RV8 aerobatic limitations

[foxmoth]

Snap rolls 80-110 mph

Actually allows a pretty fast entry speed for flicks - maximum entry speed in a Bulldog for example is 80kts (92 MPH).

[javelin]

Yes, but that's British Foxy

[waldopepper42]

Damn good fun aeroplanes nonetheless.

Absolutely agree! I have been lucky enough to fly in (though not as P1) Vans RV4, 6,7,8 and 9a, and they're superb aeroplanes. Didn't mean to criticise the mark, it was just the flick rolling bit that I had doubts about!

Thanks for the info, Mark - obviously a lot better informed than me

[jonnoboy]

Anyone own one that would be prepared to show it off in the camridgeshire/east anglia region. Contribute costs of course!

Thanks for the great replies!

JB

[smarthawke]

jonnoboy

Couple of places to make contact:

RV Sqn through the Yahoo group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rvsqn/


East Anglia RV society:

http://www.rvee.org.uk/

Also have a look at:

http://www.rvuk.co.uk/

http://www.rvforum.co.uk/YaBB.pl

It could be a very expensive ride.....!!

[AirScrew]

The PFA certification for -8 Aeros is 703Kg.

So Aeros with a P2 are permitted, subject to fuel and diets...Yes???

[Mark 1]

The factory introduced a revised (-1) wing kit in 2000 and allowed an increase in aerobatic (+6/-3G) gross weight from 1550lb to 1600lb (726 kg).
This increase hasn't filtered through to the LAA limitations yet.. I don't know why that is, as they are normally happy to go along with Van's recommendations. Possibly they want analysis or testing results to support the case.

In any event, a typical RV-8 comes out at 490-520kg empty. So add two 50th percentile adult males at 77 kg each and you still have room for 30-60kg (40-80 litres) of fuel without exceeding the limit for aeros. Typically CG will be in range too. Heavier engines and props will keep the CG forward but limit the payload, whereas lighter, wooden prop combinations may need to ballast the front baggage bay to avoid the rear CG aero limit.

If the LAA get around to accepting the 50lb increase in aero gross weight, then the option to take heavier crew and more fuel on dual aero sorties would make a useful difference.

[markkal]

SORRY, I am unable to space my text with paragraphs, don't know why...................... Hi folks!!!!! Seems that the whole discussion revolves around plain G load tolerances...Please consider the following; About flicks: What about torsional loads on engine mount ( in and against torque) and fuselage ??? No instrument to record them, definitely a primary consideration during design of an aerobatic machine. Increased loads ( Up to 50% as compared with the G meter loads recorded in he cockpit ) on the stalling side of wing during flicks.. Control surfaces; Rudder and elevator are deliberately oversized on aerobatic planes.. Excursion of these surfaces are also greater. Normal sized tailplanes will undoubtedly allow for a loop, though with a much greater radius, and would offer poor handling characteristics at low speeds.. The wings of an Extra or Sukhoi are fully symmetrical with no incidence, showing similar characteristics in upright or inverted flight. A different story with most experimentals or racers...look at the Cap 10, originally a nice tourer designed by Piel and improved by Mudry. Was born with nice oversized movable surfaces on the tail. But the elliptical non symmetrical wing with dihedral shows peculiar characteristcs during inverted flight, spins and flicks. The new Cap 10C carbon reinforced lower aspect ratio aerofoil had to be redesigned in some respects because of tendency to flick under negative dynamic loads... Think about a negative recovery ( -3G ) after a vertical dive with an RV, would'nt like to experiment that!!! Better have a Christen inverted system fitted to your plane if you don't want the engine to starve of lack of lubrication, with that red pressure lamp blinking !!!!!!! Better gain some experience with an aerobatic instructor... Wear a parachute Have plenty of room below ( Height )when experimenting Keep the entry speeds for flicks at 1,3 VS.... Remember: stall speed increases as the square root of the load factor. So don't panic if your butt feels some shudders during dynamic loads indicating a stall... just relieve pressure on the stick Remember also: When speed doubles the load factor, with same inputs applied, increases at the square root...e.g. 4 times !!!!! In an Extra or Sukhoi, with light control forces you'll find out real quick what I mean, but these machines have a great margin before reaching + or - 10G's Then structural limits are well above that 50% too 100% above. So study carefully your flight envelope and respect it !!!

[Thegoodshepherd]

I can testify that the RV6 will aileron/slow/barrel and snap (flick) roll
well - as Vans manual says its a manuever approached with caution
but it will snap nicely if entered at about 110-115 without loading up.
From talking to RV8 pilots its even nicer

the RV6 is a very nice little beastie all around - the one I did Aeros in
was half way through a "fly the borders" of the US by a then in-law.

Shepherd

[will5023]

Hi Guys, sorry to late reply on this one, yes theRV8,RV6 RV7 and 7A(nosewheel) are now cleared for aeros, reason I know this....I did the test flight for the RV7, as the LAA wanted a full spin test with the wheel at the correct end of the airframe, it does all the manuveres as mentioned, although I did not flick roll her at the time.

Will.