Harmon Rocket Info??
sik...@rcinet.res.utc.com
Has anyone heard anything on the Harmon Rocket? I have just started
a RV-4 and think the Harmon might just be a better project.
Any comments or info?
James Sleigh
Mark Williston
Any comments or info?
James Sleigh
One of the local guys just finished a harmon rocket, his name is Peter
Harisson he had previously built a beautiful RV-4. The harmon has one or
two feet cliped from each wing and has titanium tube gear. It sits a lot
higher on the ramp, I was looking eye level with the spinner and I am six
feet tall. Peter says it is easier to fly than the 4, take-off roll is
about 100' it climbs at 5 or 6 thousand feet a minute but I can't remember
what he said his cruises at. the cost of building would be the same other
than the six cylinder lycoming and prop. I think your next step up from the
harmon would be a glassair III. Overall I think it was an Awesome Airplane.
I believe that there is going to be an article on Peters airplane in sport
aviation, maybe that would give you some more info.
Mark Williston
Fleet Canuck CF-GAU
Navion C-GWIY (for sale)
Nanchang CJ-6A (yak18)
ne...@txnews.amd.com
In article <55...@mindlink.bc.ca>, Mark_Wi...@mindlink.bc.ca (Mark Williston) writes:
Personally, I don't see why anyone would build an RV-4 after taking a serious
look at the Rocket. I've seen the kit going together in a shop. Looks good to
this RV-4 builder.
The 5-6 thousand fpm rate of climb may be real for solo conditions. I've talked
to an airline pilot, former Navy fighter pilot who saw a steady 4500 fpm behind
300 HP with two on board. Folks, that is alot of vertical performance. He said
the handling was standard RV.
Due to
the popularity of the 4 cylinder Lycoming engines, you can get an O-540 for about
the same price. The prop costs about the same as a constant speed prop for the 4
cylinder Lycs for the same reason. My understanding is that the Harmon kit will
add $4-5K to the price. For that you get:
SPECS FROM A HARMON INFO SHEET:
span 21' 10" fuel 42 gal
length 21' 6" data for IO-540 250hp
height 5' 7" cruise 75% 230 mph
wing area 109 sq ft cruise 55% 215 mph
whl track 6' 6" redline 275 mph
empty weight 1138 lbs rate of climb (gross) 3100 fpm
gross weight 1781 lbs stall 55mph
useful load 643 lbs
power loading 5.9 lbs/hp
[vs 8.33 for 180 HP RV-4]
wing loading 16.4 lbs/sq ft
Advantages vs RV-4:
- Power loading - Twice the vertical performance
- 30% more fuel
- Wider cockpit (4" wider)
- Longer cockpit
- Larger baggage comp with more capacity (big counterweight on the front)
- 40 mph faster cruise
- Similar take-off distance
- Shorter wing span
- Higher wing loading (better ride in turbulence)
- Larger CG envelope
Disadvantages vs RV-4:
- Cost a little more
- Weighs 200 lbs more
- Higher wing loading (higher stall, longer landing distance)
- Higher fuel burn
- Higher maintenance costs
- Van's doesn't support it
I've heard (this needs to be verified, of course) that John Harmon had a full
structural analysis done on the Rocket II. He has flown his Rocket well beyond the
RV-4 redline. Harmon's published redline is 275 mph. I don't know about
structural limits. The Harmon kit uses thicker skins in many places on the
fuselage and the shorter span reduces the bending moment on the spar, although
the absolute load will be higher.
Problem: Van's won't sell parts to anyone known to be building a Harmon Rocket.
Don't tell Van's you're building one. In fact, maybe I shouldn't be writing
this....
I can understand Van's reluctance to stand behind something he didn't
personally design. However, it would be great if Van would look at this
seriously and, if it's inadequate, make whatever mods are required, and
market and support this design. It's fairly obvious that Harmon is not
trying to make alot of money off this. [Turn my head towards Oregon] Good thing
I'm too far along on my RV-4 to change now......
Name withheld by request
Mark60195
I've been eyeing the RV-4's as a potential project to start ASAP. But the
Harmon Rocket sounds incrediable. Anyone have a phone number or
address available? Thanks! - Mark
David Bonorden
In article <1994Oct11.1...@cronkite.res.utc.com>, sik...@rcinet.res.utc.com writes:
>
>I wonder if Van is worried about the competition? If it costs about the same,
>is as easy to fly, and has 1.7 times the performance, I'd bet the RV-4
>craze would end real quick!
>
>James
>
I doubt it. It takes about 3/4 of an RV-4 kit to build a Harmon Rocket. See
Corky Scott's post for what Van IS concerned about.
Dave Bonorden
Paul Kube
In article <1994Oct11.1...@cronkite.res.utc.com>, sik...@rcinet.res.utc.com writes:
|> I wonder if Van is worried about the competition? If it costs about the same,
|> is as easy to fly, and has 1.7 times the performance, I'd bet the RV-4
|> craze would end real quick!
Maybe, if it was as good a kit, had the same level of factory support,
and the same quality of engineering design behind it. But it isn't
and doesn't, and isn't likely to. John Harmon is a pretty good seat of
the pants builder, but he's no Dick Van Grunsven.
I was at Bakersfield in 1992 when Van saw the Harmon Rocket II for
the first time. His reaction to it was the same as his reaction to other
radical modifications of his designs by "amateurs". It's kind of
ironic that it is this way, since the RV's were themselves an evolution
of the Stits Playboy design. But given the liability considerations,
it's not too hard to understand.
--Paul
"It's worth it, it's worth the final smash-up."
-- Mermoz, quoted by de St. Exupery
sik...@rcinet.res.utc.com
> a RV-4 and think the Harmon might just be a better project.
>
>two feet cliped from each wing and has titanium tube gear. It sits a lot
>higher on the ramp, I was looking eye level with the spinner and I am six
>feet tall. Peter says it is easier to fly than the 4, take-off roll is
>about 100' it climbs at 5 or 6 thousand feet a minute but I can't remember
WOW!
>what he said his cruises at. the cost of building would be the same other
>than the six cylinder lycoming and prop. I think your next step up from the
I would think it should be about the same price as a RV-4 to build the
airframe since they are so similar, but I've heard the rocket is much
more. I am still wondering why.
As far as the six cylinder engine costs, believe it or not, the cost
of a used 0-540 can be comparable to a 0-360. This is due to the much
higher demand for the 320s and 360s. I would assume, however, that the
540 would cost much more in maint and O/H.
>harmon would be a glassair III. Overall I think it was an Awesome Airplane.
>I believe that there is going to be an article on Peters airplane in sport
>aviation, maybe that would give you some more info.
I wonder if Van is worried about the competition? If it costs about the same,
is as easy to fly, and has 1.7 times the performance, I'd bet the RV-4
craze would end real quick!
James
Charles K. Scott
sik...@rcinet.res.utc.com writes:
> I wonder if Van is worried about the competition? If it costs about the same,
> is as easy to fly, and has 1.7 times the performance, I'd bet the RV-4
> craze would end real quick!
Guys I honestly don't think competition is what's worrying Van. There
was some discussion about this aircraft somewhere a little while ago
and the gist of it was that Van was more than a little worried about
hanging a monster engine on his airframe and bending on the knots like
that. Or at least that's how I remember it. The airplane is so
modified that he really doesn't want to be associated with what it's
become. The situation reminds me a little of the discussion a few
months ago over the Falco and how a guy who wanted to change the
landing gear a little was requested to remove the name Falco from the
airplane and not call it that anymore.
I'm positive there's someone out in netterland who knows this situation
better than I do and can explain it.
Corky Scott
David Bonorden
D&J Harmon Co. Inc.
2000 S. Union Ave
Bakersfield, CA 93307
(805) 836-1028
Info pack is $6
Plans $85