What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-9 as a first RV?

Maverick972

Well Known Member
Hey everyone, I?m new to the forum and looking to purchase my first RV. Currently my little Aeronca Champ is all l know and am looking to move up to something more capable. After a long cross country in my friends RV7 l was hooked, but a little apprehensive about the speed at landing so maybe the 9 is a better fit. .

l won?t fly a nose wheel as all my time is in tail draggers.

Thanks again for your input. Sean
 
RV-9 as a first RV

Good choice, that's what Van designed the RV-9 for, an easy flying and landing cross country cruiser.
 
Works for me! I'm not into aerobatics, but wanted an efficient cross country airplane that is easy to fly. I first flew my RV-9A with about 140 hours total time and coming off of a 23 year hiatus of not flying. It is easy to land and you can slow way down to less than 60 knots. It just needs a bit of RPM (~1200) on the prop to keep the sink rate acceptable. My stall speed with flaps is around 43 knots. I cruise at 150 knots, so there is quite a wide range of speeds with the -9 wing/airfoil. Taildragger -9's are fairly rare. Don't be afraid of the nose wheel! :D
 
I have enough time in 8?s & 9?s to say without hesitation that the landing speed differences between the 7 & 9 are negligible. Yes, the 9 stalls ?7? mph slower, but your touchdown speeds are within normal variations from landing to landing that in practicality, they overlap.

Since the 7/8 handle the same, you?ll find they are notably more nimble and lighter on the controls than the 9. The 9 feels more like a truck to the 7/8, which in turn makes it more ?stable?. If your primary mission is economical cross country, then the 9 is your bird. If you want to yank and bank like an F-16, then go -7/8.

To be honest, if I were to do it again, I?d build the -14, as it seems to be the best of both worlds. Even though is has more HP, with fuel injection you can still throttle it back to -9 like fuel economy and still yank & bank it.

Just my 2 cents
 
Hey everyone, I?m new to the forum and looking to purchase my first RV. Currently my little Aeronca Champ is all l know and am looking to move up to something more capable. After a long cross country in my friends RV7 l was hooked, but a little apprehensive about the speed at landing so maybe the 9 is a better fit. .

l won?t fly a nose wheel as all my time is in tail draggers.

Thanks again for your input. Sean

Sean welcome! The 9 will be a perfect fit for you. Don't hesitate start looking now it takes a year or more to find your dream aircraft. Tail or nose doesn't matter much it's all personal choice the handling is the same :)
 
Absolutely a 9 first (and maybe last)

I am a bit biased,... as you can see below.

Made the jump from spam to RV,...Not a problem,... but as you mentioned it takes some recalibration for timing and ?sight picture?

Would highly recommend transition training, and insurance would require it. Also take a look at the safety forum for the training sylabus, good info there.

What are you waiting for? Get and keep the grin...

(Why I said ?and maybe last? is because you will enjoy it so much,...no need to change)
 
The 9 is a great choice. and since you're already " tailwheel ready", that would be a great way to go. The 9 does, in my opinion, handle noticeably much slower in the landing approach than a 7. At least my margin of safe airspeed seems slower than in a 7. Speed control is important since the 9 will not land until the correct touchdown speed is attained ( like most tailwheel planes) otherwise you will get the experience of several landings at one time. My 9 is not the best at 3 point landings, probably due to the light composite prop on the front. But an excellent performer with the 0320 160HP and FP prop. The CS prop owners indicate that the 9 is easier to slow down with that confiq.
 
What Dennis said. :)

The 9 is a great choice. and since you're already " tailwheel ready", that would be a great way to go. The 9 does, in my opinion, handle noticeably much slower in the landing approach than a 7. At least my margin of safe airspeed seems slower than in a 7. Speed control is important since the 9 will not land until the correct touchdown speed is attained ( like most tailwheel planes) otherwise you will get the experience of several landings at one time. My 9 is not the best at 3 point landings, probably due to the light composite prop on the front. But an excellent performer with the 0320 160HP and FP prop. The CS prop owners indicate that the 9 is easier to slow down with that confiq.
 
Rv-9

Hi Sean. I recently finished my 9 that I converted from a 9a.
I did the conversion because I had acquired some time in an Rv-3.
And enjoyed the tail wheel experience. I’m close to flying off my 40 hrs and so far the main difference landing the two, is the 9 likes to land slow either 3 point or wheel landings. There is a fair amount of spring in the gear which also adds to wanting a slow touch down speed. 60-65 mph over the numbers makes for some easy landings. 1.2 x Vso or 1.3 Vso is 58/62 Mph. Compared to an Rv-7? Not sure. More float and less sink rate than the 7.

The challenges so far in landing have been in gusty conditions, if you come in to fast, it doesn’t want to land and you find yourself half way down the runway before it finally wants to settle in and not bounce. As of any airplane, but the 9 moreso because of the longer/thicker wing in ground effect. This is the only draw back of the 9 that I have found thus far. Times like these I wish I had more wing loading and a smaller wing. Or maybe a large passenger and full baggage.

With an 0320, 160hp, Sterba wood cruise prop, At 8k, 75% power, 2500 rpm, I’m seeing 180mph TAS.
I’ve yet to fly it over 8k where I hear it really gets in the performance groove.
Testing so far full fuel I’m at: 48mph Vso, 54 mph Vfe.

It’s a great airplane, really fun for the full spectrum of flying. I’m looking forward
to some 10-12k distance,economy flying and some short grass strip landings.
 
Last edited:
Excellent information everyone! I am glad to see I am on the right track. I have a little less than 200 hours so I believe the 9 is the rightvjumping off point for me.

I also appreciate the comment that it will take a year to find the right aircraft, I needed to be realistic and with so many choices it can see how it will take so long.

As a newbie I really appreciate everything, I may jump over to the main thread and introduce myself.

Keep the great info coming.
 
I had about 180hrs (no tail wheel time) prior to flying my RV7A. I did 6 hrs transition training. I feel the speed differences (landing and cruise) negligible. Landing approach is 67-72 Kts. Touchdown anywhere between 52-72 Kts. This is pretty close to the Cessna 172 I used to fly before. I just love the way the 7A lands with the nose wheel configuration. As soon as the mains touch, the angle of attack instantly reduces and therefore it stays on the runway in a slight nose high attitude. Rarely get a bounce.

Cruise is 165kts at 7.5 gph. What?s not to love?

For me, the nod went to the 7 over the 9 for two reasons, one of which is now mute being the airfoil was new. No customer airplanes were flying yet so not much was being discussed other than theory. The 7s wing is stronger and smaller which appealed to me for flying in turbulence (mountains) and slightly better cruise speed, tried and true airfoil.

Bevan.
 
You can't go wrong with the 9/9A. Your thought process is pretty similar to mine, and I was at a similar experience level. I agonised about which to get for ages, and the 9A was quite a jump from my previous experience. I have had it a few years now, and if I had to replace it now it would be with another 9A. I had tailwheel experience and worried about the nose wheel, but it has never been a problem.
 
I should get my license about the same time I get my 9A certified - by the end of the year. I am really lucky to have high time RV pilots at my airport as friends. That and the safety pilot rules will allow me to get a bunch of training while I am doing my 40 hours. I still plan to have real transition training either local or with Mike and understand I am in no way qualified to do my own first flight. I am real excited to get it in the air!
 
Hey everyone, I?m new to the forum and looking to purchase my first RV. Currently my little Aeronca Champ is all l know and am looking to move up to something more capable. After a long cross country in my friends RV7 l was hooked, but a little apprehensive about the speed at landing so maybe the 9 is a better fit. .

l won?t fly a nose wheel as all my time is in tail draggers.

Actually, with proper transition training in what ever model of RV you end up with, I'm pretty sure the apprehension would be a non event.
Also, as the market goes, (personally) I'd pick the aircraft based on the best deal out there at the time, as 6-7-9 performance are pretty similar when you get to comparing 3 hour legs / cruise speeds / actual flight time differences / & bladder endurance.
 
They are all wonderful, and have somewhat different, but overlapping, capabilities. Rather than make a hard commitment to one particular model, watch for the right airplane to come along that meets your requirements with regards to fit/finish, paint, avionics, interior, location, etc. That way you won't have to "settle" for one if you run out of patience waiting for a particular model. You might be surprised at what's out there when you broaden the focus, and as others have mentioned, you won't go wrong with any of them. :)

Vic
 
RV-9A is a great training aircraft

I purchased my flying 9A with about 25 hours of flight time after passing the Sport Pilot flight test, and having a lot to learn. I trained for the Private Pilot test with another 20 hours of instruction in my airplane, and a lot of flying solo. It was/is a fantastic training airplane! The DAR was impressed with my flying and landing, especially because I took my check ride at night! After I got my license I have embarked on numerous cross country flights, and several have been coast to coast, OSH three times, and 120 different airports and 700 hours to date. The airplane will fly a coupled ILS or RNAV approach with slight adjustments in power and trim. The first major crosswind landing I ever performed was a surprise just how well it tracked the centerline down to the runway, and landed on one wheel, then the other, while still keeping me safe. The airplane and its wonderful wing, flaps, and rudder will take care of you. It does require proper speed and height management on approach with a fixed pitch propeller. Being too fast or high will cause you to float and use up precious runway. Not a big deal though on most runways, but comes into play on short runways. It does a wonderful slip, to reduce altitude and slow down as well. I always slip with right rudder for the best view of the runway, and because of that, save the right tank with more fuel for landing generally to keep from unporting the fuel pickup. The airplane instills confidence in these situations, but if you bounce, immediate full throttle and go around should always be in your training so that becomes automatic in my opinion. I have dual Dynon displays with a GTN-650 navigator and Dynon autopilot and it is a very capable airplane for local and long distance flying. I would stay away from manual elevator trim because the electronic servo trim works excellent and you use trim a lot in this airplane.
 
RV 9 is a great choice

My story is similar. Before I built my RV-9A I had about 200 hours in a 172. All 200 hours in the same 172.

I've now flown my 9A about 265 hours. It is a wonderful airplane for me.

There's exactly three airplanes in my log book. The 172, N666RV, and my 9A. N666RV is of course the 6A that I did transition training in with Mike Seager.

I found the transition training very challenging. It was not so much the 6A speeds that were difficult for me. It was the last 20 feet. The RV-6A is significantly more sensitive on the controls, and I found learning to round out and flare the 6A very challenging. After 10 hours with Mike I was beginning to get it down, but still did not feel confident. Nor did I enjoy how sensitive the controls were.

Given my transition training experience I was very nervous that the airplane I'd spent 6 years building was not going to be enjoyable for me to fly. I was so relieved the first two times around the pattern. That was all I was planning to do, but as I taxied back to the hangar I said to myself. That was amazing! I'm going to do 3 more. (This was not the first flight by the way. I had someone else do that.) The 9A is not as sensitive on the controls and that was perfect for me. Now maybe 265 hours later I would not find the 6A to be such a handful. That would be an interesting experiment.

Training in a 6 A was a great experience, and prepared me very well for flying the 9A.

That's just my experience.

Now I want to build a 14A, but I'm trying to figure out if the 14A is more like the 9A or 6A on the controls.

Michael
 
I agree with those that suggest keeping your options open for a 6/7/9 but would add the 8 as well, unless you must have side-by-side. They all fly about the same but landings are a bit different. It is likely you'll find more -6s on the market because more have been built.

When I started looking for a project, the 7 and 9 were in scope. I had flown a -8 and loved it but the baggage situation and tandem seating was less desirable. I ended up finding a -7 in, essentially, quick build state and spent another 2 years to get her finished and in the air (no paint yet). Handling is sensitive but I would not change a thing about it now after 140 hours on the Hobbs this year. An autopilot, IMO, is a must for long cross-country flights because holding an altitude takes a lot of attention until you get used to the controls.
 
Hey everyone, I?m new to the forum and looking to purchase my first RV. Currently my little Aeronca Champ is all l know and am looking to move up to something more capable. After a long cross country in my friends RV7 l was hooked, but a little apprehensive about the speed at landing so maybe the 9 is a better fit. .

don't let your current flying experience determine what you buy/build. With good transition training you can fly a -6 or -7. It just takes a bit of training to learn how to manage the speed and stay ahead of the airplane. They are very honest airplanes and lots of low time guys have learned to fly them. The key is to get a good instructor.
 
As the others have said, the -9 doesn't really fly much differently than the other RV's.

However, the -9 is probably the best "balanced" of all the RV's.

As far as tail draggers go, it is simply the easiest tail dragger I have ever flown. I went from a 65 hp T-Craft right to my -9 and was stunned at how easy was to fly in comparison.

You will have no issues moving up to an RV, any RV.

I fly formation with my neighbor in his 65 hp Champ from time to time and the -9 can easily hang in there with him.

We will fly formation to a local Class Delta airport (KGMU) where we have lunch and fly home together with me doing all the radio work.

You are probably going to have to build a -9 tail dragger because there just aren't many built that way.

Good luck making a decision.
 
Last edited:
If you end up with a -9A (nosewheel) plane, just be very, very careful to NEVER land on the nosewheel!!! So many people transitioning from Pipers and Cessnas have a tendency to do this. You can get away with it in those production planes. You will not in an RV.
 
You'll like any RV, including the 9

A while back I bloviated at some length about transitioning to the RV-9A. On the off chance that would be useful for you, here's a link:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=146300

I continue to be thrilled to own an RV-9A. It just gets so many things right. With that said, I suspect you'd be just as happy with a good -7 or -6.

Good luck!
 
Back
Top