Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Death of the RV-12]

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jhstarn(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 4:37 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

Subject: Death of the RV-12



If you have not yet read the the RVator on line you should. The 51% rule, quickbuild kits and the REAL fate of the RV-12 are in the balance. Van attempts to put on a "happy face" about the FAA latest train wreck but if you read pages 3 thru 7 you get a clearer picture. To me it reads as step number one in getting rid of the 51% violators by eliminating everyone involved, including those who play by the rules. RV-12 ? ?, now only to be built as a "clone". No choice of engines, radios, gauges or seat belts AND no repairmans certificate either. You get one ONLY by attending the classes. I guess I'll take the class so I can qualify IF & WHEN I build another airplane. 

Where did I put all that stuff I had on the S-19 and 601XL ?  KABONG

sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

jhstarn(at)verizon.net wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Subject: Death of the RV-12

 

 If you have not yet read the the RVator on line you should. The 51%

 rule, quickbuild kits and the REAL fate of the RV-12 are in the

 balance. Van attempts to put on a "happy face" about the FAA latest

 train wreck but if you read pages 3 thru 7 you get a clearer picture.

 To me it reads as step number one in getting rid of the 51% violators

 by eliminating everyone involved, including those who play by the

 rules. RV-12 ? ?, now only to be built as a "clone". No choice of

 engines, radios, gauges or seat belts AND no repairmans certificate

 either. You get one ONLY by attending the classes. I guess I'll take

 the class so I can qualify IF & WHEN I build another airplane. Where

 did I put all that stuff I had on the S-19 and 601XL ?  KABONG


	




Let's not be too hasty to sign the death warrant of the amateur-built 

RV-12.  



Vans is in a holding pattern until the FAA gets their act together and 

releases the new evaluation process of the 51% rule. Until that new 

process is released, Vans has no choice other than to offer the RV-12 as 

a S-LSA since at this point in time......there is no way for ANYONE to 

get a new kit classified as experimental amateur built. As soon as the 

FAA releases the new process, you can rest assured Vans will make a 

serious effort to offer an E-AB RV-12.



The concern is the FAA may make the new evaluation process so 

restrictive that it will be difficult to classify a kit that is as 

advanced as the RV-12 as experimental amateur built. Nobody knows at 

this point how this will play out. But even if Vans can't achieve this 

goal, an individual builder could register an RV-12 as E-AB provided he 

can demonstrate to a DAR that he built as least 51% of the plane, and 

provided Vans offers the RV-12 as an E-AB kit.



We need to sit tight while this matter is resolved and not panic...yet.



There was an interesting article in one of the Oregon newspapers about 

how the FAA had bungled this process by not considering the impact on 

some of Oregon's aircraft revenue (Lancair and Epic).



http://tinyurl.com/3a85ch



The article states that the FAA may be taking an expedited look at this 

situation with the intent of clarifying things somewhat.



But......we're talking about the FAA.........



Sam Buchanan

jhstarn(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:30 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

I guess that I may jumped a little quick BUT I have been waiting for more than two years to start an RV-12. But what really gets me is that the FAA will still allow the 51% violators to continue to build the RV-12 S-LSA for paying customers...the very thing this whole change was to prevent. Why should Vans continue to fight for an E-AB when there will be those who set up their "factory" and produce RV-12 S-LSA's with Vans supplying the parts. After all he is in the business of selling kits. KABONG

 	  Quote: 	
		  From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>

Date: 2008/03/07 Fri PM 09:14:08 CST

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Death of the RV-12]

 	  Quote: 	

jhstarn(at)verizon.net wrote:

> 

> 

> Subject: Death of the RV-12

tcervin(at)embarqmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:20 am Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

I agree with Sam but would also add the following: If the RV-12 can't be built E-AB his market for the kit will be so low I predict it will be eventually be phased out.

                                               Tom in Ohio (RV6-A)  

---

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:18 am Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

jhstarn(at)verizon.net wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I guess that I may jumped a little quick BUT I have been waiting for more than two years to start an RV-12. But what really gets me is that the FAA will still allow the 51% violators to continue to build the RV-12 S-LSA for paying customers...the very thing this whole change was to prevent. Why should Vans continue to fight for an E-AB when there will be those who set up their "factory" and produce RV-12 S-LSA's with Vans supplying the parts. After all he is in the business of selling kits. KABONG



   


	


My take was a little different. 1st, what wasn't said: Think about why 

the 51% rule came into play. It wasn't about safety; it was (and is) 

about protecting existing certified manufacturers. Why is there this 

sudden attention to build percentage after decades of allowing more & 

more prefab & assistance? Could it be that the Big Dog manufacturers see 

high performance homebuilts cutting into their sales and potential big 

bucks from LSA & want to limit competition? Lunch with a few Senators, 

Senators write a few letters to the FAA, & suddenly there's a big 

'problem' with assisted EAB.



Next, what seemed to be buried between the lines of the article I read 

was the possibility of an additional category of experimental, where 

there is a less restrictive percentage allowing more professional 

assistance. This might not be such a bad thing, if existing EAB rules 

are kept. It would still allow us to build & allow those with more money 

than time or skills to pay for help.



I follow one of the ultralite lists, & everyone there was terrified that 

LSA would end ultralites. Well, they lost 2 seat 'trainers' but nothing 

changed with single seaters & everyone got LSA making 2 seaters 

available legally to folks that might not be able to get a medical under 

existing (overly restrictive) medical requirements.



It will be interesting to see  how it shakes out.



Charlie

mike109g6(at)insideconnec
Guest

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:07 am Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

Excellent point about the 'Big Dogs' and their political impact on GA.  With 

the FAA getting so twitchy so quickly, I bet if I was a fly on the wall, 

some very Big Dogs brought this whole process about.  Is it coincidence that 

Cessna is wanting to get into the LSA market and launched their concept 

entry at OSH this past year and then 6 months later the FAA stops 

conditionals just when Van's is about to launch it's LSA entry into the 

market?  Being overly skeptical of any government interference in our lives, 

I suspect that the 'smoking gun' is LSA - NOT the 51% rule.  If a study was 

performed, I suspect that 'professionally' built aircraft probably have a 

safety record equal to or better than certified aircraft, excluding pilot 

error as the cause of an accident/incident.  The FAA is simply using it as 

an excuse.  When the FAA admits, that prior to their suspension of 

conditional inspections for manufacturers, that they DID NOT do an economic 

impact study on the effects of the suspension, when they do said impact 

study for every other FAA change prior to implementing said change, it 

speaks volumes as to what is going on 'Behind' the scenes, that we, the 

private citizen are not privy to.  Don't forget that the FAA still wants 

'user fees' for GA.  This current round of FAA infringement may only be a 

gambit, bargaining chip so to speak, to accomplish that end.  Life is 

compromise, we are taught, who better knows that than government.  Clouded 

issues, clouded agendas, all is not what it seems on the surface of the mill 

pond when you are dealing with government agencies.  The eddies, currents, 

below the surface are what is really at stake here.  The FAA is flexing it's 

sizable muscle, letting us know who is REALLY in charge;  government - not 

the citizen.  If you really are upset by the FAA's current actions, and you 

are fearful of the future of GA-Experimental-CALL/WRITE you congressman and 

senator.  Express your concerns in WRITING-encourage them to intervene on 

your behalf.  You are the taxpayer, electorate.  GET PRO-ACTIVE and protect 

yourself.

Don't wait for someone else to do it for you.  Our voice was heard and 

stopped the 'FAA User Fees' proposal.  WE CAN DO IT AGAIN.

'nuff said'

Mike H

---

robertrv607(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 9:57 am Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

Sam:



I also read the article, and agreed with you..



I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's

suggestion, at the address given.. ;Hope every one

will do so..



On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac..

unit on your plane (planes?) 



Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally,

are you aware of place to buy it, at better price

than todays ...kind of steep for me...2 years ago

was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute  I wasit

will cost me another $100.....



thanks,,



Bert

rlv6a

--- Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>

 

 jhstarn(at)verizon.net wrote:

 > 

 <jhstarn(at)verizon.net>

 > 

 > Subject: Death of the RV-12

 > 

 > If you have not yet read the the RVator on line

 you should. The 51%

 > rule, quickbuild kits and the REAL fate of the

 RV-12 are in the

 > balance. Van attempts to put on a "happy face"

 about the FAA latest

 > train wreck but if you read pages 3 thru 7 you get

 a clearer picture.

 > To me it reads as step number one in getting rid

 of the 51% violators

 > by eliminating everyone involved, including those

 who play by the

 > rules. RV-12 ? ?, now only to be built as a

 "clone". No choice of

 > engines, radios, gauges or seat belts AND no

 repairmans certificate

 > either. You get one ONLY by attending the classes.

 I guess I'll take

 > the class so I can qualify IF & WHEN I build

 another airplane. Where

 > did I put all that stuff I had on the S-19 and

 601XL ?  KABONG

 

 

 Let's not be too hasty to sign the death warrant of

 the amateur-built 

 RV-12.  

 

 Vans is in a holding pattern until the FAA gets

 their act together and 

 releases the new evaluation process of the 51% rule.

 Until that new 

 process is released, Vans has no choice other than

 to offer the RV-12 as 

 a S-LSA since at this point in time......there is no

 way for ANYONE to 

 get a new kit classified as experimental amateur

 built. As soon as the 

 FAA releases the new process, you can rest assured

 Vans will make a 

 serious effort to offer an E-AB RV-12.

 

 The concern is the FAA may make the new evaluation

 process so 

 restrictive that it will be difficult to classify a

 kit that is as 

 advanced as the RV-12 as experimental amateur built.

 Nobody knows at 

 this point how this will play out. But even if Vans

 can't achieve this 

 goal, an individual builder could register an RV-12

 as E-AB provided he 

 can demonstrate to a DAR that he built as least 51%

 of the plane, and 

 provided Vans offers the RV-12 as an E-AB kit.

 

 We need to sit tight while this matter is resolved

 and not panic...yet.

 

 There was an interesting article in one of the

 Oregon newspapers about 

 how the FAA had bungled this process by not

 considering the impact on 

 some of Oregon's aircraft revenue (Lancair and

 Epic).

 

 http://tinyurl.com/3a85ch

 

 The article states that the FAA may be taking an

 expedited look at this 

 situation with the intent of clarifying things

 somewhat.

 

 But......we're talking about the FAA.........

 

 Sam Buchanan

 



 browse

 Un/Subscription,

 FAQ,



 Forums!



 Admin.



 

 

 

 


	


Looking for last minute shopping deals?

sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:53 am Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

Bert,



I used to fly the AlTrak but switched a couple of years ago to the Trio 

EZ-Hold. You probably won't be able to beat TruTrak's price on the 

AlTrak. The AlTrak works fine and is a stone-simple unit. If you want a 

device with more features you might look at the Trio line, but they will 

be more $$$$$'s.



I doubt the AlTrak has ever been $1200.



Sam



================



bert murillo wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Sam:

 

 I also read the article, and agreed with you..

 

 I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's

 suggestion, at the address given.. ;Hope every one

 will do so..

 

 On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac..

 unit on your plane (planes?) 

 

 Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally,

 are you aware of place to buy it, at better price

 than todays ...kind of steep for me...2 years ago

 was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute  I wasit

 will cost me another $100.....

 

 thanks,,

 

 Bert

 rlv6a

n212pj(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:50 am Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

Sam, why did you go the Trio route?  I've looked at both TT and Trio to get

a two axis solution.  The Trio makes you cut two holes in your panel, which

is somewhat a bummer.  Is there some compelling reason for one over the

other?  You hear more about TT than Trio, of course.  



John



--

prtrotter

Joined: 19 Jan 2007
Posts: 14

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:41 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

John C

  6nbsp;

 I expect Trio will come out wiht a single unit dual axis system in the not too distant future E

  6nbsp;

 Paul



---

sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:41 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

John Jessen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Sam, why did you go the Trio route?  I've looked at both TT and Trio to get

 a two axis solution.  The Trio makes you cut two holes in your panel, which

 is somewhat a bummer.  Is there some compelling reason for one over the

 other?  You hear more about TT than Trio, of course.  

 

 John


	


John, selecting an autopilot hinges on many variables as I'm sure you 

have found. My path to Trio equipment has been a process of evolution, 

not one giant leap.



My first transition to an EZ-Pilot was facilitated by the way I could 

use the Navaid servo already installed in the plane. That and the fact 

the EZ-Pilot was light-years ahead of the Navaid made it a simple choice.



When the EZ-Hold came available, I was ready for another upgrade, once 

again because it had far more capability than the AlTrak. Having two 

separate devices wasn't a problem for me since that it has always been 

that way with my panel.



I have come to know the Trio guys personally and they are a top-notch 

operation, not only in technical savvy but in business and support 

matters. I can't imagine a company being more ethical in dealing with 

customers than Trio. There are other good vendors, but my experience 

with Trio has been superb.



TruTrak is also a good vendor, and the AlTrak worked fine in my plane. 

My transition to Trio was a combination of my circumstances and timing. 

Your situation may lead you in different direction, depending on the 

mission profile of your plane and what you want to accomplish with your 

autopilot installation.



Download the user manuals, do your homework, make the final decision, 

and enjoy whichever systems works best for you.  



Sam Buchanan



==================

sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:14 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

ptrotter(at)optonline.net wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   John,

 

 I expect Trio will come out wiht a single unit dual axis system in

 the not too distant future.


	


I think that is a safe statement to make.  



As with all things pertaining to avionics, it is best to defer major 

purchases until the absolute latest time possible....new toys appearing 

all the time.



Sam Buchanan

ptrotter

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 28
Location: Westchester County, NY

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:11 pm Post subject: Death of the RV-12]

It wouldn't surprise me to see something at either Sun 'N Fun or Oshkosh.

Paul

Sam Buchanan wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 ptrotter(at)optonline.net wrote:

> John,

>

> I expect Trio will come out wiht a single unit dual axis system in

> the not too distant future.

 I think that is a safe statement to make.  

 As with all things pertaining to avionics, it is best to defer major 

 purchases until the absolute latest time possible....new toys 

 appearing all the time.

 Sam Buchanan

_________________
Paul Trotter
RV-8 82080 Fuselage Kit
N801PT (reserved)

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum