Why not an RV12 ?

[Case]

Hi All,

 

Two years ago I cancelled my order for a Zodiac XL kit after realising that there were some serious problems with the design. I've been following Zeniths solution to the problems and sincerely hope that all goes well for the XL in the future. Time will tell.

 

Time is the problem though and as I'm regaining the enthusiasm to start a project I've been looking at the Vans RV12. As expected from Vans it looks like a well designed aircraft that would be a pleasure to build and fly.

 

Van's Aircraft - Aircraft Models: RV-12 Introduction

 

As part of my research into the project I'd like to get some opinions from members. Why would/wouldn't you build an RV12 ?.

 

My only dislike so far is that the fuel is in the fuselage and not in the wings. This is offset though by the fact that the wings can be reasonably easily removed.

 

Please, any opinions would be most appreciated.

 

 

[Spin]

Reasons not to: nit-picking details only, I don't like the no options dash without steam gauges and I agree about the fuel location.

 

Reasons to build one: Pedigree - Vans have a long history of getting designs right, they also have the reputation of their experimental fleet riding on the RV 12's back to some extent and will have gone the extra mile to get this one sorted before release.

 

Kits have a good reputation for relative ease of building, followed a blog for a while of a bloke who built one after completing an RV 7, he was very complimentary about the improvements.

 

+++

 

If I were in a position to build now, the RV12 would be my choice.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Pro: Fastest, highest usuable load aircraft you are going to find for that kind of money. It's Van's, it's good.

 

Con: 2000 hours to build, can get pretty expensive.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Uhm, scrap that, I read RV-10. Idiot.

 

RV-12 looks like a good LSA to me! :D

 

 

[Jay]

Have a look at the Sonex site where they have a comparison table with the RV-12 and others, may be of interest

 

 

[dazza 38]

I have been checking it out for a while also, just waiting to see when the quick built kit comes out.

 

 

[Guest Sharp End]

Hmmm, does that look familiar? Very Millicer-ish!

 

 

[slartibartfast]

I really hope you have a fly of the Morgan Sierra before you buy one. I think they compare extremely favourably - especially on price and build time and performance and capacity and wings coming off easily and space and handling and Australianness, but in other areas too.

 

 

[crashley]

HI I am currently building an rv 12 and am finding it to be a great project

 

and easy to build pm me if you want more info

 

ashley

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

This being an E-LSA, when building in Australia, does that also mean absolultely no modifications if you want it LSA registered and fly it it 600KG?

 

 

[bra83d]

Flew the RV-12 in september last year at the vans factory, beutifully balanced and good speeds considering a that stage it didn't have spats or fairings, Currently undergoing flight testing now. flys very similar to the sportstar, about half the price, it was a fairly crap day and in the cruise shows about 118kts indicated.

 

If the funds allowed would order one in a heart beat.

 

thats my 2 bobs worth anyhow.

 

Cheers Brad

 

 

[Case]

Thanks all for the comments.

 

I've been doing some calculations and if I build it like Vans intends it will cost about A$85K. That's complete, fly away, paint and all.

 

In the US they have no choices, as this is the way the kit was approved for their LSA class. We have some choices to save money here in Australia. We don't have to go with the Vans Avionics kit which is about A$16K. And there might be some savings on the power plant but I'll talk to Bert Flood about that.

 

I know $85K is a lot of money but for that you would have a pretty schmick glass cockpit aircraft and if your realistic about the actual cost of other aircraft choices it's fairly competative.

 

Thanks again for the advice.

 

 

[Vorticity]

I reckon if you found a school that turns over a 912S each year and then fitted it out with a basic instrument pack than you would have a bargain.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

If you make mods, can you still register it as LSA in Australia? I doubt it, so you'd have to go standard RA-Aus and lose 56KG of usable weight.

 

I'm not sure, but I would check it with the office to be sure!

 

 

[Case]

Good point Basscheffers. After reading the description of LSA on the RA-Aus site I think I understand a bit more.

 

Essentially LSA has 2 types of certificate -

 

A Special Certificate of Airworthiness which applies to factory built ready-to-fly aircraft.

 

An Experimental Certificate which is for kit built aircraft.

 

The kit built aircraft must be built exactly to the manufacturers specifications with no variations. In the case of the RV-12, Vans will issue an "LSA Statement of Compliance" only after you have purchased ALL the component kits. This statement of compliance will be needed in order to register the aircraft as LSA in Australia either under RA-Aus or GA.

 

Outside of the above the aircraft would need to be Amateur built and 544 kg MTOW. At that weight it would be 5 kg short for a full tank of fuel and 2 people on board. From my perspective that wouldn't be a problem because I would usually fly on my own.

 

Question is would it be better to spend the money and keep it LSA. Better resale? Who knows?

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Personally, I would spend the money and keep it LSA. The glass as well as the weight would be good for resale.

 

That said, we still have 600KG across the board in the pipeline and your modified RV-12 could be upgraded at that time. If it happens.

 

 

[RetiredRacer]

600 kg has been aproved

 

The 600 kg MTOW has been approved (late last year). We now just have to wait for the paperwork to go through the Attorney Generals office (April-May hopefully).

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

This wouldn't be the first piece of legislation in recent years that "has been approved and just needs some signatures". Some of those pieces have now been help up indefinitely.

 

I wouldn't make a long-term decission based on it being in place! :(

 

 

[codlocks]

I'm building a RANS S-19 (Venterra) which is similar to the RV-12 but I (and most other I've spoken to) think the S-19 has a distinct advantage in the looks dept. Both designs use pull rivets. I looked at the RV-12 but decided on the S-19 mainly for two safety reasons; the fuel is in the wings and the canopy is a slider not a tilt-up type. The wings do come off the S-19 also but not in 60 seconds like on the RV-12. The manuals are quite good for the S-19 but I believe this is an area where Vans people excelled (though I haven't seen them).

 

If you like the RV-12 it's probably worth having a look at the S-19 for comparison. All the holes line up perfectly and although the -19 is very high in part count, it does go together extremely well. RANS also have alot of experience with Rotax engines and make a good engine install kit.

 

In summary, I think you've probably got two very good designs from two very good companies.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Is there any real statistics on sliders vs. tilt and wing tanks vs. fuselage tanks safety?

 

Sound to me like it is mostly in the mind; yes: the fuel is closer to you, but for the aircraft to be so deformed it ruptures the tank, how deformed were you to begin with? And what about ripping open the wings on vines while the fuselage is in tact on the path?

 

And being upside down, I doubt the slider will be any easier to open than a tilt! In fact, I would argue the oposite is true; even if upright or sideways, the slider will need much less deformation to jam than the tilt canopy would, no?

 

 

[Case]

Thanks for the S-19 info Codlocks. Looks an impressive aircraft to.

 

The rules for LSA in Australia are a bit fluid at the moment. I ask the Tech Mananger Steve Bell for advise on my options for the RV-12 and he gave me quite a detailed reply.

 

Essentially it boils down to that any Australian RV-12 kit built aircraft will be classed as experimental LSA and as such will allow changes such as different engine types and Avionics. It will retain it's 600Kg LSA weight limit. It cannot be included in the Amateur built category because the kit is not certified under the 51% rule.

 

It will be registered under RA-Aus as a 19-xxxx

 

 

[Spin]

Thanks for the update, Case. Looks like a good result, 600kg and you can choose your avionics and also source your motor from wherever suits. I understand that the US LSA regs are such that the whole aircraft, including engine kit would need to come from Vans to qualify.

 

Call me old fashioned, but I can easily see a machinery grey panel, fitted with steam guages and a nice piece of glass in the central radio stack.

 

I would also prefer a slider, I love being able to open up the Tecnam Golf to keep the brain temp down on the ground, but it isn't a deal breaker.

 

Hmmm, dreaming at the moment, need to get my shed up first, but the strong AUD makes it an attractive proposition.

 

 

[Guest kozmik]

Thanks for the S-19 info Codlocks. Looks an impressive aircraft to.The rules for LSA in Australia are a bit fluid at the moment. I ask the Tech Mananger Steve Bell for advise on my options for the RV-12 and he gave me quite a detailed reply.

 

Essentially it boils down to that any Australian RV-12 kit built aircraft will be classed as experimental LSA and as such will allow changes such as different engine types and Avionics. It will retain it's 600Kg LSA weight limit. It cannot be included in the Amateur built category because the kit is not certified under the 51% rule.

 

It will be registered under RA-Aus as a 19-xxxx

As of the 30-09-10 RV12 has been listed on FAA 51% list so can now be built in the Amateur built category but MTOW of 544 kg.untill the 600 kg is passed .

 

 

[denmit]

Like Crashley, I'm building an RV-12. I will register ABE (i.e. VH Experimental) but as said elsewhere, the RV-12 is now accepted by the FAA (and therefore RAAus) as meeting the 51% owner built rule, and is eligible for the Experimental category.

 

I did my research on all the possibilities before committing and found the 12 the best compromise - as everything in aviation is. The Rans S-19 was initially very attractive but reports from the US are that actual built aeroplanes are coming out 20 to 30 pounds over the BEW weight quoted by RANS. That is fuel/range/payload lost and it made the S-19 less attractive performance-wise, but I agree that it is a very good looking LSA and, yes, I would prefer the fuel somewhere other than sharing my space.

 

But the winners for the 12 are Vans reputation for an easily built high quality kit (which has certainly proved correct so far), simple systems, relatively short build time (currently averaging 750 hours), great flying qualities (born out by the pilots of the 60+ currently flying), "plug and play" wiring (up to 200 hours to do it yourself - plus the frustration factor trouble shooting the stuff ups - been there and done that) and good performance (most flying with wheel pants are right on the FAA speed limit at 5200 RPM). Two adults plus some luggage at 115 knots over 300 Nm plus reserves - but still a lively and responsive "around the patch" fun machine - what more can you ask for for $90K?

 

Can't wait to get my bum in it - but am enjoying the building process too.

 

Just get into it - whatever it is you decide on.

 

Cheers, Denmit

 

PS: My current budget for a completed 12 with the dollar at parity is $AUD90K including freight, GST and paint.