Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I’m 4 to 5 years out from retirement and I’m  going to need a project.  Tailwheel endorsement is a bucket list item and the thought of getting a repairman’s certificate and doing my own condition inspections and maintenance is very appealing. I would probably keep the Mooney; looking at an RV 14.

  • Like 1
Posted

No, but I looked hard at a Cozy and an RV-7A. Even ordered plans and visited the RV factory and took a test flight. They might still do those, I don't know.

Crossed my mind to buy a used RV at some point. Some good deals when you consider the work. But you did say you wanted a project... :)

  • Like 1
Posted

Just looked at a buddies RV12 project yesterday.  He's got about 8 work months in it so far.  He's finished the tail and a wing.  I would probably go with the RV14 too or the 8A like the gent above.  

I just realized you are at KSEE.  My buddy is building his RV12 at KSEE.  He's in the hangars just North of the Sheriffs Dept area.  He usually works there in the mornings.  

Posted
10 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

My dad and I built an RV-4 slow build wing and empennage kit back in the 80s.  I think if we hadn’t also had the M20C that I still own to this day we might have actually finished it.  The kits are pre-punched and self rigging now, though, and less work is required.

The newer kits are pre-punched. The 3, 4 & 6 kits are not. The older kits are also being discontinued in a couple of months.

https://www.vansaircraft.com/2025/07/entering-retirement-the-rv-3-rv-4-and-rv-6/

Posted
40 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Nostalgia notwithstanding, why anyone would build one of the older kits now that the newer ones are available is beyond me.

If you want a single place, the RV3 still makes sense. I agree that the 8 is an improvement over the 4, and it is available in tricycle gear, whereas the 4 is not. Similarly, the 7 is better than the 6. The 10, 12, 14, and 15 are very different than the "typical" Vans products.

Posted
16 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

I see the appeal, but I think spending two years going to A&P school instead would be a better use of the time.

I’ve been toying with that idea as well; conveniently there’s a 147 school 15 mins drive from my home

Posted
On 7/19/2025 at 4:48 PM, bluehighwayflyer said:

Exact same here.  It looks like tuition would total about 15K.  

A lot cheaper than the kit and engine. :D

Posted
25 minutes ago, Jackk said:

I’d go with a Harmon rocket, though sadly RV is going to stop selling the narrow body RV kits soon 

 

https://www.harmonrocket.com/

Would be awesome to own and fly but that 540 is a lot of weight hanging off the front of that airframe.  I've wondered if it really makes sense longer term.  

Posted
9 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

Would be awesome to own and fly but that 540 is a lot of weight hanging off the front of that airframe.  I've wondered if it really makes sense longer term.  

 Personally I’d want a 520 or 550,  I like my planes like my cars, small frame big engine.

looks fun, aerobatic, good cross country speed, tailwheel, outside of a nemesis nxt the rocket seems pretty ideal 

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Jackk said:

This also looks sweet, all carbon 2 place p51.

the rotax is a little underpowered for this IMO but still 150kt cruise, heard there were some folks working on LS engine installs though 

https://www.scalewings.com/sw-51-mustang/


sw-51-mustang-un-wardbird-replica.jpg

 

Two-Seater-700x467.jpg

I can't find the link now, but a number of these were using not only LS engines but a modern marine V-12 that apparently fits nicely.   

Posted
4 hours ago, EricJ said:

I can't find the link now, but a number of these were using not only LS engines but a modern marine V-12 that apparently fits nicely.   


the falconer V12?  That was the thunder mustangs which are a different kit, but also composite and very cool 

Posted
9 hours ago, Jackk said:

I’d go with a Harmon rocket. . . 

The RV crowd says insurance on these is either not obtainable or eye-watering if you can get it.

Posted
Just now, KLRDMD said:

The RV crowd says insurance on these is either not obtainable or eye-watering if you can get it.


 You don’t need to buy insurance, just saying

Posted
Just now, Jackk said:


 You don’t need to buy insurance, just saying

Of course not, but insurance availability and price give you an idea of the relative risk of flying that airframe/engine combination.

  • Like 2
Posted
15 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

Of course not, but insurance availability and price give you an idea of the relative risk of flying that airframe/engine combination.


 To a point yeah, but I think with good training it’s not too much of a factor. 
 

 End of the day you know you best, and can always get a CFI or experienced pilot to go up if you want a fresh opinion :)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.