Van's announces highwing RV-15

[BJC]

Oh, I'm also guessing that it will use Rotax 912 to 915 engine options.

I’m more curious about the engine selection than strut vs cantilever or tandem vs side by side.


BJC

 

[Pilot-34]

Can’t you pretty well make your own choice of engine since it’s going to be a kit and experimental??

 

[Wanttaja]

Can’t you pretty well make your own choice of engineer since it’s going to be a kit and experimental??

Assuming you meant, "engine," not "engineer." Of course the builder could install anything he or she wanted, as long as it wasn't ELSA. But the kits are likely to be delivered for installing a given model/class of engine...if you install something else, you've got to do all the design work and troubleshooting yourself. Van's strongly recommends people don't switch engines.

Besides, I think Byron's comment was more pointed at trying to gain some insight into what class of airplane it's going to be. If Van's is using a Rotax 912, it's a two-seat airplane, relatively small, and it's intended to compete with Zenair. If it's using an O-540, it's quite possibly a four-seater like the Bearhawk. Something intermediate points at a Carbon Cub fighter.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Dillpickle]

if it doesnt have struts where do you tie the moose?

She stays home.....

 

[Tiger Tim]

Are we making predictions?

Put me down for all metal, two seat side-by-each, single strut braced and untapered wings, designed around an O-320 or O-360. Almost certainly tailwheel and trike landing gear options. The low-speed end will be taken care of by a well thought out airfoil choice, VGs, and reasonably long span flaps, nothing exotic. Generally I don’t expect a world beater in any respect but competent in all, and I suspect two seats is the place to start so that they can later up-sell happy customers a four seater if this one’s successful.

 

[Deuelly]

Oh, I'm also guessing that it will use Rotax 912 to 915 engine options.

That said, it will be fun to see if I'm right about any of this.

Every back country pilot I talk to is trying to figure out how to get more power out of the engine they have. I think the 912/915 option would be starting at a disadvantage. That's why Just Aircraft has a big engine option now.

Brandon

 

[Kyle Boatright]

I'd bet on a 2+2 (or 2+1) airplane with a big Lycoming - either an O-360 or the IO-390. That could give them and airplane with a dual personality - A true short field airplane with a pilot or a pilot and one passenger, or true cross-country utility with a pilot and 2 or 3 passengers.

 

[Vigilant1]

I'd bet on a 2+2 (or 2+1) airplane with a big Lycoming - either an O-360 or the IO-390. That could give them and airplane with a dual personality - A true short field airplane with a pilot or a pilot and one passenger, or true cross-country utility with a pilot and 2 or 3 passengers.

Maybe, and it could make a lot of folks happy. Such a plane would be an aluminum Glasair Sportsman, and like that plane it could have a lot of utility and versatility.

 

[Victor Bravo]

A majority of Van's 10 million customers are familiar with the Lycoming engines, prefer them, have flown with them, and may have one lying around because of a damaged RV-X. That will be on their mind in all likelihood.

 

[Wanttaja]

A majority of Van's 10 million customers are familiar with the Lycoming engines, prefer them, have flown with them, and may have one lying around because of a damaged RV-X. That will be on their mind in all likelihood.

Here's the breakdown of engines installed on Van's aircraft, as of 1 January this year.

Engine	Count​
LYCOMING	5018​
(None Specified)	1008​
AMA/EXPR	835​
ROTAX	597​
SUPERIOR	301​
MATTITUCK	193​
CONT MOTOR	70​
SUBARU	37​
TITAN	34​
ECI	22​
VIKING	9​
MAZDA	8​
EAGLE IVEX	7​
ULPOWER	5​
CONT	3​
JABIRU	3​
JB ENGINES	3​
FORD	2​
GM	2​
CUBCRAFTER	1​
EGGENFELLN	1​
FAIRCHILD	1​
FRANKLIN	1​
G & N	1​
HONDA	1​

This includes both EAB and SLSA/ELSA RV-12s.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Victor Bravo]

I believe five of the first six groups listed fit into the general "Lycoming" category.

 

[Tiger Tim]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, one RV has a Fairchild??!!. Who else needs pics of this Ranger RV?

 

[Wanttaja]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, one RV has a Fairchild??!!. Who else needs pics of this Ranger RV?

Ha! Interesting. FAA listing is N261Y, listed as an "Evans Body Shop RV-4."

However, looking at the picture, it's obviously not a VANS RV-4....

Ron Wanttaja

 

[cblink.007]

What we saw in the proto shop then never came to fruition. I can't tell you about it, but I can say they are not afraid to try out interesting offshoot developments, and not afraid to abandon them if they don't look to pan out.

Amen to that. You ought to drop by our R & D facility in Fort Worth sometime...

Mind = Blown

 

[pylon500]

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.

Wasn't there a guy named Murphy doing this sort of thing?

Our aircraft kits | Murphy Moose | Murphy Rebel | Murphy Radical | Murphy Renegade | Murphy Yukon | Murphy Elite | Murphy Aircraft Mfg Ltd.

For 35 years, Murphy Aircraft Mfg Ltd of Chilliwack, British Columbia, Canada has manufactured and sold aircraft kits for pilots across the world. We offer a wide variety of lightweight airplanes that are capable of operating from wheels, f

www.murphyair.com

 

[Rataplan]

I think you may be thinking of one of Ole's earlier designs called the Wasp;
View attachment 113608
Which was designed more for the training market, rather than a STOL plane.
It needed a little more development, but fell to the wayside (only five were built) under the number of orders for the Hornet STOL series;
View attachment 113609
And the Hornet Cub, which is a tandem variant;
View attachment 113610

http://www.aircraftkits.com.au/

good looking planes.

 

[CAVU Mark]

I don't believe that could be called a new product announcement.

 

[REVAN]

I'd bet on a 2+2 (or 2+1) airplane with a big Lycoming - either an O-360 or the IO-390. That could give them and airplane with a dual personality - A true short field airplane with a pilot or a pilot and one passenger, or true cross-country utility with a pilot and 2 or 3 passengers.

Maybe we can simplify this down to a basic binary of target market. Will Van's go after the Cub market, or the Sportsman market? I think both are viable assumptions and, truth be told, I think they likely have desires to go after both. So, maybe the proper frame of reference is to consider which one they are more likely to pursue first.

A two seat aluminum Cub-like competitor would be a simpler and less expensive project on which to learn how to tackle a high wing bush-plane. This makes doing the smaller plane first more attractive to the engineers. However, larger planes have more market potential and that makes them attractive to the sales department. It is likely that I biased my decision to the small plane because I'm and engineer with little sense for marketing.

Who thinks this new plane will vie to compete with the Cub, and who thinks it will vie to compete with the Sportsman?

PS - Does anyone think they are going to try to compete with something in the C-180 to Beaver range of planes???

 

[Toobuilder]

Whatever it ends up being powered with, I hope its an engine I dont want/need in the future. The Lyc 540 "was" the best bang for the buck in aviation until the RV-10 came out. On the used market, the 540 was often significantly cheaper than a comparable 360 - no more!

 

[Wanttaja]

I *knew* this thread was familiar. We'd discussed it about 18 months ago.

Early 2019 Christmas Wish - RV-7HW...Are you listening, Richard?

There's just nothing out there in a high wing aircraft that's comparable to Van's in performance and ease of construction. Just no market for such an animal?

www.homebuiltairplanes.com

Here's a sketch I put together at that time, showing how traditional RV design elements could be used in a high-wing design.

Of course, if Van's is partnering with an existing design, this is moot....

Ron Wanttaja