Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

VFR-only certification, and moving these to IFR, certifying the RV, etc

What do you think has so far stopped enterprises to produce a fully certified version of the GA top sellers RV7 or RV10?

- I think their stall speeds are “certifiable” without any design mod. And the metal structure makes them “lightning-approved” without any design mod. Does anybody see any other design mod required for certification, a priori?

- beside performance, one strong selling point of the Vans products is their price (even including the labor cost from Companies that deliver you a finished product, which is explicitly allowed for experimentals in some Countries, and done anyway in others…). But how much a full certification would add to the final selling price – assuming 200 planes/year – and what these certification costs consist in exactly? Assume, for this answer, that the answer to the previous point is that no design mod is requires to the standard Vans project for compliance to full CofA standards.
- do you think Vans projects are “patented” and therefore this is the main answer of why nobody has thought of producing a certified version of RV7/RV10?

United Kingdom

I wonder how many thousands of hours have been flown by Bellancas in IMC, that was what they were made for, on wood wings with no lightning protection that I’m aware of. It would be interesting though to know if there is something like that in the wing design, I’ve never heard it mentioned. IFR certification didn’t exist for most of the light aircraft types flown IFR today, and there is no reference or limitation on flight conditions in the TCDS of most types.

Obviously Experimental category aircraft fly IFR every day outside of Europe.

I think the reason Vans RVs have never been certified is that most of their customers buy/build them partly because they are in Experimental category. The added sales for a factory built version would I’m sure be appreciable but the main market is going in the opposite direction.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 11 Dec 14:35

What do you think has so far stopped enterprises to produce a fully certified version of the GA top sellers RV7 or RV10?

Quite simply, the main market is the US and there you can fly in the Experimental category all over the whole huge country.

And (speak to some US pilots; I have been in contact with lots of them over the years) there is little interest in flying outside the US. Going north, you can go to Canada (and freeze your balls off ). Going south, people will probably think you are performing a confidential substance (or kidnap victim) transport service That’s partly a joke of course but you get my drift. It isn’t like someone in N or central Europe flying to the stunning Alps, the Adriatic, even Greece which is a really amazing place.

RVs can fly fully IFR in US airspace.

It is the rest of the world – and Europe in the current context – which runs protectionist policies to maintain the certified scene. The restrictions on them – like the whole of the relatively deregulated VFR scene, versus IFR – are a political quid pro quo.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

FYI N-registered Experimental aircraft fly freely to Canada from the US by treaty and to Mexico because nobody cares.

Quote Silvaire “I think the reason Vans RVs have never been certified is that most of their customers buy/build them partly because they are in Experimental category”

Can you pls explain what do you think is appealing of the Experimental Category? The fun in building, or the money saving? If it is the latter, then it is very relevant to calculate how much certification would add to pricing, because I’m sure a large fraction of the 500+ Vans owners in Europe would be happy to pay right now a certain dollar amount to get a CofA for their plane, just because EU experimentals rules are more restrictive than US rules.

United Kingdom

mancival wrote:

Can you pls explain what do you think is appealing of the Experimental Category? The fun in building, or the money saving?

Lots of things, money and fun are certainly significant, but mostly issues related to relative lack of governmental oversight. Very much among them is owner maintenance and builder inspections, or A&P (non IA) only annual inspections if you buy the plane already built. Also no requirement for type approved parts of certified avionics. The ownership experience is more like that of a classic car than a Bonanza – which in addition to the parts and maintenance issues also has lower performance and higher hourly costs.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 11 Dec 15:06

Quoting Peter “Quite simply, the main market is the US and there you can fly in the Experimental category all over the whole huge country.”

This explains why Vans doesn’t certify its product (EU << US), but doesn’t explain why nobody in Europe has thought of producing an certified rv7 or rv10, while still burning capital on other less likely ventures like Elixir, Pantera, P2010, etc…

United Kingdom

It’s a good question. It could be that Vans won’t license the design for factory production by others due to liability concerns, notwithstanding that the certified plane would no longer be a Vans aircraft after certification. Or maybe they just don’t want to screw up their lives or expand to deal with certification hassles, even indirectly.

My guess would be that it is a combination of reasons:

  • the issues within Europe arise only in international flight, and
  • the % of people that fly internationally is miniscule, and
  • there are inter-country concessions already which cater for a lot of popular travel patterns (e.g. UK-France), and
  • there is no enforcement in most parts of Europe (the southern parts especially, usually nobody gives a damn), and
  • the IR community is miniscule (due to decades of restrictive practices in pilot training, etc), and
  • there are emerging scenarios where a non-cert (non “EASA”) plane is actually better because your CAA is able to give you license privileges they cannot give you within Brussels rules (the UK / NPPL may be the main scenario and that is huge; France and its no-medical UL regime is another), and
  • in the UK, there is a process for flying full IFR in homebuilts (even though it has almost ground to a halt due to a lack of resources) and there are possibilities of acceptance of such flights in some countries outside the UK

so if somebody certified the RVx, it is unlikely it would sell much.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

mancival wrote:

Can you pls explain what do you think is appealing of the Experimental Category?

I’m building an RV 7 and I can give you MY answer :
I want a cruise speed of 150 kts in something affordable and younger than me . That means Experimental .

The exact same plane has completely different costs if Experimenta , N reg , Easa reg .

Pegaso airstrip, Italy
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top