Good morning,
since I could not fly due to the weather situation, I spent over the weekend a bit of time looking at the options for a summer or late summer trip up the Norwegian coast; In general, I would love to visit the Lofoten archipelago and do some trekking (day trips, maybe overnight; can not pack for full scale self-sufficiency/tent).
The plane is a very nice RV-7 taildragger with an IO-360 engine, constant-speed prop and dual Aerosance FADEC, and while I haven’t verified any performance and fuel consumption numbers yet, a general planning estimate was 150kn TAS with 10USG/h Avgas (actual numbers are likely more favourable) and 42USG with full tanks. Looking at the airfield AIP data and Skydemon, not too many fields carry Avgas; coastwise, I found the following options:
The last four fields north of Bodø would be nice for an extension trip to the North Cape, so at the moment I’m considering Bodø as fuel hub for the Lofoten area. Since the distances between the fields are around 90-120 nm, planning for fuel alternates is important, especially as our club’s Robins which I am used to at this time use Jet-A which is ubiquitously available.
Preliminarily, I thought about a routing from Rotterdam EHRD towards the East Frisian islands, crossing the German Bight via Helgoland and tracking more or less along the western coast towards Aalborg EKYT for refueling. After crossing to Kristiansand ENCN, I could either follow the coast line to Trondheim ENVA, or fly a bit eastwards inlands more directly to Trondheim or Røros ENRO for refueling; Last hop would be then along the coast to Bodø ENBO.
As the plane has a front-hinged tip-up canopy (jettisonable) and is a two-seater, I don’t think I can reasonably bring a life raft along that would be usable in case of a ditching, and would at the moment rather consider donning an immersion/survival suit, which might be also a good idea for the flights over less inhabited terrain.
Time-wise I am lucky that I can work flexibly so taking a few days more vacation in case of weather delays on the way back is not an issue. With maybe three weeks planned vacation time, I had in mind to quickly move up north which should be easily doable in two days if the weather is OK, spend time in the Lofoten, and then leisurely fly back taking in the sights on the way south.
It’s still a while to go, but if any of you have further tips and comments on the feasibility of this trip idea, country-specific things I should take into account, sights not to miss, etc., I would be very glad to hear them!
Cheers,
Sebastian
Sebastian_H wrote:
, a general planning estimate was 150kn TAS
probably slightly on the optimistic side…
Hmm, I thought I was on the conservative side: The kit manufacturer states as performance data for the RV-7 model a 55% cruise speed of 179mph @8000ft at MTOW, which would be 155kn. The builder’s forum’s prevalent opinion is that the kit manufacturer’s data are reliable and not made-up marketing, and seem to indicate that I could expect around 7.5-8.5 USG/h for this performance.
Since the original builders of our plane have probably adapted the generic RV-7 POH, I am not sure about the actual data and one of the post-familiarisation tasks I want to do is to get some flight test data for cruising performance and fuel flow and update our POH if necessary. @LeSving builds one if I understand correctly, and can probably chime in as well (maybe we shift the RV-7 specific discussion into the non-certified subforum).
Cheers,
Sebastian
Sebastian_H wrote:
especially as our club’s Robins which I am used to at this time use Jet-A which is ubiquitously available.
Why are you not using a Robin for this trip ? To me a diesel Robin sounds better suited to the task (fuel, payload, space) than the RV7. Provided, of course, the club lets you take a plane for that length of time.
Ouch, got it….
As long as it is rigged and built straight I don’t think the performance should be of any problem. You may not be able to fly all the time at 8000 ft though, at least not VFR, if that’s what you plan. I would say very unlikely (although not entirely impossible 
) You may very well end up flying below 1000 ft with poor vis following the coastline, with few or no chance of getting inland (also very unlikely the entire trip, but not entirely impossible). Usually it’s changing a lot, both with respect to time and geography. You just have to be prepared for anything and plan accordingly.
Last time I was at ENRO, they had no fuel there. You can get fuel at ENTY and ENOP, both relatively close by, and several other GA fields in the south eastern part. Check this web page. It has info about several smaller fields.
172driver wrote:
Why are you not using a Robin for this trip ? To me a diesel Robin sounds better suited to the task (fuel, payload, space) than the RV7. Provided, of course, the club lets you take a plane for that length of time.
It would make the fuel logistics much easier, of course. The first issue is that the club’s planes are mostly used in such a way that many members taking them out for two or four hour blocks thus fragmenting the reservation plan and making longer continuous bookings difficult to arrange, and of course a large number of PPL lessons fill the calendar anyway. It would simply be unfair and impossible to take a plane away for two, three weeks when it won’t get used much. I took for the Silvester trip to Portoroz a club plane, but it cost me minimum 2.5h per work day, 3.5h per holiday or weekend, so 500 or 700 Euro per day gone, regardless if I fly or not. That’s simply not economical when three weeks trip run up 12.000 Euro minimum in aircraft cost alone!
Also, why would I use the Robins if I own a share in a great travel plane such as the RV-7? Economical, fast travel if needed, but also excellent slow-speed characteristics (800m runways no problem, but I have to train short-field landings better to be comfortable with 500m to 600m), tailwheel so also less impacted by rougher grass or gravel strips, enough space for my gear as well as a passenger.
Regarding NealCS’s experiences as Peter linked above, I simply lack the time and experience myself to meaningfully respond; as a PPL student and renter since September, the good points regarding view and engine control I can of course confirm, but with the small 135hp engine and the small 109l standard tank, performance was never better than 105kn to 110kn IAS at sea level. Compare the similar economy of the Robin’s 20l/h Diesel burn giving 105nm with the RV-7’s 30l/h Avgas burn giving 150nm in still air, not much difference in fuel per distance (yes, it costs more at the fuel station unfortunately …), but the same head wind is much less in relative terms when flying the RV-7.
Neal’s Robin was grounded for months in “my” hangar, sitting there due to really trivial to diagnose issues but which nobody could diagnose. I think it spent a comparable time grounded as it spent in a flyable condition.
Sebastian_H wrote:
It would make the fuel logistics much easier, of course
It’s not a big problem. It’s just that the AVINOR airport are designed for CAT as far as infrastructure goes. This means unless there are GA activity there, there simply will be no 100LL. Most of the smaller fields have 100 LL, and the larger AVINOR fields.
