I've never seen VG's on a RV of any type, or big tires. I have a Montana buddy with a 9 that uses 5 GPH, at 150 MPH, with a 5 hour duration, that seems like pretty cheap flying for that fast. It has neither big tires or VG's, he isn't into "that".

Built super light/simple, with Airstreaks and maybe VG's, it seems like a 9 would handle any strip on the sectionals, and still go fairly fast.

One thing about spring rod gear: it gives backwards, A-frame type only does that once! As long as the gear socket is up to the task, it holds up well, at least in the Rans S-7s, I've never bent or broke one since they upgraded them some years ago, (knock on wood) they give before bending it seems. One last thing: I've always wanted and expected Vans to maybe at some point address the high wing STOL marketplace, if they brought to the arena their usual great designing it would be worthy of note I'd expect. I'm not holding my breath.

courierguy wrote: I've always wanted and expected Vans to maybe at some point address the high wing STOL marketplace, if they brought to the arena their usual great designing it would be worthy of note I'd expect.

Oh... Hell YES !!!

A high wing STOL back country kit airplane from Dick Van Grunsven would likely yield 140+ mph on the high end, a solid and safe 40 mph on the slow end, have spectacular low speed handling, get two people plus gear in and out of tight spots, and do it all on 6-8 gph. It would probably look like a prettier version of the Murphy Rebel or a 2/3 size Pilatus Porter/Helio Courier.

I can see the magazine advertising now, a photo of a father and son holding a huge salmon with the airplane on a river bar, pointing out that "the RV grin" can now be found "on a short strip for a long weekend".

Some of the builder type guys here on this forum might ought to think about all jointly signing some sort of letter to the guy.

M6RV6 wrote:I guess we need to define Airport???
Does that mean not paved?
I thought that meant if it had a track down it and was called an airstrip, it was an airport?
I always thought off airport meant it was not an Airport or Airstrip.
I have a grass strip down the middle of my alfalfa field, I figure that's an airstrip??
Whats the consensus out there?
Maybe a hole new thread
GT

M6RV6 I'm right there with ya.

On the other hand, I've used highways, gravel roads and at least one bridge that all had better approaches, useable length, and surfaces than many of the local airstrips. Off-airport can be an upgrade sometimes. The same goes for a lot of the local ski-flying.

We could probably agree that any type of FBO or services (including hot showers and wifi ) automatically disqualifies a place, however enjoyable it might otherwise be.

-DP

[quote="M6RV6"]I guess we need to define Airport???
Does that mean not paved?
I thought that meant if it had a track down it and was called an airstrip, it was an airport?
I always thought off airport meant it was not an Airport or Airstrip.
I have a grass strip down the middle of my alfalfa field, I figure that's an airstrip??
Whats the consensus out there?

To me an airstrip is any surface that you have the skill to land on and take off again without "damaging" your aircraft.

To me an airstrip is any surface that you have the skill to land on and take off again without "damaging" your aircraft.

To much to fly out!!
GT

Rans S-21 Outbound

http://www.rans.com/s-21-outbound

Conventional gear or tri-gear

I'm building a bush RV-8 right now. Plan to fly it on skis and 26" air streaks. Wish I could put a -9 wing in it. I built and flew an RV-9A and that plane was much more solid than my 56 182 and 68 Mooney. The -9A was solid, landed slow, only issue was it had tiny tires and a nose wheel. But like I said, it felt better landing it on a frozen lake than my 182. That 182 creeked and rattled like the gear was going to fall off, perhaps a bit shorter landing and takeoff though. The wings on my Mooney bend and flex way more than the RV. RV is a great solid plane. My only worry is the -8 short wing, probably won't have the slow landing speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JLD wrote:Rans S-21 Outbound

http://www.rans.com/s-21-outbound

Conventional gear or tri-gear

I like the looks of that little plane EXCEPT the VERY short wings. Time and test flights will tell how it performs, but short wings and STOL generally dont combine well.

MTV

I have an RV9 with 800-6 tires on custom gear legs (longer axle to fit the wheel width). Also 3-blade Catto prop for better clearance. Works ok on rough strips but the weakness as noted by others is the gear legs. Problem with the 9 is that it lands slower than most RVs, so the gear legs are longer. With the big (heavy) tires hanging out there, vibration is definitely a concern. Not noticeable on a rough strip, but on smooth strips it can set up a nasty pendulum-like oscillation which is scary at times. This must also be happening on the rough strips but is not so noticeable. Most of the time, I fly it with the standard smaller wheels.

I'm considering building one of the new RANS S21s, which looks like a high-wing RV9 with similar flight characteristics but hopefully more robust gear. I am waiting to see whether the reality matches the design projections.

Greg

Regarding the Rans S-21 MTV wrote:

.
Time and test flights will tell how it performs…

Amen to that.

People have said that the S-21 is the all metal high wing that Vans should have built. Imagine a STOL-SPEED spectrum. On the left planes like the Backcountry Supercubs SQ2/Revision 2 and on the right swift aircraft like the Vans RV8. When Randy Schlitter over at RANS designed the S-21 I think he really liked the speed ingredients of the Vans line, plus he already has a fairly nice line up of slow very STOL capable aircraft in the S7 Courier and S-20 Raven. The S-21’s predicted 155 mph Vc(75%) Cruise, 215 mph Vne, and 38 mph Vso are pretty impressive. As MTV said, time and test flights will tell…

http://media.wix.com/ugd/6e941e_2c9760607fc946acb89191602ab2a731.pdf

The S-21 is a non-LSA 1800 GW design that can crank its 180 HP Titan 340 to full potential. The plane will also be able to be built light because according to a recent post over at the Ransclan website one fellow spoke with Randy at OSH who said if they can get the empty weight to <900 lbs then creating an SLSA might be a possibility. I assume that would be with a lighter engine of course such as a Rotax.

So yeah, maybe there will be a “Vans” aircraft of sorts for off airport, it will just be made by a different company, Rans. Both companies build very fine aircraft.

Some RV's on the lake at Mille Lacs:

Just as an update...

There sure are a lot of completed Vans RVs out there.

Here is a recent tally (dated December 13, 2016) with a breakdown by model.



A total of 9567 completed aircraft is quite a fleet.

Of the bunch, the RV-9 probably is the best candidate for off field operations ? Not a Super Stol, but a 189 mph Cruise, 44 mph Stall, and 300 foot take off and landing (solo pilot) are not half bad.
Performance : https://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv9perf.htm
Specifications : https://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv9specs.htm

RV-9 Tail Wheel

I would not plan for a Van's RV at Fish Lake or Dewey Moore.
Do believe a Staggerwing made it to Dewey Moore.
Only reason I know for going there is to dig up Rutabagas.

That fat-tired RV reminds me of a buddy of mine who had a Grumman Yankee converted to 150hp & tailwheel gear. He wanted to go do some dirt strips so he pulled off his wheel panties & 600x6-15 tires and put on a spare set of 850's I had. He ran them for a short while but discovered that the strips he was worried about were actually in plenty good enough shape for 600's. His airplane sure looked different with them on though!

FWIW while it took off plenty short, his Super Yankee used up a lot of real estate when landing. He had to carry a fair amount of airspeed on final due to the small wing area and non-STOL airfoil.

Here is another Van's RV where they ditched the regular small wheels. Definitely off airport capable.

Denali wrote:Here is another Van's RV where they ditched the regular small wheels. Definitely off airport capable.

I remember when this thing was flying out of Renton, it was a good performer on the water from my observations

Denali wrote:Here is another Van's RV where they ditched the regular small wheels. Definitely off airport capable.

I remember when this thing was flying out of Renton, it was a good performer on the water from my observations

Denali wrote:Here is another Van's RV where they ditched the regular small wheels. Definitely off airport capable.

I remember when this thing was flying out of Renton, it was a good performer on the water from my observations

Denali wrote:Here is another Van's RV where they ditched the regular small wheels. Definitely off airport capable.

I remember when this thing was flying out of Renton, it was a good performer on the water from my observations