What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Van's RV-15 (Next thing coming?)

Palamedes

Well Known Member
Anyone have any ideas / guesses as to what the next product to come out of vans will be?

Any hopes?

I personally would like to see a complete refactor of the RV-3. More of a modern "fighter plane" for those of us who will never actually get to pilot one of those heh. Larger than the current three for us "bigger boys" (Fat.. okay fine.. I'm fat..).

Thoughts?
 
I have asked Van a number of times for a true acro mount, one that is competitive up to Advanced. So far, he hasn't listened, says it is too small a market but that is what he said about four seaters for many years!
 
Last edited:
My guess is that it will be driven by commercial factors and the need to get the gross margin on several hundred kits to repay the development and tooling costs etc. and to follow the basic construction style that they know best.

So unlikely to be a high wing bush plane, twin or an all composite resin-rocket.

More likely:

  • Refresh of -7,-8 or -9 to take advantage of the kit developments in the -14
  • Motor glider
  • 2+2 seat development of the -14
I'm probably completely wrong, but await with interest
 
Completely speculation for speculation's sake ... but its fun:

follow the basic construction style that they know best.

So unlikely to be a high wing bush plane, twin or an all composite resin-rocket

Agreed completely!

Refresh of -7,-8 or -9 to take advantage of the kit developments in the -14
The -7 and the -14 are too similar, but I can see a -9 (the marketing would looks something like "Economical and easy to fly, and now even easier to build!")

An 8 kit like the 14 kit would be interesting. I would build one after my 14. An -3 or -4 kit would be even more interesting as a second airplane.

Motor glider
You mean a -12 with a high aspect ratio wing? I quite like that...

2+2 seat development of the -14
In some ways the 14 is a 2-seat development of the 10...

How about a taildragger STOL-winged version of the 12 with the balance adjusted to put a small Lycoming up front? That would be a great fun little plane.
 
The key thing is that Vans have to sell enough kits to return a profit, and it's hard to see any significant gaps in the current lineup that would attract enough buyers to be worthwhile. Of course, I would have said that before the 14 came along too, so maybe I'm completely wrong, but I think the fully integrated kits like the 12 and 14 is where Vans is currently headed, rather than developing new sircraft that may not suit average pilots or offer `total performance'.

I have read that Van's biggest competition comes from the market in used RV's, so the best way to sell more kits may be to upgrade some of the older kits with higher levels of pre-fabrication, better documentation, integrated avionics, completed wiring harnesses, and packaged engine/prop combinations to make life easier for the builder.

Experimental aircraft like RV's have now been around long enough to almost be regarded as mainstream, so greater standardisation makes sense and should also improve fleet safety in the long run, which has long been a major focus for Vans. While that runs counter to the traditional `build-it-your-way' approach, the fact is that the experimental market is maturing at a time when affordable GA aircraft production is generally in decline.

Which models to upgrade? The 14 is bigger, heavier, more complex and more expensive that the other 2-seat models, so it's not for everyone. However demand for the simpler and lighter 7/8/9 series still seems to be strong, so developing better versions of those kits may appeal to many potential builders, while at the same time not preventing anyone from following the traditional home-builder path.

I have no idea what tooling, planning and documentation costs would be, but I wouldn't be surprised if future developments from Vans come in the form of incremental upgrades to existing kits rather than completely new designs. Not as exciting maybe, but perhaps a better business model?
 
A morphing plane

This may sound a bit out of the box. Kit Starts as a -3. When you get married it can be expanded to an -8. When you have kids it is expandable to a -10. After a while and kids have grown, you change back to a -3.

May sound impossible but with the commonality between kits it may be doable🤔🤔
 
An RV that has foldable/removable wings and is capable of 200kts routinely. Maybe one that can be a low wing, a high wing, a biplane, or a motor glider (speed not withstanding) - or all four! And a V-tail so you can go jet motor pod, or front prop. Still needs to be a tail dragger tho.
 
RV-14 wings and flaps on the RV-7 and RV-8?

I just did my first hop in an RV-14. I've flown an RV-10 for four years. The RV-14 wings and flaps are a copy of the RV-10 wings, just shorter (the ribs and such are the parts used in the RV-10).

The RV-14 flies like all two seat RVs, very responsive in roll but perhaps a touch more stable. The slotted flaps provide more lift at full extension than the other two seat RVs. Considering my experience in the RV-10 I have to assume these wings will be more efficient in cruise than the RV-7/8 wings.

Perhaps Van's can do a consolidation of parts and standardize on the RV-10/14 wings.

Carl
RV-8A (sold)
RV-10 (regrettably sold)
RV-8 (waiting on the slow build kits to arrive)
 
Tapered wing?

I think the largest potential for the Van's fleet and market right now is in upgrades. Retrofittable, appealing upgrades for the 10000 aircraft already flying.

A tapered wing kit (3, 4, 6, 7, 8) or a raised turtledeck kit (3, 4, 8) could sell well to the long-time builders, and/or the long time owners looking for a project that won't cost as much as a full kit, but would give them something new in the end.
 
I there were a high performance, 2-place touring motor glider, with wings that would fold to fit a regular T hangar, that would get my attention.
 
I agree with rgmwa - I think they now have a pretty complete lineup that likely covers the most viable (profitable) areas of the market. As a result, I could see them updating the 7, 8 and 9 models to make the instructions and "ease of build" more like that of the 14 with more plug and play componentry.

IMO, the only other model that makes sense to me to add to their lineup would be a 6 seat model, based on maybe a slightly "stretched" 10, that has some sort of large size side cargo door, with easily removed mid and rear row seating. I may be way off (likely), but a plane like this - sort of a low-wing Cessna 206. This could be a very good choice for growing families or those requiring additional space/carrying of "stuff." I imagine a tail wheel version would make a great bush plane - although A high wing configuration would make more sense for this purpose. I imagine the price for one of these within paint, nice glass panel, and all of the other goodies could be built for less than the cost of some of those pricey new Cub clones that seem to be selling okay in today's market.

As usual, I'm probably way off...but it's always fun to speculate ;)
 
RV10 D

Make a new model of the 10 that has a high straight through top longeron, then use a sliding canopy similar to the NAVION (North American Aviation 4 seat post WWII family plane) that had similar canopy lines to its older sister the P51D.
 
Last edited:
My Vote

Van's has such great planes now for 1,2 and 4 passengers. I would argue they are the best planes out there. Only place to go is 6 place. There is no 6 place plane that is "reasonably" priced, goes 200 kt+ and can carry 6 real people and baggage.

My vote is always for a turbine powered 6 person platform.
It would be fun to build.
 
Last edited:
I asked Gus about this after a talk he gave a couple of years ago at Oshkosh and he told me that he doubts that they would produce a product in between the 7/9 and 14 but more likely they would incrementally improve the older models with more pre-fab parts and improved instructions. Whether than constitutes a new model or not would be interesting.

Some may say there are no problems at all, but the two main reasons I am currently building a 14A are the improved instructions and the improved nose gear. Had a 9A model been available with both of those features I would be building that instead. So my vote I suppose is a new model with the improved nose gear and better instructions based on the 9A.

Edit: Now that I re-read my posting, the improved canopy install was a factor as well on the 14
 
Last edited:
I personally would like to see a complete refactor of the RV-3. More of a modern "fighter plane" for those of us who will never actually get to pilot one of those heh.

Thoughts?

Yeah, what's the paperwork procedure for the wing mounted machine guns it really needs? ;)
 
....An 8 kit like the 14 kit would be interesting....

....You mean a -12 with a high aspect ratio wing? I quite like that....

....How about a taildragger STOL-winged version of the 12 with the balance adjusted to put a small Lycoming up front? That would be a great fun little plane.....

Great idea, the -8 that's built like the double-digit kits. That would be my choice, especially if it had a higher Vne.

There's sort of a long-wing -12 available now, the Sonex Xenos. A buddy has one and it's a decent plane, but unpleasant in turbulence at cruise. Plus the visibilty's not as good as the -12. Sailplane performance roughly like a 1-26.

The main difficulty with a taildragger -12 is that the horizontal is too low on the fuselage for decent ground clearance. I'd have done it if not for that. Now I'm building an RV-3B.

Dave
 
Hi Wing...

...of course, one to put those "improved" $200+k SuperCubs in their righteous
place... Carbon fibre? Heck no!

Just IMHO,

Jerry
 
Something different

I would like to see something like the Merlin PSA produced by an established and reputable company like Vans. If they make it quick building and inexpensive enough they would sell a bunch to all the people on here always asking what to build as a second airplane.
 
One of the most active markets right now is for 2-seat high-wing STOL-ish aircraft. There are major developments right now for all-metal STOLs at Murphy and Rans.

These type of aircraft have a different mission. Fancy IFR Panels are not core to this mission, which lowers cost. Using pulled rivets simplifies assembly and reduces construction time. 4-cylinder engines are the norm. Less fiberglass (yeah!) and modern machining (no deburring). Maybe folding wings? Floats?

My next project will be one of these.... I wish Vans offered one.

It might be cheaper for Van's just to buy Murphy....
 
Next thing coming?

As a soon-to-be RV-10 builder, I would love to see a -10 upgrade that is somewhere between the -10 and the more upper end home built planes, e.g. the top-end Lancairs, that would offer 200+ knots (maybe even 225 to 250) at a more affordable price that those top-end products. Pressurization would be nice, but doubt that this would keep the plane in the relatively affordable range.
 
...
The -7 and the -14 are too similar, but I can see a -9 (the marketing would looks something like "Economical and easy to fly, and now even easier to build!").
...
I didn't think the -9 was difficult to build at all. I keep telling people it was just a lot of very simple tasks.

Tapered wing?
...
I hear this a lot and wonder what you expect the benefit to be? Five to ten knots can be had by cleaning up the current models, just ask the racers.

A 3-Seater.

(A slightly-stretched -14 designed for a 3rd seat centered in the back) :D
Ummm...
The+Family+-+Copy.JPG
 
I would like to see a very efficient two place travel machine. I think the new turbo Rotax would be a great engine to design a travel plane around. No aerobatic capability required. No large tanks required due to low fuel burn.
  1. Vans high quality kit
  2. Great performance at 14K
  3. 5-6 hours of fuel
  4. 2 Comfortable seats
  5. Spacious luggage for two
 
I hear this a lot and wonder what you expect the benefit to be? Five to ten knots can be had by cleaning up the current models, just ask the racers.
One word: Looks.

I seriously doubt you could hope for a performance increase. I would be happy with the *same* performance, with a tapered wing. I believe it's possible, but it wouldn't be as easy to build.
 
New RV3 Please

RV3 replacement, to same quality of kit as RV12/14, with new 135hp Rotax due next year.
Quickbuild as much as possible.
Pop rivets for speed/ease of build.
Please - and I'll have 2.
 
RV3 replacement, to same quality of kit as RV12/14, with new 135hp Rotax due next year.
Quickbuild as much as possible.
Pop rivets for speed/ease of build.
Please - and I'll have 2.

You just described the Panther.
 
How about an RV purpose-designed to take the Rotec radial, or even an M-14P? I know a Rotec has been put on an -8, but the fuselage shape change doesn't quite look right to me (otherwise, it looks awesome...).

Make the fuselage more rounded to match, and it'll give more cockpit room. Move the landing gear mounting out to the wing structure, and you could design it to support both fixed- and retractable-gear options with the same (tapered :)) wing.
 
I have asked Van a number of times for a true acro mount, one that is competitive up to Advanced. So far, he hasn't listened, says it is too small a market but that is what he said about four seaters for many years!

That would be cool, since the current options for building an Advanced-capable aircraft are limited to a few options, and none are available in kit form. I agree that the market is very small, at least compared to the RV market in general. As evidenced by the one in 40 posts so far in this thread that even mentions an aerobatic design, an airplane like this would need to appeal well outside the existing RV builder/pilot community to the dedicated acro/IAC community. I wish the pilot/builder community were larger than it is.
 
Last edited:
A reasonably priced Glasair Sportsman :eek:

This. An all-metal, high-wing 4-seat or 2+2 seats competitor to the Sportsman 2+2, that is actually affordable.

On completely separate line of thought, something built around the Rotax 915is. Possibly an RV-9B with improvements from the -14 in terms of plans and kits and such, and with the Rotax.
 
Last edited:
I wish the pilot/builder were larger than it is.

That is the problem (and high manufacturer risk) with specialty airplane designs.

This has been tried before with limited success.... numerous sailplane designs, one-design, etc.

Only about 4% of U.S. pilots have built their own airplane.
If we assume (probably safe to do so) that the percentages for soaring and aerobatic pilots would be about the same, that translates to a very small # of kits that could be sold.
 
$$$$$s

A bunch of years ago, I remember that someone from Van's telling me that they needed to sell at least 300 RV-12 kits in order to 'break even'. I suppose that this is good info.

Van's has done an excellent job of filling the aircraft 'type' voids that are there in the market. It probably doesn't make $$$ sense to make kits that compete with Glass Star or Carbon Cub, Sea Ray etc. So, are there still markets in which market has Van's not produced a new kit that will sell at least 300 kits? I don't know.

My friends at the Sling Factory have designed a nice AC that flies 4 people on 120 hp fairly cheaply but there are about 180-190 aircraft units needed to get one flying Its' a beautiful airplane but I wonder how many they will sell?

I think that it all comes down to economics. Improving the existing kits would help most builders. Thanks to Van's for making it possible for me to step gingerly into building and owning my own aircraft.
 
A V38 Lightening.

Use 2 of the 8's fuselages, 1 wing kit, 2 emps minus a L&R horizontal stabs, enlongated spars, and a 10 cabin. Pair of IO-360's.

Shorten the main cabin and luggage in the 8's when cabin would be.

Room for retracts if desired or fixed for cost savings.

Cruises at 225 knots. Seats 4.
 
A V38 Lightening.

Use 2 of the 8's fuselages, 1 wing kit, 2 emps minus a L&R horizontal stabs, enlongated spars, and a 10 cabin. Pair of IO-360's.

Shorten the main cabin and luggage in the 8's when cabin would be.

Room for retracts if desired or fixed for cost savings.

Cruises at 225 knots. Seats 4.

I suppose it will need counter rotating Lycomings so,like a P-38, there is no "critical" engine?

Go ahead and build one, it sounds like an interesting project. You will have to modify the center section so there is no dihedral on the inboard sides. You can also remove the inboard gear towers, oder up some enlarged gear legs to support the extra weight. The rest should be straight forward.
 
Last edited:
How about an electric RV option?

If even Extra can do it, why can't we? :)

Now that's about the most logical remark so far......

Tanks could be designed to hold batteries. The remaining batteries would mount to the firewall to maintain W&B as the small electric motor would weigh very little.

The conversion kit would include battery tanks, motor- battery mount, new streamline cowl and the electric motor and controller.

I think Van,s won't ignore this challange..... It is the way of the future for sport flying.

Van, please start with the 3.
 
The margins for electric aircraft are very slim; you need a very light and low drag airframe to realy make it work. Think something like a motorglider. A standard RV would be a poor candidate for electric conversion.
 
Now that's about the most logical remark so far......

Thanks :)

Tanks could be designed to hold batteries. The remaining batteries would mount to the firewall to maintain W&B as the small electric motor would weigh very little.

Well, that's one way to go and might be a good idea for a retrofit, but if you're designing the airframe from the ground up, it probably makes more sense to spread the weight more evenly - the tanks currently have a lot of structural reinforcement because the weight of the fuel is concentrated there. You can have the same volume of batteries spread out in thin layers, like the ones you find in laptops/tablets/etc. and save some weight on the wing structure.
They may also double as interior heating if you put them against the cabin walls :) just hope they weren't made by Samsung...

Unfortunately, the whole thing (concentrated or not) would weigh considerably more than the fuel required for the equivalent range (so you end up with a poor power-to-weight ratio, like Solar Impulse). The recent advances like Siemens's SP260D (50kg engine used on the Extra 300LE) show that there's a path to get there, it's just not easy...

Now if instead of plain batteries you talk about something like fuel cells, those are a whole different beast...higher energy density (at a higher cost currently). Some of the technology details are ITAR-controlled (under category VIII?) though, so I'll refrain from commenting any further.

I was looking at the the electric Extra, and it seems they use batteries from Pipistrel, but it's unclear what type they are.

The conversion kit would include battery tanks, motor- battery mount, new streamline cowl and the electric motor and controller.

Not sure about "streamlined cowl" - those systems aren't necessarily smaller or even lighter than the current ones...but yes, it should be doable to create such a kit :)

I think Van,s won't ignore this challange..... It is the way of the future for sport flying.

Van, please start with the 3.

Let's hope they don't ignore it :) the only downside is that I'd be forced to build a second plane :D
 
Back
Top