• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Van's RV-15

I'm looking forward to seeing that one.
I read that Van had learned to fly in T-Crafts,
I kind of expected a hi-wing design from him to come out years ago.
 
The RANS S-21 builders and fliers are all over VAN's announcement.... the general consensus seems to be that VANS is late to the party. No one is expressing any "I wish I would have waited" sentiments as of yet. It will be interesting to see if it's a full sized Lyc powered bird, or more of a smaller high wing RV-12 Rotax machine.
 
If it is a two seat I think it will be "OK". Tons of two seaters out there.

If they can replicate a C-185 (4 seat, big door for loading), I think they will have huge success.

JMHO and all that.

Bill
 
Bill Rusk said:
If it is a two seat I think it will be "OK". Tons of two seaters out there.

If they can replicate a C-185 (4 seat, big door for loading), I think they will have huge success.

JMHO and all that.

Bill
Click to expand...

You mean like a Bearhawk 4 Place or Model 5?

Hard to match the wide speed envelope of the BH, the Super Cub like Patrol cruises at 145mph and stalls in the low 30’s with 2000 gross weight built for the utility category, the 4 place cruises at 145 to 165 depending on engine choice (360 or the 540) and still stalls at 40mph

Bottom line… Vans is the 800 pound gorilla in the room of kit planes
 
If I was Vans I would have done exactly the same thing. It’s PR 101 to take potential buyers out of the market, or at least get them to question if they should wait instead of buying now.

That said, a Vans build will, by all historical comparisons, be a great airplane. I’m sure it will be lycoming powered to achieve their standard of performance.

The question that remains is what market are they going to target?
Tandem, side by side, or 4 place?


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
My guess is it will be upscale in the biggish 4 seater size, as mentioned a C-185 clone but with sticks. RV crowd is not skinny poor people. And there will be a nosewheel version. All the PR photos will be the tailwheel version, all the kits ordered will be the nosewheel version.:)
 
My guess is that Van's will try to keep comommally as much as possible, and hence the plane will be a side by side, Lycoming powered, same wing (maybe longer) but upstairs not down stairs, -10 or -7 empennage, etc.....

Exciting that there will be an established kit manufacture is the 'experimental bush plane' market.
 
It's a concept that they won't admit even fully exists on paper yet, let alone a flying machine with any details, like seating, or even number of seats. So far they are selling vaporware based on the reputation of their other kits. Personally, I like RVs and own a RV, but I won't even give this a second thought until they have something to show other than a vague, totally undefined promise that someday the will produce something. Nothing to get excited about in my opinion.

-Cub Builder
 
Third party rumor for sure: Buddy stopped at the Rans tent last week. They told him that the S-21 is such a big hit that they are thinking of dropping the S-7.
Vans knows what they are doing.
 
aeroaddict said:
My guess is that Van's will try to keep comommally as much as possible, and hence the plane will be a side by side, Lycoming powered, same wing (maybe longer) but upstairs not down stairs, -10 or -7 empennage, etc.....

Exciting that there will be an established kit manufacture is the 'experimental bush plane' market.
Click to expand...

Yes, RANS is just an upstart, only in continuous business since 1983, and their planes can't really land off airport.

My bet is VANS "bushplane" will cruise at 150 plus, and the only bush it will see will be places like Johnson Creek. I COULD BE WRONG, maybe it'll be some kinda optimized slow flyer/lander, but that's not where the interest of the company seems to be.
 

Attachments

  • SCOUT 016.jpg
    SCOUT 016.jpg
    376.1 KB · Views: 283
2-place tandem, 2-place side by side, 4 place, 6 place? Doesn’t matter. They’ll find a niche. And Van’s customers enjoy seriously good Lycoming pricing. Personally the revival of the Cyclone (a true late model Skywagon clone) is much more interesting. An EXP Skywagon has been a dream of mine for many years.
 
stewartb curious as to what you know about the revival of the Cyclone kit. I am currently building an old kit and the build manual could use some serious help. Looks to me like an RV tells what part goes where, when and how. The cyclone manual just says here is your kit, have fun. Fun it is however, there is a lot of head scratching and liberties taken by the builder , welcome to experimental. Sorry for the drift.
 
Randy Schlitter of RAN's leaked a drawing of the new RV15. 8) I say they are figuring out people are tired of going fast and making low passes at pancake breakfasts and want an airplane to go to the really cool places. :lol::lol::lol:
227364134_10221392331052692_406700192303988112_n.jpg
This is a joke of course.
 

Attachments

  • 227364134_10221392331052692_406700192303988112_n.jpg
    227364134_10221392331052692_406700192303988112_n.jpg
    85.4 KB · Views: 14,568
Supercubrancher said:
stewartb curious as to what you know about the revival of the Cyclone kit. I am currently building an old kit and the build manual could use some serious help. Looks to me like an RV tells what part goes where, when and how. The cyclone manual just says here is your kit, have fun. Fun it is however, there is a lot of head scratching and liberties taken by the builder , welcome to experimental. Sorry for the drift.
Click to expand...

That sounds a lot like my Backcountry Rev 2 kit. Pile of sorta familiar parts, no guidance for how to put them together. Easier with a Cub than a Skywagon, though. I sent you a PM but for the others who may be following, Bushliner Aircraft or a closely related venture has purchased the Cyclone kit, or so I'm told by one of the Bushliner principals. I think it's early in the acquisition but Bushliner knows more about putting Cessnas together than any shop I know of so they should be a great fit for the Cyclone kit or whatever new name they market it under.
https://bushliner.com/
 
thaefeli said:
Third party rumor for sure: Buddy stopped at the Rans tent last week. They told him that the S-21 is such a big hit that they are thinking of dropping the S-7.
Click to expand...

As someone who flies a Cub but adores the S7, this rumor makes be unbelievably sad.
 
IF it, the 7, was officially discontinued, just like a certain other aircraft design I know of that was put out to pasture by it's original manufacturer (initials are SC) others will step in and serve the market. 4100 hrs in type and no plans to change, it pushes the buttons I need pushed, and besides, 75 to 85 mph is plenty fast enough!
 
I had a good friend, who has unfortunately since passed away, that built 13 different airplanes. Most from plans, versus a kit. The last airplane that he was building was the cyclone. He said it was by far the most difficult airplane he had ever built. This is a man with a degree in mechanical engineering and with a phenomenal amount of experience doing metalworking and building airplanes.
I think the cyclone has great potential, but I do think that somebody needs to do some serious work on the manual, parts fit, etc. from what I have heard.
There are tons of 2 seat airplanes out there, both tandem and side-by-side. It just seems like that part of the market is pretty well saturated. Thus my earlier comment that I thought some thing that approached a Cessna 180 might fit the market. The Maule (certified so not really a competitor) and the Bearhawk both have their limitations.

They have the potential to hit a home run here. The Murphy Moose had potential but unfortunately, both the company and the flight handling characteristics we’re significant detriments.

it will be interesting to see what happens

my opinion and all that

Bill
 
Bearhawk Five, dressed for your mission, is a damn good Experimental 180.

Full disclosure: Posting this from the Bearhawk Five right now.

I Image1627945120.607039.jpgImage1627945153.881436.jpg
Image1627945206.081282.jpg
Darn hard to try to photograph that back area from my seat.


Transmitted from my FlightPhone on fingers… [emoji849]
 

Attachments

  • Image1627945120.607039.jpg
    Image1627945120.607039.jpg
    192.5 KB · Views: 2,855
  • Image1627945153.881436.jpg
    Image1627945153.881436.jpg
    139.3 KB · Views: 1,189
  • Image1627945206.081282.jpg
    Image1627945206.081282.jpg
    94.1 KB · Views: 258
Bill Rusk said:
I had a good friend, who has unfortunately since passed away, that built 13 different airplanes. Most from plans, versus a kit. The last airplane that he was building was the cyclone. He said it was by far the most difficult airplane he had ever built. This is a man with a degree in mechanical engineering and with a phenomenal amount of experience doing metalworking and building airplanes.
I think the cyclone has great potential, but I do think that somebody needs to do some serious work on the manual, parts fit, etc. from what I have heard.
There are tons of 2 seat airplanes out there, both tandem and side-by-side. It just seems like that part of the market is pretty well saturated. Thus my earlier comment that I thought some thing that approached a Cessna 180 might fit the market. The Maule (certified so not really a competitor) and the Bearhawk both have their limitations.

They have the potential to hit a home run here. The Murphy Moose had potential but unfortunately, both the company and the flight handling characteristics we’re significant detriments.

it will be interesting to see what happens

my opinion and all that

Bill
Click to expand...

A friend sold his 185 to build a very nice Moose. He’s never looked back. Had Barrett rebuild the engine. Had Whirl Wind make custom prop blades. That Moose is the best performing piston-powered float plane I’ve ever seen. Great airplane when properly built.

I hope Kyle and the crew straighten out the Cyclone kit. It’s time has come. I hope it’s a raging success!
 
stewartb said:
That ain’t a 180 substitute to this 25 year 180 owner!
Click to expand...

That’s like saying your experimental cub “isn’t a replacement for a 25 year Supercub owner”, just without the exclamation mark.


Transmitted from my FlightPhone on fingers… [emoji849]
 
Not to hi-jack the thread, but what about the Murphy Yukon? Are there any flying? I always thought a Yukon would be more like a 180/185 than a Moose.
 
stewartb said:
.... Bushliner Aircraft or a closely related venture has purchased the Cyclone kit, or so I'm told by one of the Bushliner principals. I think it's early in the acquisition but Bushliner knows more about putting Cessnas together than any shop I know of so they should be a great fit for the Cyclone kit or whatever new name they market it under.
https://bushliner.com/
Click to expand...

I admire what they're doing, but Bushliner seems to be ramrodded by a guy that's about 25 years old.
He may be knowledgeable, but to say he knows more about putting Cessnas together than anyone else is a stretch IMHO.
He does have a large online presence, where as many other (older) shops are low profile.
Jim Hayton in western WA has been rebuilding 180/185's for many many years, as has Beegles in CO.
And I'm sure there are a number of other shops who are quietly rebuilding skywagons also.
 
hotrod180 said:
I admire what they're doing, but Bushliner seems to be ramrodded by a guy that's about 25 years old.
He may be knowledgeable, but to say he knows more about putting Cessnas together than anyone else is a stretch IMHO.
He does have a large online presence, where as many other (older) shops are low profile.
Jim Hayton in western WA has been rebuilding 180/185's for many many years, as has Beegles in CO.
And I'm sure there are a number of other shops who are quietly rebuilding skywagons also.
Click to expand...
This is the team at Bushliner: https://bushliner.com/meet-the-team/ There does appear to be a variety of experiences among them. Just because one of them is "about 25 years old" he shouldn't be put down. In my past I've worked with others in that age range who were top notch aviation mechanics producing workmanship of the highest quality. Unless you personally know of some other issue with these folks, I say give them a chance. We need enthusiastic qualified young blood in this industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sj
80 Year Old Student Pilots Wins AOPA Super Cub
Replies
1
Views
7K
Gordon Misch
Gordon Misch
skywagon8a
Congressional bills to eliminate the LODA
Replies
8
Views
3K
mvivion
mvivion
sj
What we are doing down here in Northwest Arkansas
Replies
6
Views
3K
mvivion
mvivion
sj
TURBO PROP CUB
Replies
29
Views
13K
mvivion
mvivion
M
TSA
Replies
14
Views
4K
kevin
K
Back
Top