RV-12 with Honda/Viking Engine Flown

I really don't want to get involved but I have a few shot words. I grew up in Hales Corners and go back to the pioneering stages of sport aviation. If Paul P were to read this site I think he would be shocked. Jan did not fly the pattern at 131. Long after first takeoff he did a level pass at several hunderd feet. When I flew the pattern, and only once at it was late and very tired the speeds were well under my RV9A. I didn't pay a lot of attention to speed as I know the airport and can judge speed. Downwind at the numbers I noticed 95 ""MPH"". My landing was a little fast as I wasn't familiar with that big handle on my right. I pulled one notch and sweeked it in a little fast. Made my day. Thats all I have to say.
Ron Russ RV12-Viking

Jerry, my point exactly. There needs to be no rush to try the unknown. Let the mfr. sufficiently prove it out in his tests. Then we'll see. Life is nothing but a series of choices (I am old enough to support that fact) some good, and some not so good. We all should strive to make the right ones.
Dick Seiders

Wow,

131 MPH in the pattern no that would be fun where I fly, if only I had a way to get the DA20's and 172's out of my way as I pass them at KSDL or KFFZ.

Though the guys lined up on the hold short line at KSDL in Learjets and Gulfstreams might stop fuming about my 65kt final

Seriously, I am interested in the TV issue as the gearbox worries me a bit, but it is a 15K difference I see folks willing to forgive a lot for 15K. (FYI TV issue just lit up another Viking concern for me too, need to learn more)

So instead of beating Jan up (I think he has taken a lot of punishment on the Subaru issue, and he could have folded and hidden, but learned (hopefully) something and is doing something different) maybe there are folks on here who can help, anyone have or know how to borrow the equipment to do TV testing???

The idea here is furthering aviation and keeping costs down. Jan is trying to feed himself as are all small business owners, Rotax, Lycoming, etc. are feeding money hungry corporate shareholders, maybe that is a big part of the problem.

Look at the 1 LSA put out by a major manufacturer the "skycatcher" I would pay 134K and it would way 860 lbs empty (to match my 65K (viking engine) or 79K (rotax) RV12 weighing 720-730 lbs.), can't take anyone with me in the skycatcher (no diet jokes please).

Folks I am a new Sport Pilot, If you have not noticed there are not a lot of pilot starts,

1.) guys like me in their mid 30's frown on flying planes built before we were born (warbirds excluded, rides always accepted

2.) finding an airplane to fly is not that easy, There are two that I know of (LSA Airplane >87kts) available in all of AZ for rent (1) piper sport, and (1) Skycatcher.

I have been two 5 flight schools advertising LSA who no longer have planes as leasebacks pulled out. I asked a few owners why they don't have any and they all had the same answer cost and ROI, getting a new 120 - 140K LSA is not cost economic to a flight school (unless they are huge)

Something has to be done to lower aviation costs for all of us, Jan has the start on the right track.

(Disclaimer, I do not know and have never met Jan but spent dozens of hours reading about the viking, the honda fit, and most importantly the subaru issues).

RDOG said:

What is the overhaul time and cost?

Click to expand...

Keep in mind the tiny number of these engines flying, and the fact that the stresses put on the engine in and aircraft are very different from what it sees in a car, and the low number of hours that the average amateur-built aircraft flies per year. It'll be many years before there is enough time in service for anyone to know how many hours the typical engine will run to overall.

Any numbers that are quoted until there is service history to back them up are pure guesses. Informed guesses perhaps, but guesses non the less.

Ron beat me to it, I was going to throw in "what would Paul P say" comment. I too come from Hales Corners days and am amazed at all this call for years and years of testing and deep pockets to pay us if anything goes wrong. As far as I could, I would look up the writers ages, and it is definitely a generational thing. Ron and I are old fogeys.
There is nothing wrong to want to live in a world made so safe you cannot fail at anything, but it is just not the world we grew up in, so our views are different. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. I can respect your views, why can't you respect ours?

Viking

DonFromTX said:

Ron beat me to it, I was going to throw in "what would Paul P say" comment. I too come from Hales Corners days and am amazed at all this call for years and years of testing and deep pockets to pay us if anything goes wrong. As far as I could, I would look up the writers ages, and it is definitely a generational thing. Ron and I are old fogeys.
There is nothing wrong to want to live in a world made so safe you cannot fail at anything, but it is just not the world we grew up in, so our views are different. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. I can respect your views, why can't you respect ours?

Click to expand...

Hear Hear Don Horses for Coarses I say too! Well said my Friend!

OK, I've sat this discussion out until now. But those who invoke PHP to justify themselves have got my dander up. Paul and the early EAAers were all about innovation, experimentation, trying new things...in their single seat homebuilts. To invoke Paul's name to justify the idea of using a 2 or worse 4 seat family hauler as a beta tester for an unproven and highly suspect design, is simply offensive, and the homebuilt equivalent of "playing the race card.". So knock it off. Argue the merits of this new engine if you want to but leave Paul out of it.

DonFromTX said:

Ron beat me to it, I was going to throw in "what would Paul P say" comment. I too come from Hales Corners days and am amazed at all this call for years and years of testing and deep pockets to pay us if anything goes wrong. As far as I could, I would look up the writers ages, and it is definitely a generational thing. Ron and I are old fogeys.
There is nothing wrong to want to live in a world made so safe you cannot fail at anything, but it is just not the world we grew up in, so our views are different. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. I can respect your views, why can't you respect ours?

Click to expand...

I respect your right to experiment all you want, but this engine is not marketed as such. Aren't you at all curious as to why somebody with much deeper pockets hasn't engineered the necessary gear drives and other hardware to adapt a small import auto engine to LSA? It's because it's a really challenging bit of engineering. Do you think torsional vibration is a myth? So far Viking has said nothing about testing for T.V. issues in spite of direct inquiries. I take this to mean none has been done. Of course there are many ways to do the testing. One is to hire qualified engineers with proper equipment, another is to simply sell a bunch of motors and let your customers discover the long term effects of vibration for themselves.

I hope the Viking engine is a sucess. Copmetition, and lack there of can greatly influnence market conditions. TheRotax is a good engine, but is not without it's faults. I like the idea of several different engine types building time in the 12's.

I am a bit woried about anyone who thinks the can exceed the LSA criteria with a bigger engine and fly with impunity. I fly LSA since I let my medical lapse. If I re-engine my 12 with something and go cruising along at say 130-140 kts, I'm in trouble, not the airplane. It won't be subject to enforcement action, but I will.

Mark Henderson said:

I am a bit woried about anyone who thinks the can exceed the LSA criteria with a bigger engine and fly with impunity. I fly LSA since I let my medical lapse. If I re-engine my 12 with something and go cruising along at say 130-140 kts, I'm in trouble, not the airplane. It won't be subject to enforcement action, but I will.

Click to expand...

The LSA criterion for top speed is an aircraft criterion, not an operational criterion.

As a practical matter it could be met by adjustment of the prop pitch.

Dave

Dave, you are correct. But the FAA does not cite the airplane, they cite the pilot. If I claim I am flying Light sport in a LSA airplane, And I'm really not, they will cite me. There is an element that seems to want the advantages of being a LSA pilot, but want to fly faster than 120 kts and at greater than 1320 lbs. Go for it. Defending folks in court who chose not to follow the rules has provided me a good living for 30 years. I don't think that placard on the panel will do you much good when you get busted flaunting it.

What is the empty weight

What is the empty weight difference between an RV-12 w/ the 912 and the Viking engine?

I met the owner of the Just Aircraft Escapade and talk to him at length about his installation, which I thought looked good but left me with some questions.

The owner mentioned that his Escapade gained a lot more weight than he would have liked compared to what it had before but he never gave me a number.

With this latest Viking RV-12 now flying, could we get a post on its empty weight?

A heavy LSA is no use to anyone and while I respect Van?s engineering staff, the RV-12 is not a plane I would like to fly over gross as so many of our RV (non RV-12) brethren do.

Whoa there! Ever hear of the Pietenpol Air Camper? Two place with automobile engine, extremely popular at EAA start. The POBER jr Ace experimental designed by none other than Paul himself, two place experimental. MANY two place experimentals existed back then. I will NEVER "leave Paul out of it"!

sprucemoose said:

OK, I've sat this discussion out until now. But those who invoke PHP to justify themselves have got my dander up. Paul and the early EAAers were all about innovation, experimentation, trying new things...in their single seat homebuilts. To invoke Paul's name to justify the idea of using a 2 or worse 4 seat family hauler as a beta tester for an unproven and highly suspect design, is simply offensive, and the homebuilt equivalent of "playing the race card.". So knock it off. Argue the merits of this new engine if you want to but leave Paul out of it.

Click to expand...

sprucemoose said:

OK, I've sat this discussion out until now. But those who invoke PHP to justify themselves have got my dander up. Paul and the early EAAers were all about innovation, experimentation, trying new things...in their single seat homebuilts. To invoke Paul's name to justify the idea of using a 2 or worse 4 seat family hauler as a beta tester for an unproven and highly suspect design, is simply offensive, and the homebuilt equivalent of "playing the race card.". So knock it off. Argue the merits of this new engine if you want to but leave Paul out of it.

Click to expand...

i was wondering if you could define what you would consider "proven", and what exactly about the viking and rv12 that you consider "highly suspect design"?

N941WR said:

What is the empty weight difference between an RV-12 w/ the 912 and the Viking engine?

Click to expand...

Ron, the owner, posted a week or two ago that he wasn't gonna post the empty weight.

Not that I wouldn't like to know, but it is his airplane and his choice to provide whatever information he wants to share.

Kyle Boatright said:

Ron, the owner, posted a week or two ago that he wasn't gonna post the empty weight.

Not that I wouldn't like to know, but it is his airplane and his choice to provide whatever information he wants to share.

Click to expand...

If that is the case, I would be VERY reluctant to install one of these engines without knowing the full story.

Rules

http://www.vansairforce.net/rules.htm

I'm just saying....

Close to killing it.

DR

I think....

N941WR said:

If that is the case, I would be VERY reluctant to install one of these engines without knowing the full story.

Click to expand...

Jan

Jan,
On the Rotax RV12 the prop has about 4 inches of clearance to the nose wheel fairing. It appears on the Viking instillation the prop and engine have been moved closer to the firewall than on the Rotax instillation. That being said. How much clearance is there between the prop and the nose wheel fairing on the Viking RV12 instillation?

Jan, you are your own worst enemy.

Put the engine on a dyno, get some hard data and publish it.

(I have pages of numbers from BPE on my Lycoming. Its all boring stuff to read, but it is there, it was done and makes good business and engineering sense)

Hire someone like Sonja Englert to go over the TV issues and publish her report.

Do that and 98% of this thread will go away, you will sell more engines, and have a lot less controversy.

None of this will cost and arm and a leg, it only makes good sense. Do it and get on with life. Otherwise the discussion will never end and it will harm the business potential of the Viking.

to test or not

David-aviator said:

Jan, you are your own worst enemy.

Put the engine on a dyno, get some hard data and publish it.

(I have pages of numbers from BPE on my Lycoming. Its all boring stuff to read, but it is there, it was done and makes good business and engineering sense)

Hire someone like Sonja Englert to go over the TV issues and publish her report.

Do that and 98% of this thread will go away, you will sell more engines, and have a lot less controversy.

None of this will cost and arm and a leg, it only makes good sense. Do it and get on with life. Otherwise the discussion will never end and it will harm the business potential of the Viking.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%
Unless he already knows the outcome.

Danny7 said:

i was wondering if you could define what you would consider "proven", and what exactly about the viking and rv12 that you consider "highly suspect design"?

Click to expand...

This thread is on thin ice (rightfully so) so I'll tread lightly, and summarize the unstated feelings of many people on this thread. The manufacturer in this case has a well established reputation in the RV community. Anyone who has been around here more than a couple of years is well aware of it. If you are new to the group, the info is all in the archives, google etc.

DonFromTX said:

Whoa there! Ever hear of the Pietenpol Air Camper? Two place with automobile engine, extremely popular at EAA start. The POBER jr Ace experimental designed by none other than Paul himself, two place experimental. MANY two place experimentals existed back then. I will NEVER "leave Paul out of it"!

Click to expand...

We all owe Paul a great debt, for without his efforts in the early days, our hobby would simply not exist. In fact, one of his earliest successes was to get the rules changed to allow for carrying of passengers in homebuilt aircraft, which was illegal when EAA was formed in 1953. The below quote is from the very first issue of the Experimenter in Feb. 1953

"The feeling is running ?high?
that with a strong organization,
enough pressure could be brought
to bear in the right places that
some sort of limited
airworthiness certificate could
be issued time proven
experimental aircraft to enable
the owner to carry passengers.
It is a goal to work for."

Interesting history, but not at all relevant to the discussion of the Viking engine. And not any sort of basis to invoke Paul's name to rationalize the business practices of this company. This has nothing to do with your rights to experiment with alternative engines.

janeggenfellner said:

[Text here that was promotional in nature was removed by the owner of the forums. Non advertisers cannot use the forums as a promotional tool (rule #5 at: http://www.vansairforce.net/rules.htm). Answering a specific, technical question that can be verified with a source is of course allowed - and encouraged!

]​

Jan

Click to expand...

Jan,

As a future LSA pilot, I am closely monitoring powerplant development for this category of aircraft. Considering the audience that you have on this website, why are you not a paid advertiser on this forum? I believe this would promote a more open dialogue between you and your potential customers.

Regards,

Information

Jan I think a lot of us would like to see this engine perform well, and have other choices for a power plant. Time will tell and I am looking forward to the time when Don has some time on his 12 to share his information with us. Sharing information and solving problems is what this sport is about. I will also use an alternate engine in my 12, as more information is presented. I would like to see more weight and balance, gearbox and high RPM information.

Good Luck

sprucemoose said:

This thread is on thin ice (rightfully so) so I'll tread lightly, and summarize the unstated feelings of many people on this thread. The manufacturer in this case has a well established reputation in the RV community. Anyone who has been around here more than a couple of years is well aware of it. If you are new to the group, the info is all in the archives, google etc.

Click to expand...

i am aware of most of the history, i was wondering if you knew much about the viking or if you based your "highly suspect design" solely on the what you know of the past history?

those that don't learn from the past are destined to repeat it...

Danny7 said:

i am aware of most of the history, i was wondering if you knew much about the viking or if you based your "highly suspect design" solely on the what you know of the past history?

Click to expand...

I do not know a great deal about this engine package or it's engineering, and I base my cautions on the history of the company. The lack of engineering information, especially with the gear box and TV issues that others have detailed, are my basis for the "highly suspect" description.

Gearbox

sprucemoose said:

I do not know a great deal about this engine package or it's engineering, and I base my cautions on the history of the company. The lack of engineering information, especially with the gear box and TV issues that others have detailed, are my basis for the "highly suspect" description.

Click to expand...