Learning to fly in a -6

Here's the comment referred to. "When I suggested to Dick that the RV- 8A, in the hands of a good instructor, might actually be suitable for primary flight training, he correctly pointed out that its self-coordinating tendency would leave the student ill prepared for most other aircraft. Conversely, old habits do die hard, and I never did entirely overcome a tendency to use excessive rudder during turns." This was clearly represented as the opinion of the man himself. Do you agree with him?

One Should Read the Entire CAFE Report

Bill Dicus said:

Here's the comment referred to. "When I suggested to Dick that the RV- 8A, in the hands of a good instructor, might actually be suitable for primary flight training, he correctly pointed out that its self-coordinating tendency would leave the student ill prepared for most other aircraft. Conversely, old habits do die hard, and I never did entirely overcome a tendency to use excessive rudder during turns." This was clearly represented as the opinion of the man himself. Do you agree with him?

Click to expand...

If you read the whole CAFE report you might see several other comments that appear to contradict your statement. (The word "high performance" is used on several occasions to describe the RV-8A.) The devil is in the details for those who care to look. People are free to do stupid things if that is what they prefer. I would prefer that they didn't because it could adversely impact General Aviation and my enjoyment of the hobby.

With a name like "Luddite" your opinion holds little weight in a mechanized society. The RV series of aircraft are easy to fly, but I haven't heard anyone here say they learned to fly from day one in an RV. Where are those folks?

We are really getting to extremes here. The thread originally cast around for opinions concerning the -6 as a primary trainer. Those opinions were offered, and the OP has made a decision.

But what is the point of indicating the RV series is so ill suited for a training aircraft that "...it could adversely impact General Aviation and my enjoyment of the hobby..." ? Please take a step back and look at what is being offered here.

Clearly, the -6 is not going to be the "perfect" trainer for some aspiring pilots, but it is a LONG way from the hot rod that some are making it out to be. We all draw from our own experience, and as limited as it is, MY personal experience is that of the 15 or so aircraft types accumulated over 1000 hours in my logbook, the RV is among the easiest. I have never received ?transition training" in any RV that I've flown, and in the case of the -8 and the Rocket, my first time sitting in one was in the front seat as PIC (solo, in the case of the -8). Some will view this statement as reckless, some will view it as boastful, but it is offered only as fact and to provide perspective. Flawed as my opinion may be, I feel that if someone of my limited experience can do it, it simply CAN?T be that difficult. True, not all pilots are the same - If some pilots take longer to get up to speed in their airplane, so be it. But just because some have trouble stepping into an RV, that's no reason to outright condemn the aircraft as a trainer. After all, plenty struggle with the Cherokee and 172 as well.

And BTW, I understand there's a guy here at work who is learning to fly (from scratch) in his -6A.

It's All In One's Perspective

Toobuilder said:

I have never received ?transition training" in any RV that I've flown, and in the case of the -8 and the Rocket, my first time sitting in one was in the front seat as PIC (solo, in the case of the -8). Some will view this statement as reckless, some will view it as boastful, but it is offered only as fact and to provide perspective.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your perspective. I'm slightly more risk averse (but I bet I've got more carrier landings than you).

rvn817j said:

Thanks for your perspective. I'm slightly more risk averse (but I bet I've got more carrier landings than you).

Click to expand...

?so I?ve demonstrated the unremarkable ability to fly an honest, simple airplane ?cold?, while you land a jet on a ship?

I?m not sure you fully grasp the meaning of the term ?risk averse??

Lots of discussion points here...

Quick point of order on folks commenting on the speed/complexity of military a/c used as primary traininers. Military flight training is as much a weeding out process as it is a learning process. Sink or swim. How many civil pilots would not have their tickets in that arena? Those aircraft are also purpose built to be beat on. Yes the performance is substantial by civil GA purposes, but that's also because the military has little time/money to get your from point A (0 time student) to point B (mission capable pilot in a multi million dollar platform).


To the OP:

If it were me in your situation (and this is coming from years of CFI experience watching students batter airplanes) I would find/buy/rent something more traditional. C-152 or Cherokee 140 or 160 is a good choice. While she may be over the hump, that fear of flying will come back from time to time and a tried/true/stable/rugged trainer will help mitigate that with a shallower learning curve. You can put 200-300 hours on a 152 and then flip it for what you have in it. Throw some paint on it and a handheld GPS in the panel, you may recoup some of the money spent operating it as well.

Yes you can learn in an RV-6. As was mentioned, your insurance company may have their own thoughts on that, and one poster mentioned someone learning in a new Mooney Ovation (and the damage/cost associated). I have a student right now working on his instrument rating in the same turbo charged A36 Bonanza he got his PPL in. Can't say I would've done it that way, but not my money. Your RV-6 sounds pretty stout, and will be a handful for any new student pilot should you go that route. Maybe she's a quick learner, maybe not, who knows. But every student puts a beating on training aircraft, and that level of wear and tear should be reserved for something built for it IMO (or someone elses airplane ). YMMV.

By going the traditional route, she'll be even more excited with the RV's performance too once she moves up. It'll seem like the space shuttle

Edit: I seem to be summarizing Louis's posts.

rvn817j said:

Thanks for your perspective. I'm slightly more risk averse (but I bet I've got more carrier landings than you).

Click to expand...

Says the NFO. ( I couldn't help myself, sorry)

This is a nice summary, I agree.

rvn817j said:

With a name like "Luddite" your opinion holds little weight in a mechanized society.

Click to expand...

LOL. These days a luddite is someone who has a flip phone. If you understand the definition of the word, those RV pilots who are unwilling to have dual P-mags and no back-up steam gauges are "luddites". But you may be right that I don't have the technological aptitude to comment on RVs and all their 1940's technology.

rvn817j said:

The RV series of aircraft are easy to fly, but I haven't heard anyone here say they learned to fly from day one in an RV. Where are those folks?

Click to expand...

I think we've had one or two references in this thread. Not many people buy their own airplane to learn to fly in period. RVs cannot be used for commercial flight training. Not many people learn to fly in J-3's anymore either. And very few people build and complete an RV before learning to fly. You're falsely correlating lack of activity with unsuitability. Two different things.

Sig600 said:

Says the NFO. ( I couldn't help myself, sorry)

Click to expand...

Finally, somebody qualified to provide an "expert" opinion on this topic (besides Louise....the national park ranger...if my recall hasn't failed me). My posts were only partially tongue in cheek, but you have to know to understand. (I do have a couple traps...S-3 right seat....and I was young. I also have a 757 right seat landing in my log book (with an instructor I should add - the airline didn't trust me to do it "cold")!)

Bottom line, many considerations lead to the conclusion to train a new pilot in something "more fit" than an RV-6 and there are many planes that are "more fit" for that purpose.

rvn817j said:

Bottom line, many considerations lead to the conclusion to train a new pilot in something "more fit" than an RV-6 and there are many planes that are "more fit" for that purpose.

Click to expand...

This. Not that it can't be done, but all the considerations are up to the individual given the variables involved.

FWIW I've taught a number of students in an RV-6A. Granted not a tailwheel, and it was an O-320 with a FP prop, but it made a great training airplane. One of the factors I didn't mention was the instructor in the right seat. How competent are they in the airplane (and how far into the weeds can they let a student get)? Training is lost if the instructor is taking the plane every 2 minutes because they aren't comfortable with their own comfort level in the plane.

rvn817j said:

The RV series of aircraft are easy to fly, but I haven't heard anyone here say they learned to fly from day one in an RV. Where are those folks?

Click to expand...

I learned to fly from start to finish in my husbands RV10. He and my CFI felt that it would be best for me to learn in the airplane that I would ultimately be flying. It was a bit intimidating at first, but I got used to it, and I absolutely love flying it. The hardest part for me was not busting 100 feet in my steep turns - it likes to climb.

Mary

Now We're Talkin'

stinson220 said:

I learned to fly from start to finish in my husbands RV10. He and my CFI felt that it would be best for me to learn in the airplane that I would ultimately be flying. It was a bit intimidating at first, but I got used to it, and I absolutely love flying it. The hardest part for me was not busting 100 feet in my steep turns - it likes to climb.

Click to expand...

Hi Mary. I'm not familiar with the RV-10, but in the RV-8 we use the cowl line in relation to the horizon (and, if you really have to, the altimeter and rate of climb indicator) to make a level turn (about 2 fingers width below the horizon if you catch my drift).

This has gotten to be such a long thread that most people forget there was an OP that had a question. If I recall he wanted some details about certain issues related to primary pilot training in an RV-6 aircraft (a conventional gear aircraft). Your detailed response to him would be more helpful than responding to me (but, maybe my question about who has done it should have been the OP's first question).

On a personal note, I'm thrilled to learn that you were able to get your PPL in the RV-10. Were you able to obtain insurance for training in the RV-10 or were you self insured or did you simply get your CFI insured for operating the aircraft?

I was able to get insurance, and it wasn't too bad. It went down quite a bit after I hit 100 hours.

In response to the OP, everyone is different. If she flies a lot with you and feels comfortable in the airplane, have her go up with an instructor and see if she would like to try it. If she doesn't want to, start her with something else and transition her later. I was really nervous about learning to fly at first, but after a few lessons, I started to really enjoy it and looked forward to going out to the airport.

stinson220 said:

I was able to get insurance, and it wasn't too bad. It went down quite a bit after I hit 100 hours.

In response to the OP, everyone is different. If she flies a lot with you and feels comfortable in the airplane, have her go up with an instructor and see if she would like to try it. If she doesn't want to, start her with something else and transition her later. I was really nervous about learning to fly at first, but after a few lessons, I started to really enjoy it and looked forward to going out to the airport.

Click to expand...

So there we have it. Easily the most reasonable (and credible) post in the entire thread.

...and a big congratulations to you, Mary.

Guys, you have to remember that most of us have experience in many other airplanes. Take a newby like Mary and you just do what you have to do...she proved it.

Best,

Students are hard on planes. I am not sure I would want a new person landing my 'baby' when they are learning the very basics.

Now on the student side.... (I am not a flight instructor, but an instructor in several other areas). Some students can handle more performance out of the gate, some can't. Put a fast student in a fast plane and they might be fine. Put a slightly scared student in a fast plane... And you are not helping them. If you put the fast student in a slower plane, they are still going to be fine and the less natural pilot has a better chance.

There is very little negative in starting a student in a plane more designed for primary instruction... The only one I can honestly think of is financial. But that being said, I am not sure the insurance/wear on my plane would make me excited to let my wife learn on it.