Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus

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

Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

dwight(at)openweave.org
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:19 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

On Thu Oct 12 15:18:35 2006, Bob Collins wrote :

 	  Quote: 	
		  Indeed, the accident in New York -- and the Cirrus accidents -- reminds me

that low-time Warrior/Cessna 172 pilots who are building RVs, need to spend

a LOT of time..... a LOT of time ... in transition training. 



Always makes me pause and think, "Am I *really* going to be able to fly this

thing safely."


	


Interesting that you make this comment when you do. I have been pondering that

very same issue lately. Similar thoughts (i.e. regarding the "ticket-in-Feb,

Cirrus-in-July, dead-in-Oct" sequence of events) occurred to me about the NYC

accident too.



Regarding your particular point, we'll use my situation as an example. I am

a low-time pilot. I have roughly 350 hours spread over a decade-plus. I have

owned a plane (1967 Cherokee 180, and boy I miss it), gotten my instrument

ticket, and have maybe 8 hours of tailwheel time spread over a few -years-.

The tailwheel plans that I've flown are an RV-6 and a Citabria (by flown I

don't mean just having gotten a ride in, but have done take-offs and landings

with instructors).



I'm a slow builder, so still have time to think about what to do, but I do

get my engine in about a month and a half and think it is remotely possible

I could have the RV-7 flying in as little as a year. (Imagine me crossing

my fingers as I type that sentence ... not an easy thing to do, I'll tell

you.) Two years max. (More crossing of fingers!)



When I go talk to various local folks the response is "Don't sweat it, you'll

do fine". Ok. Great. But ..... I'm left not entirely convinced. I have this

vague worry that what I _should_ do is go out and buy me something along the

lines of a Luscombe 8A for $20K, commit to putting 50 hours/year on it while

I finish the RV, and -then- do the required type-specific RV transition

training with Mike Seager. When I've got the RV flying, sell the Luscombe

(for a tidy profit ... yeah, right) and start my flight testing.



You see, I want to be SURE that I can safely fly my RV once I finish it .....

but when I talk to other folks I start to feel like a paranoid, and that my

concerns are leading me in the direction of overkill. What say you experienced

folks? Am I being overly cautious?



What I do know is that if I bend this RV after all my _wife's_ help riveting,

I'll be in deep deep trouble. 



  -- Dwight

tedd(at)vansairforce.org
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 3:22 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

Dwight:



I recommend getting transition training in an RV and then getting some

aerobatic instruction in your RV.  Once you are comfortable doing sport

aerobatics in your RV you won't be defeated by anything you're likely to meet

in "normal" RV flying.



Tedd McHenry

Surrey, BC, Canada

khedrick(at)frontiernet.n
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 3:56 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

How about a word from the unexperienced.  I am a low time pilot with 400 hrs

now but when I bought my rv 6 I had a total  ~125 hrs in - a 150, a 172, and

an eipper quicksilver wt shift.  This was over a 20 yr period.   No

tailwheel time, my cfi (Illinois Phil) really stayed with me (a long time)

and some buddies did give me some tailwheel time in their champs (big help,

thanks john and bob C).   



I don't claim to be an expert, far from it, I am a average learner.   I did

work (lot of hrs) at getting the landing down and systems and I was cautious

(still am), no big crosswinds.   You can do this.   The extra talewheel time

was good.  



Your milage may vary, but have bent no metal yet.  



Keith Hedrick

Carlinville IL

3lf

--

dwight(at)openweave.org
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 3:59 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

On Thu Oct 12 19:21:02 2006, Tedd McHenry wrote :

 	  Quote: 	
		  Dwight:



I recommend getting transition training in an RV and then getting some

aerobatic instruction in your RV.  Once you are comfortable doing sport

aerobatics in your RV you won't be defeated by anything you're likely to meet

in "normal" RV flying.



Tedd McHenry

Surrey, BC, Canada


	


Tedd,



Thanks for the input! I couldn't agree more. In fact ... those steps are on

the agenda.   I have a good friend who is now an RV-7 owner, and who sold

an Extra 300XL and bought the RV. He is in his mid-70s and decided he probably

shouldn't be pulling 5Gs on -every- flight.  His wife didn't like flying in

that front cockpit either (I've flown in it, and don't blame her), so the -7

let them fly "together" again.



He has competition experience and is willing to teach me some basics ... and

then from there I intend to find someone to help me learn more advanced

aerobatics. For instance, I've flown with Rich Perkins at Attitude Aviation

(http://attitudeaviation.com) in Livermore. I was just doing some initial

tailwheel work, but he also teaches aerobatics as well as an emergency

maneuvers course. I'm tempted to go back and work with him again as the few

flights I did have with him were great experiences. But there are plenty of

other folks who can help me down that road and we'll see what make sense when

the time comes.



So ... we agree completely on that value of that kind of training. No question

about it. Oh, aside from the value of it ... its fun, too!



Learning some aerobatics, though, are past that initial getting-to-know-you

period. It is those early hours in the -7 I sweat most. I have gotten a good

bit of a feedback off-list saying "Don't sweat it", with some good support

for that view. I'm still collecting opinions, and probably will be until the

first flight in my RV. If anyone else has opinions/suggestions on good

strategies for transitioning .... I'm listening. 



  -- Dwight

Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:38 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

Dwight,

  

 While I agree that lots of transition training would be a good thing, I  flew my RV-7A with practically none.  I landed a friends RV-6A from the  right seat one time and decided that I could fly the -7A that my wife  and I built, and I did.  I had about 450 hours in Cessnas  and Warriors, and about 100 hours in a Grumman AA1C.  The  Grumman was a good "transition trainer."  The RV-7A is much more docile  than that little devil.

  

  The only problem I had on the first flight was losing the airport (not my  home field) due to the speed which I was not used to.  I must warn you that  even though you are completely familiar with your airplane and panel, that when  you are flying it for the first time it is still a strange airplane that you are  not used to yet.  Now, if I had had a real problem, I may have been in a  lot of trouble.  But that is true of anyone on the first flight of an  airplane.  I decided to risk my own life vs. someone else's in my  plane.

  

  The nosewheel RV is a very easy airplane to fly and land.  I won't  speak to the tailwheel RVs.  I'm not a taildragger pilot, that could be a  whole 'nother story!

  



 Dan Hopper

 RV-7A 175 hours

  

 do not archive

  

  

 In a message dated 10/12/2006 4:21:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  dwight(at)openweave.org writes:



  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    RV-List message posted by: Dwight Frye <dwight(at)openweave.org>



On    Thu Oct 12 15:18:35 2006, Bob Collins wrote :

 	  Quote: 	
		  Indeed, the accident in    New York -- and the Cirrus accidents -- reminds me

that low-time    Warrior/Cessna 172 pilots who are building RVs, need to spend

a LOT of    time..... a LOT of time ... in transition training. 



Always    makes me pause and think, "Am I *really* going to be able to fly    this

thing safely."


	


Interesting that you make this comment when    you do. I have been pondering that

very same issue lately. Similar thoughts    (i.e. regarding the "ticket-in-Feb,

Cirrus-in-July, dead-in-Oct" sequence    of events) occurred to me about the NYC

accident too.



Regarding your    particular point, we'll use my situation as an example. I am

a low-time    pilot. I have roughly 350 hours spread over a decade-plus. I have

owned a    plane (1967 Cherokee 180, and boy I miss it), gotten my instrument

ticket,    and have maybe 8 hours of tailwheel time spread over a few -years-.

The    tailwheel plans that I've flown are an RV-6 and a Citabria (by flown    I

don't mean just having gotten a ride in, but have done take-offs and    landings

with instructors).



I'm a slow builder, so still have time    to think about what to do, but I do

get my engine in about a month and a    half and think it is remotely possible

I could have the RV-7 flying in as    little as a year. (Imagine me crossing

my fingers as I type that sentence    ... not an easy thing to do, I'll tell

you.) Two years max. (More crossing    of fingers!)



When I go talk to various local folks the response is    "Don't sweat it, you'll

do fine". Ok. Great. But ..... I'm left not    entirely convinced. I have this

vague worry that what I _should_ do is go    out and buy me something along the

lines of a Luscombe 8A for $20K, commit    to putting 50 hours/year on it while

I finish the RV, and -then- do the    required type-specific RV transition

training with Mike Seager. When I've    got the RV flying, sell the Luscombe

(for a tidy profit ... yeah, right)    and start my flight testing.



You see, I want to be SURE that I can    safely fly my RV once I finish it .....

but when I talk to other folks I    start to feel like a paranoid, and that my

concerns are leading me in the    direction of overkill. What say you experienced

folks? Am I being overly    cautious?



What I do know is that if I bend this RV after all my    _wife's_ help riveting,

I'll be in deep deep trouble. 



  --  es  Day       -->                - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

bsp;    -->  nbsp;                - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

_-=  ;  p;               - List Contribution Web Site  ;                             =========================



	


 

  

  [quote][b]

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:48 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

BTW, my original note referring to low time Cessna/Warrior pilots was

supposed to have a -- LIKE ME --- after it. I left it off. I'm about in the

same boat as Keith where experience and flight time is concerned. 

The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking I'll take some of the money

out of the instrument panel and put more of it into transition training.



Do not archive



----------



How about a word from the unexperienced.  I am a low time pilot with 400 hrs

now but when I bought my rv 6 I had a total  ~125 hrs in - a 150, a 172, and

an eipper quicksilver wt shift.  This was over a 20 yr period.   No

tailwheel time, my cfi (Illinois Phil) really stayed with me (a long time)

and some buddies did give me some tailwheel time in their champs (big help,

thanks john and bob C).   



I don't claim to be an expert, far from it, I am a average learner.   I did

work (lot of hrs) at getting the landing down and systems and I was cautious

(still am), no big crosswinds.   You can do this.   The extra talewheel time

was good.  



Your milage may vary, but have bent no metal yet.  



Keith Hedrick

Carlinville IL

3lf

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:51 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

Just projecting -- since  I don't know for sure -- my guess is the big difference in a trainer vs. an RV  isn't the docile characteristics per se, but the "speed factor."  I assume  things happen faster. Relating this back to the Cirrus, I don't think it's an  unsafe plane, I just think it's probably a faster airplane. There are days when  -- well, when I *was* flying (I'm grounded at the moment) --  I'd find  myself behind the old truck and just oculdn't catch up.  Can any of you who  have transitioned from a trainer to an RV report on that aspect of  things?

  

 Do not  archive.



   From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of  Hopperdhh(at)aol.com

Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:37  PM

To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: RV-List:  Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

 

   

  

  

 Dwight,

  

 While I agree that lots of transition training would be a good thing, I  flew my RV-7A with practically none.  I landed a friends RV-6A from the  right seat one time and decided that I could fly the -7A that my wife  and I built, and I did.  I had about 450 hours in Cessnas  and Warriors, and about 100 hours in a Grumman AA1C.  The  Grumman was a good "transition trainer."  The RV-7A is much more docile  than that little devil.

  



    [quote][b]

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

kboatright1(at)comcast.ne
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:35 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

I transitioned from a Tomahawk to my RV-6 with about 3-4 hours from Mike  Seager and another couple of hours in a Citabria right before the first flight.  I already had a tailwheel endorsement which I had picked up a few years  earlier in a Taylorcraft.  My opinion is that the Tomahawk is a pretty good  transition aircraft to the RV, because the sight picture and pattern speeds are  very similar.  The one thing that is different about the short wing RV's is  that if you get really slow, the sink rate goes up substantially.  Most  trainers are more forgiving in this area. 

  

 Transition training IS important, particularly if you don't have any  experience in something with RV like performance.  I strongly encourage  anyone transitioning to an RV to get some time in an RV with a CFI who has RV  experience.  If for some reason, you can't make that happen, there are a  lot of RV's around these days, and many of the pilots are very willing to give  you right seat time, which can help ease the transition.  We had  a local gentleman who made exactly two flights before he had a hard  landing and totaled his Mustang II.  He didn't get any transition training  (even in an RV) and his prior experience was in aircraft that are much more  forgiving at low speeds.   

  

 On the accident with the Cirrus, there was a graphic on one of the news  stations showing the aircraft going up the river offset to the left side of the  vfr corridor. Then, the aircraft began a left turn (to the narrower side of the  corridor) and was unable to complete the turn.  I have no idea how accurate  the graphic was, but can certainly see how a pilot used to a slower aircraft  with a tighter turning radius could have misjudged the room necessary to  complete a 180 degree turn in a faster aircraft.

  

 KB

 [quote]   ---

Vanremog(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:14 pm Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

In a message dated 10/12/2006 1:21:07 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  dwight(at)openweave.org writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Regarding your particular point, we'll use my situation as an example.    I am

a low-time pilot. I have roughly 350 hours spread over a decade-plus.    I have

owned a plane (1967 Cherokee 180, and boy I miss it), gotten my    instrument

ticket, and have maybe 8 hours of tailwheel time spread over a    few -years-.

The tailwheel plans that I've flown are an RV-6 and a Citabria    (by flown I

don't mean just having gotten a ride in, but have done    take-offs and landings

with instructors).



I'm a slow builder, so    still have time to think about what to do, but I do

get my engine in about    a month and a half and think it is remotely possible

I could have the RV-7    flying in as little as a year. (Imagine me crossing

my fingers as I type    that sentence ... not an easy thing to do, I'll tell

you.) Two years max.    (More crossing of fingers!)



When I go talk to various local folks the    response is "Don't sweat it, you'll

do fine". Ok. Great. But ..... I'm left    not entirely convinced. I have this

vague worry that what I _should_ do is    go out and buy me something along the

lines of a Luscombe 8A for $20K,    commit to putting 50 hours/year on it while

I finish the RV, and -then- do    the required type-specific RV transition

training with Mike Seager. When    I've got the RV flying, sell the Luscombe

(for a tidy profit ... yeah,    right) and start my flight testing.



You see, I want to be SURE that I    can safely fly my RV once I finish it .....

but when I talk to other folks    I start to feel like a paranoid, and that my

concerns are leading me in the    direction of overkill. What say you experienced

folks? Am I being overly    cautious?

	


 

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

  

 In my situation, I first flew a Cherokee 140 in the late sixties for about  5 hours during a high school aviation ground school, then nothing for  15 yrs.  I reacquainted myself with flying when I built and flew  an ultralight Eipper MXL for 400 or so hours back in the mid-eighties.   Then came the Kitfox 1 in the late eighties that I built, got my private license  in and put 450 hrs on over 8 years.  Then I built the RV-6A, first  flying it in early '98 after a grand total of one flying hour of additional  training (mostly pattern work to get your head in front of the airplane).   I have since taken a few hours of aerobatic and unusual attitude training to  round out my experience, but I believe that my RV is the best handling plane  money can buy.

  

 RVs fly very much the way I always imagined/wished other planes  should, light and responsive controls, but not the least bit twitchy.  I  have flown my Kitfox and my RV in every kind of weather/winds, short of  tornadoes and hurricanes, and as long as I was willing to cinch down on the  straps, it has always gotten me thru the chop to where I'm going.  If you  are an average pilot like me, after just a few moments at the controls you  will feel like your RV is wired directly into your brain.   

  GV (RV-6A  N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 811hrs, Silicon Valley, CA)  



  [quote][b]

michele.delsol(at)microsi
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:49 am Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

I have the same concern - also a low time pilot but with a fair amount of

time in a Piper Cub. My plan is to get fully cleared on a CAP 10 (aerobatic

180HP tail dragger) for take offs and landings and to do the same on a plane

with a CS prop. Once I have these two under my belt I should be OK to handle

my RV8. My plan is to get this done within six months prior to my first

flight. Transition training in an RV does not appear to be an option in

France.



Michele

RV8 - Fuselage



--

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:51 am Post subject: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

All we have to offer are opinions....I'll offer mine then

I guess.



I was a 475 hour in many GA planes pilot when I flew my RV-10

this past winter. Got 5 hours from Mike Seager.  It was

worthwhile getting the time, just to ensure you had some

recent experience, supervised, in that make and model.

I'm having a great time in the -10, as it flies and lands

nicely.



I think that the "speed factor" comments are probably part of

the picture, and a definite complication with RV's.  Don't

bother defending them because they fly nice, they're still

fast and easy to get behind.  Mind you that this isn't

ALWAYS the case...but it certainly CAN be.  Currently I'm

far away from home in El Paso for LOE.  I've now taken the

-10 to 3 of the 4 corners of the country. When your head is

out the window in unfamiliar territory, and you're deciphering

charts and getting vectors from controllers and being requested

to report over "common" VFR points that you don't even know

what or where they are, this speed becomes a factor.  You're

just plain a fish out of water.  It's nothing to do with the

plane, and all the pilot.  Stick an even lower time pilot

in a fast plane, in the complex airspace like a box canyon

in New York....trying to sightsee at the same time, and

make it a one-way box corridor and man, I see some

possibilities.  Part of the *problem* is the airspace and

restrictions.....had it been a VFR corridor that was one-way

only, defined with running altitudes and known GPS fixes,

this might have been much prettier.   Oh, and don't discount

the weather that day.  sure, the video I saw showed ok

lateral viz, but it was drizzly and overcast that day.  You

can get many things taking your mind off from the flight.



Now for one more twist...  When have I felt the stupidest

while flying?  Probably when it was me and fellow VERY

experienced (thousands of hours) pilot buddies, and we were

just flying around VFR playing around.  You have the

tendency to be lax, and 2 pilots in the plane don't make

it easier.  I've felt the safest when flying IFR in hard

conditions, with the same people by my side....so it's

an attitude and attention thing, and I've personally seen

how 2 heads can make worse decisions than one.



Transition training, even only a minimal hour, should be a

must.  Recent experience in ANY plane is very valuable, so

before first flights, get 5,10,20 recent hours under your

belt...the more total time you have, the less recent required

if you're like most people.  Put on over 100 hours a year

and you're likely to retain it very well for a few years.



Sport pilot / Rec pilot?  I'm not a fan.  I really like the

medical ideas, but the lack of overall training time sounds

like a mess to me.  To me, they're cheaper to fly so the

goal could maybe be to let pilots get their 40 hours in

cheaper planes, so it doesn't cost as much...but cutting the

total to 20, well, lets just say there are times I wouldn't

want to share the airspace with a 21 hour pilot who

thinks they're ready.  I'm now well over 600 and there

are times that even with really good preflight prep that

I could do better when I'm in unfamiliar places.



The whole learn, buy a cirrus (or lancair, or rv-10, or...)

and then pile it in, concept shouldn't be discounted too

much either.  A pocket of cash spent more on the toy than

the time just isn't a good idea.  Don't underestimate the

value of *negative* experience in slower planes.  I distinctly

remember hopping the airports around MSP in a retract when I

had only 75 or so TT and flying with another pilot.  You're

with your departure tower for 5 miles, have 2 miles until

you must contact the other tower, and you're flying a faster

plane than your trainer.  I got turned around trying to

visualize the runways as they told me to report over the

"whatever" (that I had no clue what/where it was), and almost

flew downwind to the wrong runway.   It's when they bite

your head off on the radio, and straighten you out, and

you walk away only a little ego bruised that you start to

gain "experience".  The upside to living through the

standard problems is the gain of experience....which is

somewhat nice to get in slower, easy flying planes for

a while.



Remember that the insurance companies have mathematical

reasons for setting rates, and pilot time and training

requirements.  Anyone priced insurance on a new SR22

lately?



It's not the plane, it's the pilot....same with our RV's.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Bob Collins wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Just projecting -- since I don't know for sure -- my guess is the big 

 difference in a trainer vs. an RV isn't the docile characteristics per 

 se, but the "speed factor."  I assume things happen faster. Relating 

 this back to the Cirrus, I don't think it's an unsafe plane, I just 

 think it's probably a faster airplane. There are days when -- well, when 

 I *was* flying (I'm grounded at the moment) --  I'd find myself behind 

 the old truck and just oculdn't catch up.  Can any of you who have 

 transitioned from a trainer to an RV report on that aspect of things?

  

 Do not archive.

 

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

 *From:* owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com 

 [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Hopperdhh(at)aol.com

 *Sent:* Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:37 PM

 *To:* rv-list(at)matronics.com

 *Subject:* Re: Transitioning Low-time Pilots (was: Cirrus - OT)

 

  

  

  

 Dwight,

  

 While I agree that lots of transition training would be a good thing, I 

 flew my RV-7A with practically none.  I landed a friends RV-6A from the 

 right seat one time and decided that I could fly the -7A that my wife 

 and I built, and I did.  I had about 450 hours in Cessnas and Warriors, 

 and about 100 hours in a Grumman AA1C.  The Grumman was a good 

 "transition trainer."  The RV-7A is much more docile than that little devil.

 ** 

 

 *

 

 

 *

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