adding a pic of my ES it took yesterday afternoon to liven up this discussion

You can still buy ESP, flying or unfinished

I fly an Es-p it's a great traveling machine. Indeed it is slower than a iv-p but I get 215 true at 17.5 on 17.5gph lop and very docile slow speed handling. I think that's a good trade for the speed of the VIP. Insurance is reasonable and so is maintenance.

I hear the Rdd guys are improving on it. Calling it the lx7. Will have a flying one at osh.

Yes, they are improving on the IV-P.

Everyone believes that a second door is a better option. Maybe it is. But for me, it is not. For several reasons.

I have owned several bonanza's, a few “low n slow” aircrafts, a few canards (Long Ez and Berkut) and a Mirage to name a few. But the ones that really matter here, I draw my experience from having owned a Lancair ES, Cirrus SR22, Columbia/Lancair 400 and now an ES-P. This does not make me an expert, but does give me the grounds to comment and would like to share my views.

First of all, I'm a very particular pilot. (I prefer that to being called “anal”) And what I mean is, any time a passenger is getting into my plane, I am there to assist them. With that being said, I am there instructing them on how to step up on the wing, avoiding the flaps and making sure they don't slip. If it is only one passenger, we are on the right wing obviously. But having 2 doors does not save me anytime with loading and unloading passengers. I do not allow them to enter or exit without my assistance. That's just the way I am. Right or wrong. But my point is, having 2 doors is really not easier, and does complicate things.

With 2 doors, there is twice as much that can go wrong. 2 doors that I need to make sure are shut and closed correctly. Twice the wind noise. 2 locks that can break. And I always make sure that I am the one who opens and shuts the door. That's the way I like it. And if you've ever had a door pop open in flight due to allowing someone to shut it themselves, you know what I mean. Also, there is only one wing to get up on. Less scratches on the wing. One less step. And for the folks who get in, it's not that difficult. Yes, it is more difficult than the SR22 as they have more room and the door opens up more at the top of the fuselage and you can step directly down on the floor. But you don't buy a Porsche or Corvette because you want the comfort of an SUV. And that's the way you have to think about the Lancair line of aircraft. Yes, it is a 4 seat cross country traveling machine. But you kind of “strap it on” more so then getting into a Mirage or a Cirrus.

Here's my point. Pressurized or not, the one door is a much better option. I hate when others tried to operate the right door on my SR22, bonanza's and my 400. They don't know what they are doing most of the time and they will eventually break something. Been there. Done that. Not a good thing. But this way, we all enter and exit off one wing. And all the passenger has to do is sit on the left side and then slide over. Very easy. And I don't have to run around to the other wing to make sure they don't slip and hurt themselves getting on or off.

As for which airplane is better. Depends on the mission and preference. I like to go high, fast and in control. The Lancair line is more of a “pilots” airplane. The sidestick is far superior than the side yolk. And my experience is that more Cirrus flyers fly by the autopilot and are more interested in just getting to their destination, then they are truly "flying" their aircraft. And there's nothing wrong with that. But I do believe the Lancair's are built stronger and fly much nicer. They are faster and sexier. But if none of that matters to you, than buy the SR22. It's a very nice aircraft with good speeds, great avionics, roomy, etc. But as my SR22 friend told me, “...when you park your Lancair next to my Cirrus, it makes my Cirrus look like it's 7 months pregnant!”

Just my thoughts. My opinion only. Hope I didn't offend anyone!

Well I for one love having 2 doors. Most of my time is in Cessnas and of course my own plane has 2 doors. The doors on the RV-10 are definitely the weak point of the design and care must be taken to insure they are properly latched or you risk a door departure in flight. However, I still wouldn't willing switch to a plane with a single door, all things being equal. It's just personal preference-- there's no wrong answer.

I understand Todd as most people are probably like you where they appreciate a second door. Guess I'm different. And you're right. Personal preference.

Safe flying!

I also enjoy having 1 door, it's one less thing to worry about, and it really keeps the drafts and water out compared to the 2 person planes i've been in, i think my next airplane will have one door as well but i'll have to walk forward to the flight deck

I hear you Brian. I don't see something that big and nice in my future. Happy flying the little stuff for now.

I should have added that SWMBO prefers her own door so that's a factor for me too!

I stumbled onto this thread. I have a Lancair ES I've been flying since March '22. Flight tested it myself through the additional pilot program. Additional pilot quipped my dual G3x, Garmin 750, Garmin auto pilot set up was way better than the avionics in the 757 he was flying for work. I have 270 hours now, criss crossing the country. Started working on my commercial mostly to challenge myself. My instructor couldn't stop raving about the plane through all the maneuvers. It handles wonderfully. Stalls are benign when the ball is centered--lower the nose just a bit and it's flying again. The one negative comment from the instructor was he wouldn't want to spin it--the tail is maybe a bit small, something one notices in slow speed handing, though it is fine, just not perfect.

I agree with all the positives said in this thread. The ES-P, in particular (not mine), is amazing, but only 5 were made. The ES got its start in the mid 90s. The fuselage is the same as the IV, but the wing and h.stab are much bigger. The design was done and still exists on paper (See here: https://www.aircraftdesigns.com/design/lancair-es/; Martin's description of the Columbia transition is not entirely accurate, but the rest probably is according former employees). There would be a market for this plane if it were put in modern CAD and had more factory molded parts to make the build easier. If the build were on par with say an RV-10, I think they'd sell a ton of kits, as it is a better plane all the way around. But 6 years after this thread was started, the current owners haven't made that investment, or any apparent investment and one of the best airplanes out there is not being built apart from some older kits. There are enough Lancairs out there and active user groups (LOBO, LancairTalk) and maintenance shops that maintenance and parts are available (and builders do much themselves). But I find myself in disbelief that this wonderful airplane is not in production, while RV is going gangbusters. Nothing against RVs--Vans clearly cracked the experimental marketing and buildability code. I've spoken with former Lancair employees that have moved into other exciting projects including composite jets who believe there is a strong case for modernizing the design and build of Lancairs. But it will require some investment. Maybe the fact that it hasn't happened means it just isn't possible to get build time where it needs to be. Everyone seems to love the plane, but someone has to put their money where their mouth is.

LX7 has essentially done this (modernized the design and build) for an improved version of the IV, (mostly the same fuselage; but with new and more forgiving but still fast airfoils, and CAD design with more molded parts; they might not like calling it a IV, but it certainly grew out of the IV). But that's a different class of aircraft, competing with (and out-performing!) standard certified turbines at a much lower price point and with the flexibility (though insurability issues) afforded by the experimental category. I'm still hoping something like this happens to the ES and Legacy, but as the years tick by, optimism fades.

Happy and safe flying,
Dan

I love the ES!

Agree with all of the positive comments. Years ago the company I worked for sold a IV-P Turbine to Bill Elliott, I went on the delivery with a VERY experienced IV-P pilot, he was pretty cautious, got my attention. Fuel starvation from the center tank was the biggest concern. To say it’s fast is an understatement.

Inbound to Meridian, Mississippi for a fuel stop, the tower kept asking us to slow down, I guess there must have been a Citation in front of us.

After he asked us to slow down, he said “WHAT KIND OF EXPERIMENTAL ARE YOU??”

I replied “a Lancair…

…turbine”

We had a good chuckle.

The IVPT is an incredible airplane. Stay in the envelope. And just smile. It is just a shame that modernized Lancair kits are not being produced.

Based on the ad for their demo Mako (I believe their other demo planes are already sold off), the IP is for sale. I wish I knew more about the business and engineering sides of things - I’d certainly love to take on a business in the space and there’s a great start and foundation. I would just be too totally out of my league, and I am not at the stage of life where I could take on a hobby business of that scale so far out of my true wheelhouses. Imagine borrowing from the LX7 airfoil and getting the Es/mako or even maybe the esp compliant with Mosaic. ESP and now LX7 are planes I would LOVE (and lust) to have.

I could not agree more. The fact that it hasn't happened, though, suggests either (i) bad luck (repeated transfers to the wrong people), or (ii) what seems viable on paper really isn't. Otherwise someone would have done it. I am actually hopeful that (i) is the truth and that we might soon see these great airplanes move forward.