, the max gross weight cannot exceed 1320, can=99t it
declare lower after. The lightest certified RV9/A was approx 980 pounds
empty, leaving 340 for load (fuel, pilot and baggage). So, let=99s
look at some numbers. First fuel, 36 gal capacity equals 216 pounds,
leaving 136 for pilot & baggage. (I haven=99t seen 136 since I was
30 in 1981). You could reduce the fuel capacity by putting the end rib
of the tank inboard a few bays, but that would reduce the utility of the
aircraft even more.
The big problem is how to slow down the RV9, LSA rules only allow a top
speed of 138 mph in level flight. The only way to do that is to change
the pitch of the prop, de-rating the engine won=99t work, then you
wouldn=99t have climb performance.
Is it really worth it?
Ralph
Do not archive
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! --
|