I think you may be thinking of one of Ole's earlier designs called the Wasp;Good point dear addicted2climbing,
AAK's Hornet has shoulder-mounted wings that meet two criteria.
A - it's wings are mounted high enough to keep them out of the weeds.
B - Pilots can see both above and below their wings.
With Van's experience balancing their RV-12, they can probably design a Hornet-ish airplane with zero forward sweep in the wings.
Ole's a really nice guy, have dropped in numbers of times on my way past. Would have liked to do something with him, but our ambitions are at the opposite end of the price range.Here is something nobody mentioned...
I had been in talks with AAK (Australian Aircraft Kits) for a good long time prior to Covid trying to become a rep in the USA for the Hornet STOL. I contacted them too late however, as they have been in talks for a few months prior with a MAJOR kit manufacturer in the USA and were close to closing a deal. I still offered to be a west coast rep with whoever they go with but in my mind I always thought Vans was who he was talking to. I even mentioned it once and he sort of gave me a vague enough answer to make me think I hit the nail on the head. It might be easier for Vans to assume a working design already proven in the harsh backcountry over a new design on their own into a market they have no experience in... I would not be surprised if this is what happens..
Kind of hope it is as AAK was so mired in backorders that they would only consider a fully functioning shop to manufacturer everything here over shipping kits as they were already too busy. I wanted to import kits so it did not work out in the end for me.
The Hornet STOL is a bit less refined than the typical Vans aircraft so if it does end up being him, I am sure he will change it up a bit.
If only someone could invent something like a small camera that you could have a screen inside to represent that view, sigh.Dear Rataplan,
My biggest beef about the high wings - on Cessnas - is that I lose sight of the runway while turning onto final approach. Van had best install plenty of windows in the cabin ceiling if he wants perfect visibility for his new RV-15.
if it doesnt have struts where do you tie the moose?
It is.. its why I tried to import it. Would sell well to ranchers and STOL people. As Cheapracer said, he is far to busy with backorders for ready to fly aircraft to even consider building kits. If Vans is not the guy and the person he was working with fell short due to C19, I still poke Ole every few months with an email to remind him I'm still here interested.That Hornet series looks really really well-done.
Best new product web page ever!
Hopefully more will come out in the next few months.....................
- High wing,
- More than one seat
- Backcountry capable,
- Total performance
I visited the Mothership twice, and each time got a peek into their prototype shop. The first time, when I was helping a friend pick up their engine and finishing kit, we got a look at the RV-12, which was just then being finalized. Along the way they had changed just about every part of the airplane from what they had built for the prototype, and they had a sizeable pile of scrap parts from successive levels of development. The basic configuration was there, and the shape was about the same, but the wing had gotten larger in both chord and span, and the fuselage had been pretty much completely revised to match the wing. In the end, they had something that had sweet flying characteristics, was (relatively) easy to build from a very complete kit, and the finished airplane met both the spirit and letter of the E-LSA rules. So I have complete confidence that Vans is going to work diligently to get this just right.Best new product web page ever!
We (the entire aviation community) need to be giving Van's a huge award for NOT putting some ridiculous burst of renderware, "clown puke", and "artist's conception" out there, complete with a bunch of horses**t claims like everyone else seems to love doing. The fact that they are very loudly not doing that, and managing to have a little fun in the process, speaks volumes to their credibility and sincerity.They won't needlessly keep us in the dark, but they will also be careful not to paint themselves into a corner with premature claims and conjecture.
I think you hit the nail on the head with it being a sheet metal equivalent of a Bearhawk. They will be doing something to get it handling better than a Bearhawk. When I flew the prototype Bearhawk, I told Bob I wouldn't change a thing. Then he said, let me show you something. Nose sticking up at the sky with the airspeed on zero and doing tight 360's to the right and left. I started my flight instruction in a 150 HP SuperCub and decided the SC is a has been.Maybe also look at this from the design engineer's perspective for a second, and think what airplane doesn't exist in the marketplace (or is not easily available), but would serve a useful purpose.
Something that can get in and out of the back country at reasonably short strips (500-700 ft), but also has enough speed and range to go further/faster without having to stop for fuel as often. And something that is more fun to fly than the majority of existing STOL airplanes. But something built out of sheet metal because not everyone loves fabric or wants to be terrified of every thorny bush.
The best airplane that meets the first three requirements is the Bearhawk. It's cleaner and faster than many others, it can operate out of a fairly short strip, and it can go a fair distance. It also handles significantly better than some other bush type aircraft. So if you made a sheet metal equivalent of a Bearhawk, you'd have something fairly desirable to a good number of people.