What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

2-200 lb guys in a 6

No problem. RV-6A 0-320 fixed pitch prop. I had a 275 pound passenger, I'm 200, and full fuel for a test flight lasting 15 mins. Take off roll was 400 feet farther down the runway, I kept the speed up by 10MPH in the pattern over my normal numbers just for safety.
 
Last edited:
It shouldn't be a problem.

Heck, I'm up to 225 :( and gave a 280 lb guy a ride in my 135 HP RV-9 with no problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
High GW? Aft CG?

Beyond Van's recommended GW, the aft CG limit is what you watch next. You can plug the numbers into a handheld Garmin, and arrive at OW CG before/after flight. Note CG moves aft as fuel qty decreases. If the airplane in question has not, no kidding, been actually weighed, EW and EW CG determined, you'd want to do that..... An RV6 at high gross weight for landing is a different animal with the resultant far aft CG. Be careful. Also, bear in kind that G envelope compresses above 1400 lbs OW. Last, aft CG = bad for spin recovery. Approx 500 RV6 landings here if anyone must know.
 
RV-6

I have hauled 2 200lb guys and full fuel plus 100lb baggaged in my RV-6. The 6 is stronger than the 7 as far as the wings are concerned. I would watch the CG as was stated before, as you burn fuel, CG moves aft. I had to put the big battery back in just for this reason. Just make sure you do not stress the plane and land a little faster than normal to counter the weight. Just because Van's raised the weight on the RV-7 does not mean the RV-6 won't take it. The RV-6 is a much stronger airplane.
 
I would watch the CG as was stated before, as you burn fuel, CG moves aft. I had to put the big battery back in just for this reason.

snipped

The RV-6 is a much stronger airplane.

I'm the reverse. I have the heavier starter motor, and put my ELT far aft in the tailcone, and oxygen tank behind the seats to offset too much forward weight.

And of course the RV-6 is stronger! Keep saying that............ and bring up the "sale prices" of this wonderful aircraft! :D

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
The 6 is stronger than the 7 as far as the wings are concerned. The RV-6 is a much stronger airplane.

I'm not picking a fight with Aden...just wanting to tell everyone else reading his post to not just take his word for it (or anyone else in this forum for that matter) unless he can provide data from an engineering analysis or static testing that can prove it.

I believe this sort of blanket statement is dangerous in a public forum such as this.

The only facts as we know them is that the RV-7(A) has an approved aerobatic gross weight of 1550 lbs (if I remember right) and the RV-6(A) has an approved aerobatic gross weight of 1375 (also if I remember right). This implys that the RV-7 wing is designed for a higher load than the RV-6 wing.
Both of the wings were statically load tested to verify wing strength at these weights. Saying anything more is (in my opinion) purely speculation.

By the way I currently fly an RV-6A so I am not trying to imply that a 7 or 6 is better or worse, only that there is no data to support a statement that the RV-6 wing is stronger than the RV-7.
 
The wing spar cross section of the -6 is thicker than the -7, measured at the outboard spar attach bolts. Whether or not that is the weak link I don't know.

Heinrich Gerhardt
 
Routinely fly 2 X 200!

I routineley fly my -6 with 2 X 200+#. I weigh aprox 210#s going to fly and just yesterday flew a friend to Amarillo and back who is about the same. Biggest load yet was myself and my Dad bringing us to almost 500#s in pax. No problems ever noted. These flights are generally straight and level. My -6has an IO-360 with CS composite prop, battery in the back.

Tailwinds!
 
Yes..

I believe this sort of blanket statement is dangerous in a public forum such as this.

...to Scott's statement.

Bear in mind that Jon Johannson flies his -4 waaaay over gross with 18 hours of fuel, 50 gallons of that in the rear seat area.

My Air Tractor's gross is around 7500 Lbs but I've flown it at 8500 often. You have to be very careful to allow increased approach and landing speeds and no aerobatics. Slowly work up to the weight you want and don't just put it at 1800 lbs without easing up there.

Johannson is flying near 2000 lbs, I'd guess, but reached that point very systematically.

Regards,
 
With empty weight of 973#, my O-320 powered -6 routinely carried myself and a 225# friend with full fuel. We were just under the 1650 gross wt. Even with the fixed pitch prop, we would always climb out at over 1000 ft/ min.
 
Last edited:
(1) A RV is not built to a Type Certificate.

(2) No Production Certificate on the parts.

The strength of any one airplane would be determined be the weakest part that fails first. Pretty much a fantasy to compare real world finished experimental airplanes due to builder variations.
 
...to Scott's statement.

Bear in mind that Jon Johannson flies his -4 waaaay over gross with 18 hours of fuel, 50 gallons of that in the rear seat area.

My Air Tractor's gross is around 7500 Lbs but I've flown it at 8500 often. You have to be very careful to allow increased approach and landing speeds and no aerobatics. Slowly work up to the weight you want and don't just put it at 1800 lbs without easing up there.

Johannson is flying near 2000 lbs, I'd guess, but reached that point very systematically.

Regards,

Pierre,
I know about all of Johns flights (he actually made one flight after modifying the wings so that the whole interior of each wing was a fuel tank), but I don't think that is relavent to this conversation.
The original statement was that The RV-6 wing is stronger than the RV-7 wing.
I don't think any one would assume that just because John flew at a much higher gross weight, that it means an RV-4 has a wing that is even stronger than an RV-6 or 7. A wing that is designed for a specific aerobatic limit load at 6 G's could obviously carry a much higher load than that if limited to 2 G's.

My comment was that the RV-7 wing has an approved aerobatic gross weight of 1550 lbs and the RV-6 wing is approved for an aerobatic gross weight of 1375. Both wings were static tested to those weights. Unless someone wants to static test an RV-6 wing at a weight higher than 1550 lbs at 6 G's, they should not be saying (in my opinion) that the 6 wing is stronger.

BTW... one of the RV-7 wings that was static tested to the aerobatic ultimate load of 9 G's is on display in the hangar at Van's. It has portions of the skins cut away so that the structure inside is visible. From what I remember, there is virtually no deformation apparent on any of the structure.
 
2200 Gross RV-6

I know someone who has taken off at 2200 pound gross in an RV-6. Most of that was fuel.

Hans
 
Traded my F1 Rocket Evo kit to Aden Rich for his 6. Flown it over 800 hrs now and would not trade for any other RV. I say this respectfully as all RV's are pretty nice (except the 12 YUCK!) and reliable but I do feel mine is a bit superior. Spar system is a similar design to the rocket. Aden made several mods to this craft to improve it's appearance and strength. Most obvious is a 7 cowling and custom spinner. Anyway, transport Canada made me do a 3 minute climb test at gross (1800# with 100lbs in baggage). Started at 570ft ASL@ 85mph and 52 degrees and 3 minutes later I was at 4600ft. Been in that cofiguration low on fuel and just carried about 10mph extra to the tarmac. Feels a bit tail heavy when fuel is low but just have to be aware.
 
Oh , if anyone is curious as to the appearance of this craft that I would not trade , look on airliners.net and search C-FDNS
 
This is a w&b sheet on my 160 hp, o-320, fixed pitch catto rv6. OAT was 31C with light winds at 50ft MSL. Climbed 1000ft/min at 100mph. Flies great.



QzKjq61.jpg
 
Back
Top