What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV12 Regrets?

Manchu16

Active Member
I have been lurking on this site for some time and the information is extremely helpful for someone contemplating an RV. I am getting ready to move on to another phase in my live after 20 years in the green suit. Aviation has been a part of me so long, I don't want to give it up.

Two retired CWOs I know are each building RV12s and are very complementary of the platform. I have not decided if I am going to build or buy yet. One of my buddies is going down the path of a RV9 and has been struggling to find one that meets his standards.

The 12 fits much of what I like about aviation. I am looking for a long term aircraft, but this will probably not be my last one. Hopefully I will be flying into my 80s which is almost 40 years away.

overall I hear very positive things about the 12 but when I see so many for sale I have to ask; what if any regreats do current/former 12 owners have about the platform? I don't see any information from pilots on why they sold their 12 to another model.

I am not trying to start any kind of product bashing, just looking for some perspectives from pilots with more experience than I have.
 
Last edited:
I have a friend who built and flies an RV-12. He loves the plane but takes long trips and now wants something that will go faster. Money is no object for him so he's thinking of an RV-14.

Re: Building or buying. Have an honest discussion with yourself. You'll have to decide whether you love building things or love flying. It's very rare that one finds both loves in the same person. If you do build your own, you will be able to maintain it yourself, so that's a plus if you're on a budget.
 
First, define your requirements - not just "I want an airplane", but what do you want to DO with the airplane. If you just want to get airborne for local flying, the -12 is economical, fun, and efficient (this fits the description of a LOT of planes that meet LSA specs BTW....). If you want to leap across the country from coast to coast on a regular basis, and want to do that in two days, then you might want something faster.

It's all about what you want to the airplane to do. The -12 is a great aplane - you see them for sale for numerous reasons, one of which is that guys build them when they want to go LSA without a medical), and then they decide they've reached the age where they are giving up flying. Another is that it is legal to build an ELSA for profit (pro building isn't legal for E-AB), so there are pro builders doing that. I don't think you see them for sale very often because the builders aren't happy with them.

Paul
 
My Rv12

My Rv12 has dual Garmin G3X,s Garmin a/p and a Viking 110 aircraft engine. You need to think about what you want in avionics and power plant. The VIKING ENGINE IS NOT LIMITED to 5 min and then LIMITED to 80 up for climb out. I have the full 110 up with no time limit. The Rv12 is a wonderful that you will enjoy and was fun and easy to build.
 
I have been lurking on this site for some time and the information is extremely helpful for someone contemplating an RV. I am getting ready to move on to another phase in my live after 20 years in the green suit. Aviation has been a part of me so long, I don't want to give it up.

Two retired CWOs I know are each building RV12s and are very complementary of the platform. I have not decided if I am going to build or buy yet. One of my buddies is going down the path of a RV9 and has been struggling to find one that meets his standards.

The 12 fits much of what I like about aviation. I am looking for a long term aircraft, but this will probably not be my last one. Hopefully I will be flying into my 80s which is almost 40 years away.

overall I hear very positive things about the 12 but when I see so many for sale I have to ask; what if any regreats do current/former 12 owners have about the platform? I don't see any information from pilots on why they sold their 12 to another model.

I am not trying to start any kind of product bashing, just looking for some perspectives from pilots with more experience than I have.

Joe


To add a twist to what Ironflight said...it is possible that with the new basic med legislation passed; some guys that built E-LSA (the -12), might have decided to move to faster aircraft. I know I'm on the fence with my trip to Oshkosh probably going to be the deciding factor. The 9a is looking good....however, my -12 is really fun to fly.
 
Last edited:
I bought my 12 a year and half ago with 48TT. I was looking for a plane in state so I didn’t have to pay sales tax. Also was looking for someone to take my J3-Cub in trade so dollar outlay was minimal and deal would be clean.

Found all of it in Cincinnati... I drove down to look at the 12 and told the builder it looked very nice and asked why he was selling it. He told me that between himself, his lady friend, and his son they owned 21 airplanes. The builder was 80 years old and the lady was right up there too. Like a proud grandma see opened her wallet and displayed a stack of airplane pics including her J3, UPF-7, several float planes, two RV-6, and a bunch of other planes. Really nice people. The builder was a flight instructor and he checked me out in the 12. The following day I flew the Cub south and they flew the 12 north and we met halfway, did the paperwork, palmed some money, and both flew home in different planes than we came in.

I thought I was going to miss the Cub. My father and I owned it for 23 years. Seems like everyone’s clamoring for a Cub. Well let me tell you – I’ve put over 200 hours on the 12 and never looked back. RV grin every time I fly it – myself and passengers.
 
Last edited:
My Dad and I built one of the first RV-12 kits (#18) mostly because he wanted something with pull rivets instead of solid rivets. We finished it in 2 years and 2 months, which included at least 6 months of waiting for Van's to have next kits available. I flew that airplane for 2 years and a little over 220 hrs. At the time I was stepping up from a C-150, so the -12 was superior in every aspect. The -12 is a joy to fly and I enjoyed every minute of it.

I did not particularly want or need an LSA so we sold it and I bought a flying RV-4. As much better than the 150 the -12 was, the -4 was more betterer still.

I sold the -4 when we finished up a Sportsman we were working on. All in all, I much preferred the -4 and would love to sell my Sportsman and buy either a -4 or an -8.

As for the build or buy? It depends on what you really want to do.
 
This is from the perspective of a former RV-7 builder who is now limited to LSA, Basic Med notwithstanding. I've owned an RV-12 for a little over a year and a half now.

I can't imagine anyone selling an RV-12 because it doesn't live up to expectations, unless their expectations were unrealistic. It's a solid, honest airplane that will do every bit of what Van's says it will do, all day long, without complaint. I can walk on past a lot of airplanes based at my field, while spending a whole lot less per hour to do it. The Rotax doesn't burn oil, doesn't require a lot of maintenance, runs smooth and I get good heat in the winter. It really has no bad habits and flies much better than I do.

It's not a Mooney or an RV-7. I've got enough room for a few days of camping at Oshkosh, or a couple of overnight bags and a few other odds & ends. It will cruise happily at 110 to 115 knots, or I can burn a little more gas and do 120 TAS. If you need to haul a lot more baggage or get somewhere in a big hurry, you're just not going to coax another 5-10 knots or find another few cubic feet of baggage space. Unless maybe some day Van's decides to offer wing mounted fuel tanks. Who knows. Anyway, for what it is, a 2-place LSA, it's really, I think, about as good as you're going to find for anywhere near the money.

If I had a choice I'd fly something faster. But I don't, and quite frankly the only thing about that I don't like is giving up 40 knots. On the other hand, my cost per hour is ridiculously low.
 
My Dad and I built one of the first RV-12 kits (#18) mostly because he wanted something with pull rivets instead of solid rivets. We finished it in 2 years and 2 months, which included at least 6 months of waiting for Van's to have next kits available. I flew that airplane for 2 years and a little over 220 hrs. At the time I was stepping up from a C-150, so the -12 was superior in every aspect. The -12 is a joy to fly and I enjoyed every minute of it.

I did not particularly want or need an LSA so we sold it and I bought a flying RV-4. As much better than the 150 the -12 was, the -4 was more betterer still.

I sold the -4 when we finished up a Sportsman we were working on. All in all, I much preferred the -4 and would love to sell my Sportsman and buy either a -4 or an -8.

As for the build or buy? It depends on what you really want to do.
Steve,

What is your take on the Ran's S-21 with the Titan engine?
 
Joe, my background sounds similar, I am looking at the RV-12 because of its abilities and not just because it is an LSA. I don't need to fly an LSA and I am currently flying the typical Cessna line up of 172/182s. So I can't weigh in on personal history with an RV-12.

I have been going back and forth between the RV-9 and the 12. There are a bunch of arguments for one versus the other. I don't have a specific mission outside of having fun flying with my wife. If I want to take my college girls up we rent the Cessna for us to go somewhere. If I want to do some seaplane flying I head out with one of the guys at the local field and pick up the tab for the breakfast. If I have to get their quickly, you can find me on the next Delta flight.

Overall the RV-12 checks more of the boxes for me today. Would I be disappointed with an RV-9, probably not. But to be fair, I am not disapppointed with the 172M either. Just hate dealing with a rental schedule and not being able to change my mind on the fly.

Not sure where you served but I spent quite a bit of time at Rucker and Benning.
 
Steve,

What is your take on the Ran's S-21 with the Titan engine?

I don't know any more than what I have seen in YouTube videos, but it looks like a really impressive set up. It seems to have very similar specs to a Glastar. Were I in the market for an airplane like that I would give it a close look, specially since the Glastar is no longer available (though I have a project airplane I could be talked into selling).
 
Since you listen to retired CWOs, I am one and will turn 80 in a matter of days. I have TWO of them, I may ONLY fly an LSA. I built one, but to get qualified to fly off my 40 hour phase 1 in it, I bought another to take lessons in, I don't feel you can have too many RV12s.
The recent spike in sales is not because pilots don't like them, but based a lot on the new medical rules, my purchase was from a builder that can now build and fly an RV14.
 
I'm building a single-seat RV-3B and own a good four-seat airplane. I've flown an RV-12 and I think that it's handling is superb and it's visibility in wonderful. It's a fast airplane to build and you can fly it with a driver's license instead of a medical. Those are its major advantages, unless you like the relatively easy wing removal, which can be handy.

As far as I see it, there are a few points at which other airplanes are superior: the RV-12 is relatively slow by RV standards and it has low wing loading, so it'll be more susceptible to turbulence. The power is relatively lower than the other RVs, and you'll definitely see that on high density altitude days.

As for the speed, I flew a slower airplane, slower than an RV-12, from here in Colorado to both coasts. It went well and I had a lot of fun. Got to learn how to fly around weather, as that gets harder with a slower airplane.

Dave
 
Joe,

I have restored and built light aeroplanes for 20 years now, my RV involvement has been 1 RV7, 80% of an RV8, now 60% through 2 RV12's and waiting to receive the fuselage from my build partner of our RV14 that will replace the 7.

Kinda like building !

Day job is front and left of an A330 going longhaul everywhere and there is still time for lots of RV flying as I am part time.

So......

Firstly, do you want to build an aeroplane ? I get asked about certain types a lot and the first question from me is why do you want to build an aeroplane ? If it is to have a certain type, then I suggest they go purchase as they are after that aeroplane sooner rather than later.

If the answer is because they want to build an aeroplane, then we talk a lot more. Of all the volume kits on the market, Vans have by far and away the best design, build quality and support. There may be other kits with more hands on niche involvement, but as a shake it out and build it, Vans are way ahead.

So we then talk about how much practical experience have you, how much do you want to learn, to be challenged, how patient are you and ultimately what do you want the aeroplane to do when you have finished it ?

Vans have a very wide range, from the 12 through to the 10 with all sorts in between, some aerobatic, some not, some snug, some roomy, some very economical and others very capable cruisers with family room. The build involvement varies a lot between them.

Back to the 12 then.

My buddy and I are building 2 12's as a learning programme for him, a continued therapy programme for me :D, a workshop encroachment programme to stop my wifelet filling my shop up and ultimately to turn a little coin when they are finished. Compared to the 7 and 8, the construction has been astonishingly quick and straightforward. We started the projects last July, we now have 2 complete sets of empennages, wings, tailcones, the forward fuselages are on their wheels about to have wiring pre installed. That is in a year of 2 full days a week, several evenings and odd vacation time. If we were doing a 7 or 9, we would be half way to where we are by now.

What about when it is finished ?

I did the initial fly off of an RV12 some years ago, see here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYb5D8AfDyw

Yes, that was it's first flight, the early turn is because it is a shared use site with sailplanes.

I did the full flight test schedule and was mightily impressed indeed. Great handling, great visibility, superb fuel economy and ease of use, good equipment and dual axis autopilot which makes cross country a breeze when you need to fold a map or just enjoy the view.

No, it isn't aerobatic - does it matter ? Yes, it is quick enough - 115kts, yes it has easy access, has de mountable wings and can be handled easily by 1 person.

I would suggest you find your local EAA Chapter, go along, ask, chat, go see projects and please, keep asking the questions on this forum and as soon as you get involved and committed, don't forget why and how we have this amazing forum resource and visit the top left corner of this page ;)
 
Lots of great input here and I hope it is helping you get some answers to your initial questions.

I have another thought I want to mention, though. When new builders are trying to decide which airplane to build, the counseling is always given about deciding on your "mission." Personally, I think it is a bigger wrapper than that, and I have learned it myself over the years.

See, our initial vision was to have an airplane which was capable of family trips back to Ohio from Atlanta. So, you end up building airplanes with extended range tanks, lots of IFR capability, and sometimes big, thirsty engines. We had a C-182 and a Bonanza to fulfill those requirements until Van's produced the RV-10 (lots of cajoling between he and I during those years, too). After a while I realized we actually only flew that mission a couple of times a year, and it wasn't even always fun, due to weather mostly.

So as time goes by I realized that I like flying for FUN, as probably do most of us here. The Saturday flying, the formation flying (with trained and qualified participants), the weekend jaunts for lunch, etc. were happening a whole lot more than the intitial "mission" requirements. So, I ended up bulding some airplanes just for fun, like Kitfoxes (pre-RV-12 era). We had an amazing amount of fun with them, including soloing my youngest son.

We used to joke that we flew the Kitfox on "lunch" money, as the fuel burn was so small. Then I started noticing other things---insurance was cheaper, I flew more just for Fun, and since they were trailerable, they got a whole lot more attention during the week. And they turned out to be very capable when needed, with trips to OSH and SNF, even IFR sometimes.

Sure it took longer, but one of the things I always noticed was that when we were fledgling pilots we were all trying to build time. Now we are trying to go as fast as we can. Perhaps we should slow down sometimes and enjoy the beauty of flying. :)

That being said, take the time to understand what kind of FUN flying you plan to do. After all, no one here is flying these airplanes commercially (except for the few giving transition training). I think you will be very happy in the long run with your choice.

All of the Van's aricraft are really great choices, and I've said that LONG before I started officially wearing a Van's hat. :) Even, my wife, who is not a pilot, likes all of them as a passenger. In fact, she was wowed by the visibilty and roominess in the 12.

So, do what's good for you. :)

Vic
 
I forgot to mention in my previous post that a huge benefit with the RV-12 is the ability to obtain a Repairman Certificate (Light-Sport Aircraft) by attending a 16 hour LSA Repairman Inspection Course. This certificate allows you to do your own annual condition inspections. Each FAA Repairman Certificate is registered to the owner’s specific ELSA aircraft and this is the only aircraft you are permitted to do the condition inspection. The certificate is good for life and can be transferred to other ELSA that you purchase.

The aircraft can be built by you or purchased but must be licensed as Experimental Light Sport. This is unlike EAB (Experimental Amateur Built) where the repairman certificate is issued to the builder, or his designee, and the certificate expires when the airplane changes ownership thus requiring AP/IA for condition inspection from that point onward.
 
I forgot to mention in my previous post that a huge benefit with the RV-12 is the ability to obtain a Repairman Certificate (Light-Sport Aircraft) by attending a 16 hour LSA Repairman Inspection Course. This certificate allows you to do your own annual condition inspections. Each FAA Repairman Certificate is registered to the owner’s specific ELSA aircraft and this is the only aircraft you are permitted to do the condition inspection. The certificate is good for life and can be transferred to other ELSA that you purchase.

The aircraft can be built by you or purchased but must be licensed as Experimental Light Sport. This is unlike EAB (Experimental Amateur Built) where the repairman certificate is issued to the builder, or his designee, and the certificate expires when the airplane changes ownership thus requiring AP/IA for condition inspection from that point onward.

Just a few clarifications. The repairman's certificate for E-AB doesn't expire but is tied to a specific airframe and for owners without the certificate the condition inspection on an E-AB aircraft doesn't require an A&P with IA (like it does for a standard certificated annual), just a regular A&P can sign off.
 
I built and fly the first Customer Built RV 12 to receive an Airworthiness Certificate and do its maiden flight. (September 2009) .

I have operated off the 1400 ft grass strip here at the farm since then . 850 hours no with NO REGRETS.



Brad Stiefvater
Salem SD
 
I've been flying my RV-12 for about six months and have 60 hrs on the airframe. I've been happy with it. It was a compromise. I would have preferred to build a Carbon Cub, but I felt that the RV-12 would be an easier build and more economical to operate. I could not afford to build and maintain a Carbon Cub.

I was apprehensive about building. I flew model airplanes for years and hated building but loved flying. I found the RV-12 build to be enjoyable and a better use of my time than watching TV. I never thought I would say this, but I miss building.

My mission is to fly locally in the mountains near Salt Lake City. The RV-12 has exceeded my performance expectations. That said, it is still "slow." It performs like a 172, which is good enough for me. I have been particularly impressed with the the RV-12's capability to fly at gross weight at high altitude (11,500).

Flying on auto-gas has been a big plus for me. Flying is relatively cheap. I was concerned about the non-conventional nature of the Rotax. It has been wonderful to operate.

If you want to land on gravel bars, fly at 170 kts, do loops, or you and your passenger weigh over ~220 lbs, the RV-12 is not for you. If fun, simple, and economical fits your mission, I can't think of a better airplane to build and fly. It's not nirvana, but it is pretty darn good.

I suspect that one of the reasons that there are more RV-12's for sale is that there are more of them. When you look at the number of completed airplanes over the time period that the kits have been available, it is a remarkably high number. More airplanes = more for sale.

Some day I will probably move on to a faster and bigger airplane. But for now, it fits the bill. I look forward to many more hours of low and slow flying for cheap. And the RV-12 is going to be a great platform for my young kids to learn how to fly some day when they are older.
 
It's loads of fun and cheap to fly

I bought an ELSA -12 to fly while I'm finishing up my RV-14 build.

It's really a blast to fly -- It's quick and responsive and a joy to take up.

I'm running premium unleaded in it for less than $2.50/gallon, so my consumables cost for punching holes in the sky is about $12!

I took the ELSA repairman's course, so I can do my own condition inspections and it's giving me a great leg up on learning to maintain a plane.

I'll eventually part with it (might have to sell it to pay for the engine and avionics for the -14), but it will be a sad day.
 
Just a few clarifications. The repairman's certificate for E-AB doesn't expire but is tied to a specific airframe and for owners without the certificate the condition inspection on an E-AB aircraft doesn't require an A&P with IA (like it does for a standard certificated annual), just a regular A&P can sign off.

Correct
And if the holder of the Repairmans Cert. is willing to do the condition inspections after sale of the airplane (to a friend for example), they can still do that.
 
I looked at several LSAs before deciding on an SLSA RV-12.

First though, I would say think about what your personal 'mission' is. I say this because everyone is different and at different phases of their aviation life. For me I retired after 30 odd years of professional flying from night freight to corporate to major airline. During that time I owned and restored a DH82a Tiger Moth and took it to multiple fly-ins and airshows to the point that I now love the simplicity and great reward of owning and flying an RV-12.
And enjoy flying from my quiet field when and where I want with minimum fuss.

I chose SLSA because I wanted a new airplane which would last me the rest of my flying days if I decided to keep the 12. A hangar buddy recently completed a beautiful -12 build but it took 6 years. Whilst not averse to building the time and tools required to me are too daunting. I've flown my SLSA ,which was wonderfully built and has been extremely reliable, almost 350 hours in 3 years and find it easy to operate on my own.
I get around 4.8 gph flying at 5300 rpm and with the wheel fairings get 118-120kts easily. Visibility is great and I ordered it with all the available options at the time for about $90k less than a heavier Tecnam I was looking at.

Whilst there have been a few frustrations from time to time more to do with ownership in general I have no regrets whatsoever in selecting the RV-12.

Lastly, there are more Rv-12s for sale on line because so many have been built or bought as SLSA. Compared to say 38 or so Tecnam P2008s on the register which I was also looking at.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all for the great responses and the PMs.

I do want to build eventually, but not right now unless that is the only way to get what I want. It is only for a lack of time and a space that I can call mine to complete the build. In my line of work you learn a lot about how to keep the bird healthy and in the air. I am not an A&P, but I have worked hand in hand with many a great one.

When I think of flying an airplane that grosses out at almost half of the weight of fuel in my current ride, it does make me think how that ride is going. I have had the pleasure of flying in an RV-12 but it was perfect CAVU with 0 wind.

Please keep the thoughts coming they really do help more than I can explain.

One other question. I realize that there are regs around max cruise for an LSA, 120 KT. Will the 12 really get up there with 100HP and sustain it? My training in a T-34C would call out a 214KT cruise at altitude and the only time we saw that was in an aggressive decent from altitude. More realistically, we would plan on 176KT cruise.

Any war stories about some one else, of course, that has experienced better sustained cruise speeds in a 12? Bottom line is the 120 reality, a dream in a dive, or something that requires powering back so you don't bust it.
 
You can read about the various speeds/altitudes and prop pitch combinations on here (hotly debated at times). But with wheel pants I consistently see 120-123 kts true at near full throttle/just under 5,500 rpm. Will "outrun" local C172s!

With the ground adjustable prop you can fine tune the cruise speed/climb performance to suit you - some guys who sacrifice climb perf. to squeeze out a few more kts in cruise. Not sure its worth doing that, especially in the summer, but that's why its called 'experimental'.

Good luck with your decision. (BTW, not a big fan of the title you choose for this thread. I've done a few things I regret, but my -12 isn't even close to any of them!)
 
My RV-12, like Pilot Brent's, will easily do the LSA 120 knot 'limit'. Compared to the Pipers and Cessnas that I learned to fly in, the RV-12 outperforms them in both speed and fuel economy.
I usually fly at 5300RPM but at 5000 I can get 110kts and 4.5 gph.

Taking off the RV-12, to me, with just me and full fuel, feels like an airplane attached to the engine since there is so much power to spare. Here in baking hot SC with DAs over 2000' I can get 900+ fpm and in the winter 1500'+.

I flew mine solo home to SC from Vans in OR and it was a great trip! Sitting at 9500' over West Texas doing 135 over the ground on auto-pilot whilst I had my sandwich and soda was just awesome.
The SkyView with ADSB provides almost as much capability as the airliners I flew.

Made in the USA with a great resource of owners and builders I'm convinced I made the right choice.
 
Any war stories about some one else, of course, that has experienced better sustained cruise speeds in a 12? Bottom line is the 120 reality, a dream in a dive, or something that requires powering back so you don't bust it.

I personally started building an RV-12 for the economy of O&M plus the simple build process - when compared to any of the others RV's. It will (still building) give me a fun, low cost commuter that will make the Pancake breakfast runs a lot for cost effective, adding the joy of ownership.

One of the drivers for me was the LSA driver's license medical aspect that attracted me as something flying to the day I hang it up. But now that I'm flying under BasicMed, if I had it to do over again, I would probably have built an RV-9A. I've flown most of the RV line and don't think any of them are a bad choice. My current plan is to start building an RV-10 right away, once I get my -12 done. And that's the last aspect - it's fun to build.

But if you're just buying, I think you owe it to yourself to go fly a couple of them and choose one that fits about 80% of your typical missions.

Oh, just a quick clarification, the actual airspeed limitation is "120 KCAS at sea level at maximum continuous power"... which could mean faster true airspeed cruise speeds at altitude greater than 120KTAS. Although, if you want to cruise much faster, then that is where the other models come in.

I agree with previous posters that the RV-12 is more about enjoying the ride. To me it's more about having a great view in a fun, easy to fly, low cost package and less about getting "there" fast.
 
I see 120 TAS if I push the throttle in a little. Some days I can get 123, maybe even 125 occasionally. I usually prefer to pull it back a little, fly 110-115, save some gas. If I push it I'll burn over 6 GPH, but I think I've been a little over-pitched.

Normally climbing out on takeoff feels about like a kite on a string. On a HOT, muggy day, 3000+ DA, loaded down at about max gross, it still out-climbed the typical 172s and Cherokees in which I spent my training time.

Like I said before... the RV-12 will do every bit of what Van's claims it will. The only real departure I see from their spec is the range... I don't know where on earth they got those numbers, but I plan for 350 nm at most.
 
I find that the 12 is much more comfortable to fly than the 6/7/9's. By design it is just roomier. It is also easier to get in and out of. You don't have to step on the seat either. I have been on the 14 fence for several years. Every time I get ready to pull the trigger all I have to do is fly this great airplane and its back to indecision time. If I fly it cross country I usually fly early as it's wing loading is a bit low. The Rotax is truly excellent. I work on lycs and conts every day and the Rotax will hold it's own against them any time. I like the 12 so much I have built 2 of them. The second one took 6 months. They are very easy to build. Ken Krueger hit a grand slam with this one. 02.
 
If I fly it cross country I usually fly early as it's wing loading is a bit low.

Perhaps a better way to describe it would be..... "the wing loading of Light Sport Aircraft is a bit low".
It is the nature of the beast so to speak.
It is not possible to design an airplane that truly meets the LSA performance requirements (45 Kt no flap stall speed, etc) without having a bit lower wing loading.
 
I did notice the nose wanted to hunt back and forth (yaw) with any bump. Is that normal?

Yes, this is normal for the 12. Other's will tell you to hold even rudder pressure - not the answer. The 12 hunts in yaw a fair amount when in turbulence. Inherent with the design. You get used to it...
 
Yes, this is normal for the 12. Other's will tell you to hold even rudder pressure - not the answer. The 12 hunts in yaw a fair amount when in turbulence. Inherent with the design. You get used to it...

Actually, rudder free vs rudder fixed stability is different in most all airplanes including the RV-12.

If you hold pressure on both pedals, locking the rudder in its neutral position it is effectively increasing the vertical stabilizer area by the additional area of the rudder. This increases yaw stability.
If you fly feet on the floor (so to speak), the rudder is free to pivot with yaw excursions (and it will).

I fly all the RV models with my feet "fixing" the position of the rudder, if there is any turbulence.
 
Try several models on for "size"

Get a ride in a couple different model RV's. You have flown a 12 now try a 6,7 or 9 then a 4 or 8. That might help you decide. Whatever you decide 12, 6/7, 4/8, 14 I am 100% positive you have no regrets.

The harder question IMHO is do you want to spend years building (which is fine) or do you want to fly now (buy used)? Whatever your choice it is an RV, you will love it!
 
I am not a short guy, 5'9", but I could barely reach the brakes. Seat was in the forward of the two positions but still was tip-towing. I will need to figure out an option to go further forward or take the wood blocks off of one of the kids tricycles.

Easily fix by ordering a 2 inch pad from Flight Line Interiors that goes behind the rear seat cushion to mover you forward.;)
I think they are $60
 
A guy down in Alabama let me fly his 12. That thing is super responsive! I can't imagine a cross country with AP.

I'm hoping to hear more about the RV12iS when they get back from Oshkosh. The RV12 just seems to fit the bill with it's cheap operating costs and autogas.
 
I'm 5'-9 on a good day and I have no problem reaching pedals. Perhaps the links are longer where the rudder cables connect on that plane to accommodate someone with longer legs. See plans 32-12 for parts F-1258 L and R.

The 12 bounces around a little more than the other RVs due to light wing loading as you expect out of all LSAs but you just slow down, fly higher or minimize flying during mid-day. I've flown it everywhere I flew the RV-9A including multiple trips to Oshkosh in the always challenging varying weather conditions.
 
Last edited:
A guy down in Alabama let me fly his 12. That thing is super responsive! I can't imagine a cross country with AP.

It's a great cross country machine. I flew mine almost 300 hours and to 42 states in a little over two years.

You have to adjust the auto pilot settings to your personal preference. A lot of builders seem to not mess with it. Too bad because with a few adjustments, it's as smooth as can be.

In real bumpy air, it tends to "hunt" a little. Eventually, I hand fly it some to smooth it out and then go back to the AP.
 
. . . "In real bumpy air, it tends to "hunt" a little. Eventually, I hand fly it some to smooth it out and then go back to the AP."
In that regard, I don't think it is much different than any other LSA.
Due to the light wing loading, it is "just the nature of the animal.":)
 
I am not a short guy, 5'9", but I could barely reach the brakes. Seat was in the forward of the two positions but still was tip-towing. I will need to figure out an option to go further forward or take the wood blocks off of one of the kids tricycles.

Easily fix by ordering a 2 inch pad from Flight Line Interiors that goes behind the rear seat cushion to mover you forward.;)
I think they are $60

For the first couple of hundred hours I used a gel filled back cushion to feel more comfortable. I'm 5'8".

Then after having owned a Mazda Miata I adopted the RV 'slouch' where I slouch down more as I did in the Mazda. My feet easily fit the pedals and brakes as well as not having too much travel where you can over control the rudder. You don't need that much rudder in RV-12 as opposed to other planes.

Tip for take-off ...line up straight and quickly apply about half power which is enough airflow over rudder to prevent over controlling the first few feet with differential braking. Once going straight go to full power and by the time you're there it's ready to rotate.

I do still uses a lumbar cushion to fill the gap betetween the vertical and horizontal cushion and this helps a lot for fatigue on longer legs.
 
Actually, rudder free vs rudder fixed stability is different in most all airplanes including the RV-12.

If you hold pressure on both pedals, locking the rudder in its neutral position it is effectively increasing the vertical stabilizer area by the additional area of the rudder. This increases yaw stability.
If you fly feet on the floor (so to speak), the rudder is free to pivot with yaw excursions (and it will).

I fly all the RV models with my feet "fixing" the position of the rudder, if there is any turbulence.

Duly noted, very good suggestions about fixing your feet in turbulence, on the rudders. Sounds like it helps lower the work load a bit.

I am 6'5", and sit on a lawn chair pad and back rest, to allow my Clark headphone band to clear the canopy. Yes I do fit, but I do sit pretty low for my view over the cowling. I guess if I had one wish, it was that the RV-12 could hold another 5 or 6 gallons of fuel. Of course, a RV-12 IS built with the fuel injected Rotax 912 would probably solve that problem, as Scott says 3.8 gallons per hour.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top