What's new
Van's Air Force

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

When did you "accept" EXPERIMENTALs?

N941WR

N941WR

Legacy Member
Bob Axsom said:
These planes are hot and small and they are not universally liked by all controllers and pilots of certified airplanes. I'm not sure what their problem is but it is almost as if they have a chip on their shoulder when they hear the word "Experimental" (like they are challenged in some way). Anyway, be careful out there, attitudes can cause problems.

Bob Axsom
Click to expand...
Bob?s note in another thread got me thinking. Back when I was getting my PPL everyone talked trash about experimental airplanes. Yes, this was in the days before RV?s.

I held that attitude for a long time, then some friend?s introduced me to antiques and homebuilts (Great Lakes w/ 220 Franklyn), RV-4?s (Claudio C?s Purple Passion), J-3, PT-17, UPF-7, T6, and a few other interesting birds. Once I understood that there were better airplanes out there I never looked at a Skyhawk or Cherokee/Warrior the same again, nor did I ever want to fly one again.

Why don?t some people like experimentals? Is it because of the perceived poor safety record, high landing speeds, just plane ignorance? (Pun intended.)

The other part of this thread is, what made you change your mind about experimentals?
 
Experimentals

When I was discharged from the Army in 1969, I went to the Reno air races and was Immediately infected with Cassutt fever!! I had built many control line model airplanes and graduated to Radio Control and a fresh Commercial/instrument license. What I saw was just a big model airplane with more or less the same parts and my Cassutt wing kit was ordered. 15 months later it was flying and my love of "decent" experimentals has never faded.
For sure, the Jim Bedes of this world still exist and blatant embellished promises still exist. This unfortunately discolors experimentals but they're learning and it's up to us.
The little Cassutt went over 225 on 100HP Continental turning 3850RPM!! Not a typo-really 3850RPM with the fast ones turning 4100 or better.
Pierre
RV6A 56hrs, 180HP, 3 bladed Catto luvin' it.
 
Two Years Ago

I really didn't know that much about experimentals and never considered them. To me experimentals were built by crazy guys gluing wood and fabric together in a barn somewhere. They were lifelong projects for the sake of a project and nobody actually flew them things.

I started my flying lessons in 150's and 140's with the Navy flying club in 1973. The thought of building my own airplane or even owning my own airplane was never considered. I experienced a long lapse in flying while raising a family and building a career. But the memories of flying and the bug remained with me although dormant because of higher priorities. Going through my midlife crisis the bug became active again yet the cost of flying seemed out of hand. The 3 hour minimum per day pretty much ruled out any crosscountry flights for me. And the cost of ownership pretty much ruled out ownership of a production aircraft. Two years ago I started watching the "Wings" channel and saw "From the Ground Up" and "A Plane is Born." I thought those shows were really kewl and I wondered if that might be a possible solution. I didn't know anything about experimentals and had doubts about my ability to actually build one. My first search on the internet turned up Van's Aircraft. The info packet and video from Van's lead me to believe that I could build a kit plane if not one from scratch. I still have questions about my long-term financial ability to own a plane but we will see. I am going slow-build all the way so right now the building is the source of enjoyment over actually flying. Obviously the ultimate goal is to fly but that goal is too far off for me to focus on right now. I just want to have fun playing with my new tools and building a plane.

There is little doubt in mind that if I could afford one I would probably be flying a Cirrus over building an RV. But right now my only option for flying a relatively high performance crosscountry aircraft is to build a kit.

As far as safety is concerned, unfortunately it is not a perception. Experimental aircraft are not as safe as production aircraft. The up side is that most of the issues occur during phase 1 of flight. I expect that after years of building the pilots are likely rusty and antsy to get the plane off the ground. Couple that with a possibly unfamiliar aircraft, a higher performance aircraft, and a few technical problems, and the probability for issues goes way up. Bottom line, as you approach your first flight, slow down, take a breath, renew your skills, get transition training, and get several pairs of eyeballs to look over your plane.
 
Last edited:
I guess I came at it the other way. The closest thing I had to "exposure" to airplanes as a kid was my father's interest in building a homebuilt. He never did it, but I grew up assuming that if I ever owned an airplane (which seemed rather far-fetched) it would be an experimental. He had books and magazines, plus stories of friends who had built experimentals in the 50s when he was growing up in Wisconsin.

When I first encountered production planes (flight training) I went through a cycle of seriously considering buying one... but when I laid out my goals for flying and my life in general, building was more appealing.

The cool thing is that my father is now helping me to build my plane... so it becomes a double victory in a sense....
 
Hmm . . .

For me, the issue has always been will I ever fully accept certified airplanes. Gee, the government approves them, that's nice.
 
timing

I have always wanted to own a cross country plane, but when I first started looking around I realized that I would have to spend a fortune to get the kind of performance I was seeking. Then one day I picked up KitPlanes magazine and fell in love with the Lancair 360 and Lancair IV. Since then I knew I would build my own plane. Lancair came close to getting my money, but the RV won out in the end.

Building a plane didn't seem out of the ordinary to me considering all of the time I spent building RC aerobatic planes and jets. At the point where the aerobatic planes required a truck to transport them and the jets started to cost over 10K I decided it was time to build something I could fit in.

From what I have seen the people who bad mouth experimentals either don't know a lot about them, have met some eccentric builders and so discredit all builders or they view experimentals as a threat to the certified aircraft business.

Antony
 
avaviat said:
I guess I came at it the other way. The closest thing I had to "exposure" to airplanes as a kid was my father's interest in building a homebuilt.
Click to expand...

I had a similar situation. The first time I saw a GA plane up close, it was a relative's Thorp T-18. At 5 years old, that was by far the coolest thing I had ever seen. That was my first ride in a GA plane, too. My first airplane magazine was Sport Aviation. So, I've always been in the experimental camp, and the other side seems weird to me. It was hard to convince myself that it was ok to learn to fly in a lame C-152.
 
Not my experience

Most controllers are accepting if not down right enthusiastic about experimental aircraft. Many ATC are pilots, building planes or know someone who is. I can't tell you how many times a controller asked, "what kind of plane is that, you are sure moving fast?" One time going thru Luke AFB airspace (near Phoenix) to get to Glendale Muni, they asked if I would buzz the tower!

UGLY experimental pilots do happen. May be pride or bravado of some experimental pilots comes-off a little elitist. How many times have you thought or said "Oh those spam cans". It goes both ways. I can look at someone's clean pride and joy Piper Tri-pacer and tell them, nice plane.

Also some RV'ers feel they have the right to enter the pattern anytime with a 360 or 180 break in formation and expect everyone to be in awe and wounder, getting out of the way of their superior airmanship and planes demo. This is rare (I hope) but I have seen this attitude at a home-field and had people confide in me they did not like certain RV pilots, which in general made all RV's the target of their ire.

How many formation C152's doing OH breaks do you see. When we make a spectical of ourselves, you have to take the heat. Also abrupt idle on the break makes for back-fires. Not everyone is so thrilled with this. Just common sense works.

You can argue all day long how superior a "Break out approach is" but we are civilian pilots at civilian airports and should try and be nice neighbors, go with the flow, even if it cramps our TOP GUN style. Most of the time pilots and tower are glad to ablige formations or break out approach requests, but we should be gracious.

Other than that I get compliments and positive comments.

One last thing about ATC, the "AIM", communication section I believe says all you need to say is experimental, but they would like to know type of experimental. "Experimental RV4, November-234, 10 south, landing with echo." If you don't mention your make/model they have to ask sometimes. It kind of annoys them when they have to ask, wasting time. A Lancair IV doing 200kts or a Kitfox doing 90 kts makes a difference to them. Most ATC folks are up on the popular kit planes like the RV's, Glasair, Lancairs. Some towers have scopes and see how fast you are going, many can not.

I learned about experimental right after I completed undergrad in mechanical engineering and was driving from New Orleans to Seattle to start my first engineering job at Boeing. I picked up a Kit plane magazine and saw an article on the first Lancair (around 1985). After some research and discussion with a co-worker the RV6 was the one for me a year or so later when it came out.

George
 
Last edited:
Easy question, easy answer...

After flying a couple of trainers, then going to OSH...game over.

I had to ask myself "how much plane can I buy" then "how much plane can I build for the same money?" Once again, game over.

I was considering a Kitfox, as I had a hay field at the time in Michigan that would do for my "airfield", and a huge barn that, when spoken in French, became a "hangar".

Then when the farm/previous life thing didn't work out (or DID work out, I guess) and I started reading about RV's, and the "repeat offenders" I had to start thinking about aluminum.

It was really settled when a certain Texan RV4 made the cover of Sport Aviation. That red/white/blue beauty had me quivering. Next, I read a story about a couple of careless wingnuts that did a loop at too low an altitude, both pulled hard to avoid a hill, and put a 12 degree bend in the main spar, and flew it home...I decided that I just had to have me some of that magic bird. If you can screw up to that degree and survive, imagine how great a plane it would be if you flew "inside" the envelope.

Fast forward...while working on my CFII etc, I got a ride in an RV4 at Mason, Michigan. WOW. So THAT is what a plane is supposed to handle like! Now I know what "control harmony" means. There was no looking back.

Jeff
Closing in on 300 hours on RV4 Toucan N605RV.
 
Good thread. This has me scratching my head. I can't remember. I guess I was in high school or early undergrad because I used to spend time between classes at the engineering library reading about aircraft design and trying to design my own. (I still have some sketches - they were terrible! I was an accounting major). I kind of always new I'd build one someday. It took me more than a decade after graduation to get started, but its done. A lifetime dream come true.

I never had to 'break it' to my wife as some have had to do. I told her before we were married that I was going to build an airplane someday. Crazy girl married me anyway.

Now ask what got me started on flying in general and I can remember that. Lying in my bunk bed when I was just out of diapers listening to Snoopy vs. the Red Baron (the Royal Guardsmen) - 'While the baron was laughing, he got him in his sight!' :D
 
Experimental is special

"Accepting Experimentals" sounds strange to me. I first heard of the term in the 1940s when "Experimental" meant only one thing: the absolute leading edge of flight. "Experimental" meant planes like the Bell X-1. Do you remember the XC-99? When the first one tookoff from Lindbergh Field and flew over my school everyone, including the teachers, ran out to see what it was. The only other sound that I have heard that was that overwhelming was one day in St. Louis when walking across a parking lot when they fired the F-4's gattling gun in the adjacent gun butts (I didn't know whether to S### or go Blind but I closed my eyes and squatted). In the early 50s I saw the variable sweep Bell X-5 fly at Kearny Mesa in San Diego. When the word "Experimental" was first applied to homebuilts I thought it was a bit pretentious but a clean and sleek high quality airplane has always been apealing and the more unique and faster the better. I have never discriminated against an airplane because of some badge or classification. When I built my RV-6A I was quite proud to be entering that Experimental classification even if it was at the very low end of the scale as far as government X-planes are concerned and I was proud to be a test pilot on the first flight of an experimental airplane even if thousands of very similar experimental airplanes have been flown. As Jack Nickelson said in "Terms of Endearment" of the millions of people on Earth only a few have done this and I'm one of them.

Bob Axsom
 
Last edited:
Age 3...?

I'm not sure I understand the question ;) :D

Every since I was old enough to know what an airplane was, I have admired the airplanes and aviators that did new things - and they were, by definition, experimentals, racers, research planes....the cutting edge stuff. Sure, you can argue that they weren't built in garages - but actually, in the early days - they were! All of my early airplanes had "NX" numbers....The thought of looking down on the homebuilts never occured to me!

Paul
 
The idea of homebuilt airplanes began to appeal to me as a teenager while I was learning to fly in a Cessna 140. That was in 1957. The first homebuilt I saw was a home brewed single seat parasol powered by an A-65 Continental. My instructor flew it once and said, "it didn't fly worth a damn". A few years later I'd purchased a Cessna 120 and made it to several nearby airshows, where I saw Van fly an aerobatic routine in an airplane I believe was his RV-1, but could have been the prototype RV-3. I thought "neat airplane". A few years later, I was at Klamath Falls, Oregon taxiing out for departure in a Cessna T310R, when a RV-3 taxied out behind us. I didn't even think about where he might be going. We were headed for Eugene, Oregon. We took off first, and when we landed at Eugene that RV-3 was at the gas pump getting gas. I was forever impressed, and knew I had to have an RV someday.
My wife and I still own the Cessna 120, and have owned a RV-6 for a couple of years now. I'm 64 years young now and still loving every minute.

Bob Severns
 
I was half way to my Private ticket and was starting to think about buying and owning an airplane. I looked at many options: partnerships, buying an older bird on my own, or renting forever. For awhile I was heavily interested in the older Mooneys (M20C's, and older M20J's). But they have issues too: expensive maintenance, and avionics much too old for my tastes - I wanted something newer but not as boring as a 172. And I couldn't afford a M20J built in the 90s.

One day, while browsing Trade-A-Plane I ran across a Lancair Legacy. I looked at the stats and the price and said: Wow! It cruises how fast? And you can make one? Woot! After that I spent maybe 4 months researching and lurking on the Lancair mailing lists.

Then I went to Oshkosh last year (2005).

I went solely for the purpose to get more information on Lancair and attend their forums and ended up walking away (1 day later) with my mind set to build an RV. And so here I am.
 
When I knew they existed.

I accepted experimentals the moment that I knew they existed.

About 4 years ago, I was building my fourth radio controlled airplane - a 1/5 scale Skybolt (with a sweet smoke system). I was looking up information on the internet about it and I stumbled across a builder?s website that was building a full size Skybolt. After studying the site, I thought to myself ?I can do that.?

OK, so I decided on the RV-8A over the Skybolt. It is a good thing because the RV is much more practical and will take me half the time to build.

I will, however, be using the same paint scheme on my RV as my radio controlled Skybolt.
 
I lost the "Eww, what's that?" about experimentals/homebuilts at the 1998 NAS Willow Grove airshow. I had finished my second flight as a crewmember in the CH-53E a couple hours earlier, and was wandering around looking at the static displays; one of them was a Lancair. This was the first homebuilt I had seen that wasn't some wood-and-fabric thing that only appealed to eccentrics and WWI enthusiasts, and it was by far the coolest-looking civilian aircraft on the field. If an F-14 hadn't been a static display too, it would have been the coolest-looking airplane at the show. I talked to the owner for about 20 minutes, and it was obvious that he was a "proud papa". I'd had nearly-zero interest in civilian aircraft up to this point because everything I'd seen that wasn't Trump-priced was boring-looking and slow.


I really started admiring experimentals/homebuilts during A&P school last year, when I started getting much closer to GA airplanes than I ever had before. I also started reading GA News, and really started thinking seriously about getting a Sport Pilot license and an LSA. I figured that for $40-50K I could have a nice aircraft that wasn't older than me, and I could live with 120 knots - after all, I was used to cross-country flight at 130-150 knots in the 53.
Then in early December, I stumbled over Dan Checkoway's site while Google-ing for something one night... I opened his site at about 10PM that night - the next time I looked at the clock, it was 3AM :eek: . I was hooked on the RV at that point.
At Christmas, one of my in-laws in town from Oregon told me he was going to build an RV-9A, and that was the clincher. I decided in the week between Christmas and New Year's that I was gonna abandon building the off-road truck that had been my hobby up to that point, and get my PPL and build an RV-9A. Needless to say, my wife's much happier about me spending big buck$ on an airplane that she'll enjoy a lot more than a rockcrawling/mudbogging truck...
 
Controllers Accepting Experimentals

I've shared this story before. I was flying my RV-6 out to Key West after Sun-n-Fun in 2001. I was about 10 miles behind a Cherokee driver. I was listening in on the NAS Approach frequency as he called in. If you are not familiar with the Naval Air Station down there, it is direcly to the east of Key West International. You typically have to fly around their "little airport" to get to Key West.
Florida13.jpg
Florida14.jpg

So the Cherokee driver calls in and the NAS controller routes him due south out over the ocean to avoid the NAS airspace. I prepare for the same instructions as I make my initial call. Instead, the controller askes me to make a high speed, low altitude pass right down his runway so he can get a look at my airplane. Now, how cool is that? So I kindly oblige and we exchange pleasantries. He immediately hands me off to Key West, who approves me for landing. I'm already waiting for my taxi to arrive by the time the Cherokee driver pulls up.
 
Last edited:
You only wish!

f1rocket said:
as I make my initial call. Instead, the controller askes me to make a high speed, low altitude pass right down his runway so he can get a look at my airplane.
Click to expand...

Randy, I'll bet you'd give anything to do that again.... In your F1 !!! Woo hoo! :eek:
 
aadamson said:
Randy, I'll bet you'd give anything to do that again.... In your F1 !!! Woo hoo! :eek:
Click to expand...
You bet. I should get the chance this Spring. I'm heading down that way once I finish painting.
 
I converted when I became and A&P and learned how retarded the parts availablity is for certified birds, and all the restrictions to modifications. I wich I could make our Cardinal experiemental.
 
A well known Aero E turned me on

I worked for a small aircraft design company about 10-12 years ago. The owner of the company was the cheif designer for the most current Mooney (sometime in the 80's) and the new Sino Swearengin biz jet. He explained to me that all the real new things in aviation where coming from the experimental field. I started reading his Kitplanes magazines while at work. At that time the net was just getting started and there was a few good websites about KR's. I followed that plane for a little while then in the late 90's I read about the RV9 and decided I had to have one. I started my flight instruction shortly after and have been flying my 9a for about a year and just started on my HRII. Before that I learned about aviation from my grandfather who was a General in the airforce and flew in three wars. Anything smaller than his P47 was a toy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top