PDA

View Full Version : What is a F-4 Raider?


Av8rRob
12-02-2016, 05:38 PM
I saw in the home built directory of Kitplanes the F-4 Raider from team rocket aircraft. Anybody know about this plane as the website is severely lacking info?

F1Boss
12-02-2016, 06:03 PM
It's basically a 4cyl F1 with the Sport wing. There's a lot more to it than that, and I'm sure Vince will jump in and tell you more about what is happening.

Carry on!
Mark

vfrazier
12-05-2016, 08:55 AM
Geez... the website is terrible? We're airplane guys, not Amazon.com tech gurus. I thought that we were doing pretty good just getting a website up while trying to build parts to support the existing F1 Rocket fleet and also to build our own F4 Raider. I'll go beat Blake mercilessly until he gets the website in better shape. :rolleyes:

But to answer your question, the F4 Raider is our response to all of the RV guys who wanted a 4 cylinder Rocket. I'd compare it to an RV-8, but with a more comfortable cockpit (no gear towers in the cockpit).

The Raider uses a stock F1 fuselage. Wings and tails can be obtained from the Van's secondhand market or from us once we get them back into production. The 4 cylinder engine mount keeps the prop in the same place as the stock 6 cylinder Rocket and allows the battery and other items to be moved up front to maintain CG. Externally, it will be very difficult to tell whether you are looking at an F1 Rocket or a Raider.

Larry V. put a 4 cylinder on his HRII to prove the concept. He reports good handling, an empty weight of well over 100# less than the stock HRII, and says he is quite pleased.

There is another, an F8, nearing completion here in Indiana, using an RV-8 tail and wings, with an F1 fuselage. And then there's mine, under construction, using an RV-4 tail and wings.

Currently (December 2016) we don't have full kits available. We do have all of the items that you can see on our "terrible" website at www.f1aircraft.com and quite a few items that aren't listed there. We don't have a set timeline on kits. We know that isn't cool with the instant gratification crowd, but we're in it for the long haul and refuse to: 1) take money for things we don't have in hand or 2) promise things that can't be delivered on time and on budget.

What that means, is that new F1s and new F4s are being built by guys who who how to build and know how to obtain what is needed from various sources, including us. We are assisting, advising, and providing parts as we move forward with these gents.

To reiterate: our #1 priority is to support the existing F1 fleet, #2 assist new starts, and #3 produce more parts with the goal of having full kits again.

To see how a slow-build F1 Rocket or F4 Raider is built, visit www.vincesrocket.com

SMO
12-05-2016, 09:21 AM
www.vincesrocket.com works better :D

vfrazier
12-05-2016, 10:13 AM
OOPS.... Thanks Mark. I fixed it in my earlier post too. www.vincesrocket.com

Also, I just received an email from Larry V. who says:

Here's what my 4cyl. Rocket does and wt. numbers.
Empty wt. reduced 150 lbs. removed the large 35 lb. battery and cable from behind the baggage compartment and installed a PC680 on the firewall/rudder step. The rest of the wt. reduction came from engine, prop, baffling etc.

Cruise speed reduced 4mph from IO-540 to IO-360. Fuel burn reduced 3.8-4 gph. Typical cruise speed at 8500 ft. DA is 208 mph, 2450 rpm, full throttle @ 9.2-9.4 gph. The best cruise altitude I have found is 10,500 or 11,500. Larry V.

Those are very respectable numbers, and are a good reason to consider a Raider if you're considering a tandem, sport, taildragger!

Toobuilder
12-05-2016, 01:39 PM
I have a 180 HP engine without a firewall to call home, and I have long considered doing a 4 banger Rocket if the right project comes along.

After spending a bunch of time in both the -8 and the Rocket, I'll say that the ergonomics of the latter are far better. If I was limited to a 4 banger for some reason (thank God I'm not!), then an F-4 would be a clear choice over the -8.

ppilotmike
12-05-2016, 01:41 PM
... I think your website is fine, Vince.

Raymo
12-06-2016, 03:55 AM
I think a Raider will be my next project and will be watching progress.

mburch
12-06-2016, 08:16 AM
Next project: F-12 Raider LSA? :)

vfrazier
12-06-2016, 03:07 PM
Thanks Mike!!

Matt... you're gonna make my head explode! LOL :D

Bob Kuykendall
12-06-2016, 05:52 PM
But to answer your question, the F4 Raider is our response to all of the RV guys who wanted a 4 cylinder Rocket. I'd compare it to an RV-8, but with a more comfortable cockpit (no gear towers in the cockpit)...

Let me know when you're ready for a tapered wing for it.

vfrazier
12-06-2016, 08:00 PM
Let me know when you're ready for a tapered wing for it.

Bob, let me know when you're ready to make about 200 sets! Maybe we should take this offline for now so we don't cause mass hysteria. Hit me at vincefrazier@gmail.com or vince@f1aircraft.com

DanH
12-06-2016, 08:39 PM
Now you're talkin'....

Rupester
12-07-2016, 08:53 AM
Now you're talkin'....

For sure! :):):)

vfrazier
12-07-2016, 01:16 PM
Just to be clear here for the masses, there are NO Evo (tapered) wings available at this time. If such a wing becomes available again, it will be announced on our websites first and here on VAF about 3 seconds afterwards.

So please, hold your inquiries, comments, and speculation. We get it. Honestly. We get it. But we have a whole bunch of other, higher priority pieces and parts to get produced before any wing options are considered.

Bob Kuykendall
12-07-2016, 01:41 PM
Just to be clear here for the masses, there are NO Evo (tapered) wings available at this time...

And anyhow, my wing is much better than the Czech tapered wing. It is being developed by Steve Smith, who designed the RV-10 wing profile for Van.

Tom Martin
12-07-2016, 02:46 PM
Bob
I have over a thousand hours on my EVO and I am not sure I would change anything other then maybe moving it aft on the fuselage a tad for weight and balance reasons.
Is your wing flying yet?

Tom Martin
12-07-2016, 02:51 PM
Bob
I have over a thousand hours on my EVO and I am not sure I would change anything other then maybe moving it aft on the fuselage a tad for weight and balance reasons.
Is your wing flying yet?

F1Boss
12-07-2016, 03:58 PM
And anyhow, my wing is much better than the Czech tapered wing. It is being developed by Steve Smith, who designed the RV-10 wing profile for Van.

I think all of us will agree that a tapered wing looks better. Those better looks come at a cost - there ain't no free lunch. There are benefits and drawbacks to a tapered design that replaces a non-tapered wing.

The Evo wing is designed to FAR 23 specs for a specific Vne, CG range, and weight. If I recall what the Czech engineer told me, it is good for close to 400MPH, and the gust penetration speed is 175KT at 2600LBS. That is a very robust envelope for a small aircraft. The wing was not designed specificlally for the F1 - it was designed for a very different design with side-by-side seating.

At the weights the F1 Evo flies, the design allows us to load it up like an A-10 - if the gear were stronger, and the empennage/aft fuselage/tailwheel assy were up to the job. Alas, they are not.

So, the robust design of the Evo wing adds a 'bit more' weight than required, compared to a wing set up for the design parameters of the F1. How much more weight? About 115lbs. Yes - that is one hundred fifteen pounds. Generally, the empty weight of the Evos run 1300lbs or so.

A composite wing - that meets the same design requirements - would be much lighter - likely close to the weight of a std RV wing assembly. Attaching the thing to the RV/F1 fuselage is the difficult part; a stub spar seems to be a good plan for the main spar.

Tapered wing Disclaimer: the CG range of a wing is described as two points on the airfoil, referencing the mean chord. If the wing is tapered, the mean chord is smaller, thus the CG range is smaller. This can change the gross weight load distribution slightly, or dramatically. What this means to us in the smaller plane we fly: the luggage capacity might have to be reduced (assuming it is in the aft fuselage), and maybe we can't take Bubba for a ride.

You might say (as Tom suggested): I'll move the engine forward! That would allow for more luggage, and Bubba, but if the design puts the pilot in the front seat, solo flight characteristics will suffer - think heavy elevator forces. The HR2 is known for better control harmony with someone in the back - the F1 has the same setup, but just a bit better due to the different horizontal tail.

We tweaked the elev system in the Evo (less deflection required), and retrofitted the same system to the Sport wing to reduce the heavy elev forces. The Evo has very light elev forces, but that goes hand in hand with the narrower CG range, and smaller aft load capacity.

Note the Extra has the pilot in the back for solo flight, putting the cargo/baggage/passenger on the CG. The load effect on the CG is much more favorable in this design.

So, a tapered wing design will probably be more suited for a side-by-side design as opposed to a tandem (front seat solo), as the CG range required is much smaller in the side by side design. The fwd luggage compartment in the RV8 might also help, but my guess is the airfoil will need to be shifted a bit on the spar to tweak the wing CG range to reflect what is normal to the standard wing. I can almost guarantee that the CG range will be smaller - but I could be wrong!

In any case, it will certainly look better, and it just might fly better. Likely it will also be faster. I can't wait to see it fly!

Carry on!
Mark

hrhodes2@comcast.net
12-07-2016, 10:08 PM
Solution:

GIII RG with TIO540AE2A! Doing it! Yep I'm aping Jeff Lavell's package....and yes composite & side by side. Did I mention tapered wing???

So clear
HR

Snowflake
12-07-2016, 11:29 PM
...
So, a tapered wing design will probably be more suited for a side-by-side design as opposed to a tandem (front seat solo), as the CG range required is much smaller in the side by side design.
...
Well, there's an obvious solution then. Make tapered wings for the -6 instead.

(I may be slightly biased)

vfrazier
12-08-2016, 08:08 AM
Talk about thread drift.......

Getting back to the original question.... the F4 Raider is the 4 cylinder engine version of the F1 Rocket. We are seeing very strong interest in this aircraft. Larry Vetterman has proven that the concept is sound with his 4 cylinder conversion of his previously 6 cylinder engine equipped Rocket.

The primary changes to make a Rocket into a Raider:
1) make a longer engine mount
2) move the battery and other stuff to the front
That's it. It's not "Rocket" science. Pun intended.

We will continue to support the F1 Rocket, a GREAT aircraft, while developing the Raider.

Tapered wings, 100% pre-punched parts, and quickbuilds, are not on the table at this point. Slow build kits for both the F1 and the F4 are coming, but we're not guaranteeing a timetable.

If you can't wait, we have all of the important parts now. You just have to mesh some other popular kit parts in with the parts that we can supply. HRII builders have done this for years. Like I said, it's not Rocket science.

f1rocket
12-09-2016, 09:13 AM
Hey Vince,

How are the F1 fuselage parts provided? Do you have kits for them? I can source the wings and empennage.

logansc
12-09-2016, 01:27 PM
Randy! You're at it again? You just can't quit building! You're work is top quality, so no complaints---just wish I had your energy.


Lee...

f1rocket
12-10-2016, 02:49 AM
Just delivered the RV-12 to its new owner in Arizona. Just looking at some possible projects. The F-4 intrigues me.

vfrazier
12-10-2016, 12:07 PM
Slow build kits for both the F1 and the F4 are coming, but we're not guaranteeing a timetable.

If you can't wait, we have all of the important parts now. You just have to mesh some other popular kit parts in with the parts that we can supply. HRII builders have done this for years. Like I said, it's not Rocket science.

Randy,

Contact me offline, if you like, and we can discuss the above in more detail! Since you're so close by, and since you're so experienced, we may be able to coordinate some things that lesser builders, er... normal humans, er.... mere mortals..... aw heck... other builders, couldn't do. :D

Thanks,
Vince
vince@f1aircraft.com

ksauce
12-10-2016, 01:32 PM
There is another, an F8, nearing completion here in Indiana, using an RV-8 tail and wings, with an F1 fuselage.

So...if someone wanted to do an F8, just start with regular RV-8 tail and wings? Any mods?

smokyray
12-10-2016, 02:06 PM
Just delivered the RV-12 to its new owner in Arizona. Just looking at some possible projects. The F-4 intrigues me.

Randy,
It can be done!
When I brainstormed the RVX I was staring across the hangar at my HR2, my RV4 parked next to it. In the rafters of my hangar were a set of completed RV4 wings and tail along with an untouched RV6 fuselage kit still in the crate. Standing beside me was my late friend and RV guru Arvil Porter.
"You've got a nice airplane here, just need to put it together."
That's all it took. I grabbed my Rocket, RV4 and RV6 plans and Arvil and I started taking measurements of the RV4 and HR2. It would work!

The combined RV4/6/HR2 turned out to be a marvel, and it all started as parts.
Just do it!
V/R
Smokey

PS: Kevin, this might be a better/easier option for the RV8...
http://www.showplanes.com/ecom-prodshow/FB_8.html

patterson
12-10-2016, 09:10 PM
Hey Vince,
Thought I'd ask this question on the website. Maybe some engine guru's would offer some advice. My F4 is coming together, but I need advice on just which engine would be the better choice.

I've decided I like the idea of flying up around 15-16,000', with O2, and get long range cruise, hopefully at 70-75% power. There are lots of turbo'd air cooled engines to choose from, but the question is which might be best for the F4 Rocket?

Considerations are: 1) weight, including turbo and required waste gate and exhaust. 2) Horsepower at 14, 15, 16 thousand feet
3) Fuel Burn Using a TN-4 cylinder should result in fuel savings over the 6 cylinder normally aspirated Lycoming 4) Cost maybe I should have put this first.

I'd like to see HP of around 210 (75% of that T-normalized at altitude) but what about configuration and weight? If it ends up to about the same weight as a 6 cyl Lycoming in weight all in, I wonder if I would be better off doing a 6 cyl normally aspirated Lyc?
Ron

logansc
12-11-2016, 07:12 AM
I would be one of the last persons to ever question going fast, but my first concern with your plan would be: 75% of 210 hp = 157.5 hp. 157-ish horsepower at 15,000' with a could well produce an indicated airspeed in the neighborhood of 170+ knots and a TAS of 215+ knots or so and very close to 250 mph true. These calculations are just off the top of my head, so somebody who knows what they are talking about should chime in here, but that is basically the Rocket Vne (these days). For this airframe, that is Vne---in cruise!

You'd be riding the edge in ordinary flight and potentially would have to "slow down, to come down". Lovely problem to have...some of the time... but even without your engine and configuration considerations, I would be concerned first of all with this, assuming my thinking is approximately correct.


Lee...

F1Boss
12-11-2016, 08:32 AM
Lee is very close to correct with his power/airspeed calculations - the Evo 550 will touch 215KTAS at 17500 on 50% power (~160hp) - I see this number when I get up that high regularly. I doubt you could do this with a sport wing, tho I can ask one customer about that and get back to you.

Lee does mention the problem with getting down from 17500 - I have to pull back to 2000RPM to stay below the 240KTAS Vne - until I get to about 14000 or so where the MP available will allow a different sort of power management (keep it squared up at about (2100/21"/10GPH).

Of course, my plane has the TCM 550 in it to start with, so that is not what you might see with a straight valve 540. The 550 has an extra 50hp and 100 lbs/ft when compared to the 260hp 540; weight is very close to the same.

So, you could plan for about 160hp at altitude to get very close to your target - this would not be recommended with the 4cyl setup as you would be nearer to max power than desired for max engine life. I might suggest a 75% power setting for normal cruise as a max number (150hp from a 200hp engine), or ~200hp from a 300hp engine. BTW the 6cyl engines get kinda thirsty above 200hp - same as the 4cyls do above 140 or so.

I am building another Evo with RG and a 7.5 compression supercharged motor. I have made several mods to the aft end of the aircraft to make sure the parts stay attached and intact. I am looking at a 280KTAS Vne on this one, tho it might be OK going faster. When you get closer to 300KTAS things get very interesting in terms of structure..

I'll be happy with this ship if I can get fuel specifics close to what is expected with the stock 350hp TSIO-550, and if that does happen - I'll be looking at the TAS closely to make sure I am within my personal envelope. I expect that descending from the available power setting (about 220HP) I will still need to power back before pushing over. Keep in mind I can touch 215KTAS with the stock motor @50% and fixed gear; the additional 60hp might change things more than I expect.

Summary: yes, you can get what you want. No - you should not do it with a stock airframe. You should expect to need a set of Evo wings for this mission profile. RG is not a requirement for this particular mission; it is just possible to do it with a stock engine (550 Continental). Forced induction will help with the power equation, but this addition skews the aircraft mission profile upwards about 5000'. Yes - you will need an oxygen refill station.

Sorry for the thread drift again, Vince!

Carry on!
Mark

vfrazier
12-11-2016, 08:38 PM
So...if someone wanted to do an F8, just start with regular RV-8 tail and wings? Any mods?

Yes, that is correct. A well known RV builder from Colorado is making the necessary spar carry through to mate the wings to the F4 fuselage. No other mods to do except for all of the other mods that you'll do. :rolleyes:

The tail shouldn't require any serious surgery. The wing roots, particularly the tanks, will require some surgery to mate the F4's slightly different fuselage.... so don't rivet the roots/tanks until you have the fuselage on hand.

hrhodes2@comcast.net
12-11-2016, 09:29 PM
Vince at the risk of thread drift criminal status I must emphatically state this is fabulous! You guys are gettin down and dirty after what I feared was rocket death. Mark & Vince here is the new (?) mission statement:

"Make the Rocket Great Again"

OK I'll be good, back to making way faster......oh well skip it. CU next year:-) It was good to see u at OSH Vince.

Carry On
HR

PS Randy go build another show stopper, we only live once. Be brave, go back to your glass roots!? Grass Roots? Plus in this forum a guy can let his inner child out, in the Beechtalk forum one must be mature.

DanH
12-12-2016, 06:55 AM
Typical cruise speed at 8500 ft. DA is 208 mph, 2450 rpm, full throttle @ 9.2-9.4 gph. The best cruise altitude I have found is 10,500 or 11,500. Larry V.

Back to performance. What sort of 4-cyl is Vince flying above?

Not to be the Grinch, but a fella can get those numbers with a RV-8, on less fuel. Here's LOP back in June of '15, 390 on a well worn set of Slicks:

http://i1368.photobucket.com/albums/ag200/Dan51/Misc%20VAF%20Illustrations/Inflight%20and%20first%20flight/LOP%20June%202015_zps4lgoti6j.jpg (http://s1368.photobucket.com/user/Dan51/media/Misc%20VAF%20Illustrations/Inflight%20and%20first%20flight/LOP%20June%202015_zps4lgoti6j.jpg.html)

Snowflake
12-12-2016, 08:10 AM
Not to be the Grinch, but a fella can get those numbers with a RV-8, on less fuel. Here's LOP back in June of '15, 390 on a well worn set of Slicks:
Um... That's about 30 knots slower. Hardly the same numbers?

Bill Dicus
12-12-2016, 08:22 AM
Knots vs. mph.

gnuse
12-12-2016, 08:28 AM
This is all very good news.

Dan, don't make me post a picture of my RV-8 or yours with my F1 Rocket. :)

DanH
12-12-2016, 09:16 AM
Um... That's about 30 knots slower. Hardly the same numbers?

208 mph = 181 knots. True airspeed at lower right.

Dan, don't make me post a picture of my RV-8 or yours with my F1 Rocket. :)

"Eye of the beholder" and all that rot. Yeah, the RV-8 is a bit more plump. It's sort of like comparing Kate Upton to Cindy Crawford ;)

vfrazier
12-12-2016, 10:28 AM
I don't know all of the details of how Larry V. measured his speeds or fuel flow, so let's not get too knotted up over it. These are all great planes and we're all blessed to be flying them. Let's leave all of the "who is fastest" questions for Reno.

Now, if you want to talk about which plane has the best cockpit, I can sit cross-legged, both legs, aka "indian style" in my Rocket and I'm almost 6' tall. Try that in your RV-8.

And for style.... well... both are pretty, but the Rockets...mmmmmmm.

DanH
12-12-2016, 11:01 AM
Now, if you want to talk about which plane has the best cockpit, I can sit cross-legged, both legs, aka "indian style" in my Rocket and I'm almost 6' tall. Try that in your RV-8.

Ummm....ok.

Actually, I'm a little over 6-2, with size 14 shoes, and I do sit cross-legged in the -8. Knees are well aft of the gear towers. What I'd really like is a bit more overall cockpit length so the seatback could recline some, without cramping the GIB. For that I need to try on a Rocket. And yes, a Rocket looks great. Mark will confirm that I was hot for one some years ago.

Toobuilder
12-12-2016, 12:31 PM
Ummm....ok.

Actually, I'm a little over 6-2, with size 14 shoes, and I do sit cross-legged in the -8. Knees are well aft of the gear towers. What I'd really like is a bit more overall cockpit length so the seatback could recline some, without cramping the GIB. For that I need to try on a Rocket. And yes, a Rocket looks great. Mark will confirm that I was hot for one some years ago.

I sit cross-legged in the -8 as well, but the Rocket is still more comfortable and "roomy".

So am I to understand you have not flown a Rocket yet Dan?

I'd delay that ride as long as possible because I suspect your -8 will be for sale the next day. ;)

DanH
12-12-2016, 01:08 PM
I'd delay that ride as long as possible because I suspect your -8 will be for sale the next day. ;)

Touche' my brother. Prove the point; toss me your keys ;)

Toobuilder
12-12-2016, 04:07 PM
Touche' my brother. Prove the point; toss me your keys ;)

If we ever find ourselves occupying the same real estate for a few hours, you got it.

Mjuckes
12-12-2016, 04:12 PM
I fly a -4 and a Rocket. It feels like you could sit 2 side by side in the Rocket compared to the -4. :D

Snowflake
12-12-2016, 11:47 PM
Knots vs. mph.
Gah. And I looked back and forth at those two images for a good five minutes trying to figure out why someone thought they were the same. I should know better. :)

autoglide
01-01-2017, 03:55 AM
Flew a 6 for 15 yrs, a 4 for 3 yrs....now a Rocket for the last 6 months.
Absolutely no comparison between the Rocket & prev 2 birds.
Seems like I'm in an auditorium vs a closet.....couldn't be happier!
Good luck Vince in your endeavors..........

Marvin

Av8rRob
01-20-2017, 08:26 PM
O.k. Guys, sorry about the "terrible website " comment, I've corrected to "severely lacks information " in regards to the Raider. That being said, this thread is great and full of good information. I will look for too seeing what '
You guys bring to Oshkosh this year and in the future. Always loved the Rocket.

vfrazier
01-21-2017, 09:46 AM
We're continually updating the website and feel that we have a pretty good handle on "what's an F4 Raider" in there. Even have a photo of Larry V's converted HRII, which is our basis for the design claims. Another RV-8 based "Raider" should fly soon right here in Indiana.

Just to recap for those who popped in late to the conversation:

We're resuming F1 Rocket, and F4 Raider, parts production. There will eventually be kits, fuselage first, then the rest of the sub kits. QBs are NOT available now, but should be after we have all of the sub kits available again (duh!).

In a nutshell, the F4 is just an F1 with a different engine mount. The rest of the airframe is the same.

Fleet support is our primary mission right now, however, we have had a of couple intrepid builders get an early start on a new construction project with a mix of RV and TR parts.

I'm building an F4 Raider with a 200+ HP Titan engine. My F4 airframe will be identical to the F1H Rocket (see www.vincesrocket.com) that I built back in 2004, except for the extended F4 engine mount.

It is possible to use a mix of Van's parts with our TR parts, either because you got a screaming deal on them, or because you can't wait until we have everything available.

Currently, the entire fuselage is in process, actively being put back into production, with many pieces available now. I hope to have an entire NEW construction fuselage at Sun n Fun, but I'm at the mercy of the production schedule just like everyone else. Surely, by Oshkosh I'll have it....

We could go faster, but have chosen to pursue parts that won't require a lot of hand work, fluting, etc. to fit properly. Yes, it does take longer and, yes, it will be more expensive than some options.

Check the website (below) or email me for specific info. Please don't email me asking for the price of QB kits... that question is getting kinda old.... same for EVO wings... no EVO wings at this time... read the web site for updates!

WyoDave
02-26-2017, 08:06 PM
I currently fly an RV-6 and just about to start construction on a Rans S7S. I see there are F4ís being built with RV-4 wings, RV-8 wings, andÖ? Could an F4 be built with RV-14 wings? I have not flown an RV-14, but I suspect it will do all the acro I am capable of and care to do. And mostly due to where I live, I commonly cruise at higher altitudes. My most common cross country (KPNA-KSHR) includes climbing to 14,500 for terrain clearance. On occasion to 15,500-17,500. While the 6 wing does ok, it is really out of itís element at the higher altitudes. At least from what I read, it seems the -14 air foil should be better in those conditions.

vfrazier
02-28-2017, 10:45 AM
WyoDave,

While anything is possible, we haven't done any work on adapting that wing to our airframe. That's about all I can say because we don't have any RV-14s nearby that I'm aware of, so I can't readily check out the wings.

ChiefPilot
02-28-2017, 11:09 AM
Looking at the RV-14 wings vs RV-4 wings...it'd be a major re-engineering effort. Structurally for sure...maybe some aerodynamic considerations as well given the different airfoil and it's associated pitching moment.

f1rocket
06-21-2017, 02:44 PM
Vince ole buddy ole pal,

Still plan to have a completed fuselage at this year's AirVenture? If so, what are you doing for the wing center section station? Are you using the old Rocket bolt pattern or Van's?

Thinking of running up for a day but only of you got the fuselage there, otherwise there's no point for me. Retirement is getting a little boring. Might need a project to fill some time.

logansc
06-21-2017, 06:18 PM
Randy: We would all LOVE to see you start an F4 project! No one documents their work or explains it better than you!


Lee...

hrhodes2@comcast.net
06-21-2017, 07:10 PM
Do it Randy!!!!

Vince get some hardware at OSH, resuscitate this thing.

vfrazier
06-22-2017, 08:58 AM
Randy,

Wing bolt pattern depends on whether you use the stock (RV-4 type) Sport Wing, or an RV-8 wing, as Brad has done. Regardless, it's all doable, particularly for a master builder like you (pun not intended.. it's true!).

Loyd Remus will be at our booth to display the RV-8 type spar carry through that he's making. Brad Hood will be there displaying his brand new F4 Rocket II with the 4 cylinder.

We're trying to get a fuselage skeleton to the show, but it may, or may not happen. We've got the parts, but we've been distracted by other work. There's just not enough hours in the day, and it takes a lotta hours to put together a fuselage, get ready for the show (including Flyboy Accessories stuff), and still ship stuff out to waiting builders.

If only someone nearby, say someone from Indiana, let's say the Mooresville area of Indiana, would get on board and start putting together an F4 Raider. Boy, would that be a boon to everyone involved. Isn't that right, Randy?

I can't make excuses... well, other than I like to sleep at night... and that building a SINGLE airplane takes a LOT of time... and trying to wrangle together a new production kit... well, let's just say that my life is a lot like herding cats right now. Not that I'd trade it. :D

So, what other work you ask? Well, aside from trying to ship parts to guys who are AOG or otherwise waiting for support parts, we're also trying to get the NEW empennage kits, or at least the first production prototype, ready for Oshkosh. The new empennage kits will have the appropriate "beef" added to a couple of areas where beef is appropriate. Stop by the show and talk to us if you want more details. With a bit of luck, we'll be able to just show you firsthand.

Now, about those rumors... the ones about a new tapered wing... nothing to see here.... yet.

Watch for news here:
http://www.f1aircraft.com/team-rocket-home-f1-rocket-f4-raider/f1-rocket-f4-raider-news-updates/

Tom Martin
06-22-2017, 09:23 AM
Some one asked my yesterday if I would build another plane after this 14 and I said that I did not think I had another one in me.

But a lighter tapered winged rocket.......

I am in my 12th flying season with my tapered wing F1 and it is hands down the best airplane that I have flown. My altitude speeds are amazing and it stalls about 10 knots slower then the standard wing.

f1rocket
06-25-2017, 07:21 AM
Well, thanks for the compliments. Not sure if I'm a master builder or not, but I am a persistent one. ;)

I'm making plans to stop by one day during show week. I'd like to talk to you and see what you have. I'm seriously considering a couple of options. First is to build a F4 to quickbuild stage and then either sell it, or continue on. If I continue on, I'm going for a Lindy. No other reason for me to build yet another airplane. (Got to have some goal out there). I'm fortunate that my son is a senior engineer at Textron so that gives me some access to machinery, technology (3D), and an employee discount at Lycoming. :eek:

I have a bunch of questions but I'll save them for in-person. Not sure what your plans are for quickbuild kits but I have an interest in doing that as well. I'd be willing to buy a trailer and do delivery too. I don't want to interfere with any plans you already have in place, but if I can assist in getting the Rocket back out into the flying community and make a few dollars on the side, I'm willing to explore those opportunities.

I'll see you up there sometime in the middle of the week. I'm still working on housing options. I'll be bringing my boat up and fishing most of the week so I hope the walleye are biting!

morganjohn24
07-01-2017, 09:24 AM
Been following Vince's work intently for a year or so now. While I have don't have a lot I can contribute at the moment, I did promise to spread the word to the extent I can and become a builder ASAP!

I had never been interested in the tapered wing models, but after doing some research they are pretty darn cool. Vince, count me as an EVO enthusiast...but when the time comes, I'll build whichever model is available.

Toobuilder
07-01-2017, 12:11 PM
I thought the supply of the tapered wings dried up? Besides that, its my understanding that those wings are from another airplane and thus 50 pounds heavier than they should be for a F-1... Seems like they would be WAY overkill for a 4 banger to drag around.

Tom Martin
07-01-2017, 12:57 PM
The EVO wing is indeed heavier then it needs to be. You could walk on the ailerons and not leave a mark on them, the flaps are just the same. Carbon fibre control surfaces could get rid of a lot of that weight and I am sure that you could also go down a thickness on the wing skins.
Even with the extra weight the plane will out climb the standard wing anywhere above 4500', it stalls 10knots slower and is 2 gallons per hour faster at altitude (anywhere above 8000' it is faster, the higher you go the greater the difference)
It will be more expensive then a standard square wing. This is my 12th flying season with the EVO. I have never owned an airplane that long before and I have no intention of letting this one go!!!

hrhodes2@comcast.net
07-01-2017, 04:55 PM
Tom

What is carbon fibre? I've been knee deep for the past 4 years in vacuum bagged CF. Is this that strange silver material the RV14 appears to be made from? The parts that I make now are strong light & black. Is this close to carbon fibre....... or fiber? :-)

Cheers
HR

Toobuilder
07-01-2017, 08:00 PM
Bob, let me know when you're ready to make about 200 sets! Maybe we should take this offline for now so we don't cause mass hysteria. Hit me at vincefrazier@gmail.com or vince@f1aircraft.com

When you do the new wing, please make sure you have AT LEAST 60 gallons available (for the 540). I know this goes well beyong John's concept of "local area hot rod", but some of us actually use these things for transportation. 1000 mile legs would be most welcome!

vfrazier
07-14-2017, 05:48 PM
Brad Hood's F4 Rocket II is now flying. See more here:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=151394

Spectacular...

http://www.vincesrocket.com/1%20fileshare/Brad%20Hood%203.JPG

http://www.vincesrocket.com/1%20fileshare/Brad%20Hood%202.JPG

Gt-401
07-14-2017, 07:48 PM
That looks great.. I would love to see it go head to head with a similarly powered RV-8. It certainly looks faster😉

vfrazier
07-23-2017, 09:32 PM
https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/fr/cp0/e15/q65/20248214_691125807751155_4161766732483427737_o.jpg ?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=25fee9dfaecc6b10c82f109629d41fb8&oe=5A0C1F27


Setting up at Oshkosh. Brad just arrived. Wow. You should see this plane in person!

RhinoDrvr
07-25-2017, 08:18 PM
How is CG and baggage capacity compared to an -8? I assume performance is similar enough to be a wash for aerobatics, and the F-4 obviously wins in looks...

Dmadd
07-26-2017, 11:12 PM
I need one of those... :-)

vfrazier
07-30-2017, 10:20 PM
Brad Hood won the grand champion gold Lindy in the kitbuilt category! Woo hoo!

vfrazier
07-30-2017, 10:31 PM
How is CG and baggage capacity compared to an -8? I assume performance is similar enough to be a wash for aerobatics, and the F-4 obviously wins in looks...

Brad tells me that the CG came out great, towards the forward limit when solo, just where you want it. No real surprise though. The 6 cylinder Rockets are plenty nose heavy, so swapping engines and moving batteries around fixes it.

As with any plane, an accurate W&B should be performed so you can verify your options are all in the right place!

Baggage capacity depends on engine choice, etc.same, as other aircraft.

NorthernRV4
08-12-2017, 06:16 PM
Darn that plane is GORGEOUS! Any info on those main wing fillets? custom job? they are just icing on the cake to me.

vfrazier
08-15-2017, 09:54 AM
Darn that plane is GORGEOUS! Any info on those main wing fillets? custom job? they are just icing on the cake to me.

Those are Team Rocket wing root fillets. Contact me at vince@f1aircraft.com if you'd like a set.

No PMs please.