What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV8 - an aerobatic two seater?

HansR

Active Member
Hi.
I have yet not decided whether to buy a second hand RV8 or RV4.

My main target is to have an aircraft able to do aerobatics with two fullgrown males onboard.

On spec, everything points towards RV8, but when I found a plane of interest, it was with the Mark1 wing, with max aerobatic weight 1500 lbs.
The empty weight is 1140 lbs, leaving just 360 lbs for useful load. Even with the new wing with 1600 lbs aero weight, it is just 460 lbs useful weight. Not much fuel if the crew is 400 lbs.

I checked the RV4. It seems to be 1375 lbs max aerobatic weight, and 930 lbs empty weight, giving a 445 lbs useful load.

As far as I can see, the two planes have about the same useful load, providing a low margin for fuel.

How do you do with your RV4/8? Do you fly aerobatics with passenger?

Does anyone know the design difference between new and old wing?

Do you exceed the max aerob. weight if you stay below 4G?

What other advantages do I get with a RV8 (except a bit more room in the cockpit and more baggage)?

I really want an aerobatic RV, and I would like it to be aerobatic also with passanger. Please help me with the arguments for the two models.
 
I am still in my test period, so haven't done anything with a passenger yet. Built my 8A as light as I could, currently 1003 lbs with no gear fairing or wheel pants. Tends toward aft CG unlike most RV-8s. Have the old original wing so 1550 lbs aerobatic weight.

Running my weight and balance, with half tanks of gas, it could carry two 170lb people and be in the aerobatic envelope. This requires putting 50 lbs in the front baggage compartment as ballast to get the CG forward enough.

As I haven't weighed 170 lbs since 5th grade, I can only take about 120 lbs for the passenger and be aerobatic. Only have the one parachute, so unless could borrow one someplace don't expect actually doing any two up aerobatics. I have done plenty of aerobatics in the past and never gone over 4Gs, so in theory could do it at higher weights, but that then doesn't leave you with any safety margin for mistakes. I wouldn't do it.

My take is, build it light and the -8 can be a two place aerobatic plane for medium to small pilots. Harder to do with a finished plane, would have to take stuff like heavy batteries, extra radios out.
 
Just my 2 cents worth. Some 5 years ago, I was trying to decide between a 4 and an 8. I rode in the back seat of a 4. It's so tight, I found it to be claustrophobic, and I'm not a big guy---5' 10". So I went with an 8. Now this is just me. Get yourself a ride in the back seat of a 4, and decide for yourself.
 
Hi.

On spec, everything points towards RV8, but when I found a plane of interest, it was with the Mark1 wing, with max aerobatic weight 1500 lbs.

I thought that, in general, Mark I wings on an -8 meant an aerobatic load of 1550lbs.
 
Typical empty weights are nearer 1000 lbs for the -4 and 1100 lbs for the -8 averagely equipped. So aerobatic payloads are more like 375 lb and 500 lb respectively (assuming -1 wing).

The best combination for aerobatic payload could be an -8 with a fixed pitch wooden prop and a firewall mounted battery. Swapping the Odyssey for an EarthX battery gives you another ~10 lbs.
 
Your post doesn't specify tandem seating?

So is a RV6 or RV7 NOT an option? Both are aerobatic right? With 2 full grown 200lb people and room for luggage right?

Check the specs on a 7.
 
I rode in the back of a -8 for about an hour. Wouldn't want to do it again... I'm 6'4" and 225. My legs were basically locked in position around the front seater and couldn't move my feet. When I got out - it was not easy...

I own a -9A (similar size inside to -7) and much more comfortable seating and easier in/out.
 
Having flown aerobatics in both, the RV-8 is a bit easier to fly "two-up" aerobatic aircraft than the RV-4. The RV-4 is much more aft-CG pitch-sensitive with a passenger.

Both aircraft really need to be flown at aerobatic weight for CG reasons, which is very limiting if you have a passenger.

Both aircraft are very pleasant for aerobatics without a passenger.

Of course, every build is a little bit different so YMMV based on individual airframe.
 
Both aircraft are very pleasant for aerobatics without a passenger.

Agree.

As for passengers it depends what kind of acro you want to do. A gentle roll and loop with a passenger isn't a problem. I wouldn't want to use either as a basic trainer. If you are looking for that I would keep looking.

Oliver
 
No two up aerobatics in a RV-4

You can't get there, legally in a RV-4. I've owned a -4 and an -8. The RV-4 is just not a two-up aerobat. Cook the numbers however you like but it isn't. Your CG or your weight will be out of whack. Can you load your 200 lb neighbor up and go do loops? Sure. But, just because you can doesn't mean you should. You'll be so far out of CG, and probably overweight, that it will not be a comfortable experience.

The RV-8 is most certainly a two-up aerobat. Just manage the CG appropriately. Depending on the weight of the person in the back seat, you might want to add some weight up front. But, you'll definitely be within the weight limits and you'll be able to manage the CG.
 
Agreed!

You can't get there, legally in a RV-4. I've owned a -4 and an -8. The RV-4 is just not a two-up aerobat. Cook the numbers however you like but it isn't. Your CG or your weight will be out of whack. Can you load your 200 lb neighbor up and go do loops? Sure. But, just because you can doesn't mean you should. You'll be so far out of CG, and probably overweight, that it will not be a comfortable experience.

The RV-8 is most certainly a two-up aerobat. Just manage the CG appropriately. Depending on the weight of the person in the back seat, you might want to add some weight up front. But, you'll definitely be within the weight limits and you'll be able to manage the CG.

I agree, with this and add that if you find an 8 or better build one that has a good weight and configuration for it you will be fine. We have an 8-A that is 1008 Lbs. with a Prince "P" tip wood and carbon fiber prop. We put it together with a strong IO-360, that puts out about 195 Hp. The airframe does have a "dash one" wing and the empty C.G. is close to the front of the limit. This set-up allows the aircraft to be used to its full potential for both seats. If you want to go out for a hour or so and do some fun flying with a friend you can just unload everything but for 16 or 20 gallons of fuel. Always watch your rear C.G. limit, it does change a little forward for Aero. Or if you want to do KOSH with the wife or friend, you load 50 Lbs. in the front baggage, 50+25 Lbs. in the rear baggage and shelf, Full fuel in the mains and anything that is left over in the seats and go. There is a lot of extra weight that does not need to be carried for those day trips. I would vote for the eight in this question. Just our two pennies. Yours, R.E.A. III # 80888
 
Keep looking

Hi.
I have yet not decided whether to buy a second hand RV8 or RV4.

My main target is to have an aircraft able to do aerobatics with two fullgrown males onboard.

On spec, everything points towards RV8, but when I found a plane of interest, it was with the Mark1 wing, with max aerobatic weight 1500 lbs.
The empty weight is 1140 lbs, leaving just 360 lbs for useful load. Even with the new wing with 1600 lbs aero weight, it is just 460 lbs useful weight. Not much fuel if the crew is 400 lbs.

I checked the RV4. It seems to be 1375 lbs max aerobatic weight, and 930 lbs empty weight, giving a 445 lbs useful load.

As far as I can see, the two planes have about the same useful load, providing a low margin for fuel.

How do you do with your RV4/8? Do you fly aerobatics with passenger?

Does anyone know the design difference between new and old wing?

Do you exceed the max aerob. weight if you stay below 4G?

What other advantages do I get with a RV8 (except a bit more room in the cockpit and more baggage)?

I really want an aerobatic RV, and I would like it to be aerobatic also with passanger. Please help me with the arguments for the two models.

That is a fairly heavy 8. Look for one built a bit more recently with a parallel valve engine and composite or wood 2-blade prop and the weight should be under 1100. With the -1 wing, that gives you 400 lb for crew and 100 lb fuel. That should still give you 30-45 min of acro, 15 minutes to get back home and a 30 minute reserve. My Hangar neighbor competes in acro in a -4 and he never practices longer than 30 min at a time.

The difference between the 2 wings is the spars. The -1 spar is the same as is used in the 7/7A. Never asked Vans, but I'm sure it was to reduce tooling costs as much as anything. Max gross is the same (gear limited I think).
 
That is a fairly heavy 8. Look for one built a bit more recently with a parallel valve engine and composite or wood 2-blade prop and the weight should be under 1100. With the -1 wing, that gives you 400 lb for crew and 100 lb fuel. That should still give you 30-45 min of acro, 15 minutes to get back home and a 30 minute reserve. My Hangar neighbor competes in acro in a -4 and he never practices longer than 30 min at a time.

The difference between the 2 wings is the spars. The -1 spar is the same as is used in the 7/7A. Never asked Vans, but I'm sure it was to reduce tooling costs as much as anything. Max gross is the same (gear limited I think).

Yes, it seems heavy. There is not a lot of RV8's to choose from here in Europe, and most are too expensive.
Vans has told me that the reason for wing change is tooling cost.
 
My 8 is just under 1200lbs m/t, well equip. I fly 99% solo so the weight isn't an issue for me but is probably one of the heaviest 8's I've seen. Great 1 up for aeros. I tried a 4 but way too limiting even for me solo. The 8 is the best design Vans ever made, well I reckon a pussycat to drive and idiot proof handling even on the ground:)
 
Depends on your

Hi.
I have yet not decided whether to buy a second hand RV8 or RV4.

My main target is to have an aircraft able to do aerobatics with two fullgrown males onboard.

On spec, everything points towards RV8, but when I found a plane of interest, it was with the Mark1 wing, with max aerobatic weight 1500 lbs.
The empty weight is 1140 lbs, leaving just 360 lbs for useful load. Even with the new wing with 1600 lbs aero weight, it is just 460 lbs useful weight. Not much fuel if the crew is 400 lbs.

I checked the RV4. It seems to be 1375 lbs max aerobatic weight, and 930 lbs empty weight, giving a 445 lbs useful load.

As far as I can see, the two planes have about the same useful load, providing a low margin for fuel.

How do you do with your RV4/8? Do you fly aerobatics with passenger?

Does anyone know the design difference between new and old wing?

Do you exceed the max aerob. weight if you stay below 4G?

What other advantages do I get with a RV8 (except a bit more room in the cockpit and more baggage)?

I really want an aerobatic RV, and I would like it to be aerobatic also with passanger. Please help me with the arguments for the two models.


My main target is to have an aircraft able to do aerobatics with two fullgrown males onboard.

Can't be done in a 4. And depending on your definition of two fully grown males, AND your definition of aerobatics, not even a great idea in an 8. Unless all you are going to do is aileron rolls.

An Extra 300 or SU 29 might be the safe solution depending on what aerobatics and how fully grown you and your passenger are.
 
Folow-up.

I don't know how to transfer to this sight. This question got me to thinking I should go back and look at my POHB to see why we built our C.G and weight the way we did. Keeping in mind that the 8 is a sport aerobatic, not a hard core aero platform, this may help if I can get it on here. We had to put samples of W&B in our POHB, so I pulled the one that gave the best look at a two person aerobatic configuration from it. Lets see if I can place it in here by long hand.
PILOT,PX, NO BAGS--------------WEIGHT-------ARM----------MOMENT
EMPTY AIRCRAFT-------------------1008------------------------79,527.18
FWD BAGGAGE---------------------------0----------58.51-------------0
FUEL ( 31.5 GAL)---------------------192----------80.0--------15,360.0
PILOT-----------------------------------190----------91.78------17,438.2
PASSENGER----------------------------185----------119.12-----23,037.27
AFT BAGGAGE-----------------------------0----------138.00-----------0
AFT BAGGAGE SHELF----------------------0----------152.91----------0
----------------TOTAL-----------------1575.0-------------------134,362.58
I think you can see that you can have some fun, even if it is not hard hammering. The rear C.G. moves up an inch from 86.82" to 85.82" and the weight is limited to 1600 Lbs. or 1550 Lbs. with the older wings.
I hope this goes and helps a little. Yours, R.E.A. III # 80888

sorry guys, I had this all spread out on each line, but it will not take it that way. I went back and added the dashes. I guess that matches our wing as well.
 
Last edited:
Weight and C.G. location.

You should not need to replace the wing. The older style is only 50Lbs, less suggested weight limit for Aero, than that of the dash one wing. The rear C.G. limit will stay the same for both. It would be a lot less work to reduce and shift weight around in the airframe and you can do that as you go. I would and have done just that on our 8. After very carefully building it, we still found that we could improve our utility by removing as much weight aft of the C.G. and for that matter from the whole aircraft. Then shifted as much of what we had to keep, forward to get the C.G. as close to the front of the C.G. envelope as we could. It is a nice platform and you can work with it to make it to fit a number of missions. With the 8 most all of the weight is loaded aft of the empty C.G. before you leave the ground. If you try to get both the empty weight down and the empty C.G. as close to the front as you can, you well have one that can be used for most of the fun and those other trips you will want to make.
Good luck your got a good start. Yours, R.E.A. III # 80888
 
You should not need to replace the wing. The older style is only 50Lbs, less suggested weight limit for Aero, than that of the dash one wing. The rear C.G. limit will stay the same for both. It would be a lot less work to reduce and shift weight around in the airframe and you can do that as you go. I would and have done just that on our 8. After very carefully building it, we still found that we could improve our utility by removing as much weight aft of the C.G. and for that matter from the whole aircraft. Then shifted as much of what we had to keep, forward to get the C.G. as close to the front of the C.G. envelope as we could. It is a nice platform and you can work with it to make it to fit a number of missions. With the 8 most all of the weight is loaded aft of the empty C.G. before you leave the ground. If you try to get both the empty weight down and the empty C.G. as close to the front as you can, you well have one that can be used for most of the fun and those other trips you will want to make.
Good luck your got a good start. Yours, R.E.A. III # 80888

Thank you for the advice. My RV has a Hartzell C/S prop, so that should put the CG a bit forward.

Now I will just have Mitchell Lock to confirm the 1550 as opposed to the 1500.
 
Keep in mind "Aerobatic" gross weight is only required if you intend on pulling between 4.4-6 G's in the airplane. The airplane doesn't care what it's attitude is, all it cares about is load factor.

If you execute a loop at 3G's you are legal all the way up to 1800lbs, since you haven't exceeded the 4.4G Normal (Utility?) Category load factor.

My -8 with the non-1 wing weighs 1164 empty (complete steam gauge IFR panel, primed, metal Hartzell non-blended airfoil prop) and I have imposed a 4 G limit on the airframe for ALL maneuvers. Therefore "aerobatic" gross weight isn't a thing. I've got zero desire to pull 6 G's my airplane, ever. The only thing I'll do that in is made of composite with two jet engines on it.

Just my .02 cents. With that mindset two 200lbs adults with parachutes (430lbs) and 20 gals of fuel are legal to do aerobatics, and get the $100 hamburger.

Now, that means that you need to be careful not to exceed 4.4 G's at all during the flight, including any botched maneuvers, but I believe that is a realistic goal. Shooting for 3G pulls, that gives 1.4 G of overshoot.
 
Keep in mind "Aerobatic" gross weight is only required if you intend on pulling between 4.4-6 G's in the airplane. The airplane doesn't care what it's attitude is, all it cares about is load factor.

If you execute a loop at 3G's you are legal all the way up to 1800lbs, since you haven't exceeded the 4.4G Normal (Utility?) Category load factor.

My -8 with the non-1 wing weighs 1164 empty (complete steam gauge IFR panel, primed, metal Hartzell non-blended airfoil prop) and I have imposed a 4 G limit on the airframe for ALL maneuvers. Therefore "aerobatic" gross weight isn't a thing. I've got zero desire to pull 6 G's my airplane, ever. The only thing I'll do that in is made of composite with two jet engines on it.

Just my .02 cents. With that mindset two 200lbs adults with parachutes (430lbs) and 20 gals of fuel are legal to do aerobatics, and get the $100 hamburger.

Now, that means that you need to be careful not to exceed 4.4 G's at all during the flight, including any botched maneuvers, but I believe that is a realistic goal. Shooting for 3G pulls, that gives 1.4 G of overshoot.

I suppose you are correct BUT I paid for and built an aerobatic airplane and I intend to use every bit of the flight envelope that I paid for! ;)
 
Hi all and thanks for all advice!

Vans has confirmed that aero weight for old wing is 1550 lbs, so Mitch was wrong, with is in this case a very good thing.

I have bought the RV, and the seller did not have all the facts right, so the empty weight is lower than advertised, and actually the full gross weight was also wrong!

Doing the calculations, I can see I will pass the CG limit before the aero gross weight limit, so a -1 wing would not help me.

How sensitive is the RV-8? If I do aerobatics with maybe an inch of off CG, would that be a real issue?

Futhermore, the aerobatics was not tested and included in the POH, so I will have to do that.

What aerobatic manoeuvres is the RV-8 capable of? I would like all suitable manoeuvres in the book.
 
Hi all and thanks for all advice!

Vans has confirmed that aero weight for old wing is 1550 lbs, so Mitch was wrong, with is in this case a very good thing.

I have bought the RV, and the seller did not have all the facts right, so the empty weight is lower than advertised, and actually the full gross weight was also wrong!

Doing the calculations, I can see I will pass the CG limit before the aero gross weight limit, so a -1 wing would not help me.

How sensitive is the RV-8? If I do aerobatics with maybe an inch of off CG, would that be a real issue?

Futhermore, the aerobatics was not tested and included in the POH, so I will have to do that.

What aerobatic manoeuvres is the RV-8 capable of? I would like all suitable manoeuvres in the book.

Hi Hans,

Congratulations on your purchase. You are going to love the RV-8!

Please be careful to stay withing the published CG and weight limits of the RV-8. With the CG an inch forward of the aft aerobatic CG limit the aircraft is very responsive and not twitchy. I have added ballast to my RV-8 tail to put the CG about one and a quarter inch forward of the aft aerobatic CG limit and find that is the sweet spot for solo aerobatics.

The aircraft is capable of all of the maneuvers in the IAC Sportsman sequences (roll, loop, immelmann, split S, cuban 8, spin and hammerhead turns) and most competition RV pilots fly in that category. The Intermediate IAC sequences can be flown in the RV-8 but there are more negative G figures and snap (flick) rolls. Snap rolls can be done but you should become very proficient in the aircraft before you attempt snaps. I so snaps between 100 and 110 knots and have never exceeded 4 Gs during the maneuver.
If you are new to aerobatics you should get some dual instruction in spin and unusual attitude recoveries. It doesn't have to be dual in an RV. The basics recoveries are the same for most aircraft. And practice aerobatics with enough altitude to do two botched recoveries and still have enough altitude for a successful third attempt!

Van wrote a very good article about IAC Aerobatics in the RV. It's in the August issue of the EAA Sport Aviation Magazine. You can find it in the EAA.org archives if you are a member. Or you can send me your email address via private message and I'll send you a PDF of the article.
 
Hi Hans,

Congratulations on your purchase. You are going to love the RV-8!

Please be careful to stay withing the published CG and weight limits of the RV-8. With the CG an inch forward of the aft aerobatic CG limit the aircraft is very responsive and not twitchy. I have added ballast to my RV-8 tail to put the CG about one and a quarter inch forward of the aft aerobatic CG limit and find that is the sweet spot for solo aerobatics.

The aircraft is capable of all of the maneuvers in the IAC Sportsman sequences (roll, loop, immelmann, split S, cuban 8, spin and hammerhead turns) and most competition RV pilots fly in that category. The Intermediate IAC sequences can be flown in the RV-8 but there are more negative G figures and snap (flick) rolls. Snap rolls can be done but you should become very proficient in the aircraft before you attempt snaps. I so snaps between 100 and 110 knots and have never exceeded 4 Gs during the maneuver.
If you are new to aerobatics you should get some dual instruction in spin and unusual attitude recoveries. It doesn't have to be dual in an RV. The basics recoveries are the same for most aircraft. And practice aerobatics with enough altitude to do two botched recoveries and still have enough altitude for a successful third attempt!

Van wrote a very good article about IAC Aerobatics in the RV. It's in the August issue of the EAA Sport Aviation Magazine. You can find it in the EAA.org archives if you are a member. Or you can send me your email address via private message and I'll send you a PDF of the article.

Hi Ron

No I am not all new to aerobatics, I have certificate for glider aerobatics.
Talking about spins, Vans strongly advise to never do it by purpose, but I find it most valuable to get spin recovery into the muscle memory, so I intend to do it.

I suppose G load is not fully significant when it comes to snap rolls, as the measured G load is only where the meter is, and the load is very assymetrical, so you might have a higher load on one wing. I love snap rolls and hope I can do them in my RV-8.

Yes, I have paid the EAA membership, but all has not gone through, so if you could mail me the article I would appreciate it. [email protected]
 
Hi.
I have yet not decided whether to buy a second hand RV8 or RV4.

My main target is to have an aircraft able to do aerobatics with two fullgrown males onboard.

On spec, everything points towards RV8, but when I found a plane of interest, it was with the Mark1 wing, with max aerobatic weight 1500 lbs.
The empty weight is 1140 lbs, leaving just 360 lbs for useful load. Even with the new wing with 1600 lbs aero weight, it is just 460 lbs useful weight. Not much fuel if the crew is 400 lbs.

I checked the RV4. It seems to be 1375 lbs max aerobatic weight, and 930 lbs empty weight, giving a 445 lbs useful load.

As far as I can see, the two planes have about the same useful load, providing a low margin for fuel.

How do you do with your RV4/8? Do you fly aerobatics with passenger?

Does anyone know the design difference between new and old wing?

Do you exceed the max aerob. weight if you stay below 4G?

What other advantages do I get with a RV8 (except a bit more room in the cockpit and more baggage)?

I really want an aerobatic RV, and I would like it to be aerobatic also with passanger. Please help me with the arguments for the two models.

I purchased my -8. It's pretty light at 1012# emty. I'm 6-2, 205 # and rode in the back for 8 hours home after purchasing it since I wasn't able to fly it yet. Absolutely no issues with Van's stock seats. Very comfortable. I've also done aerobatics in the back including spinning, loops and roles. My weight in the back with 35 gal in the tanks and a light pilot is about the limit. The plane is a joy to fly. I sometimes wish I had a little more weight on the nose given my FP prop, but overall, there are no issues flying aerobatics as long as you follow the specs from vans.
 
I've never seen or heard Van's advise against spins in the RV-8. There is a section regarding RV-8 spin entry and recovery techniques on page 15-18 of the RV-8/-8A Construction Manual. (In that section, it does recommend that the RV-6/-6A and RV-7/-7A limit intentional spins to two turns or less, and that the RV-9/-9A is not intended for spins at all.)

In that section it does say, "Van's Aircraft Inc. does not consider spins to be a recreational aerobatic maneuver, and recommends that they not be casually undertaken."

Page 15-23 and -24 discusses aerobatics and entry speeds for various maneuvers.

You can purchase the plans and manual on a USB flash drive for the RV-8/8A using this link:


You may also want to peruse this article by Van, "An Aerobatic Epistle":


"Van's Aircraft Inc. does not consider spins to be a recreational aerobatic maneuver, and recommends that they not be casually undertaken."
Right, that sentence I have understood that you should not spin deliberately. However, I am not a native english speaker, and might have misunderstood it. If so, it is very good, as I really want to spin until it is my second nature to feel it coming and stop it when needed.

Thanks for the advice, and also the links.

Is there not a way to just download the material (at a cost) rather than sending it physically? Always a hassle with customs and such. However, I really want the material on electronic media.

The article is a bit cut on the edges, I guess that's a scanning issue. I will have to guess the outer parts.
 
"Van's Aircraft Inc. does not consider spins to be a recreational aerobatic maneuver, and recommends that they not be casually undertaken."
Right, that sentence I have understood that you should not spin deliberately. However, I am not a native english speaker, and might have misunderstood it. If so, it is very good, as I really want to spin until it is my second nature to feel it coming and stop it when needed.

I do think you misunderstood. Spins in the RV are quite docile for the first two turns or so then they tend to accelerate which tends to disturb pilots who are unfamiliar with spins. Recovery from upright spins in the RV is quite simple and normal spin recovery techniques are all that is required. I would suggest that you get some dual instruction in spin and unusual attitude recovery procedures if you are new to aerobatics.

I think that Van's recommendation that spins "not be casually undertaken" implies that proper training or aerobatic experience is recommended before taking on spins in your RV.

Have fun. Be safe.
 
I do think you misunderstood. Spins in the RV are quite docile for the first two turns or so then they tend to accelerate which tends to disturb pilots who are unfamiliar with spins. Recovery from upright spins in the RV is quite simple and normal spin recovery techniques are all that is required. I would suggest that you get some dual instruction in spin and unusual attitude recovery procedures if you are new to aerobatics.

I think that Van's recommendation that spins "not be casually undertaken" implies that proper training or aerobatic experience is recommended before taking on spins in your RV.

Have fun. Be safe.

Very well, I have overinterpreted the writing.

I have done some spins in gliders, and also properly recovered from unintentional spin, so I am not all new.

I look forward to do as many spins as is required to automatically respond correctly.
 
Hi all, long time no see!

I have now flown my -8 40 hours, and it is really nice!
However, I have not been able to get the aerobatics instructions (not a lot of instructors around here).

I have started a little bit with barrel rolls.

Now I want to try loop, immelman and cuban eights.

Please advice:
Entry speed?
Initial G's?
G's at top?
When to power off?


The RV is very slippery, so I am very afraid to accelerate above Vne. Is it difficult to keep in in the envelope?
 
Hans,

In case you haven't seen these, here are three good articles. The first is "An Aerobatic Epistle" by Van himself.

Another article by Van named "IAC Aerobatics in RVs", with a great section at the end on "Preparing Your RV for Aerobatics" by Ron Schrek.

And one by Budd Davisson, "RVs, Aerobatics, & You".

All the advice about getting aerobatic dual instruction in a powerplane

stands.

Carl, Thanks a million for showing these. Didn't know they existed. Have just printed all of them, and will read at my leisure. I "do" do acro, but they are Slo-o-o-opy. If I had to take on a mig, the mig would win.:eek:
 
I have read the articles, but not saved them.... now the links do not work anymore.
Anyone can help me?
 
I’ll take my 8 above 4Gs regularly. I try never to get to 6 though, but the natural stick forces make that hard to do anyway unless you’re really pulling. Come on Evan, surely you bend those Marchettis past 4 don’t you!? ;)

I suppose you are correct BUT I paid for and built an aerobatic airplane and I intend to use every bit of the flight envelope that I paid for! ;)
 
Now I have done some aerobatics in my RV.

My RV-8 is rather heavy, and I am too, about 210 lbs.

To stay within aero gross weight, the passenger may max weigh 175 lbs to give any kind of margin for fuel.

I have tried some aerobatics with 130 lbs passenger, and to be honest, the CG change already makes the -8 so much twitchier that I think it would be unwise to do it with someone over 175.

When having a 220 lbs passenger, the elevator stick force is so small I think it would be very easy to make a G overload.

That said, I will continue with aerobatics, but only by my self or with lightweight passenger.
 
To Hans from Hans,

Ditch the big guys in back for acro. I have a -4 and generally fly acro solo since most people don't enjoy acro rides as much as the guy flying and as you mentioned, the aircraft gets pitch sensitive with that extra weight in back.

Only exception would be a slender Swedish gal that laughs a lot when pulling a few G's and turning the world upside down.

Cheers, Hans
 
To Hans from Hans,

Only exception would be a slender Swedish gal that laughs a lot when pulling a few G's and turning the world upside down.

Cheers, Hans

Right, that's exactly what I have done, but my experience is that people are quite excited if they get some acro, afterwards anyway.

Some rolls can of course be done with all passengers.

The flight character really changes with heavy passenger! Also without acro
 
Back
Top