What's new
Van's Air Force

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

"Say Type Experimental..."

Oh my. Thread drift. Uncontrolled field, just N# (maybe "red low wing").

Yes AIM and operating limitations say ID as experimental on initial call.

If you say "R-Vee" N#, it's synonymous as experimental. Most controllers are pilots/airplane fans.
They know what an RV is... If they come back with what model... don't say "Winnebago". :D

PS Cessna, most say Skyhawk, Skylane. Citation, Twin Cessna.
 
Last edited:
gmcjetpilot says:

" Most controllers are pilots/airplane fans.
They know what an RV is."

How do you know this?????

I can tell you that 2 sets of controllers at Beverly Municipal Airport did not know what an RV was.
 
Not in Alaska, it's always a cub clone....

Yes! I noticed that when I was up there! Very cool state you have up there!

So, I was just thinking... If you have an RV 3, 4 or 6 you can change your tail number to a November x-ray. In which case you don't have to say the word experimental!

That way, you are still identifying the experimental nature of the aircraft by just simply stating the tail number!

:D CJ
 
And then there's *this* argument...

FAA Order 7360.1D Section 2-2 says:
f. ?Homebuilt,? ?amateur-built,? or ?kit plane? aircraft that exist in operationally significant numbers will be assigned a designator; however, these aircraft will only be listed under the original designer or under the manufacturer that produces or produced the aircraft type in series.

Since Van's models are listed, it's been argued that identifying as "RV XXXXX" is, as a matter of definition, identifying it as an amateur-built (and thus, experimental).

Just more grist for the mill :)
 
And then there's *this* argument...

FAA Order 7360.1D Section 2-2 says:
f. ?Homebuilt,? ?amateur-built,? or ?kit plane? aircraft that exist in operationally significant numbers will be assigned a designator; however, these aircraft will only be listed under the original designer or under the manufacturer that produces or produced the aircraft type in series.

Since Van's models are listed, it's been argued that identifying as "RV XXXXX" is, as a matter of definition, identifying it as an amateur-built (and thus, experimental).

Just more grist for the mill :)

Ah, thanks! You found the documentation for the 2nd half of my earlier post. (#82). :)
 
As pointed out previously in this thread, earlier Ops Lims have that proviso and later Ops Lims do not.

Also pointed out in an earlier post, it doesn't matter what one's Ops Lims say, since the requirement to inform the Control Tower of the Experimental nature of the aircraft is codified in CFR 91.319(d)(3).

"...(3) Notify the control tower of the experimental nature of the aircraft when operating the aircraft into or out of airports with operating control towers."

It's really frustrating when folks jump in at the end of a thread and don't read the previous posts. If you can't be bothered to read the previous posts, you'll probably post redundant or erroneous information.
Carl chill out. I use to work with you at Boeing in Everett. My main point is RVee (3/4/6/7/8/10/14) + N# is sufficient to ID your "experimental nature". Why? Because RV's are defined or "codified" aircraft ID by the administrator (FAA). I accept disagreement, but frustration is not required.

Carl I read the posts. So by me not delineating between old or new operating limits frustrates you? Please. The AIM and the FAR you quote both say indicate your aircrafts "experimental nature" on initial call. AIM gives an example. So old or new op limitations are irrelevant was my point. My gosh.

If your debate is "Experimental" is appropriate or mandatory, I would not argue. But if one drops experimental on initial contact for RVeeX, that is up to you as the PIC. The rebuttle is that "R-Vee Eight 24DG" does ID you as Experimental in nature. No hard feelings. If I was giving transition training I'd suggest saying both, "Experimental RVee7 N#... on initial call.

BTW my Winnebago joke is hilarious. :)

gmcjetpilot says:

" Most controllers are pilots/airplane fans.
They know what an RV is."

How do you know this?????

I can tell you that 2 sets of controllers at Beverly Municipal Airport did not know what an RV was.
As posted above by RV7A Flyer, the FAA Order clearly ID's Van's aircraft and others. I've been a pilot for 33 years, CFI, ATP. Controllers know experimental in general and RVs in particular from my experience. I never said all ATC.

As to your local tower who knew nothing of Van's RV series or expetimental kit planes, they now know, right? Other parts of country there can be +20 RV's based at one field. TOWER in some regions may not be up on EAA and kit planes. Fair point.

It's only initial call, example "Experimental R-Vee 7, N# ....... " Does not take much time or effort. Experimental tips them off you are not a Cessna, Piper or Beechcraft. So experimental is relevant and some may say mandatory. But experimental only is not real helpful with wide range of types and performance of home built planes.

Be SAFE and LEGAL ATC needs to know speed and visually ID you on the ground or airborne near airport (big, small, twin, single, high, low wing). Tower expects a 100 mph C152 and you are doing 180 mph; you get there faster than expected, it can cause issues. If you just say experimental, you can be a slow LSA or a turbine Lancair.

RV's have become well known in the time since I started building one 30 years ago (when the RV6 just came out). Cheers.

Sorry to frustrate you Carl
 
Last edited:
A few times, I've offered up just "Experimental RV" to the tower and they'll ask to clarify whether it's a -12, -10, -7, -9 or whatever. A pretty big speed delta between a -12 and an -8!
 
And then there's *this* argument...

FAA Order 7360.1D Section 2-2 says:
f. “Homebuilt,” “amateur-built,” or “kit plane” aircraft that exist in operationally significant numbers will be assigned a designator; however, these aircraft will only be listed under the original designer or under the manufacturer that produces or produced the aircraft type in series.

Since Van's models are listed, it's been argued that identifying as "RV XXXXX" is, as a matter of definition, identifying it as an amateur-built (and thus, experimental).

Just more grist for the mill :)
FAA Order 7360.1D is not an FAR so it carries absolutely no authority on this issue.

So it doesn't matter what you think, what you do, what your Ops Lims say, or what FAA Order 7360.1D says. Like it or not, the requirement to inform the Control Tower of the Experimental nature of the aircraft is codified in CFR 91.319(d)(3) and is mandatory.
Be SAFE and LEGAL ATC needs to know speed and visually ID you on the ground or airborne near airport (big, small, twin, single, high, low wing).
If ATC needs to know, they will ask.

FWIW I always identify myself as EXPERIMENTAL 819PR. If ATC asks what kind of experimental I am, then I provide the official FAA/ICAO designation. That is when 7360.1D becomes relevant. YMMV

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Well, now that we’ve got that settled, can we move on to something less contentious like overhead breaks or non-standard patterns?��
 
Well, now that we?ve got that settled, can we move on to something less contentious like overhead breaks or non-standard patterns?��

Glug, glug glug,....

That's the sound of 100LL being poured onto the campfire.

Soooooo, are overhead breaks OK at non-towered airport.
 
Well, now that we?ve got that settled, can we move on to something less contentious like overhead breaks or non-standard patterns?��

glug glug glug,....

That's the sound of 100LL being poured onto the campfire.

Soooooo, are overhead breaks OK at non-towered airport.

I was just thinking this thread is turning into a prime candidate for the "Never Ending Debate" section of the forum. :rolleyes:
 
Glug, glug glug,....

That's the sound of 100LL being poured onto the campfire.

Soooooo, are overhead breaks OK at non-towered airport.

Well, we need to define "OK" for that discussion.

I use them all the time in my home private strip... in my overpowered 9A, with too much fuel, no steam backups, and parts of it dubiously primered. Somewhere in the fuel system I've almost certainly got some off-spec parts as well. Works fine for me, YMMV! :D
 
Wrong, again. I hope you're being facetious. There's no requirement for "experimental" in any radio call except to the first approach/tower contact and continued for clarity only if they repeat it.

But for rare instances, there's no statutory requirement for any radio transmission at a non-towered airport.

Jeeze, after 13 pages of back and forth, you'd think this point was settled.

John Siebold
 
AIA

10/12/17
AIM 4-2-4. a.
3. Civil aircraft pilots should state the aircraft
type, model or manufacturer?s name, followed by the
digits/letters of the registration number. When the
aircraft manufacturer?s name or model is stated, the
prefix ?N? is dropped; e.g., Aztec Two Four Six Four
Alpha.
EXAMPLE−
1. Bonanza Six Five Five Golf.
2. Breezy Six One Three Romeo Experimental (omit
?Experimental? after initial contact).
 
Wrong, again. I hope you're being facetious. There's no requirement for "experimental" in any radio call except to the first approach/tower contact and continued for clarity only if they repeat it.

But for rare instances, there's no statutory requirement for any radio transmission at a non-towered airport.

Jeeze, after 13 pages of back and forth, you'd think this point was settled.

John Siebold

It was settled - pages and pages ago. You are required to use the word "experimental" on your first call-up. After that it's not required.
 
It was settled - pages and pages ago. You are required to use the word "experimental" on your first call-up. After that it's not required.

Sorry, no. The reg says you are required to "Notify the control tower of the experimental nature of the aircraft..."

There's a difference, legally :)
 
Sorry, no. The reg says you are required to "Notify the control tower of the experimental nature of the aircraft..."

There's a difference, legally :)

Yes agreed, and then the conversation moved to whether or not saying "RV" was good enough....whether or not RV is SUFFICIENT to convey "experimental". In my opinion it is not.

It is a proven fact that in some airports, and for some pilots, it is not. This is an established fact beyond debate.
Unless you know an airport knows about RV's - and unless you know that the pilots you are dealing with in that airspace and at that moment - knows about RV's, you are taking a chance.

So there you MAY have satisfied the requirements. Or you may not have.

There is ABSOLUTELY ZERO chance that you have not satisfied the requirement when you use the word "experimental". You have definitely conveyed the "experimental nature" without question.

From there we got into opinion and acceptable risk factors.

That's pretty much when I tuned out. I know what risk I'm willing to accept - as little as practical. And the "pain" of using the word "experimental" is so infinitesimal that to avoid it strikes me as silly and there's no good reason to not use it. I have seen no rational argument against using the word "experimental". It costs almost nothing to use the word. I have to wonder if some people defend against its use because they don't want to admit they may have been taking unnecessary risks. But I really I don't know

I see no harm in saying "Experimental RV November 12345.....", as adding the "RV" is helpful, MIGHT provide useful info and doesn't take up much extra time on the frequency.

I also know that I specifically asked my home airport's Tower Team (2 teams because one whole set retired to be replaced by new folks), and they BOTH said they Want. To. Hear. the word "experimental". So that's the second reason I use it.


So that's my choice. Everyone does what they think is best.

If people want to continue to debate the issue have at it. I'm pretty much done with it:

I've listened to both sides, identified the silly arguments, and have made my choices.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I missed this idea in this long thread, but does any one announce themselves with:

"Vans RV-XX tail number"

or

"Van's XX tail number"

Then isn't "Van's" equivalent to saying "experimental", except for the 12 (which may be professionally built).

Van's is the make, while RV-xx is the model. Like Cessna Skyhawk (172). With that said, why doesn't Van's come up with cool names for each model. A wait I know, for the same reason that a Porsche only has to be identified as a 911 or a 944.
 
"Vans" is only the manufacturer of a very small number of the 10,000+ Airplanes identified as RV's
That's not true according to the FAA order. Van is the recognized manufacturer, and every one of the Van's Aircraft from rv-3 to rv-14 is listed in this official document. Orders and Notices are mandatory for FAA internal use. There are no other VAN aircraft manufacturers according to FAA. There' are several thousand RVs flying, which far exceeds many certified models. Not sure what the point is, but in the world of experimental aircraft Van's models are one of the most prolific and well-known. In the total GA population Van's Aircraft, a round over 40 years, and are not a minority by any stretch.

Some say RVx is not sufficient to indicate your experimental nature, which is an opinion. If you ask an FAA inspector you will likely get different opinions. If you just say RVx would you ever get a violation or cause a safety issue? In my opinion no. However there's no controversy if you just say experimental.

If you say "Experimental RVx N#...." you are covered. This has the added benefit of letting those who do know what an RV is know what type you are. This saves time from ATC having to come back and ask you what type of aircraft you are.

By the way when I say ATC I mean Tower. This requirement to indicate your experimental nature only applies to initial communication with airport control Towers. Enroute you don't have to say it at all.
 
Last edited:
That's not true according to the FAA order. Van is the recognized manufacturer, and every one of the Van's Aircraft from rv-3 to rv-14 is listed in this official document. Orders and Notices are mandatory for FAA internal use.
As you point out, FAA orders and documents are mandatory for FAA internal use ONLY. They do not apply to anyone else and do not override the FAR's.

It was settled - pages and pages ago. You are required to use the word "experimental" on your first call-up. After that it's not required.
EXACTLY, but some people insist on justifying what they do no matter what the reality is. :(
 
Last edited:
As you point out, FAA orders and documents are mandatory for FAA internal use ONLY. They do not apply to anyone else and do not override the FAR's.


EXACTLY, but some people insist on justifying what they do no matter what the reality is. :(
Mandatory for FAA personel. They are the boss of you. Ha ha. You are free to ignore the fact that the FAA recognizes the Van's RV types as they do a Boeing 747. It is useful to know. If you file a flight plan, it is a recognized (by FAA) make/model type along with its description 1P/S, which is 1 engine, piston, small and wake turb index F ICAO weight: Light. This is what ATC has access to do their job. Note: FAA ATC considers "Van's" as manufacture not builder for ATC purposes. For type designation (model) omit hyphen.

Again say experimental. That is perfect. If Tower comes back say what type, what will you say? Vans' RVx. If they say what's that? Small, light, single piston engine low wing 2 place airplane I guess. If tower say oh a Grumman Yankee.. land at another Airport. :)

Here is Order 7360.1D.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/Order_7360.1D_Aircraft_Type_Designators_FINAL.pdf

What is an Order?
ANSWER:*FAA Orders*are published by the*FAA for*FAA*personnel. These documents outline procedures for performing their job functions. The acronym JO is used in the*FAA*Air Traffic Control*order numbering system and stands for Job*Order.
 
Last edited:
Mandatory for FAA personel. They are the boss of you. Ha ha.

Just out of curiosity, how long have you been employed by the FAA? Based on your post(s) I think I know the answer. FWIW I was a controller for 22yrs so I know that they are nobody's boss and these orders are not mandatory for anybody outside the FAA, no matter what you want to think. But the FAR's apply to everyone so I follow them.

Again say experimental. That is perfect. If Tower comes back say what type, what will you say? Vans' RVx. If they say what's that? Small, light, single piston engine low wing 2 place airplane I guess. If tower say oh a Grumman Yankee.. land at another Airport. :)
See this thread's post #115 for what I do when ATC asks me about my experimental.

What is an Order?
ANSWER:*FAA Orders*are published by the*FAA for*FAA*personnel. These documents outline procedures for performing their job functions. The acronym JO is used in the*FAA*Air Traffic Control*order numbering system and stands for Job*Order.
There, I highlighted your own post for you to understand.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Clarification sometimes isn't enough

In my early lifetime I was initiating a VFR landing clearance into Dallas Love Field by stating "Love tower, Swift 3959K over Bonham (visual reporting point) for landing". Tower controller asked for aircraft type. I replied "Globe GC1-B".
Tower controller after a few minutes: "Cleared to land RWY 13L".

About 2 miles from touchdown the controller advised me my nose gear did not appear to be down...
 
10/12/17
AIM 4-2-4. a.
3. Civil aircraft pilots should state the aircraft
type, model or manufacturer?s name, followed by the
digits/letters of the registration number. When the
aircraft manufacturer?s name or model is stated, the
prefix ?N? is dropped; e.g., Aztec Two Four Six Four
Alpha.
EXAMPLE−
1. Bonanza Six Five Five Golf.
2. Breezy Six One Three Romeo Experimental (omit
?Experimental? after initial contact).

I note that no one pays attention to the example above, placing "Experimental" AFTER the tail number. I too succumb to Experimental RV XYZ. I've tried to recall putting experimental at the rear, but it just doesn't flow.
 
I note that no one pays attention to the example above, placing "Experimental" AFTER the tail number.
That's the way I say it, but my aircraft type doesn't consist of two letters. I think that's where the confusion comes in. Most of the RV guys at my airport omit the aircraft type and say "Experimental XXXX". Tower always knows it's an RV when they see it take off like a rocket :D
 
10/12/17
AIM 4-2-4. a.
3. Civil aircraft pilots should state the aircraft
type, model or manufacturer?s name, followed by the
digits/letters of the registration number. When the
aircraft manufacturer?s name or model is stated, the
prefix ?N? is dropped; e.g., Aztec Two Four Six Four
Alpha.
EXAMPLE−
1. Bonanza Six Five Five Golf.
2. Breezy Six One Three Romeo Experimental (omit
?Experimental? after initial contact).

Been doing that for over 20-years. Was a DAR for 10-years and recommended all the builders I worked with do the same thing.
 
Ok, so after reading all these posts on pages one through fourteen, I'm still confused about first contact with tower.
If I say "Experimental RV8 123" does ATC now believe my N number is 123 or 8123?
I have used "Experimental 123" and been asked "say type" to which I replied "RV". ATC comes back with "what kind of RV?"
So now its "Experimental RV8 November 123"
 
Ok, so after reading all these posts on pages one through fourteen, I'm still confused about first contact with tower.
If I say "Experimental RV8 123" does ATC now believe my N number is 123 or 8123?
I have used "Experimental 123" and been asked "say type" to which I replied "RV". ATC comes back with "what kind of RV?"
So now its "Experimental RV8 November 123"
To be legal and avoid confusion, you make your initial contact as "Experimental 123". After that you can say "Experimental 123", "RV123", "Cutiepie 123" or whatever floats your boat. Be warned, some controllers might have an issue with something other than "Experimental 123" but they will quickly let you know.

FWIW; to avoid unnecessary confusion, after initial contact I use whatever the tower calls me.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top