What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Hello Van's

LifeofReiley

LifeofReiley

Well Known Member
RV3B kits are very popular. More people would build them if they were offered QB!!! With our US down turn in the economy many are looking for an option to still build and fly. Today's market is QB.

Scott... we need QB kits for RV3's and RV4's. These planes are very special and need to represented properly. Let's get through the red tape and get the engineers moving forward. YOU HAVE THE BUYERS!
 
Last edited:
LifeofReiley said:
With our US down turn in the economy many are looking for an option to still build and fly. Today's market is QB.
Click to expand...
Sounds to me like these two options are at odds with one another. I would think that saving the money by buying a slow-build would be an attractive option.
 
Been there and done the slow build route and the QB route... RV3 QB would be a smoking hot kit for Van's. Compared to my RV7, I could build a new plane for 1/2...

Maybe you know something I don't... :) I'm not a slow builder anymore... as are MANY others.
 
Last edited:
QB vs Pre-punched

I'm watching my next door neighbor build a -3B. It's a sweet little plane and looks like it will be a blast to fly.

If I were to build another plane (and I probably will - some day in the future) I would definitely do a slo-build pre-punch...

If the Van's engineers can work out the pre-punch on the -3 and -4, the QB is just a contract job in the Phillipines.
 
Chalk me up as a -3B potential buyer, if it was available as a QB kit. Perhaps a -4 so I could take the KRviatrix, but a -3B would give me my "me" time.

I'm too paranoid of stuffing it up to use a normal kit, so even for my future -9A kit, it's gonna be a QuickBuild. Laziness and a desire to fly sooner are also thrown in there for good measure... :D
 
Just to make sure everyone understands, the 3B wing IS offered as a Quickbuild option...just not the fuselage.

I too have been playing with the idea of a 3B. My ideal situation would be to have an expensive little plane to fly around the patch and do my rolls in and then have a share in a grocery getter for hauling the family places.
 
It sounds like a great idea, but I bet Van has done the math....

The thing is, even using Van's price estimator, the -3B slow build is not "cheap" - you're still looking at a pretty good investment before you're done - it's not like you're getting a $25,000 airplane, ready to fly (now THAT would be cool!). QB adds a pretty good chunk of change, just to the wings. If Van had to amortize the costs of re-deigning it to be prepunched, it would cost what the two-place kits do to build, I bet.

Just to give folks perspective, we laid the longerons on our fuselage jig in late November, and here it is, the first of March, with all the skins clecoed in place - a couple weeks of dimpling/deburing and riveting, and we could theoretically flip the canoe. That includes several weeks with both Louise and I out of town on trips and vacations, workign evenings only when Louise isn't up at work, and at least one Shuttle mission where it didn't get touched.

Granted, we've got building experience (QB before) and years of airplane maintenance/mod time - but this whole "build it from raw aluminum and drill all your own holes" stuff is new. Not for a newbie, but for someone with building experience, it is just about the perfect "next kit" - challenging and rewarding.

Oh yeah - and the QB wings are sitting in our garage, finished - wings are boring...:)
 
Pre-punched

I second Scott's comment regarding a pre-punched -3B. That would probably be my next plane if Van made one.
 
Terminology, Terminology, Termonology.

DakotaHawk said:
If I were to build another plane (and I probably will - some day in the future) I would definitely do a slo-build pre-punch...
Click to expand...

Pre-punch does not equal slo-build!
 
QB kits

Ironflight said:
It sounds like a great idea, but I bet Van has done the math....

The thing is, even using Van's price estimator, the -3B slow build is not "cheap" - you're still looking at a pretty good investment before you're done - it's not like you're getting a $25,000 airplane, ready to fly (now THAT would be cool!). QB adds a pretty good chunk of change, just to the wings. If Van had to amortize the costs of re-deigning it to be prepunched, it would cost what the two-place kits do to build, I bet.

Just to give folks perspective, we laid the longerons on our fuselage jig in late November, and here it is, the first of March, with all the skins clecoed in place - a couple weeks of dimpling/deburing and riveting, and we could theoretically flip the canoe. That includes several weeks with both Louise and I out of town on trips and vacations, workign evenings only when Louise isn't up at work, and at least one Shuttle mission where it didn't get touched.

Granted, we've got building experience (QB before) and years of airplane maintenance/mod time - but this whole "build it from raw aluminum and drill all your own holes" stuff is new. Not for a newbie, but for someone with building experience, it is just about the perfect "next kit" - challenging and rewarding.

Oh yeah - and the QB wings are sitting in our garage, finished - wings are boring...:)
Click to expand...

I don't begrudge the QB kit builders but the whole idea behind the experimental aircraft movement has been hijacked by people who just want the airplane and not the building experience. How many builders hire out instrument panels, fuel tanks, wiring loops, paint and fiberglass, etc.etc. So yu paid 5 grand for the paint job and its great but I appreciate the guy who painted his own even if its not that great. Or the guy who shot every single rivet, or the guy who bought a run out engine and did the overhaul himself. The QB movement has made the RV designs a dime a dozen now. That is what is attractive about the -3B ,how often do you see one around?

Just a thought Chris M
 
If Only

I'd love to have a "3" as a second airplane, but that's probably not going to happen. With a design that's been around for about 40 years and with less than 270 flying, I don't think Vans is going to invest too much more engineering time in it either. Taking a look at the Vans cost estimator, I see a like built and equipped 3 comes in only about $5000 less than an RV7. Owning one doesn't really make a lot of sense. Then again, financial sense and airplane ownership really don't go together anyway.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
I think that the single place market is extremely limited. What is wrong with the kit the way it is. If you really want one build it and learn what real building is all about. Van's I doubt is going to produce a plane into the QB or pre-punch market if the numbers aren't there, it would not make sense.
 
I disagree with the paint statement, painting an airplane is a big undertaking, and many people are not up to it. I have no desire to paint, or have an airplane that I spent thousands of hours and dollars building to have it ruined by a crappy paint job.

A paint job is what you see every time you get to the plane, and what everybody else sees. Most people judge by the outward appearance, not by the quality of driven rivets.

How many of you would paint your $75,000 BMW in your garage?

I am going to have my plane painted by a pro, and I don't feel like it makes me less of a builder than the guy who paints his own.

Just my 2 cents!!
 
Norman CYYJ said:
I think that the single place market is extremely limited. What is wrong with the kit the way it is. If you really want one build it and learn what real building is all about. Van's I doubt is going to produce a plane into the QB or pre-punch market if the numbers aren't there, it would not make sense.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your support... ;) the RV3B could be the weekend fun pilot playboy machine...
 
Last edited:
lancef53 said:
I disagree with the paint statement, painting an airplane is a big undertaking, and many people are not up to it. I have no desire to paint, or have an airplane that I spent thousands of hours and dollars building to have it ruined by a crappy paint job.

A paint job is what you see every time you get to the plane, and what everybody else sees. Most people judge by the outward appearance, not by the quality of driven rivets.

How many of you would paint your $75,000 BMW in your garage?

I am going to have my plane painted by a pro, and I don't feel like it makes me less of a builder than the guy who paints his own.

Just my 2 cents!!
Click to expand...

I agree with you (for the most part) on painting the plane, it "is what you see every time you get to the plane, and what everybody else sees. Most people judge by the outward appearance, not by the quality of driven rivets." I too am planning on having someone else paint my plane. Two reasons, I don't have the facility and I know nothing about painting. As for the BMW thing, well, I don't think anybody has built a $75,000 BMW, let alone in their garage. Most (not all) of the kit car builders that I know painted their own cars. It was part of the building process and the cars look great.

and that is merely my 2 cents.
 
Christopher Murphy said:
I don't begrudge the QB kit builders but the whole idea behind the experimental aircraft movement has been hijacked by people who just want the airplane and not the building experience. How many builders hire out instrument panels, fuel tanks, wiring loops, paint and fiberglass, etc.etc. So yu paid 5 grand for the paint job and its great but I appreciate the guy who painted his own even if its not that great. Or the guy who shot every single rivet, or the guy who bought a run out engine and did the overhaul himself. The QB movement has made the RV designs a dime a dozen now. That is what is attractive about the -3B ,how often do you see one around?

Just a thought Chris M
Click to expand...

whatever floats the builder/ buyer/ pilots (air)boat Chris. :) however they want to do it let them do it. Movement sounds to much like a social experiment, I'm not sure there are enough experimental airplane builders out there to qualify as a movement! Should we all do our own design as well, or stick to plans building to be more pure?

what is attractive about the 3b is the handling quality. to quotesome of the VAC description: "Light, fast, nimble, and possessing remarkable short field capabilities, the RV-3 is the airplane responsible for the original "RV Grin" ? the expression found on the face of every pilot after his or her first flight in an RV......The first thing that starts the RV Grin is the takeoff roll and climb. It doesn?t take long to get airborne! The climb rate is exhilarating. In the air, the RV-3 is a joy. The controls are smooth, powerful, and almost perfectly harmonized. Sport aerobatics are delightful."

I think that is why people are drawn to it, not because the building of it is inherently more noble.
 
The -3B caught my eye as a fun, nimble, fighter like machine that would also be fun to travel with. My GF has no appeal to flying so it didn't make me think twice about a single place airframe. If you like to "build" your airplane compared to bolt together, the -3B is for you. The build process isn't that difficult, but the plans and instructions HAVE to be read 3 or more times before the cuts or drilling happen. If you are mechanically inclined and you can read plans, you too can build this airplane. This is my first airplane and I have many ex builders and current builders around me to help if need be. The -3 is where I want it..... Simple, Light and Fun!!
 
You should thank Van's for the quick build wings. Thank Van's for supporting the 3. And then pray that he improves the building manual.

Remember, Van's dropped his most popular model.
 
Last edited:
Well... I guess you can say this thread has been hijacked. My point was not who can build what. I've been the slow build route. I don't want to do it again. I've also been the QB route and I want to do it again. This thread was about a business opportunity for Van's. As a SB kit, Van's will sell very few RV3B kits, but as a full blown QB kit... Katy bar the door!! Van's would sell a butt load of them.
 
Last edited:
LifeofReiley said:
Well... I guess you can say this thread has been hijacked. My point was not who can build what. I've been the slow build route. I don't want to do it again. I've also been the QB route and I want to do it again. This thread was about a business opportunity for Van's. As a SB kit, Van's will sell very few RV3B kits, but as a full blown QB kit... Katy bar the door!! Van's would sell a butt load of them.
Click to expand...

since van's can do a QB can't you get someone else to do a QB for you? everyone here hold on to your 51% witey tighty's- what is the difference between van's doing a qb and some other contractor doing a qb? so maybe for the 3 this would be uncharted territory, but nothing wrong with looking at the problem (in reilly's eyes) and looking for a solution. Van went with eab for his -12, why can't some other person look at the 3 and try to do a qb fuselage with the FAA's approval?

maybe you've stumbled on a business opportunity darrel if there really are that many people that want to do a 3 qb.
 
I have heard people say they built there airplane and they have something against the people who bought there?s or built from a QB kit or the pre-punch kit, just as has happened in this thread, I have even heard people turn there nose up at the side by side models and then the ?A models, Some of them are even friends of mine, I take umbrage with this attitude.

Thanks to Van?s for making the side buy side kits, the pre-punch kits, the QB kits and the ?A kits. All of these introductions made it possible for more people to dream of building an RV and then building one.

My little company supports three families building weldments for Van?s, Van?s directly supports 50-70 families as well as all the other vendors, If all they ever built where the ?slow build? kits for the -3 and -4 they would be long gone like so many others that have come and gone, or maybe it would still just be 5 guys working there.

I don?t know if they should make the -3, -4, pre-punch or QB or not but I commend any one that builds one of these planes no mater what they choose, there all allot of work and when there done there all cool!!!

Art Chard used to build the -3 -4 -6 up to today?s QB stage, maybe he still does, maybe others do, totally doable.
 
lancef53 said:
A paint job is what you see every time you get to the plane, and what everybody else sees. Most people judge by the outward appearance, not by the quality of driven rivets.
Click to expand...

I know....

Sometimes I just open the hangar door and stare.

Yesterday, we even had lunch at the hangar just to stare.

But I painted it in the garage. :)

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
Good for you l.adamson, It is very evident by nearly all of your posts you are very pround of your plane.

Different strokes for different folks:)
 
I really doubt that any plane that is used is perfect, but it is way better to fly an imperfect plane that look at a perfect one:)
 
lancef53 said:
I really doubt that any plane that is used is perfect, but it is way better to fly an imperfect plane that look at a perfect one:)
Click to expand...

True, but I've been laid up for three months (actually just starting month #3). Broken back, broken pelvis, and broken wrist. I'm put back together with stainless steel, lot's of self tapping screws, and a 5" bolt. I feel lucky to have finally made it back to the hangar. At least the battery isn't dead! :) Other than that, I racked up about 110 hrs in it last year. It was down two months of that, for a panel/radio stack modifcation.

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
new and improved

gasman said:
Remember, Van's dropped his most popular model.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the RV-6, I wouldn't agree that he "dropped" it. I'd say he created a new and improved updated version with refreshed technology and renamed it the RV-7.;)
 
Great business move

flytoboat said:
If you're talking about the RV-6, I wouldn't agree that he "dropped" it. I'd say he created a new and improved updated version with refreshed technology and renamed it the RV-7.;)
Click to expand...

I agree with flytoboat. Vans is still supporting all his models you just cant start a new 6. Besides I don't think they would sell many anyways. Remember the 7 was created to reduce the amount of parts and inventory they have to stock. They came up with a great idea in my book. They took the 9 fuse made some minor changes and combined it with the the 8 wing and tail. The original 7 small rudder was from the 8 but then they changed it to the 9 rudder. Brilliant business idea that allows them to have three models of aircraft while only stocking parts for say 2 1/2.
 
flytoboat said:
If you're talking about the RV-6, I wouldn't agree that he "dropped" it. I'd say he created a new and improved updated version with refreshed technology and renamed it the RV-7.;)
Click to expand...

Yes, and doing so, the RV6 is now the best used aircraft bargain in the history of EXPERIMENTAL aircraft..............:eek:

A properly built 6 is every bit as good as a 7. I do agree, Van did the right thing. And some day, the seven will out number the six. But it will take a while.

My point, just be glad that Van's still offers the Three.
 
Totally agree with you Chris. I would not have the same satisfaction building a QB project as I do with current RV7 ?slow? build. You might say that a matched punch kit is almost in the same category as QB but there is still plenty of work to be done as is with matched punched kit but that?s just me. I just ?plane? enjoy building.
 
Van?s is already offering the
QB Wings. They should consider taking another step and offering the QB
Fuselage. That would do it. How difficult and expensive would be to set up
production of the QB fuse? I don?t know, but I guess much less than a
complete redesign of the kit.

Would that work?
Click to expand...
NB The RV-3B wing was redesigned, for well known reasons... into effectively an RV-8 type wing... which in turn is offered as a QB. Hence it might be an easier process to QB the wing than the Fuselage?

Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top