ARV Super 2 Opinions?
Simplicate and Add Lightness
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: EGSG, mainly
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ARV Super 2 Opinions?
Anyone have any experience of this little beastie?
I found an oblique reference on the 'net somewhere to 'problems with the Hewland engine', but I can't find any other info on this?
Looks like a sensible 1st 'plane to me.
I found an oblique reference on the 'net somewhere to 'problems with the Hewland engine', but I can't find any other info on this?
Looks like a sensible 1st 'plane to me.
In Alt in original Hewland engined form they only had 75hp which didn't really cut it. The original (2-stroke) engine suffered from lubrication problems due to an inherent fault. By the time the problem was solved the ARV's reputation had suffered badly.
All the ones still flying with a Hewland should be OK now as long as the mods were incorporated. One which suffered a snapped crankshaft has been re-engined with a Rotax 914S (I think it's an S) but I read in Pilot that this involved putting a lead weight in the tail to bring the C of G back within limits which didn't do the load lifting ability any good. At least one other has been re-engined with a Mid-West rotary which seemed to be a good option.
Cons
a) The Hewland engined ones did run out of puff on a hot day.
b) The nose wheel arrangement looks a tad ungainly
c) The steps into the cockpit were a bit fragile for the training environment
d) No heater (unforgiveable with a liquid cooled engine)
e) Limited seat adjustment
f) Hand brake rather than toe brakes (not as bad as it sounds as the handle was set below the throttle and was easy to use)
g) Minimal baggage storage
Pros
a) Fantastic handling and general 'chuckability'
b) Fantastic visibility
c) Stick not yoke
d) Quadrant throttle not Cessna type push-pull
e) Excellent panel layout, everything falls readily to hand
f) Positive ground handling
Overall they are great fun to fly and I have occasionally been tempted to get one myself, preferably one on a PFA Permit rather than a C of A.
All the ones still flying with a Hewland should be OK now as long as the mods were incorporated. One which suffered a snapped crankshaft has been re-engined with a Rotax 914S (I think it's an S) but I read in Pilot that this involved putting a lead weight in the tail to bring the C of G back within limits which didn't do the load lifting ability any good. At least one other has been re-engined with a Mid-West rotary which seemed to be a good option.
Cons
a) The Hewland engined ones did run out of puff on a hot day.
b) The nose wheel arrangement looks a tad ungainly
c) The steps into the cockpit were a bit fragile for the training environment
d) No heater (unforgiveable with a liquid cooled engine)
e) Limited seat adjustment
f) Hand brake rather than toe brakes (not as bad as it sounds as the handle was set below the throttle and was easy to use)
g) Minimal baggage storage
Pros
a) Fantastic handling and general 'chuckability'
b) Fantastic visibility
c) Stick not yoke
d) Quadrant throttle not Cessna type push-pull
e) Excellent panel layout, everything falls readily to hand
f) Positive ground handling
Overall they are great fun to fly and I have occasionally been tempted to get one myself, preferably one on a PFA Permit rather than a C of A.
Simplicate and Add Lightness
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: EGSG, mainly
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks LnS.
Why is there never an easy answer to these things
It looks like a great 'plane - with the wrong engine.
Surely somebody got it right once???
Of course, I'm talking from a personal perspective - other 'planes might suit others perfectly... This one looks perfect for me in every respect save the engine: all metal, tricycle, good value, modern design, etc.
I'm going to have a look at it anyway - who knows?
Why is there never an easy answer to these things
It looks like a great 'plane - with the wrong engine. Surely somebody got it right once???
Of course, I'm talking from a personal perspective - other 'planes might suit others perfectly... This one looks perfect for me in every respect save the engine: all metal, tricycle, good value, modern design, etc.
I'm going to have a look at it anyway - who knows?
In Alt do a check on G-INFO and trace G-OTAL, she's the one with the Rotax engine. The chap who owns it is the UK Rotax dealer so should be easy to trace. I have no idea if it's for sale or not as it has quite a lot of non-standard instrumentation which has been fitted to develop the installation of the Rotax I would assume. I'm sure he'd flog you a Rotax and installation kit if you can find an engineless airframe!
PS We used to run out of steam flying out of Popham when two up. I was 14 stone at the time and the instructor was about 15. If your body mass isn't in this league your problems would also be smaller.
The best advice is see if you can persuade an ARV owner to take you for a whizz about for a reasonable contribution to the costs. That's the best way to make up your mind.
PS I did a chunk of my PPL on G-OTAL
PS We used to run out of steam flying out of Popham when two up. I was 14 stone at the time and the instructor was about 15. If your body mass isn't in this league your problems would also be smaller.
The best advice is see if you can persuade an ARV owner to take you for a whizz about for a reasonable contribution to the costs. That's the best way to make up your mind.
PS I did a chunk of my PPL on G-OTAL
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Spain
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ArV Surer 2
Cher Amis
No doubt, the most horrible aeroplane I have ever flown.
I have never been so frightened in my life in aviation. (18,000hrs )
Go out and buy a BMW. Lots more fun and a great deal safer.
Rgds. FPG
No doubt, the most horrible aeroplane I have ever flown.
I have never been so frightened in my life in aviation. (18,000hrs )
Go out and buy a BMW. Lots more fun and a great deal safer.
Rgds. FPG
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Spain
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ArV Surer 2
Cher Amis
No doubt, the most horrible aeroplane I have ever flown.
I have never been so frightened in my life in aviation. (18,000hrs )
Go out and buy a BMW. Lots more fun and a great deal safer.
Rgds. FPG
No doubt, the most horrible aeroplane I have ever flown.
I have never been so frightened in my life in aviation. (18,000hrs )
Go out and buy a BMW. Lots more fun and a great deal safer.
Rgds. FPG
FaPoGai , you said it twice but didn't explain why it was the most horrible aeroplane you've ever flown? What was so frightening about such a benign little aeroplane?
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Spain
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ARV Super 2
In ltissimus
It was not the lack of a co-pilot and an auto-pilot but the lack of
a co-pilot a navigator a flight engineer a wireless operator and ones own personal steward and DUAL auto-pilots.
LowNSlow
Twice was a result of ageing fingers on the key board.
Why did I not like it? It was cramped,that lever sticking up between the seats was always in the way. The controls were too snappy, it was under powered. AND if it was so good, and so benign,why did it not sell in its thousands?
Rgds. FPG
It was not the lack of a co-pilot and an auto-pilot but the lack of
a co-pilot a navigator a flight engineer a wireless operator and ones own personal steward and DUAL auto-pilots.
LowNSlow
Twice was a result of ageing fingers on the key board.
Why did I not like it? It was cramped,that lever sticking up between the seats was always in the way. The controls were too snappy, it was under powered. AND if it was so good, and so benign,why did it not sell in its thousands?
Rgds. FPG
FaPoGai I'm 6' and 200lbs and I didn't find it any more cramped than a C-150/2.
Controls to snappy? My preference is for aeroplanes that can be flown rather than driven (Pa-28 etc etc).
Underpowered, yes, especially on a warm day with a few chunky chaps in it.
I don't recall any lever between the seats getting in the way. Was that the elevator trim?
The reasons why it wasn't a success? See my 'cons' list in my first post. Basically it was put on the market before it had been developed fully. ARV were not unique in doing this, ask Mr. Gates. I mean, no heater in an aircraft aimed at the Northern hemisphere! Also it was the first (I think) certified 2-stroke. The very conservative flying industry were not convinced. Rightly so in the case of the, again, underdeveloped Hewland engine. I've heard that Mr. Noble was under pressure from his financial backers to get the ARV onto the market ASAP so they could get some money back. This typically short sighted view cost them lots in the end.
A frightening aeroplane? You must have had an incident free flying career to consider an ARV frightening! C'mon, how many recently (last 25 years) certified aircraft are 'frightening' ?
Controls to snappy? My preference is for aeroplanes that can be flown rather than driven (Pa-28 etc etc).
Underpowered, yes, especially on a warm day with a few chunky chaps in it.
I don't recall any lever between the seats getting in the way. Was that the elevator trim?
The reasons why it wasn't a success? See my 'cons' list in my first post. Basically it was put on the market before it had been developed fully. ARV were not unique in doing this, ask Mr. Gates. I mean, no heater in an aircraft aimed at the Northern hemisphere! Also it was the first (I think) certified 2-stroke. The very conservative flying industry were not convinced. Rightly so in the case of the, again, underdeveloped Hewland engine. I've heard that Mr. Noble was under pressure from his financial backers to get the ARV onto the market ASAP so they could get some money back. This typically short sighted view cost them lots in the end.
A frightening aeroplane? You must have had an incident free flying career to consider an ARV frightening! C'mon, how many recently (last 25 years) certified aircraft are 'frightening' ?
