What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-15 Intel

It is a 6 seat single engine jet with 1,500NM range, capable of supersonic cruise while burning 8gal/hr of 80octane regular gas.

;)
 
Last edited:
You forgot

You forgot that it will be a super quick build with stol capability 300 it cruise and cost under $100k...
 
It's unicorn powered, and they consume hydrogen from water in clouds, exhaust is pure oxygen for high elevation cruising, with wings fabricated out of Unobtanium.
 
My understanding is that it will have VTOL capability and is based on an earlier design of Italian origins.

Science_and_inventions_of_Leonardo_da_Vinci
 
Okay. That didn't work. Clearly I don't know how to embed images in these forums.

My prior post had a picture of Da Vinci's aerial screw / helicopter attached.

It was supposed to be funny. Oh well.
 
Rv15

All joking aside, I know a lot of people who are tired of hangar expenses, logistics of hangar locations, waitlists, convenience and just lack of them.

A 1 person required folding wing RV with a Lycoming engine would put me #1 on the list. I’m moving to Phoenix near Chandler and can’t find a hangar within 45 min of my house. That makes me cry. Will the distance finally force me out of GA...:confused::mad:

We need to evolve how to reduce expense, improve the overall experience of owning a plane so the younger generation gets more engaged...before we lose GA all together.
 
They?re mounting a big marketing tease on Instagram and Facebook. Makes me suspect an announcement will be coming at SNF. Hope so!
 
See the Van?s FB page. Monday night (Jan 20, 2020) they asked for inputs on the design configuration of the RV-15.

https://m.facebook.com/pg/vansaircraftinc/posts/?ref=m_notif

So reading over the comments it looks like the next model will be a 4 seat twin. Engines will be Rotax but will also be jet turbine. The plane will be fully aerobatic. It will use construction techniques that will allow it to built in 600 hours. And building on the concept used in the Sportsman, it will be possible to convert back and forth between tailwheel and nosewheel in an afternoon. But it will also be able to be converted from low wing to high wing and slider to tip up by removing four simple pins. Oh yeah and it will go 220kts on 8 gph, takeoff and land in under 200ft and cost no more than $100k to build.
 
So, is the teaser campaign on fb/instagram a genuine market research campaign, which would mean a 15 launch is still at the concept stage and therefore years away?

Or is it a pre-launch teaser which means all these decisions and engineering have already been done and the launch is imminent, so our responses don't matter much?

My feeling is you wouldn't focus your marketing on the 15, potentially causing people to hold off on committing to an existing model, unless launch was going to be very soon...

Waiting impatiently for for my Rotax 915 powered, RV-9 wing, RV-15 :)
 
I think Vans would do very well with a reworked 915 powered version of the -9 assuming of course they could do it at a competitive price point.

That can be done today by any EAB builder, no need for a new model with it. If they are going to introduce a new model, methinks it will have more changes than just a different engine on an existing plane.
 
So, is the teaser campaign on fb/instagram a genuine market research campaign, which would mean a 15 launch is still at the concept stage and therefore years away?

Or is it a pre-launch teaser which means all these decisions and engineering have already been done and the launch is imminent, so our responses don't matter much?

My feeling is you wouldn't focus your marketing on the 15, potentially causing people to hold off on committing to an existing model, unless launch was going to be very soon...

Waiting impatiently for for my Rotax 915 powered, RV-9 wing, RV-15 :)


Same question I?ve asked myself. In OSH 2018 VANS told us the project RV15 has started.
1,5 years later they ask what ?we hope it will be?.
I guess you have to decide right at the beginning if you want to build a 2 seater high wing bush plane or a 6 seater high performance aircraft.
So I have no idea what is the intention behind. If it is marketing research, what was done the last 1,5 years?
I hope for a launch very soon, so I can finally decide if it is worth to wait or start building.:)
 
That can be done today by any EAB builder, no need for a new model with it. If they are going to introduce a new model, methinks it will have more changes than just a different engine on an existing plane.

Agreed, but it would be great for them to offer an engine mount, cowling, and FF kit for it...
 
So, is the teaser campaign on fb/instagram a genuine market research campaign, which would mean a 15 launch is still at the concept stage and therefore years away?

Or is it a pre-launch teaser which means all these decisions and engineering have already been done and the launch is imminent, so our responses don't matter much?

My feeling is you wouldn't focus your marketing on the 15, potentially causing people to hold off on committing to an existing model, unless launch was going to be very soon...

Waiting impatiently for for my Rotax 915 powered, RV-9 wing, RV-15 :)
Given how they?ve answered some of the questions, I?m pretty sure they?re teasing pre-launch. As you said, anyone considering an RV today would be wise to wait and see what the -15 is and Van?s knows it.
 
That can be done today by any EAB builder, no need for a new model with it. If they are going to introduce a new model, methinks it will have more changes than just a different engine on an existing plane.
True. But isn't the -7 just an updated version of the -6 that is designed to accept engines the -6 was never designed to take? Isn't it the case with the -4 and the -8 as well? And the -7 and the -14?

The -9 was not designed to use the 915 engine and getting one elegantly into that airframe will be no easy task for someone trying to roll their own solution.

Redesign the -9 for that specific engine, integrate the same sorts of airframe design and construction changes that turned the -7 into the -14 and I'd bet kits would fly out the door.
 
I think Vans would do very well with a reworked 915 powered version of the -9 assuming of course they could do it at a competitive price point.

Why? The -12 has more room and better visibility than the -9 and the useful load might be surprisingly close.

The 915 has a turbo which typically have some long-term maintenance issues. Granted, they can maintain rated HP at altitude, unlike a normally aspirated engine.

The installed weight might be surprisingly close to a Lycoming. Rotax lists the empty weight of the 915 as 186.4 lb (84.6 kg) but this number does not include the ?fuel pumps assembly, radiator and oil cooler?, which can add a good bit of weight.

Lycoming lists the weight of the O-290D2 at 233 lb (106 kg), which is closest in power out 135 hp continuous and 140 hp for five minutes.

As a performance measure, when I had the O-290D2 in my -9, it had a fixed pitch Catto climb prop on it. (Standard O-235 prop for an RV-3.) at 65% power it would cruise right at 140 knots / 165 mph and climb at 1600 fpm, if I pushed it. It was a really good match to the airframe and had I not had a prop strike and been able to find parts, I would still be flying with it.

All that said, I am a fan of Rotax engines. I?m just not sure retrofitting one to an existing airframe is worth the effort.
 
The RV12 uses a Rotax 912

RV15 using a Rotax 915 makes some sense. ;)


A Rotax 915 has a critical altitude of 15,000 ft and 135 HP continuous (141 HP takeoff)

A RV9ish / RV12ish plane with a 915 would be an impressive high altitude / x-country machine (better than RV9 because of higher available HP)
 
Baby RV-8

Here's my hope. A tandem seat taildragger version of the RV-12 capable of mild aerobatics. Maybe a couple engine options; Rotax, O-200 and O-235. Something less expensive to build, great fun to fly and doesn't chug back 390 fuel burn.
 
Why? The -12 has more room and better visibility than the -9 and the useful load might be surprisingly close.
Absolutely correct. And 120kts is about all you're going to get out of it with that 100hp engine.

So what would you have if you took what the -12 is i.e. a non aerobatic side by side machine, and retooled it to handle the performance that could be achieved with a 915 and CS prop on the front? Would that not essentially be a rework of the -9 with a Rotax 915 in terms of mission profile?
 
I think Vans would do very well with a reworked 915 powered version of the -9 assuming of course they could do it at a competitive price point.

I keep thinking about this, over and over in my head. I use my 9A on a lot of long cross-country trips at high altitude, and I'm thinking about 915is in place of the IO360 in that case. It would allow me to cruise about 4k' higher, in the 18k-21k range and be able to cruise well into the yellow zone right up against Vne in smooth air - but that again bumps up into the idea that we need to protect against going too fast on descent and Vans has always shied away from trusting the pilot to not do anything stupid. You'd have about a +$12k delta for the 915is over the IO360, and it would buy about 15-20 knots in cruise at a higher altitude. It would require a new cowl for the cooling requirements, and close attention to airspeed, perhaps a stronger empennage for better flutter margins.

Might be worth doing after all...
 
Haven't seen it yet at UAO

I've been based at Aurora since about 1996. If I recall correctly, Van's flew several of their other prototypes back in the 90's and early 2000's before they were announced.

Today, my guess is they'll unveil it before it flys - or about the same time. They'll be no keeping this cat in the bag once the -15 sees daylight!
 
Maybe the RV-15 should be a well-designed trailer for the RV-12.

Nice. Well-designed and affordable please. With optional fuel-transfer tank. I'm only at the empennage stage, but I was toying with the idea of heavily modifying a harbor freight trailer. Mission would be from home to gas station to local field and back on low-speed surface streets. Probably would want a more substantial enclosed trailer for much more than that.
 
RV-15 with a match for those supposed new E-LSA weight standards 1550 to 1600 # we keep hoping for with a Sport Pilot License, if the FAA ever gets it moving. Removable wings, slightly wider cabin, a 30 gal fuel tank behind the seats, utility rated, and could be flown with a Sport Pilot license.

2 seater, but somewhat like the Sling TSI also with the 915iS.

Or maybe the UL-350IS 130 HP FI motor, to keep the price lower and operating on Mogas, keep the lead out of the motor parts?

More payload weight back there, maybe a full 100 # with out screwing up the CG, and the forward and below visibility the RV-12 is so well known for.

Glass EFIS with ADSB Out and In.

One can dream... kinda feel with what little I know, that the RV9 and RV-12 pretty much cover most of those bases.

Must be similar or less assembly time than the RV-12.
 
Last edited:
True. But isn't the -7 just an updated version of the -6 that is designed to accept engines the -6 was never designed to take? Isn't it the case with the -4 and the -8 as well? And the -7 and the -14?

The -9 was not designed to use the 915 engine and getting one elegantly into that airframe will be no easy task for someone trying to roll their own solution.

Redesign the -9 for that specific engine, integrate the same sorts of airframe design and construction changes that turned the -7 into the -14 and I'd bet kits would fly out the door.

You think the 8 is an updated version of the 4? I guess it depends on your definition of updated. They both have wings and a tail and an engine at the front but that’s about the end of the similarity.
 
Folding wings are a significant weight penalty and a pita from what
I have seen of my friend’s glastar. It compromises the spar location/attachment and the strut location (assuming there is a strut). I don’t think trailering an aircraft to an airport and assembling it is a practical alternative to hangaring. too much hassle. How many people do that with the 12?

If Vans is going for an aluminum fuselage they will already have a competitive disadvantage in terms of weight Vs cub types. I doubt they would take the hit for a folding wing. But I’ve been wrong before. Frequently.
 
We'll it's finally been announce at Oshkosh so I'm expecting more info and pictures from the guys there.
 
The announcement stated it will be High Wing, Backcountry Capable, all-metal, stick & rudder, and tailwheel at first (with tricycle option later). The rest of the design is still being determined.
 
Last edited:
The RV 15 will place Van's Aircraft ahead of Piper and Cessna by offering more models than either one of them.
 
Here are the slides

There were two slides presented… and then there was Sling’s response.:D

(I have no idea why they are getting rotated. They are not on my phone)
 

Attachments

  • 800D687E-195A-46E7-8535-B1687EEBA909.jpg
    800D687E-195A-46E7-8535-B1687EEBA909.jpg
    362.5 KB · Views: 272
  • F8482416-08DC-48FE-9851-F975BE152CC6.jpg
    F8482416-08DC-48FE-9851-F975BE152CC6.jpg
    411.5 KB · Views: 295
  • EA85F0E3-66E0-461E-9783-F558679ED719.jpg
    EA85F0E3-66E0-461E-9783-F558679ED719.jpg
    923.6 KB · Views: 372
That is quite funny. Thanks for posting! But what does a decked out Sling HW costs...$190k and you still have a 1,000ft. T/O on dirt.

There were two slides presented… and then there was Sling’s response.:D

(I have no idea why they are getting rotated. They are not on my phone)
 
tired of hangar expenses, logistics of hangar locations, waitlists, convenience and just lack of them.

A 1 person required folding wing RV with a Lycoming engine

Agree 100%

Moving to Lake Havasu and cannot find a hanger.
 
Back
Top