VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #51  
Old 06-24-2019, 10:25 PM
NewbRVator NewbRVator is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CA
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rightrudder View Post
Regardless of gear design, using proper nose-high landing technique can't be stressed enough. We've got generous elevator area and throw on our planes; let's use it to full advantage by carrying the nose wheel as far into the landing roll as possible. Treat the nose gear as if it were made of balsa wood and let the mains take the brunt of the landing forces. Wait till you're at jogging speed before turning off the runway.

Sorry about the "Captain Obvious" nature of this post, but it's really worth repeating!!
I watched a gentleman in a tricycle gear certificated plane wheelbarrowing his landing today and was thinking “that wouldn’t work in a tricycle RV”.
__________________
19 dues paid member since 2018
RV6A
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 06-24-2019, 10:37 PM
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 8,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbRVator View Post
I watched a gentleman in a tricycle gear certificated plane wheelbarrowing his landing today and was thinking “that wouldn’t work in a tricycle RV”.
The outcome is often not good on certified airplanes either.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMmHYWjEmkY
__________________
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 06-25-2019, 07:09 AM
NewbRVator NewbRVator is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CA
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 View Post
The outcome is often not good on certified airplanes either.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMmHYWjEmkY
Absolutely. Not a comment about RV gear but about what not to do!!!

If you’re gonna do a “front wheel landing it should be in a plane with 2 fronts and a small draggy rear”.

Nice video
__________________
19 dues paid member since 2018
RV6A
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 06-25-2019, 09:26 AM
DanH's Avatar
DanH DanH is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 08A
Posts: 8,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 View Post
The outcome is often not good on certified airplanes either.....
And it costs more!

https://aircraftpartsandsalvage.com/...ducts_id=29497

http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...6&postcount=11

The RV upgrade is downright cheap.
__________________
Dan Horton
RV-8 SS
Barrett IO-390
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 06-26-2019, 12:40 AM
Captain Avgas Captain Avgas is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,680
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian_JOY View Post

While I don't own a Vans aircraft, I have some experience with our Glasair Sportsman. The Sportsman nose gear came into being before the RV10 and I sometimes wonder if Vans used the Sportsman design as a nearly direct copy - yes, they look that similar.
I’d be reasonably confident that Vans plagiarised the nose gear for the RV10 from the Cirrus. And then when they saw how it performed in service they incorporated a similar design into the RV14A. And now finally they are offering a similar principle mechanism on other A models.

The original spring steel design as introduced on the RV6A was always a bit problematic but it was very cheap and Vans have always been fixated on price. Also the RV6A came onto the market in a different era (1985) for a different demographic. It had a lower gross weight with typically an O320 engine, a fixed timber prop, and simple VFR panel. Originally there were virtually no bells and whistles from third party vendors. So the RV6As typically were lighter and with less load on the nose gear.

However with the later introduction of the RV7A the game eventually changed. The gross weight increased and IO360s with heavy Hartzell CS props became the new standard. The simple spring steel nose gear design carried forward from the RV6A was now being expected to withstand higher loads....and logically the safety margin was eroded. The nose gear was simple....but it was too simple. The end result was a plethora of nose gear failures.

Broadly speaking Vans modus operandi has been to not re-engineer existing models. Once a model is on the market their engineers move onto the next one. Even their construction drawings and building instructions for any model remain frozen in time.

The current major change to the engine mount /nose gears on the RV7A and RV9A (the new nose gear is now the factory standard on all new finishing kits) is a huge and unprecedented move by Vans. It is unlikely that they have ever re-engineered any existing model on this scale before. Why they have opted to do it now is another interesting subject of discussion. Bear in mind that the RV7A has now been in production for 18 years.

For those who are building and can still make the swap I say do it and don’t worry about the money. You’ll get it back and more when you sell the plane. Planes on the market with the new nose gear will be in hot demand.
__________________
Regards
Bob Barrow
RV7A

Last edited by Captain Avgas : 06-26-2019 at 05:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 06-26-2019, 08:41 AM
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 8,208
Default An alternate viewpoint could be......

........that since the Lord style compression elastomers are one of the most logical ways of absorbing load on a solid style (non-oleo strut) nose gear leg, that it was only natural that they end up look similar (though they are still very far from being the same). I don't remember the Cirrus design being referenced at the time but if it important to people, it should maybe be considered a copy of the Grumman line of airplanes (which was possibly copied by Cirrus???)

As far as Vans never re-engineering existing models.......
There is very strong argument for just the opposite position.

The RV-8 was essentially a major redesign of the RV-4
The RV-7(A) was essentially a major redesign of the RV-6(A)
The RV-12iS was not as major, but still an extensive redesign of the RV-12


As far as the why now question? I think in large part you answered that yourself. There is now quite a few years of experience with that style nose gear from the RV-10 and additionally on the RV-14A. That was valuable experience for developing a system that is robust enough to take the abuse that some pilots are able to induce, and have a system that could be retrofitted to the existing fleet without the need for structural changes to the fuselage.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Avgas View Post
I’d be reasonably confident that Vans plagiarised the nose gear for the RV10 from the Cirrus. And then when they saw how it performed in service they incorporated a similar design into the RV14A. And now finally they are offering a similar principle mechanism on other A models.

The original spring steel design as introduced on the RV6A was always a bit problematic but it was very cheap and Vans have always been fixated on price. Also the RV6A came onto the market in a different era (1985) for a different demographic. It had a lower gross weight with typically an O320 engine, a fixed timber prop, and simple VFR panel. Originally there were virtually no bells and whistles from third party vendors. So the RV6As typically were lighter and with less load on the nose gear.

However with the later introduction of the RV7A the game eventually changed. The gross weight increased and IO360s with heavy Hartzell CS props became the new standard. The simple spring steel nose gear design carried forward from the RV6A was now being expected to withstand higher loads....and logically the safety margin was eroded. The nose gear was simple....but it was too simple. The end result was a plethora of nose gear failures.

Broadly speaking Vans modus operandi has been to not re-engineer existing models. Once a model is on the market their engineers move onto the next one. Even their construction drawings and building instructions for any model remain frozen in time.

The current major change to the engine mount /nose gears on the RV7A and RV9A (the new nose gear is now the factory standard on all new finishing kits) is a huge and unprecedented move by Vans. It is unlikely that they have ever re-engineered any existing model on this scale before. Why they have opted to do it now is another interesting subject of discussion. Bear in mind that the RV7A has now been in production for 18 years.

For those who are building and can still make the swap I say do it and don’t worry about the money. You’ll get it back and more when you sell the plane. Planes on the market with the new nose gear will be in hot demand.
__________________
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 06-26-2019, 09:11 AM
TS Flightlines TS Flightlines is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ridgeland, SC
Posts: 2,291
Default

Dont know about you guys, but I'm pretty confident that Vans is looking at all the models, and maybe doing some upgrades to make them better/safer for all of us.

Tom
__________________
Tom Swearengen, TS Flightlines LLC, AS Flightlines
Joint Venture with Aircraft Specialty
Teflon Hose Assemblies for Experimentals
Proud Vendor for RV1, Donator to VAF
RV7 Tail Kit Completed, Fuse started-Pay as I go Plan
Ridgeland, SC
www.tsflightlines.com, www.asflightlines.com
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 06-26-2019, 10:05 AM
rockwoodrv9 rockwoodrv9 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Meridian ID, Aspen CO
Posts: 2,499
Default

Scott,
Thanks. I have my 9A at the certification stage and I am thrilled you guys have upgraded the nose wheel. I will probably get mine papered, flown, and then make the change since I am so close. I agree with others that the price is very reasonable for the benefit. I believe the value of planes with the new nose wheel will increase higher than the cost and the old style will be reduced in value the same amount or more.
__________________
rockwoodrv9a
Williamston MI
rockwoodrv9a@gmail.com
O-320 D2A
Awaiting DAR Inspection
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 06-26-2019, 02:09 PM
jcarne's Avatar
jcarne jcarne is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Worland, Wyoming
Posts: 811
Default

Due to good points in this thread I have changed my mind and got my name on the list for the new system. Mainly for resale purposes.

Scott, I think what Captain Avgas is trying to say is that there seems to be a general shift in thought at Van's to better support existing product lines and make improvements. (correct me if I'm wrong Captain) While I agree with your statements about new kits modifying and re-engineering old kits it is without question that many models (especially plans) have remained unchanged. I have always wondered why Van's doesn't update drawings after knowing there is an error?

As I said before, with the new branding, the new upgrades and what appears to be a new mentality at Van's I really truly appreciate it and look forward to what Van's has in store for the future!
__________________
Jereme Carne
PPL
RV-7A Emp. done
Wings mostly done
Fuselage almost done
Finish kit arrived
Exempt but gladly paying!
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 06-26-2019, 02:36 PM
Jimbot Jimbot is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: FL & NC
Posts: 138
Default

I have often thought this too, Jereme.

I don’t pretend to know the first thing about aircraft engineering/manufacturing processes, but I always wondered if maybe Van’s could get a couple of aeronautical or engineering students in there each summer as interns and work on trying to update the instruction manuals to make them more like those of the “modern” RV designs (10, 12, 14). Plus the interns could peruse the plans “gotchas” here on VAF and make these updates as well.
__________________
Jim Hall
2018 VAF Annual Dues Paid

Former President, EAA Chapter 309 - EAA 309

Founder, SUPERBIRD Aircraft & Automotive Cleaning Products, featuring the SUPERBIRD Paint Restoration System
https://www.superbirdclean.com/colle...-force-members
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.