08 Nov 2025, 01:12 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution  Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 17:54 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 04/28/12
Posts: 4973
Post Likes: +3588
Location: Kansas City, KS (KLXT)
Aircraft: 1972 Duke A60
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Those numbers seem too high to me.
VSx1.3 is around 83-85 knots from memory. The one next to me is a slick machine but not impossible to fly safely. The little 320/360's are the ones that demand more respect.
They could be, it's been a few years since my ride. Those numbers are what I remember, though.
_________________
CFII/MEI
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 18:47 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/03/12
Posts: 2303
Post Likes: +719
Location: Wichita, KS
Aircraft: Mooney 201
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I've ridden in a IV-P and remember the owner talking about the "Safety." You don't stall them, ever, and the speeds in the pattern are insane. IIRC, we were something like 140 knots on downwind, 130 knots on base. 120 knots on final, 110 knots over the fence, and touchdown at 100 or so, with a long roll-out due to the shopping-cart sized wheels/tires. That said, the thing climbs and cruises like nothing I've ever flown in that class (size/engine). Those numbers seem too high to me. VSx1.3 is around 83-85 knots from memory. The one next to me is a slick machine but not impossible to fly safely. The little 320/360's are the ones that demand more respect.
Actually I am pretty sure the stall speed on the IV(P) is in the neighborhood of 70 knots, or perhaps a bit more. I've ridden in a couple, and over-the-fence speeds were north of 90 KIAS. In addition, the control harmony is terrible, and stall behavior is atrocious. It was designed as a go-fast machine as the primary, secondary, and tertiary criteria. The 320/360 (with the larger H-stab) actually fly pretty well with decent control harmony, stability, and stall speeds. If I won either, I would keep the 360 and sell the IV, FWIW.
The Evolution was designed to meet Part 23 standards in all regards, and thus is (or should be!) a much more forgiving plane in all aspects while still offering great cruise speeds and certifiable control behavior, stability, etc. I sure hope they succeed with the Evolution as it seems to offer a lot IMO while still being forgiving enough to be safe with an average trained pilot.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 21:32 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/01/09
Posts: 1287
Post Likes: +137
Company: Red Hawk
Location: TVC - Traverse City, MI
Aircraft: 2014 RV7A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Here's a 111 hr. Evolution that came on the market today. It's $1.4 million! It not certified, no airframe deice, and almost impossible to insure. There are better choices. http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 255461.htmNow you're getting close to the price of a TBM700C2 that goes just as fast, carries a decent load, cabin class and IS insurable. That's why they make all different makes and models but it would be an easy choice for me.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 21:58 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/03/08
Posts: 16153
Post Likes: +8870
Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Now you're getting close to the price of a TBM700C2 that goes just as fast, carries a decent load, cabin class and IS insurable. That's why they make all different makes and models but it would be an easy choice for me. The difference is that with the TBM you are tied into Socatas maintenance scheme with time limited components, mandatory inspection etc. If you 'built' your own Evolution, you can fix everything yourself with stuff you buy at the hardware store. Crack in a wing-skin after you overstressed the plane on descent ? Just buy some directional glass, a tube of quickset epoxy and a packet of Bondo and you are back in business after some glassing and sanding  . Insurance is overrated.....
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 22:24 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6062
Post Likes: +714
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
|
|
Not really Charles, The TBM as a big fat wing like a Bonanza unlike this tiny laminar wing on the Evolution. Use the same speed, 90 kts on final, 80 short final. Very safe, built like a tank, nothing like these plastic planes. Username Protected wrote: The Evolution has 33% more wing area than the LancairlV.
The landing speeds should be lower to accommodate the huge fuel weight required for a PT-6. Ity should also be a little more forgiving, but I still think a forced landing with it would be pretty sketchy.
It would not be any worse than a Duke, TBM, or other high performance airplane in a forced landing.
_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.
Marc Bourdon
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 22:33 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 03/10/11
Posts: 918
Post Likes: +295
Aircraft: B95, F33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The difference is that with the TBM you are tied into Socatas maintenance scheme with time limited components, mandatory inspection etc. Not true with a turbine single - they can be operated on condition. Nobody will want to buy it with timed out components, but it's not a necessity.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 22:58 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/29/10
Posts: 3958
Post Likes: +1108
Company: Advanced Pilot Seminars Aust.
Location: Brisbane Qld Australia
Aircraft: RV-10....ssshhh!
|
|
Asked my neighbour, In Landing config Vs=67 knots, so final at 100knots, over the fence at 90-92 and touching down at 75 knots. Granted that is probably 15 more than a Bonanza, but its a different beast. Lucky we do not all fly Cherokee 140's 
_________________
David Brown
The two best investments you can make, by any financial test, an EMS and APS!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 23:05 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/03/10
Posts: 1592
Post Likes: +162
Aircraft: C55, VELOX, Bulldog
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The Evolution has 33% more wing area than the LancairlV.
The landing speeds should be lower to accommodate the huge fuel weight required for a PT-6. Ity should also be a little more forgiving, but I still think a forced landing with it would be pretty sketchy.
It would not be any worse than a Duke, TBM, or other high performance airplane in a forced landing.
_________________
Too Much Horsepower, is Almost Enough!
I have done my 2.7 seconds
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Lancair evolution Posted: 24 Sep 2012, 23:35 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 06/02/10
Posts: 7698
Post Likes: +5098
Company: Inscrutable Fasteners, LLC
Location: West Palm Beach - F45
Aircraft: Planeless
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Looks like another addition to my "things to buy" list when I win the lottery.  Meh, I think I'd rather buy a whole slew of Sundowners, Sierrias, Skippers and various other Mouses for ground up restoration when I win the lottery. Best, Rich
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
