I joined an EAA chapter ( 268 ), and they are mostly building/flying RV's. The RV series are all really nice, and I was talking to one guy about his project and he showed me the plans.
Step-by-step with illustrations. It's almost like IKEA or LEGO. To go back to the plans I have... I mean, I can make it work just fine, but I also write work instructions for building C-130's and F-16's for a living, and I can see some room for improvement. 10 years ago they were great, but today they are looking pretty dated. I also understand that the MAX is no where near as complex as a Vans, and that creating new assembly documents would be very costly. At the same time I'm thinking that some improved plans could attract more buyers/builders.
Y'all got any thoughts on this?
(before you break out the pitch forks and torches - I'm not bashing the current plans. I'm just putting myself in the mind of a 30-something dude and thinking what he would prefer)
I built a RV4 in the early 90’s. They are indeed a great airplane! I was told before I started that if you try to build it exactly to the plans , it will not go together. I thought the people telling me that were crazy , so I started building the horizontal stabilizer exactly to the plans. Not too far in I discovered it was not going to go together like the plans showed. I called Vans( back when Van still answered the phone) and told him of my issues. He also told me you couldn’t build it to the plans. Try to make the pieces join up with the same number of rivets and close to the same spacing. I ended up ordering new parts and using the plans as a reference to build the airplane. Long story long, the plans are nice but not as nice as you would think. Sometimes less is more.
Maybe you should consider what you want to work with wood or aluminum ? Tooling up for aluminum can be a little expensive and those tools are not adaptable for other purposes. Wood working tools are not so expensive and are readily adaptable to other projects. Mistakes in ruining a part are expensive in aluminium Is this your first build? Are you sure you will like building. Van's aircraft make great airplanes, but think about what you want to be doing with your airplane and try to decide from that. Van's is also a great company to deal with.I have owned a RV-3A and it was a fun airplane but a lot more expensive to own than my Minimax. In the end it is up to you but I would urge you to do some deep thinking about the question before you commit to one or the other. Whatever you decide I wish you well in your endeavor.
While I agree that less can be more, these were not plans from the 1990's. Not even the 2000's.
The guys building the 10's and 14's say all they have to do if follow the plans, step-by-step, and at the end they have an airplane. Similarly, it looks as though following the plans for a Max will get you a Max. But... why not make the plans a bit easier to follow?
I write work instructions for assemblers in their 20's on up. The 40+ crowd can pick up a blueprint and written instructions and build a plane. Thirty and younger... not so much. We're having to put much more graphical and video content in our work instructions because there has been a cultural shift away from that old style of working on things. Even the "Makers" (weird dudes who build robots and drones in their basements), have Image+text work instructions (or videos).
As a community, I figure we want more people to build a Max, rather than fewer, and having Millennial-Friendly work instructions (if such a thing is even possible) is part of the formula for continued success of these little planes.
While I agree that less can be more, these were not plans from the 1990's. Not even the 2000's.
The guys building the 10's and 14's say all they have to do if follow the plans, step-by-step, and at the end they have an airplane. Similarly, it looks as though following the plans for a Max will get you a Max.
As a community, I figure we want more people to build a Max, rather than fewer, and having Millennial-Friendly work instructions (if such a thing is even possible) is part of the formula for continued success of these little planes.
I have ran into issues because of the instructions already. In the plans, it says make 20 standard ribs, then 4 root and tip ribs. I made 20 ribs and and made a tip rib; then the next line says that rib 5 on each wing plus the roots and tips get reinforced bits that must be installed during construction. I just made all those, now I have to remake 3 ribs. I use the instructions like a checklist, and this does not work with the max.
The plans are wildly out of date and can be very vague. This relaxed style does not translate to us younger folk. As someone with only basic wood working experience, I messed up a lot initially. Now I understand it, it is usually easy to read, but as a newbie it was tough.
I would like to offer an alternative viewpoint. I was born in 1983 so I don't consider myself an "old timer", but my father was 48 when I was born so I learned a lot of the "old timer" ideals from him and his older friends growing up. Perhaps it's more of a cultural shift from learning from experience what works and what doesn't, developing a talent over time through experience to become a craftsman, an artist in the trade, an aircraft builder... rather than just an assembler who can follow point by point instructions that require no thought or challenge ? I view building an aircraft as an expression of a passion to create, as much as a sculpture, a fine painter, or even a master musician. I think if you have the passion for the art of creating a flying machine that will out live you if maintained that you will figure out the details, (and sorry for the shot, but atleast read all the way through the instructions before starting the build, I fell for that test in third grade with the "read all questions before answering any and the last one said just sign your name and turn it in test). If your looking for a cheap way to fly, buy a used experimental, if you want to build accept there will be some thought involved. The adventure is in the journey not the destination, just my two cents.... a few years ago I found a one sheet plan view of the barnaby Wainfields facetmobile with a quote say it had all the information needed to replicate it (idk if it was valid, internet and all), but I spent a couple cold blizzardy days with a print out of that one sheet and a caliper and built a a 3' span model from it that the following spring I threw off a grain elevator (220' approx) and it glided gracefully to the ground. Different strokes fore different folks, but I'm afraid if you make it too idiot proof it will cause incidents that will start to draw unwanted attention to the field of experimental aircraft and ruin it for everybody. Their has to be a fuse, and some plan vagueness is an effective fuse🤷🏻♂️
Darn it now I want to make a full size on again! (I had taped on a rudder to test a few different configurations, hence why it's missing. This had been in the rafters of the garage for years until today)
I would like to offer an alternative viewpoint. I was born in 1983 so I don't consider myself an "old timer", but my father was 48 when I was born so I learned a lot of the "old timer" ideals from him and his older friends growing up. Perhaps it's more of a cultural shift from learning from experience what works and what doesn't, developing a talent over time through experience to become a craftsman, an artist in the trade, an aircraft builder... rather than just an assembler who can follow point by point instructions that require no thought or challenge ? I view building an aircraft as an expression of a passion to create, as much as a sculpture, a fine painter, or even a master musician. I think if you have the passion for the art of creating a flying machine that will out live you if maintained that you will figure out the details, (and sorry for the shot, but atleast read all the way through the instructions before starting the build, I fell for that test in third grade with the "read all questions before answering any and the last one said just sign your name and turn it in test). If your looking for a cheap way to fly, buy a used experimental, if you want to build accept there will be some thought involved. The adventure is in the journey not the destination, just my two cents.... a few years ago I found a one sheet plan view of the barnaby Wainfields facetmobile with a quote say it had all the information needed to replicate it (idk if it was valid, internet and all), but I spent a couple cold blizzardy days with a print out of that one sheet and a caliper and built a a 3' span model from it that the following spring I threw off a grain elevator (220' approx) and it glided gracefully to the ground. Different strokes fore different folks, but I'm afraid if you make it too idiot proof it will cause incidents that will start to draw unwanted attention to the field of experimental aircraft and ruin it for everybody. Their has to be a fuse, and some plan vagueness is an effective fuse🤷🏻♂️
1986 baby here!
For me its just different strokes. I want to build, and not worry about if what I build is correct. I was a mechanic earlier and I just like to get to the point! I think its also a fear of screwing up, this being my first aircraft, I don't want to test my skill outright. I plan on doing some extensive modification to the aircraft, but I hate having issues when I'm trying to measure out something on a wing. I've been measuring out some parts as they do not have a set dimension in the plans and I find it super stressful. I like a benchmark to know if it is right and although I can oversize parts and trim it down, I know that someone else has figured out a better way. I am totally going to experiment later, but making sure I don't eff it up is my main concern.
Totally respectable, I think the issue may be that in a lot of cases (beyond just this subject) the prototype is created by an artisan. Then they make the prints afterwords, and if lucky an istruction manual afterwords. I've worked on a lot of machine development in other fields and the process has always been (on the ones that made it 😉) do an initial calculation of the forces involved, size with an appropriate safety margin, and test. From there if further refinements were needed it progressed piece meal style to refine it if it justified the cost. A lot of things never leave the ground from analysis paralysis, and I'd say most of the people creating designs that are successful enough to market plans are probably not of the personality type to spend countless hours on creating a step by step exact guide on recreating it, they've moved onto their next project.. it's kind of a poisoned pill, in the rare instance they partner with somebody that is of the detail oriented nature to do the build manual then it's huge (vans?). I highly recommend reading every print, every page of the manual until you know it by heart, until it becomes intuative what is needed to be done.
I will give the homebuiltairplane forum as an example, years ago it was very active with true artisans in the experimental airplane field, over the years it has become a place of hypotheticals and theories and overanalysis to the point that I can't remember when the last "new" design build has been made? It's disappointing, in the days of Orion it was a forum of people building airplanes, now it's a morning coffee shop gossip circle of hypotheticals (no offense ment to the site, I still check it daily out of hope to find inspiration, it's just my observation that's it's "changed"). I fear people new to the hobby underestimate the work involved and have expectations higher than what is really realistic for what is an odd activity that has very little or no financial insentive.. 🤷🏻♂️
I will give the homebuiltairplane forum as an example, years ago it was very active with true artisans in the experimental airplane field, over the years it has become a place of hypotheticals and theories and overanalysis to the point that I can't remember when the last "new" design build has been made? It's disappointing, in the days of Orion it was a forum of people building airplanes, now it's a morning coffee shop gossip circle of hypotheticals (no offense ment to the site, I still check it daily out of hope to find inspiration, it's just my observation that's it's "changed"). I fear people new to the hobby underestimate the work involved and have expectations higher than what is really realistic for what is an odd activity that has very little or no financial insentive.. 🤷🏻♂️
Oh man, I have stopped posting pics of my build everywhere due to the armchair pilots. I had a guy tell me to follow the plans and not use t88... of course he does not build nor does he fly and also he apparently can't read. He also told me sanding is bad and gave me quite the lesson on coatings, even though I've been professionally in coatings all my life. Buh.
You are absolutely right.As an aeromodeller building from plans apart from the subject aircraft the layout of the plan has a lot to do with keeping up your interest.Some drawings are lifeless and depict a complicated build while in reality the construction is easy.Similiarly there are drawings which present information in a simple and attractive format so the construction is a pleasure rather than a chore.Case in point drawings for rubber powered models by Ternaero which were a true delight IMHO.
Before I built my max, I was considering a MiniMax, Rans or Belite. Decided to go with MiniMax because I wanted to build an airplane, not assemble an erector set. Plus I already had lots of woodworking tools.
That said, I do agree that the instructions could be improved slightly and I don't think it would be a huge undertaking. The majority of the effort would be retyping the current instructions so one can make edits. That is a rather small investment.
The actual plans, it would be a huge undertaking to make them better and other than looking a little nicer I think it would be hard to make them easier to understand.
I get what you mean but the minimax plans are better than the ragwing plans i am building off of. The younger crowed wants instant gratification and those few that are willing to put in some effort do want insert tab A into slot B construction. people my age and younger can't believe that i got as far as i have with my plans. The older people look at the plans and can see exactly how I did it. It really hasn't been that hard though just have to think though it
I built a MiniMAX a few years ago. There were times when I had questions or was confused but either coming here or contacting a gentleman who offered his help freely always cleared up my confusion. Most times the plans had the info I needed, I just hadn't looked. The "flat" drawings don't answer the questions? Look at the 3D drawings and they'll put things into perspective and breath life into the plans.
As far as the mindset of today, I feel it's sad that things have become so dumbed down. Follow the GPS lady's step by step directions will certainly get you to your destination, but you'll really have no idea of where you are or how you got there. Read a paper map to get the perspective? No, too difficult and old fashioned and it would take thought.
FWIW....I built my MiniMAX from scratch, and per plans. Started with 1 X 6 boards that were hand selected and re-sawn to size and quantity needed. Finished cost was about $5500 including the 277 Rotax I rebuilt/freshened and new instruments. It took me a bit longer than building from a kit, but the finished product flew well. Cost and time to build an RV-anything......WAY more money and a completely different concept of an airplane.
It was a bitter-sweet day, but I have sold my MiniMAX and will be selling my hangar soon. I'll always have the satisfaction of checking the box "Build an Airplane" and still enjoy the company of friends I met through the EAA Chapter I still belong to.
Logged
