Page 1 of 1

RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 12:50 pm
by drseti
Just flew Mitch's RV-12 ELSA for 0.4 hours. Here are my first impressions:

Overall, both stable and very responsive. Noticeably faster than my SportStar in cruise. Needs lots of right rudder in slow flight, even when turning left. Doesn't want any rudder at cruise speeds, even when doing standard turns. Because of the castering nosewheel, crosswind taxiing requires brakes. X-wind limit for TO seems to be about 10 knots; she can handle 15 for landing.

Stalls power off produce lots of buffeting, and you have to force the break by increasing back pressure. Power on stalls require a huge deck angle. Unlike the SportStar, it is not necessary to reduce throttle in power-on stall recovery.

Roll rate is extremely fast, and control pressures light. Landing, set up 60 kts on downwind with full flapperons. Powering off produces about a 400 fpm descent. Over the fence at fifty, you can flare with no float. Because of the castering nosewheel, it is not necessary to neutralize the rudders before letting the nosewheel down - it shakes slightly and straightens out all by itself.

Brief summary: I'm smiling. :D

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 7:05 pm
by c162pilot
So Paul, given your brief time in the RV-12 and given that it is now in as close to serial production as a plane can be and given the attractive price, do you think that the RV-12 is the S-LSA for training and flight schools going forward (I should qualify by saying for those who want to fly low wing airplanes).?

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:52 pm
by drseti
Assuming that. Vans and Synergy continue with volume production, and can hold their prices where they are now, then the RV-12 becomes very attractive for those flight schools that want a low wing, all metal LSA. They have the advantage of being able to provide excellent product and parts support, and comsequently have a very loyal following.

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 9:02 pm
by c162pilot
Paul, did you see the folks from the Aviation Access Project at Expo, I looked for them on Thursday but did not see them. Last year they had a big presence with Bristell. Also what was your general impression of Expo this year compared to last year? I attended Thursday this year and Saturday last year so I fear my experience may be an apples to oranges comparison.

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 9:46 pm
by drseti
The Aviation Access Project guys made a big splash at Expo last year. Conspicuous by their absence this year. I spoke with Barry Pruitt of Bristell, and he told me that AAP wanted him to advance them aircraft to sell into partnerships. Barry said that he'd be happy to sell them aircraft as they come into the country, but could not order them on his nickel to put into their inventory. AAP apparently never came through with any Bristell orders. Does that tell you anything?

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 9:55 pm
by drseti
C162, in answer to your second question: fewer exhibitors this year than last, but the big players were here more in earnest. So, we're beginning to see who the survivors are going to be if there is some winnowing out. The crowd was about the same, but there was no twilight airshow this year, so folks left a little earlier in the day, all three evenings. Those who did come seemed to me more serious customers than prior years (which were dominated by tire kickers).

All three of my safety seminars were well attended, by serious folks. One client asked me to do a pre-purchase inspection for him of a used SLSA that was being brokered on the field. I gave it a once-over, inspected the logbooks, took it for a test flight, found it pretty much as advertised, and then told him to go make his best deal. He was definitely ready to buy.

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 10:41 pm
by c162pilot
Paul, I must say I was impressed by the show of force shown by Tecnam this year. It appeard to me that others who where there loudly last year where either not there or had toned down their presence.

With regard to Aviation Access Project, this link below to their Blog attempts to tell a different story...

http://aviationaccessproject.blogspot.com/

Regards,
Stephen

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:19 pm
by drseti
The blog and the company website tell completely different stories, Stephen. Look at the latter - the top page is still featuring the Bristell, not the Skycatcher!

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 10:02 am
by dstclair
I wish AAP well but their track record is non-existent. Came on the scene with a bang with official low wing partner Bristell and high wing partner Flight Design. Announced their first flight center Kissimmee in the spring but the website still says 'coming soon' after 8 months. Now they're going to open their first center in Tennessee with a SkyCatcher. Lot of talk and announcements but nothing tangible. Hmmm.

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 10:06 am
by Merlinspop
I ran AAP's numbers multiple times and I couldn't find anything about them that was more attractive than forming a club or partnership. Total buy-in for 8 people worked out to something like 1.3X the purchase price of the aircraft, and the sum of the fees far exceeded what one would normally expect to pay if a group self-managed the aircraft. Maybe they're attractive to those who just want to be able to jump in a plane and go fly and make no further effort other than writing checks.

And wrt Bristell... their website is atrocious. Just terrible. Everyone in the LSA marketplace should look at Cubcrafter's website and forum. THEY understand what having an internet and social media presence is all about. And their sales and demographics show that these things DO lead to sales.

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:21 pm
by MovingOn
.......

Re: RV-12 demo

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:50 pm
by Merlinspop
MovingOn wrote:The main problem I had was you did not have an equity position in an airplane. They maintained ownership of the airplane. If you wanted out, you had to find someone to buy your share. If they went bankrupt, you would be left with a worthless piece of paper.
Right! I forgot about that. That's a non-starter for me, too. If you're going to pay an 'ownership' amount of money to buy in, then you should BE an owner.