I understand the engine has been very reliable in military drone applications.

Yes, but I bet there's an awful lot of loitering at low power. If an engine isn't reliable given thsoe conditions, there's a serious problem.

I flew in the Lycoming powered Evolution yesterday and was impressed. Attractive to me except for the windows, lovely finish, large baggage door that doubles as an emergency exit. Very skinny wheels which wouldn't do well on anything soft or rough. Tyres cost $400 a time. Heavier gear with more normal wheels available at a cost of 2-3 thousand dollars and 15 kts.

The cowl is very tightly screwed down with a high oil access door. Not much opportunity to preflight the engine.

Even with a step, it's a climb up onto the wing. Kevin, who demonstrated the airplane told me he had put two full-sized bicycles in the back. I used to do that with my Grumman Tiger. It must be tougher with the Evo - the wing is much higher. Getting into the pilot's seat involved mild contortions. I didn't try the access to the other seats. I've read elsewhere the accommodation is spacious in the back. In the front, I had plenty of room, good visibility and plenty of headroom.

The avionics were impressive. A Garmin G3x with two screens, a 750 in between and the G700 AP.

Kevin said he climbed at 1200 fpm for the first 10K, then 1000 fpm to 20K and finally 800 fpm to 25K. That was compatible with what I saw at 160 kts and 25 gph. First we flew at 9.5K' and showed 205 kts TAS at 17 gph, then we went up to 17.5K. We flew a box, calculating 236 kts at 25 gph, or 211kts at 12 gph. I took the controls and made a few turns. The airplane seemed solid whether flown by hand, using the thumb-trim, or on the AP, but Doug's qualified to talk about handling; I'm not. Next Kevin showed me an emergence descent: the VSI was pegged, Kevin claimed 5K fpm which seemed likely. There was nothing exciting about the descent that as exciting - apart from all the desert that was visible in the canopy. The approach and landing seemed Bonanza like to me.

The piston-powered EVo can be built for significantly less than $1m. That's a reason for me to prefer it to the turbine. It also makes sense to me for someone like me who makes more short trips but wants occasional long-distance trips. Range won't limit any reasonable person.

Ashley

I saw it at the Mojave experimental fly-in on Saturday. It is a beautiful plane, and the fit & finish are outstanding. I spent a little time gawking at the engine while the top cowl was off, and it sure looks like a very modern package compared to what I'm used to! I would have very much liked to get a demo, but I don't think that was available at the fly-in, and more to the point, I'm not a prospect for one.

The only thing that alarmed me were some cracks at least through the paint originating at the upper corners of the baggage door. I'm a structural analyst, and I can't help but think they missed on the analysis of that cutout and the tailcone is moving a LOT in those corners. The rest of the paint job seemed flawless, so I doubt it was a simple paint failure... If that were my plane I would remove the paint and do a thorough NDI of the region, and likely add some strain gages and go measure the strains in flight.

The Legacy and Evolution are so much better than the original suite of Lancair kits, and I'm glad they evolved into really good airplanes that don't demand exceptional skills.

fractures in the micro/compound are normal on all lancairs, especially after their first few hundred hours, most builders encounter those and go back and touch them up later

i wouldn't say it's any sign of fatigue/failure at all, the shell is very well designed and over-engineered as with all lancair products

I'll yield to your experience on common cosmetic issues in the fleet, but I can assure you not everything is over-engineered in the Lancair fleet!

I'll yield to your experience on common cosmetic issues in the fleet, but I can assure you not everything is over-engineered in the Lancair fleet!

Looked it up on Flightaware for a longer flight. Here's one from FL to PA that reached 270KTS+. Of course that isn't necessarily TAS.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N52P ... /KECP/KIPT
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N52P ... T/tracklog

Looks like he is filing 232 KTAS. Looking at the climb profile, seems to have a similar climb rate as a Mirage, but is a little faster in cruise. I guess the IE engine is the more technologically refined cousin of the TIO540AE2A in the Mirage.

Anybody know who's supplying the FADEC/ fuel injection & ignitions systems for that new Lycoming ?

I'm just glad to finally see some innovation in light GA planes. Cirrus has been doing it, but this is closer to what I would want to own if I was shelling out that much money for a new single. Fast, far, retract, and parachute. I like it. Experimental is the future. Time to quit letting the FAA get in the way of everything.

I agree with Ben's assessment. It seems the only way to get innovation is thru the experimental market and now with the parachute option I would be much more inclined to purchasing one. Ironically I used to be opposed to parachutes back when flying my Mooney, but departing from an airport in a congested city or low over inhospitable terrain I've come to realize a parachute could be a life saver under the right conditions. It's one thing to depart over flat land or corn fields Vs city and worse night.

If I was in the market for a new 4 seat piston/turbine, this plane would certainly be on my short list.

jeff

I'd like to see the w&b numbers for the piston. The turbine Evolution already tends to an aft cg and adding the weight of the parachute behind the aft bulkhead pushed it over the edge. The extra weight of the piston engine up front could make it workable.

I've asked for the W&B info for the piston. No joy as yet.

An option regarding the parachute is to built a place for it but not install it. The cost in $ and pounds is reasonable. There's then always the option of retrofitting.

Ashley

If it's anything like the CAPS installation it's probably more complex than you might think with reefing lines embedded in the fuselage. That said, it's an interesting option.