Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
kit prototype?
- Thread starter 13brv3
- Start date
No news is good news?
I'm sure that if something was happening we'd here about it here on VAF first.
One factor that is going to start weighing heavily on any flight testing schedule is the Pacific NW weather. Just as the initial prototype had to wait out the rain, so too will the kit version.
But if it follows the lead of the first ship, it should fly .... well, just about any day now!
Jim
I'm sure that if something was happening we'd here about it here on VAF first.
One factor that is going to start weighing heavily on any flight testing schedule is the Pacific NW weather. Just as the initial prototype had to wait out the rain, so too will the kit version.
But if it follows the lead of the first ship, it should fly .... well, just about any day now!
Jim
Phyrcooler
Well Known Member
The silence is becoming deafening
I hope there is some magic coming out of the skunkworks... cause the complete lack of sharing any of the development of this new Kit Prototype is getting frustrating.
Maybe it will emerge from the misty shroud as an LSA RV-4...
DJ
I hope there is some magic coming out of the skunkworks... cause the complete lack of sharing any of the development of this new Kit Prototype is getting frustrating.
Maybe it will emerge from the misty shroud as an LSA RV-4...
DJ
Mike Armstrong
Well Known Member
Maybe it will emerge from the misty shroud as an LSA RV-4...
DJ
You mean an all-metal tandem taildragger LSA? Something other than another LSA clone? Nah, that wouldn't have gone over well!
how long?
I'm with you on this one DJ. Right now I'm planeless and tired of renting. However without any information on the progress of the second generation RV-12 I am getting close to putting my thoughts of an RV-12 on hold and just buying something fun to fly right now. I can always pick up an RV-12 project at a later date. If Vans thinks there is going to be further delays it would be nice to know. If the production intent prototype is progressing nicely it would be nice to know that too. I'm not interested in critiqueing or second guessing Vans design. I trust their engineering track record and I plan on building it strictly according to the plans. But I would like to know how they are progressing so I can make a decision whether to wait a little longer for the kit or just buy a plane for now and put the thoughts of a kit off for a few years. Without any updates to read I'm spending more time lately in the trade-a-plane web site than I am here at the RV-12 forum.
Frank
I'm with you on this one DJ. Right now I'm planeless and tired of renting. However without any information on the progress of the second generation RV-12 I am getting close to putting my thoughts of an RV-12 on hold and just buying something fun to fly right now. I can always pick up an RV-12 project at a later date. If Vans thinks there is going to be further delays it would be nice to know. If the production intent prototype is progressing nicely it would be nice to know that too. I'm not interested in critiqueing or second guessing Vans design. I trust their engineering track record and I plan on building it strictly according to the plans. But I would like to know how they are progressing so I can make a decision whether to wait a little longer for the kit or just buy a plane for now and put the thoughts of a kit off for a few years. Without any updates to read I'm spending more time lately in the trade-a-plane web site than I am here at the RV-12 forum.
Frank
Response from Vans on kit-prototype
Received this response from Ken Scott to my inquiry to Vans about status of kit prototype.
Harold: just as soon as we have something concrete to report. Right now most of our effort is going into structural tests, which take a lot of time to set up and conduct. When those are done and we've learned what we need to know, the prototype should go together very quickly. But there's no point in building it until the tests are complete.
Received this response from Ken Scott to my inquiry to Vans about status of kit prototype.
Harold: just as soon as we have something concrete to report. Right now most of our effort is going into structural tests, which take a lot of time to set up and conduct. When those are done and we've learned what we need to know, the prototype should go together very quickly. But there's no point in building it until the tests are complete.
13brv3
Well Known Member
Thanks for checking. Sounds like Van's is doing their usual thorough job of testing. I just wish they would post at least a miminum update on a regular basis. It would make the waiting a bit easier.
Cheers,
Rusty (also wishing for a tandem tailwheel model)
I thought they would be further along...
Thanks, Hal-san, for doing the obvious - ask the factory for an update!
If the kit prototype isn't even assembled I doubt we will be seeing any RV-12 kits in 2007. But if we *do* see a flying prototype this year, what does that imply about assembly times for the kit?
As for a tandem tail-dragger LSA, sure, that would be an interesting design. I might even buy one. But I suspect that most people in the LSA market want a tri-gear side-by-side airplane and thus Van has gone in that direction.
And speaking of Ken Scott, I saw him land at KHIO last weekend in the KK-1. It's not a taildragger and it only seats one but it sure looks like a neat little $10,000 airplane. And I bet it could be licensed as a LSA. Too bad it's not being offered as a kit.
Jim
Thanks, Hal-san, for doing the obvious - ask the factory for an update!
If the kit prototype isn't even assembled I doubt we will be seeing any RV-12 kits in 2007. But if we *do* see a flying prototype this year, what does that imply about assembly times for the kit?
As for a tandem tail-dragger LSA, sure, that would be an interesting design. I might even buy one. But I suspect that most people in the LSA market want a tri-gear side-by-side airplane and thus Van has gone in that direction.
And speaking of Ken Scott, I saw him land at KHIO last weekend in the KK-1. It's not a taildragger and it only seats one but it sure looks like a neat little $10,000 airplane. And I bet it could be licensed as a LSA. Too bad it's not being offered as a kit.
Jim
reality check
I'm not dissapointed. I'm just grateful for the update. Considering that they are designing a new wing and stretching the fuselage thats practically a complete new design (while retaining the original concept). So there's design work, structural testing, prototype assembly, prototype flight testing, production tooling, supplier selection, assembly manual preparation, etc,etc and oh by the way they have the rest of the business to support. Sounds to me like they are going to be well into 2008 before they are in kit production mode. Even Cessna pushed out the delivery of the 162 for a year. It just takes time to prepare a new plane for production.
Although I have already come to the conclusion that I am going to order a kit I think I am going to push back my expectations for a year to give Vans time to sort everything out and debug the whole design/process. This would be my first kit plane so I am not one that would benefit the factory in building an early kit and offering constructive feedback. Kudos to you experienced builders that are able to do that.
So, my "plan B" is to buy a cheap fun flyer for now (Champ, T'craft, etc) and place an order for the RV-12 kit in the yet to be determined future (Oshkosh 2008??). Being an experimental aircraft I expect that Vans will at least split the kit into "airframe and firewall forward". I'll order the airframe and I will sell the fun flyer when it comes time to buy the engine for the 12. In the mean time having something fun to fly will take the anxiety off of waiting for the RV-12 kit to arrive.
There is an interesting quote in the December Plane and Pilot that goes like this: " The airplane that we have now may not be our ideal, but it's what keeps us flying until we get the airplane of our dreams". That sounds like a philosophy I can live by while waiting for the RV-12 to mature.
I'm still going to monitor the progress so thanks to all with the inside track to the factory information.
Frank
I'm not dissapointed. I'm just grateful for the update. Considering that they are designing a new wing and stretching the fuselage thats practically a complete new design (while retaining the original concept). So there's design work, structural testing, prototype assembly, prototype flight testing, production tooling, supplier selection, assembly manual preparation, etc,etc and oh by the way they have the rest of the business to support. Sounds to me like they are going to be well into 2008 before they are in kit production mode. Even Cessna pushed out the delivery of the 162 for a year. It just takes time to prepare a new plane for production.
Although I have already come to the conclusion that I am going to order a kit I think I am going to push back my expectations for a year to give Vans time to sort everything out and debug the whole design/process. This would be my first kit plane so I am not one that would benefit the factory in building an early kit and offering constructive feedback. Kudos to you experienced builders that are able to do that.
So, my "plan B" is to buy a cheap fun flyer for now (Champ, T'craft, etc) and place an order for the RV-12 kit in the yet to be determined future (Oshkosh 2008??). Being an experimental aircraft I expect that Vans will at least split the kit into "airframe and firewall forward". I'll order the airframe and I will sell the fun flyer when it comes time to buy the engine for the 12. In the mean time having something fun to fly will take the anxiety off of waiting for the RV-12 kit to arrive.
There is an interesting quote in the December Plane and Pilot that goes like this: " The airplane that we have now may not be our ideal, but it's what keeps us flying until we get the airplane of our dreams". That sounds like a philosophy I can live by while waiting for the RV-12 to mature.
I'm still going to monitor the progress so thanks to all with the inside track to the factory information.
Frank
Last edited:
DavidBurton
Active Member
Greetings,
Has anyone heard how close the kit prototype is to flying?
Thanks,
Rusty QUOTE]
One unpleasant effect of the dollar being down so much against the rest of the world's currency is that the Rotax 912s that the 12 is intended to use is up $5000 in price since the summer. That's a bummer. I sent an email to Van's asking if they had any luck negotiating better prices on the 912 but did not receive a response from them
Dave
RV6
Rising Rotax
I hadn't considered this angle. A 5K increase in price would put the Rotax in the $20,000 price range, which is Lycoming territory.
Of course, the price of European factory built LSA's will be rising as well, so a RV-12 may still look attractive in comparison. But this is disconcerting news, for sure.
Jim
I hadn't considered this angle. A 5K increase in price would put the Rotax in the $20,000 price range, which is Lycoming territory.
Of course, the price of European factory built LSA's will be rising as well, so a RV-12 may still look attractive in comparison. But this is disconcerting news, for sure.
Jim
Phyrcooler
Well Known Member
Yeah... an issue of concern for me as well. The somewhat lower cost, coupled with a (hopefully) fairly quick build time is what has pushed me to look at the LSA's. Depending on what happens cost-wise and timing (kit delays)... I am starting to consider doing a 9A QB.
Fortunately(?) several personal/home issues are still unresolved... so am not quite ready to start anything yet. So it isn't quite a clock issue for me yet. As others have said here... it would sure be nice to get some updates, a couple photo's, etc. They shared more during the POC development. There's less to hide now that RAN's has cemented their design... so not sure why nothing has come out. It would sure appease us impatient ones!
DJrising rotax
This past summer I visited the Rotax factory in Austria and they were concerned then about remaining competative in the US market.
At that time they were considering manufacturing soime of their other products in Mexico or Canada to stay competative in the US market. No word on whether they were thinking the same thing for the aircraft engines.
Hmmmm. With the dollar down maybe Lycoming or Continental could license the manufacturing rights to the Rotax engines and manufacture them for the North American LSA (and military UAV) market....
Frank
This past summer I visited the Rotax factory in Austria and they were concerned then about remaining competative in the US market.
At that time they were considering manufacturing soime of their other products in Mexico or Canada to stay competative in the US market. No word on whether they were thinking the same thing for the aircraft engines.
Hmmmm. With the dollar down maybe Lycoming or Continental could license the manufacturing rights to the Rotax engines and manufacture them for the North American LSA (and military UAV) market....
Frank
Phyrcooler
Well Known Member
I wonder what the price of the Jabiru will do? I think that this is an ideal engine, and supposedly a smooth runner. Reported TBO is good, and reported early Jabiru teething problems are ironed out. It is light enough that it shouldn't require much change to the -12 to maintain W&B. Because it is rated at a lower continuous output... (107hp) you could prop it at that to keep your cruise at 120kt at sea level as required... but have a full 120hp available for climbout. That would be awesome.
Unfortunately, while the "new/lighter" TCM O-200 is American made and maybe going to be price competitive with the Rotax... IMHO it still isn't light enough for LSA use... and definitely would add enough weight to the -12 that a full redesign - including losing the "cab-forward" style - would be required. Their FADEC IO-240 may make a nice economical powerplant for the -9 though.? DJ
Unfortunately, while the "new/lighter" TCM O-200 is American made and maybe going to be price competitive with the Rotax... IMHO it still isn't light enough for LSA use... and definitely would add enough weight to the -12 that a full redesign - including losing the "cab-forward" style - would be required. Their FADEC IO-240 may make a nice economical powerplant for the -9 though.? DJ
Last edited:
What about the Gemini 100, the three-cylinder, six-piston diesel that was announced at Airventure 2007? It will be available for the kit market in April 2008 according to the company. It develops 100 hp, weighs 166 lbs. with accessories (if I remember correctly), and fits in the same approximate form factor as the Rotax 912. Plus, it has many fewer parts to break.
Here's the link to the video that caught my interest:
http://www.aero-tv.net/index.cfm?do=app.bestView&videoid=811bce8e-bfc7-4841-afa7-3181d4b63689
Here's a link to a FAQ:
http://ppdgemini.com/_PDF/Gemini100_FAQs.pdf
Here's the link to the video that caught my interest:
http://www.aero-tv.net/index.cfm?do=app.bestView&videoid=811bce8e-bfc7-4841-afa7-3181d4b63689
Here's a link to a FAQ:
http://ppdgemini.com/_PDF/Gemini100_FAQs.pdf
The Gemini 100
The Gemini 100 sure sounds like an interesting engine.
Unfortunately, they don't mention a price in the FAQ and whatever that turns out to be will be effected by the low value of the US dollar as it is foreign made. Just like the Rotax. So we're back where we started from.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. The dollar could recover. Rotax could decide to make engines over here. The Gemini 100 could turn out to cost $12,000 US and Van could offer an engine mount and cowling for it. We could all get tired of waiting and take up golf.
Jim
The Gemini 100 sure sounds like an interesting engine.
Unfortunately, they don't mention a price in the FAQ and whatever that turns out to be will be effected by the low value of the US dollar as it is foreign made. Just like the Rotax. So we're back where we started from.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. The dollar could recover. Rotax could decide to make engines over here. The Gemini 100 could turn out to cost $12,000 US and Van could offer an engine mount and cowling for it. We could all get tired of waiting and take up golf.
Jim
I think I read that the Gemini 100 was being targeted for about $18,000. That was a couple of weeks ago, and they were taking advance orders. That price already reflected a weak dollar, but I'm sure the situation is even more disadvantageous now. I also seem to recall hearing that the Gemini was being designed to fit some of the mounts for existing engines. All of this should be treated as subject to check since it is rather late and I might not be remembering everything exactly ... but I don't think I am far off.
It would be cool, though, if Van developed an interest in it. It could reinforce both designs.
It would be cool, though, if Van developed an interest in it. It could reinforce both designs.
13brv3
Well Known Member
Hi Mel,
I hadn't noticed the wording of the actual rule, but on the sportpilot.org synopsis, they list it as "Single, reciprocating engine (if powered), including rotary or diesel engines". Hopefully, this means they've already asked the FAA about rotary engines, but I'll have to check to see. If they won't allow rotaries to be flown by Sport Pilots, then that shoots down my whole reason for looking at the RV-12.
As for engine choices, I still think Van is making a mistake by not offering at least an option to use a traditional, air cooled engine, such as the new O-200. I know the 912S is an outstanding engine, and I believe newer Sport Pilots will have no hesitation using it. However, I also believe the average, existing pilots, who were brought up to trust air cooled engine, would much rather have the O-200. On the other hand, Van is a pretty old traditional pilot too, and if he can swallow it, then maybe anyone can
BTW, good point about the Rotax prices. Even without the falling dollar, Rotax prices go up every couple months. I'll have to check and see how much my nearly new 582 has appreciated in value
Cheers,
Rusty
Last edited:
I under what you are saying and the rule may be changed. However, in spite of the fact that EAA is "driving the Light-Sport train", We DARs must go by the FAA rules. And my 2008 FARs still state it like I quoted.
13brv3
Well Known Member
I looked into this further, and found a statement on page 87 of the official rule that supports the EAA's synopsis:
The FAA notes that in the final rule the term ?single non-turbine engine? has been
modified to single reciprocating non-turbine engine. This was done to preclude lightsport
aircraft powered by rocket engines but still permit rotary and diesel engines.
The logic of their wording change eludes me, but it does sound like they allow rotary engines. Not quite as clear as I'd like it though.
Cheers,
Rusty
13brv3
Well Known Member
Hi Mel,
The sportpilot.org site has a copy of the "final rule". The quote I posted is from page 87.
http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/final_rule.pdf
Try as I might, I couldn't find this on the FAA site though.
Rusty
The sportpilot.org site has a copy of the "final rule". The quote I posted is from page 87.
http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/final_rule.pdf
Try as I might, I couldn't find this on the FAA site though.
Rusty
Pure speculation..
This is just pure speculation on my part but..
The lack of info coming out of the factory can be read one of two ways, the details are still being hammered out by the engineers, or they want to keep details quiet till they can make a big one time splash with their release. Say at an airshow that would showcase the light sport side of flying.
My guess is we might get some serious news come the Light Sport Expo in Sebring Fl. 17-20 Jan 2008..
But like I said.. pure speculation
This is just pure speculation on my part but..
The lack of info coming out of the factory can be read one of two ways, the details are still being hammered out by the engineers, or they want to keep details quiet till they can make a big one time splash with their release. Say at an airshow that would showcase the light sport side of flying.
My guess is we might get some serious news come the Light Sport Expo in Sebring Fl. 17-20 Jan 2008..
But like I said.. pure speculation
jim miller
Well Known Member
Mel
I would like to get your opinion as a DAR on a exp cub project I am working on regarding the 51% rule. If you could e-mail me I will forward my question.
Thanks
Jim Miller [email protected]
I would like to get your opinion as a DAR on a exp cub project I am working on regarding the 51% rule. If you could e-mail me I will forward my question.
Thanks
Jim Miller [email protected]
Factory Update
Bravo! Any news from the factory is welcome and what they reported is certainly good news. It does indicate good progress but it does not indicate just how far off the completion and flight testing of the second prototype is going to be. They did say they are not going to complete the second prototype until the individual component testing is completed so we are still aways off from seeing the second prototype fly. It does seem to confirm that they are going to be thorough in testing, tooling, documention, etc and that thoroughness is going to take time.
Sun and Fun is only four months away. I'd be more than pleasantly surprised if the second prototype is there. I'm thinking Oshkosh 2008 is a more sure bet. I have not been to Oshkosh in a few years so this seems like a good enough excuse to plan to go this year.
Frank
Bravo! Any news from the factory is welcome and what they reported is certainly good news. It does indicate good progress but it does not indicate just how far off the completion and flight testing of the second prototype is going to be. They did say they are not going to complete the second prototype until the individual component testing is completed so we are still aways off from seeing the second prototype fly. It does seem to confirm that they are going to be thorough in testing, tooling, documention, etc and that thoroughness is going to take time.
Sun and Fun is only four months away. I'd be more than pleasantly surprised if the second prototype is there. I'm thinking Oshkosh 2008 is a more sure bet. I have not been to Oshkosh in a few years so this seems like a good enough excuse to plan to go this year.
Frank
Blastr42
Member
Somethings better than nothing. While the announcement wasn't substantive, it does indicate how advanced the kit will be compared to kits of just a few years ago. Maybe everyone will be flying an RV-12 as a starter plane/kit just because they'll be so easy to build for what you get.
bigbill25
Well Known Member
Here are some things I took from the update:
--Bill
- More support for the kit being very quick to put together
- Sounds like non-standard kitting will be a must: No separate empennage, wing, and fuse kits
- They will have a Rotax engine deal
- Having Ken and Ken build their own RVs is going to pay off huge dividends for us!
--Bill
Kit engine requirements
If you buy the RV12 kit:
1 Can it be registered as an ELSA after 2-2008?
2 Will you be limited to using only the Rotax or whatever engine Van's selects?
I know the factory built SLSA's only allow approved equipment.
3 If you install a different engine, like a Corvair, can it be registered as an LSA or will it be an Experimental Built only?
I've asked "The Expert" at the EAA site twice and never got an answer.
Bob
If you buy the RV12 kit:
1 Can it be registered as an ELSA after 2-2008?
2 Will you be limited to using only the Rotax or whatever engine Van's selects?
I know the factory built SLSA's only allow approved equipment.
3 If you install a different engine, like a Corvair, can it be registered as an LSA or will it be an Experimental Built only?
I've asked "The Expert" at the EAA site twice and never got an answer.
Bob
westexflyboy
Active Member
Answer 1 - Not under the transition regulation that expires January 31, 2008. However if in the future Van's produces an S-LSA version, then E-LSA version would be a copy. It should be noted that an airworthiness certificate with the words "Light Sport" is NOT required for the airplane to be Sport Pilot eligible.
Answer 2 - E-LSA after 1-31-08 (copy of S-LSA) must use only approved engine. As Experimental Amateur Built (ExAB) you may install whatever pleases you.
Answer 3 - Corvair engine would make it ExAB only.
Chase Snodgrass
Presidio, TX
http://flybigbend.com
Last edited:
Blastr42
Member
1. Absolutely, the 2008 thing only applies to transitioning ultralights/other aircraft receiving airworthiness docs before then. Newly built kits that are compliant with the ELSA approval process will be ELSAs when built. (that process includes the designers building one to spec and demonstrating the LSA performance numbers). Remember the 2008 window was designed as an amnesty program to get illegal ultralights legal, the ELSA part for approved kits will exist forever.
2. At the time the airworthiness cert is granted, yes, it will be limited to what Van's says is the engine. After that has occurred, you can change out the engine to whatever you want. There has been a bunch of "that doesn't make sense" comments about this (which you can search for and read), but the idea is this: you will build the safe, known aircraft as it was designed, after that you can screw it up however you want.
3. If it's not an approved engine, read answer #2, you can (likely) still register the kit as Amateur Built. I say likely because it still has to meet 51%.
vernhendershott
Well Known Member
In a talk with Gus and Ken last week, I got some real concern that the FAA is talking about some change to the rules that causes them to be concerned that there may not be the 51% Amateur Built category available in the near future and this has caused them to focus on the E-LSA route for the RV-12. I would much rather build one as an Amateur Built Experimental so that I could make any changes that I want to the radio, instruments and the like. The glass panel they seem to be planning will cost a lot more than the old steam gauges that are appropriate for a by definition "Day VFR" aircraft
Best regards,
Vern
Best regards,
Vern
Well, I guess I made my question clear as mud. Let me try again.
If I build an RV12 in 2010 will it be an:
A- Experimental Built and I have the repairman's certificate. A&P does annual
B- S-LSA and I can repair after 16 hour course. 'Only approved components'
C- E-LSA I can annual and use any motor, panel, Etc.
A/ It will be experimental. Maybe experimental light-sport, maybe experimental amateur-built. You may or may not have repairman certificate.
B/ It will NOT be S-LSA if you build it. 16 hour course is only for inspection, not maintenance.
C/ If it is E-LSA, you can do maintenance, not annual condition inspection unless you have the I-repairman certificate.
Way too many unknowns!
Sorry for the confusion. Let me try one more time, then I'll wait till 2-2008.
I thought some of the S-LSA kits could be 90% factory built. Only approved components, engines, etc. The 16 hour course allowed the OWNER to repair and annual HIS plane. If the plane is sold, the new owner can take the 16 hour course and do his own repairs and annual.The 100 hour course allows service on all LSA's for a fee, like an AP/IA.
If the RV12 or Zenith or one-off is built, can it be registered as a E-LSA after 2-2008. Using the components of our choice and the owner still get the 16 hour repairman's certificate.
I think the RV12 is going to be another Expermental that can be flown by a Light Sport Pilot, but I hope I'm wrong.
Thanks,
Bob
Here is the Ask the Expert answer I read:
Question :
I have completed the 16 hour ELSA inspection course and I'm thinking about purchasing a ELSA that was licensed as ELSA by the builder. As the second owner, not the builder, of this aircraft can I do my own maintance and annual inspection?
Answer :
Yes, you can. There is no restriction on who does the maintenance, repair, or modification to an ELSA, so you can do all these things regardless of whether you are the builder or not. You do not need any FAA certificate of any kind in order to do maintenance, repair, or modification on an ELSA.
Since you have completed the LSA Repairman Inspection course for airplanes, you can apply to have your new ELSA added to your inspection certificate. Once the aircraft is listed on your repairman certificate, you are allowed to do the condition inspection each year. You do not have to be the builder. You simply have to have successfully completed the 16 hour training course for LSA Repairman Inspection.
Last edited:
westexflyboy
Active Member
Bob, I'm afraid your assumptions are in error. None of the choices are valid as written, with the exception that an ExAB builder with a repairman certificate could hire an A&P if desired - not necessary.
A. If you build any RV kitplane as it stands today, choose ExAB. If you have the repairman's certificate, you would not need to involve an A&P except for advice and consultation at your option. And you don't need any additional training to perform the condition inspection (called an annual inspection in the world of certified airplanes but not for kitplanes)
B. You may NOT perform repairs on an S-LSA after a 16-hour course. The 16-hour course only applies to E-LSA, and it's not for repairs, it's for condition inspections.
C. You may legally perform repairs on your ExAB or E-LSA airplane with no training or certification whatsoever. You may choose major components for ExAB. You may not choose major components for anything with LSA in the title. You may perform the "annual" condition inspection for ExAB if you have the repairman's certificate. You may perform the "annual" condition inspection for E-LSA if you pass the proper 16-hour course. Regardless, Van's has not built an S-LSA and until they do, E-LSA version will not be available.
Chase Snodgrass
Presidio, TX
http://flybigbend.com
Mike Armstrong
Well Known Member
westexflyboy
Active Member
Bob,
I don't understand, so perhaps we are looking at this from very different perspectives. There is pretty strong consensus that Experimental Amateur Built is the optimal choice in general aviation. For thousands of owners this category offers the most flexibility and least cost of ownership. E-LSA does not appeal to me because it does not have the flexibility and the savings are not nearly as dramatic.
Would you mind explaining why you hope you're wrong about the RV-12 being an Experimental that may be flown by a Sport Pilot? Are your goals different than mine?
Chase Snodgrass
Presidio, TX
http://flybigbend.com
Last year at SnF I sat in on the seminar presented by the people who give the 16 hour training courses. They made a huge point about getting the ELSA registration by 01/31/08. I couldn't understand what the big deal was either, but the one thing they stated was the value of a plane registered ELSA was worth $30,000 more than one that is Experimental. I'm just trying to find out how that could be possible. I'm thinking it was BS.
The last line of the Ask the EX included the words: 16 hour course, annual LSA's.
I took that to mean all LSA's, not just ELSA's.
Here is a site that cleared up all my confusion, sorry should have Googled sooner.
http://www.sportaviationspecialties.com/Useful_Information.htm
The last line of the Ask the EX included the words: 16 hour course, annual LSA's.
I took that to mean all LSA's, not just ELSA's.
Here is a site that cleared up all my confusion, sorry should have Googled sooner.
http://www.sportaviationspecialties.com/Useful_Information.htm
Last edited:
Alan Gilmore
Active Member
RV-12 schedule
Hello,
FYI...I spoke to Vans Nov 29th and they said the best guess for the delivery would be in Feburary. I know that Vans is driven by quality more than schedule, and I am glad of it. I dont mind waiting a few months if it means that the big bugs will be worked out, and worst case, only a few minor problems left.
Hello,
FYI...I spoke to Vans Nov 29th and they said the best guess for the delivery would be in Feburary. I know that Vans is driven by quality more than schedule, and I am glad of it. I dont mind waiting a few months if it means that the big bugs will be worked out, and worst case, only a few minor problems left.
The only real benefit to certifying E-LSA is...
for resale.
If you build it, and then you certify it E-LSA (can only be done once Van's has certified at least a single example as an S-LSA), you can do the annual condition inspection after completing the 16 hour course.
If you decide to sell it, the new owner can go take the 16 hour course and now he can complete the condition inspection.
This is the only real difference between an RV-12 (or anything else) certified as Exper. Amateur Built vs. Exper.-LSA.
With an Experimental Amateur Built, the new owner has to have an A&P sign off the annual condition inspection (but he can stall do any repairs, maint, or modifications that he wants too).
The trade off is that with E-LSA you must build it exactly like the S-LSA version, with E-A you can build it / equip it how ever you want.
Many builders will probably decide that E-A is more to there liking. Either one can be flow under Sport Pilot rules.
BTW... I doubt that an E-LSA RV-12 could sell for $30K more than an E-A one. Maybe two or three thousand more, if you are dealing with someone who doesn't want to find an A&P one time each year.
for resale.
If you build it, and then you certify it E-LSA (can only be done once Van's has certified at least a single example as an S-LSA), you can do the annual condition inspection after completing the 16 hour course.
If you decide to sell it, the new owner can go take the 16 hour course and now he can complete the condition inspection.
This is the only real difference between an RV-12 (or anything else) certified as Exper. Amateur Built vs. Exper.-LSA.
With an Experimental Amateur Built, the new owner has to have an A&P sign off the annual condition inspection (but he can stall do any repairs, maint, or modifications that he wants too).
The trade off is that with E-LSA you must build it exactly like the S-LSA version, with E-A you can build it / equip it how ever you want.
Many builders will probably decide that E-A is more to there liking. Either one can be flow under Sport Pilot rules.
BTW... I doubt that an E-LSA RV-12 could sell for $30K more than an E-A one. Maybe two or three thousand more, if you are dealing with someone who doesn't want to find an A&P one time each year.
bigbill25
Well Known Member
What about market size? Anyone (Rec Pilots and Private Pilots) can fly an E-LSA RV-12, but only Private Pilots can fly the ExAB version. Thus, the market for the E-LSA is conceivably larger.
I'm just starting to get into this crazy armature built world, but I am thinking of building a RV-12 to spec as it will be the fastest way to build and be LSA sell-able in the end. Then build a slow-build RV-9A while flying the -12. When it comes time to buy the motor for the -9A, sell the -12. Still working out the details and need to get a house with a two car garage first, however...
--Bill
RV10Hopeful
Member
My understanding from previous posts is that any Light Sport or above license is eligible to fly any plane that fits the LSA requirements. So LS, Rec or Private would be able to fly an RV-12 built to LSA specs even if registered as ExAb. It comes down to more of who can do the work on the plane when it's needed.
Please correct me if my thinking is incorrect.
