At the recent LOBO (Lancair), there was a presentation made that claimed the accident rate is overstated. When a Lancair crashed enough effort was always made to identify it as a Lancair. But this ID was difficult for the general population of aircraft as the builder could assign any name to the aircraft make & model. So the denominator was too small. Efforts to ID aircraft by pictures, etc. give a better fleet number. A claim was made that the accident rate is almost pseudo-Cirrus like. Hard to compare given accidents where the chute was pulled out of its limits… Or where the chute inspired overconfidence resulting in an accident.

The early 2-place Lancair also had a too small tail; with the larger tail, accident rate dropped significantly.

But I agree that training is key to reducing Lancair accidents. I believe that there has never been a LOBO trained pilot fatality. And there has not been an accident in the last 23 months… (this from a sometimes failing memory).

Best,

Tom

Unfortunately that isn’t a true statement. I can think of a handful off the top of my head, the most recent being Neal Longwill.

The Lancair is a beautiful plane and I have looked at the Columbia Lancairs as a compromise (i.e. Cessna - Lancair), but I am not to that level yet and I have over 400 hours in multiple singles. I am impressed with its speed and efficiency so maybe I will be a ride some day.

The Lancair is a beautiful plane and I have looked at the Columbia Lancairs as a compromise (i.e. Cessna - Lancair), but I am not to that level yet and I have over 400 hours in multiple singles. I am impressed with its speed and efficiency so maybe I will be a ride some day.

The Lancair is a beautiful plane and I have looked at the Columbia Lancairs as a compromise (i.e. Cessna - Lancair), but I am not to that level yet and I have over 400 hours in multiple singles. I am impressed with its speed and efficiency so maybe I will be a ride some day.

Unfortunately that isn’t a true statement. I can think of a handful off the top of my head, the most recent being Neal Longwill.

Unfortunately that isn’t a true statement. I can think of a handful off the top of my head, the most recent being Neal Longwill.

Has this been sold? If not, please advise!

Has this been sold? If not, please advise!

Win (OP),

If you are still selling your plane and would like to access some of the LOBO resources, please contact me. I'm on the LOBO board and willing to help as needed. Also consider posting on the LOBO forum lancairlive.com.

To help shed light on LOBO training, it means the pilot went through the FAA FITS certified LOBO syllabus with a LOBO certified instructor. We keep very good training data on all of our training and work with the FAA and and insurance brokers to show the trend data.

Regarding Lancairs, there are several models and they are all designed for efficient speed. But they have different flying characteristics. The IV, like the one the OP is selling, has a smaller wing than the ES, which means it flies faster, but has a higher stall speed as previously stated in this thread. LOBO instructors do not recommend, nor teach stalls during checkouts or recurrency flights for the IV series aircraft.

The ES is the closest performance-wise to the Bonanza. I own an ES with the IO-550N and it trues out 175 LOP, and 182 ROP. They typically have a 57-60 kt stall (fully configured), and are flown 90 kt final turn, 85 kt final, and 80 kt over the numbers (landing flaps). They stall well and are predictable. Overall, they are very efficient and have a great useful load of around 1,300-1,400 lb.