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?)

Now of course, if they were not retractables, the performance would be lower, but still very good - primarily on the tremendous drag reduction of tandem seating vs. side-by-side.
As others have said and shown by building them, the weight penalty offsets the speed gain for the most part on the RV airframe. Also, the -4 and the -6 aren't that different in speeds, either.

A tandem -12 would seem to fit the same market as the Shark.
 
And make it a tail-dragger while we're at it. :D

So basically we're talking about a LSA version of the -4.
Actually, no. I'm thinking a "baby Tucano". The Shark wouldn't look right as a taildragger, I don't think... Nor would a Legend or a Tucano. In the same way an RV-8 doesn't look right with a nosewheel.
 
My dream is for useful load, basically a PA32 version of RV10 stretched with an RV9 type wing. Actually thinking about buying a PA32 to complement by RV9A but sure is hard to go back to an antique panels and high service costs.
 
I'm still waiting for a widened PA-14 with the RV-9 wing and powered with an affordable four cylinder engine.
 
The Sling 4 sort of competes with the RV10. But Sling 4 is smaller and slower, but also quicker/easier to build and cheaper to fly. But near as I can tell, both end up being $200k airplanes or thereabouts. At $200k, why just just build a 10?

Seems to me there's room in Vans roster for a blind rivet Rotax powered 4 seater if you can keep the realistic build cost under $110k or so. Obviously it won't be nearly as roomy or fast as the 10. But I bet you could do something with the 914 or 915 motor that's an inch or two wider than the Sling and can deliver realistic 140kt cruise with half decent load capability.

Think of the mission of the 9 with the design/build aspects of the 12. And make it 4 seats for all those that are sure they need 4 seats even though they will fly solo or with one other person 99% of the time.
 
Next RV

What would the repeat offenders line up for?

1. Something that would cruise faster then the Rocket! Much faster!
2. 6 place with a side door like a Cherokee 6
3. A plane that will land on water and land.
4. Turbine (Bring the flutter limit much higher)
5. Work through the laws to get the RV-12 (or something similar) to become most common commercial trainer.

Larry
 
A bush plane

I would like to see a home built version of the Cessna 175.
Square tail
56 gallons of gas
Tailwheel.
0-320. To IO-390. For power

Cessna fixed the 170-,,, but,,,,, it is a 180. Not the best engine
A home built version 175 could have 1 or 2 front seats, 0 or 2 back seats.
A baggage door and all the things you get with a 180 just a little smaller.
 
I would like to see a home built version of the Cessna 175.
Square tail
56 gallons of gas
Tailwheel.
0-320. To IO-390. For power

Cessna fixed the 170-,,, but,,,,, it is a 180. Not the best engine
A home built version 175 could have 1 or 2 front seats, 0 or 2 back seats.
A baggage door and all the things you get with a 180 just a little smaller.



You ALMOST described the Rans S21 perfectly. :)
 
You ALMOST described the Rans S21 perfectly. :)

That was one of the new planes that really caught my eye this year. I really liked the construction and look. The specs looked great.
I need a backcountry plane to go with the -10 and there are just way too many great options out there.

I have already voted for Van to work on the six place, not pressurized, maybe some new diesel turbo powered or turbine homebuilt. I think a good six place priced around 250k to 350k that could land at Johnsons Creek would sell like 1/2 price Oshkosh tickets.
 
Van's has pretty much covered the spectrum of gasoline-powered kit planes, except for high-wing bush planes and that market is saturated and fairly small. I think Van likes to push the envelope a bit.

I'm guessing it'll be a jet-powered 2-seater...
 
Last edited:
RV-Bush Plane gets my vote.

I would like to see a home built version of the Cessna 175. Square tail. 56 gallons of gas. Tailwheel. 0-320. To IO-390. For power Cessna fixed the 170-,,, but,,,,, it is a 180. Not the best engine. A home built version 175 could have 1 or 2 front seats, 0 or 2 back seats. A baggage door and all the things you get with a 180 just a little smaller.

RV-Super Cub.

Please.

Modern day plans and a devoted, passionate user base. The perfect compliment to your existing RV. Total FLIGHT ENVELOPE Performance! I would order the tail kit the day after it’s announced and broaden the scope of VAF to include RV backcountry flying in a nanosecond. Something the thousands of us RV pilots down south from Arizona straight over to Florida can stick our hands and feet out into the air while flying.

Why? Because for all those days folks in the NW complain about rain, those of us in the south deal with this:
Screen%20Shot%202018-08-01%20at%204.49.58%20PM-X2.png


Those four days each year Portland reaches 100*F? Go sit in your RV on the ramp at that temp and close the canopy. Then imagine what three months feels like. Still want to go fly? ;^)

RV-8(ish) front and back, PA-18(ish) in the middle. Windows/doors optional. Make the fuse out of tubing like a Super Cub and offer it as a finished part like we already get with the current motor mounts. Garmin G5 or equivalent and an oil pressure gauge for a panel - this model isn't about avionics. It's a Jeep.

unknown-M.jpg


I would quite simply love to land at 15mph in the pic below in an RV, get out and fish for half an hour, take a picture, then feature it on the front page of VAF ;^). There are dozens of spots just like this a ten minute flight from my field, and my RV-6 just shakes its head no.

Click here and see for yourself: https://goo.gl/maps/d37ptBXMRyj

Screen%20Shot%202018-08-05%20at%208.53.28%20AM-X2.png


That Rans S21 looks pretty sweet.

RV-Super Cub? You had me at hello...

One could argue there is too much competition, but I would counter that statement with the real belief Van’s would have one of the, if not THE, largest slice of the backcountry pilot market shockingly fast. Almost every RV pilot I talk to here in the hot south wants something 1) open door and 2) bush plane to compliment their existing RV. Maybe my area of the country is a statistical RV anomaly, but I have to believe it's not.

I’ll own a true backcountry plane with big tires someday….I'm saving for it now (wanna buy a 1967 Triumph Bonneville?). I’m pulling for it to be an RV so I can champion its existence here. That’s my hope and best case scenario. Over the last (46) years or so, our favorite airplane company offered us (14) versions of aircraft with a closed canopy and smooth surface gear (3,4,6,6A,7,7A,8,8A,9,9A,10,12,14,14A). This fanboy would certainly appreciate an offering that allows more air in...and real off road utility.

An RV-Jeep if you will...

How many first time RV builders would choose this as their first build, given the factory’s stellar history, amazingly detailed plans and customer satisfaction record?

Hundreds? Thousands? After all, at the end of the day it's about sales out the door being needed to keep the lights on.

Is the average pilot growing in girth at a rate to warrant another ‘wider RV-7’? (The RV-14 to me is an RV-7 XL. Is there enough demand for a RV-7 XXL?). I don't know. That demographic, the *really* big pilot who can keep a medical, seems to me to be a dwindling pool to choose from if the objective is sales out the door. Don’t get me wrong, big vehicles are very popular here where I live. People drive trucks here so big they don’t fit in the garage. They sell ‘em by the boatload, and an airplane equivalent would probably have its audience. But having said that, about every fifth vehicle that you pass around my neck of the woods is a Jeep. Myself included.

So if it’s about kits being sold (which of course it has to be), I’d respectfully ask for an RV bush plane….specifically an RV-Super Cub. It is an untapped RV market with potentially thousands of customers craving that most valuable, dare say incalculable, of known quantities: the RV build experience and networking community.

That sense of community, that the-company-is-behind-you safety net that swings people on the fence over to this company when you're in uncharted waters (contemplating building your first airplane).

I think it would be a hit (Piper built 10,222 of them after all). I would absolutely commit to building an RV version.

In a heartbeat.

Respectfully,



A future RV backcountry pilot (hopefully).

 
Last edited:
RV-Super Cub. Modern day plans and a devoted, passionate user base. The perfect compliment to your existing RV. Total ENVELOPE Performance! I would order the tail kit the day after it?s announced and broaden the scope of VAF to include RV backcountry flying in a nanosecond. Something the thousands of us RV pilots down in the south can stick our hands and feet out into the air while flying

RV-8(ish) front and back, PA-18(ish) in the middle. Make the fuse out of tubing like a Super Cub and offer it as a finished part like we already get with the current motor mounts.

unknown-M.jpg



Bush plane? I?m all in the first hour it?s offered (if the doors open).

One could argue there is too much competition, but I would counter that with the real belief Van?s would have one of the, if not THE, largest slice of the backcountry pilot market pretty fast. Almost every RV pilot I talk to here in the hot south wants something 1) open door and 2) bush plane to compliment their existing RV. Maybe my area of the country is a statistical RV anomaly, but I have to believe we?re not.

I?ll own a true backcountry plane with big tires someday?.and I?m pulling for it to be an RV. That?s my hope.
]​



You mean like this:

2u4h6oh.jpg



This is in my hangar right now. You can have it (less engine and prop) for $2500 today. Come get it.​
 
Big 4 seat cabin,
Double side doors for cargo,
Aluminum wing,
Steel tube fuselage,
Semi-STOL ground performance,
1500 lb useful load,
Reasonable cruise (135-145 kts)?

Been done.
Barrows Bearhawk.


All aluminum, pulled rivets, more useful load?

Been done.
http://www.murphyair.com/detail/moose

[ed. Yes, but not by Van's Aircraft. Thorp did 'RV' style/performance before RVs, but that didn't stop the RV-6/7 from outselling it is my point. v/r,dr]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How about...

How about an open cockpit, tandem, taildragger, 0320/360, that is designed for, uh, bigger pilots, that flies like an RV? With classic styling...

Like the Warner Sportster but aluminum construction with pulled rivets...
 
RV Bush Plane = Vashon?

All of you wanting a RV back country bush plane, don?t you think Vashon will deliver on something like that eventually?

Look at where they are at now, where they are trying to go, and who they have on the team (including the team at Dynon.)

They are the ones I?m watching closely...
 
Hi wing rv9

I want a high wing rv9-like plane. With the change in medical rules, I need a plane i can get in without climbimg on a wing.
Hi wings normally dont perform as well. But i am sure vans can find a way.
 
All of you wanting a RV back country bush plane, don’t you think Vashon will deliver on something like that eventually?

Look at where they are at now, where they are trying to go, and who they have on the team (including the team at Dynon.)

They are the ones I’m watching closely...


I worked up a RV high wing proposal of sorts back in 2012. You can read it at: http://www.vansairforce.net/rv-15.pdf. Back then I got 100 signatures saying they would build it - Van wanted to see at least 250. Ken Krueger and I exchanged emails back and forth those six years ago discussing my wish for a less expensive, lightweight RV bush plane slash Cub to have as a second RV. The yellow side drawing on the coverpage was done by Ken. The upper right corner single seat aircraft on the same page is the KK-1, discussed later in the document. Fast forward to 2018 and the Vashon Ranger now exists - a KK design. Other than it not being a tailwheel, not having windows/doors that remove for flight and not being cheaper like my idea was, there is a lot of similarity between my proposed idea and the current Vashon. Lots of RV-like parts. I bet Dynon will eventually offer a Vashon model with removable doors as a tailwheel. I think they will find people to buy it.

There just didn't seem to be enough demand for a CHEAPER RV bush plane back in 2012 when I wrote it, so that's why I posted what I did here six years later - proposing a full size RV Super Cub. Changed out the word 'cheaper' with 'utility and Jeep' in this updated pitch.

Will I ever build another RV? Unless it's a high wing bush plane, I just can't see it happening. My wonderful, awesome, kick@ss RV-6 already does 95+% of what a 3,4,7,8,9,10,12,14 would offer. I want to explore other parts of the flight envelope now, specifically on the slow, open-doored end.

It's the same reason I still have an iPhone 6. The 7/8/X models don't offer me enough of a change for my family's money.

Why do I share an old Cub with friends? Because my RV can't do this on a hot summer morning:
https://dougreeves.smugmug.com/Planes/Cub/i-GVg8PRD/A. I shot this vid last week on a dried up lakebed 3n.m. from my home field. It's the go to summer plane for quite a few RV folks on my field. Note the open door flopping around <g>.

It would make me beyond happy to have the Cub be an RV. The Cub would go away overnight. Heck, it's MY FULL TIME JOB to promote these amazing RVs....but in my defense even Van owns a glider ;^). Like I said, the Cub would go away overnight...

I've often wondered if somebody could lay out all the flight envelopes of the existing RV models on top of each other, and then overlay a Super Cub or Carbon Cub's to see the differences. And how big those are. And what percentage of the RV crowd would find that appealing with their wallets. iPhone 6 vs 7/8/X...

Van's isn't crazy and they have a 46 year track record of nailing it. They aren't going to do something unless they are pretty darn sure they can make money with it, and that it fits with their long term goals. I admire them for it.

I still want an RV-Super Cub though. I want to build it. I want to promote it. ;^)
 
Last edited:
All of you wanting a RV back country bush plane, don?t you think Vashon will deliver on something like that eventually?

Look at where they are at now, where they are trying to go, and who they have on the team (including the team at Dynon.)

They are the ones I?m watching closely...

The biggest drawback to the Vashon is that it is an LSA. I don?t want an LSA. I want a reasonable (big) useful load. A reasonable (biggish) engine. And a lot of interior room. I do like some of the interior features, but...

An all metal Sportsmanesque airplane would be a winner. The Sportsman as currently produced is a good airplane, but has a lot of room for improvement, particularly in buildability and, oh yeah, they won?t be making kits once the certified version is complete.
 
I saw the Vashon at Oshkosh. It's a really nice airplane, but I just can't take it seriously until it gets a bigger engine. I'm sure that will evolve over time, so not worried.
 
I enjoyed the Vashon when I flew it - but it really isn’t relevant in a discussion of kit airplanes - it is not available as a kit, and it is my understanding that’s kit isn’t in the cards.
 
I'm interested in the S-21 with side-by-side seating. If Van's made something like this, I'd do it in a heartbeat to compliment a -10.
 
All metal tandem ?Super Cub? style with two doors

The Rans S-21 is nice, but I?d rather see Van?s produce an all metal tandem seat back country bush plane with doors on both sides. I got my seaplane rating almost two years ago in Super Cub. The Super Cub has only one door on the right side and I can tell you how much better it would have been if it would have had doors on both sides. So, my vote would be for an all metal, STOL, quick build tandem with the proper fixtures to accommodate the latest technology landing gear so that the big 31? Alaskan bush tires could be installed along with mounting points for amphibs. I know it?s a crowded field in the bush plane category but I don?t think I?ve ever seen an all metal tandem STOL bush plane configuration. I?m thinking an all metal ?Super Cub? style bird with doors on both sides, 50 gallon tanks, large easy access baggage compartment, and the ability to haul a heavy load, would be the ticket.

Mark
 
DeltaRomeo with you 100%+

But wile we're wishing let's wish BIG and ask for self deploying leading edge slats like the SuperSTOL & a3rd door in the back like the Maules maybe even small person/child seat 3rd row seat/useable cargo. Fallower flaps that can extend to 60+* to get really slow behind the power curve for those very very short spots,Oh flaps gotta have overhead jhonson bar for quick response like the Carbon Cub . By the way it's gotta be way faster in cruise then all other STOL capable aircraft as well. If anyone can do that it aught to be Vans, get on it guys I'll be ready to order my kit as soon as I get this Radial RV8 project flying!!
 
But wile we're wishing let's wish BIG and ask for self deploying leading edge slats like the SuperSTOL & a3rd door in the back like the Maules maybe even small person/child seat 3rd row seat/useable cargo. Fallower flaps that can extend to 60+* to get really slow behind the power curve for those very very short spots,Oh flaps gotta have overhead jhonson bar for quick response like the Carbon Cub . By the way it's gotta be way faster in cruise then all other STOL capable aircraft as well. If anyone can do that it aught to be Vans, get on it guys I'll be ready to order my kit as soon as I get this Radial RV8 project flying!!

Yes!!! 😎👍
 
-15

My money is on Van producing a motorglider. He's an aerodynamicist after all. :D With an advanced degree in aero engineering (that I never did anything with) I can't say I blame him...soaring is the closest I've been to 'pure' flight.
With that said...PLEASE build a six-seater!!! We have three kids! Unless I can sell one or two of 'em at next year's Airventure, I'm stuck needing at least five seats and something that will take five plus bags. If something doesn't show up soon, we'll be picking up an Aztec for family trips and my -7 will be...well...mine. First world problems, right?


Exempt twice and 2018 dues paid gladly.
 
I don't want to be a negative Nancy, but I'm more than a little concerned about the future of 100LL (see links below). I haven't purchased an engine yet, and I'm having a hard time justifying paying big $$ for an engine I may not be able to get fuel for in the long term. I'm sure they'll come up with some type of "band-aid" fuel for the already flying planes, but who knows what it will cost.
So..., my vote for the RV-15 would be something that doesn't use 100LL. There appears to be some movement in diesel, and even small turbine engine development. I'm not interested in flying faster, higher, farther..I just want to be able to buy fuel that is readily available and at a fair price (i.e. Jet A).
Come on Vans, let's light a spark in the experimental world and lead the way for the future of small plane aviation. :)

http://www.aviationconsumer.com/issues/50_8/maintenancematters/Whither-100UL-Tested-Fuels-Fall-Short_7234-1.html

https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/avgas/
 
My vote for the next RV would be a twin engine, 2 place jet. Sorta like a two place Sonex jet, built with the quality we have all come to expect from Van's. Would use Jet-A, so no issues with availability of 100LL and two engines would give safety options. It would be the Van's aircraft for the 21st century. :D
 
Funny, Rian made a quiet remark about the "15" taking his time at the OSH Banquet. Maybe a joke, I did not get a sense of his humor to judge. Smart guy who pays attention though.
 
My personal wish-list for the next Van's iteration would be an RV-14 with a slide-back canopy. I don't like tilt-forward style, so would love to have a slide-back on the -14 platform.
 
I don't want to be a negative Nancy, but I'm more than a little concerned about the future of 100LL (see links below). I haven't purchased an engine yet, and I'm having a hard time justifying paying big $$ for an engine I may not be able to get fuel for in the long term. I'm sure they'll come up with some type of "band-aid" fuel for the already flying planes, but who knows what it will cost.
So..., my vote for the RV-15 would be something that doesn't use 100LL. There appears to be some movement in diesel, and even small turbine engine development. I'm not interested in flying faster, higher, farther..I just want to be able to buy fuel that is readily available and at a fair price (i.e. Jet A).
Come on Vans, let's light a spark in the experimental world and lead the way for the future of small plane aviation. :)

http://www.aviationconsumer.com/issues/50_8/maintenancematters/Whither-100UL-Tested-Fuels-Fall-Short_7234-1.html

https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/avgas/
You may not have anything to worry about.

The 390 does have an 8.7:1 compression ratio, which is is only .2 higher than the smaller engines

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=35765
 
Last edited:
My vote for the next RV would be a twin engine, 2 place jet. Sorta like a two place Sonex jet, built with the quality we have all come to expect from Van's. Would use Jet-A, so no issues with availability of 100LL and two engines would give safety options. It would be the Van's aircraft for the 21st century. :D

Not a jet, but here's an idea for a RV turbo twin engine-single prop.
Take two of these https://www.turb.aero/ta200tp-turboprop (or similar),mounted side by side under the cowling. Couple the two engines to something like this http://www.epi-eng.com/gearbox_products/mark-14_gearbox.htm. Both engines coupled with the gear box weigh approx. the same as a Lycoming 540. Run both engines for takeoff and landing for safety, and shut one down in cruise to reduce fuel flow and save time on the engines. Helicopters run two engines into one output, so how hard can it be for a fixed wing.:)
Someone much smarter than me design and build it....include a BRS, and I'll be the guinea pig and put it on my 14 project! :D
 
Last edited:
update

I want a high wing rv9-like plane. With the change in medical rules, I need a plane i can get in without climbimg on a wing.
Hi wings normally dont perform as well. But i am sure vans can find a way.

Make mine a high wing rocket with 240Kt cruise and large barn door style fowler flaps and high aspect wing for high altitude cruise. WHAT A COUNTRY!
 
I was looking seriously at buying an L-39 earlier this year until I sat down and added up the cost per month for any reasonable usage at the current price of Jet A and that engine's fuel flow. Truly eye-watering numbers.

So, back to the RV world and, while I expect to be very happy with my RV-14A, I'd love to see Van's produce a true 250+ knot (300 would be better!) 2-place airplane burning 100LL at no more than mid-teens fuel flows. Sort of a faster, side-by-side Rocket. I'd buy that kit in heartbeat!
 
If I were Vans I would update the RV7/8 kits to use this engine. 170 hp AE300 Jet-A1
http://www.diamond-air.at/en/about-dai/why-diamond/
It would have a amazing range and great cruise performance. If Vans could source the engines at a great price even better. This is a proven engine that offers excellent performance.

In addition to being 100lb or so heavier than a Lycoming, I have a sneaking suspicion that this engine probably costs more on its own than a complete and nicely-outfitted RV.

I don't think you'll find too many takers for a diesel option that costs 2-3 times (or more) the new price for a traditional engine.

Same goes for turbines; they cost a lot more and don't even have the benefit of good fuel burn. At least they don't weigh as much...
 
anonymos

dont believe all you read. I have done just as much deburring and realignment of holes on the Rans as any RV, likely more. Hole alignement on my RV was near perfect. You will not find that with the other brand.
 
I wouldn't be surprised to see an updated RV-8 with modern build instructions, kits that come together more nicely and options for more powerful engines (IO-390, IO-540 or even an IO-580 like in an Extra 330LX).

If you want to do something new you'd have to give up some parts of the Van's philosophy:
- Full-metal plane
- "cheap"
- Easy to build (e.g. no swept wings)
- No exotic engines (which means higher prices and less sales)
- light weight
- "low" fuel consumption
- short takeoff and landing distances

Starting from the RV-8 if you'd reduce the easyness to build the wings (not a big problem since you can still buy quick builds) Van's could bring out something like a full aerobatic IFR ready Blackshape Prime. Would be quite nice, wouldn't it? :cool:
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised to see an updated RV-8 with modern build instructions, kits that come together more nicely and options for more powerful engines (IO-390, IO-540 or even an IO-580 like in an Extra 330LX).

...

They have already redesigned the -8 once when they went from pre punched skins to matched hole construction. I would be surprised if the reengineered it again.
 
According to Wikipedia, Richard VanGrunsven is 78 years old. Most people at this age would have retired a long time ago. Sales seems be be strong, why should he risk anything or make investments at his age? While I admire him for still working, I would therefore be very surprised if we would see anything new from Van's anytime soon.

Heck, there is not even factory support for often asked for features like RV-10 long range tanks. Hoping for a pulled-rivet RV-7/9/14 or even a high wing therefore appears to be pretty pointless.
 
Last edited:
According to Wikipedia, Richard VanGrunsven is 78 years old. Most people at this age would have retired a long time ago. Sales seems be be strong, why should he risk anything or make investments at his age? While I admire him for still working, I would therefore be very surprised if we would see anything new from Van's anytime soon.

Heck, there is not even factory support for often asked for features like RV-10 long range tanks. Hoping for a pulled-rivet RV-7/9/14 or even a high wing therefore appears to be pretty pointless.

Van is semi retired but the company is going strong as partially employee owned. many of which plan to be doing what they are doing for a very long time.

Take that to mean what ever you like ;)
 
I'd buy an aluminum "Glastar Sportsman" kit: 150kt - high wing - convertible nosewheel/tailwheel - 2 place - 150 lbs baggage.
 
Back
Top