I don't get it. I'm a little slow I guess.....

I don't get it. I'm a little slow I guess.....

Jeff. Hobby pilot and general tinkerer.

"Men's room measuring sticks"? Sounds like legitimate "Bona Fides" from way back here in the cheap seats!

I called Todd and spoke with him at length about Lancair IV-P when I too was hearing the "Siren-Song" of the amazing performance these aircraft possess. For me, it was VERY helpful, (and sobering), to hear recommendations and advice from an alphabet-soup pro-pilot that approaches his IV-P like the Citation X he flys for his day job.

I appreciated his counsel and quietly returned to my seat in the back of the room. Sounds to me like Mike is adopting a similar approach.... "Measurement" duly noted!

Keep the PIREPS coming! Very cool airplane!

I have more respect reading his posts since he put his ratings in there.
he's not just a weekend warrier who bought a IV-P. obviously flown a few different things...

Tks panels are available. Problem is the install changes the airfoil enough that it loses 10kts minimum and stall speeds change. Reports of CG issue tolerance has been reported too. Possibly since the airfoil is changed and it seems to move the center of pressure forward therefore less aft CG is tolerated.
The heated panels have had mixed reviews some say they work, some have had nothing but issues. Differences include how installed and new or old style controllers and alternators.
If flying the plane at altitude in the summer would make you nervous it isn't for you. Pre planning and watching conditions as you go there is no reason to be afraid to fly. Not all TN bonanzas have deice. Don't hear people saying how flying that would scare them. Always have an out too

Tail is plenty big. For slow flight? Lol. It's a LANCAiR! Slow? Now that there's funny I'm telling you. There is only 108sf of wing. Seriously there is tons of pitch authority, usually too much.

Rides thru turbulence rather smooth. As if there was no wing to be affected.

Not for tall people though. Head will be hitting the roof a lot.

As for the measuring sticks, the only one that matters for the Lancair is really time in a Lancair. Pilots with more time and ratings than me have augered them. A bunch of jet types and time crossing the pond doesn't help much.

Bonanzas fly well with ice (relatively speaking).

One BTer got as close as you could get in the last 40 years.

I'm still trying to understand how ATP, Jet time, multi time, etc, makes you a better pilot in a IVP

Plenty of highly qualified/decorated pilots have had mishaps in the IVP, I'm glad he's seeking the training- my condolences to him though as I had a regretful experience calling up those "trainers" and trying to schedule some training time, rates such as $1000/day plus expenses were not uncommon, I hope i was just unlucky and things have changed, i'm hoping he shares his progress back with us all so we can learn

Brian, I completely agree. That's why I didn't lead with any ratings. They mean nothing here. My time in the IV-P though should count for some credibility.


I spent about $2500 for my training. Includes that I airlined the guy to Hilton head to pick it up with me.

Interesting note, Lancair is trying to sell all the parts business and intellectual property for all Lancairs besides the Evo. Not sure what that will do for the old airframes. Would be interesting if RDD picked it up to start selling new modified kits to go with their LX7 conversion they have planned. Would compete with the Evo piston. But hopefully quite a bit cheaper.

Let's keep the rest of this about the Lancairs rather than pilot quals.

It's a good thing if it demonstrates that
-you care about being a safe, proficient pilot
-you have an appreciation of the pitfalls of transitioning to a new airplane (because you've done it before)

Remember too, a few months ago here there was a thread about putting stuff like that in your signature (ratings, recent training, etc.). The idea was to foster a culture of trying to be better pilots. I didn't climb aboard that one but I agree with the idea.

I'm glad he got the wakeup call from this thread is all i'm sayin

Will do, there's a wing cuff mod and it's $20K; not really sure it's needed. I don't think the slow speed handling is any worse than any other twin/jet/fast single.

Will do, there's a wing cuff mod and it's $20K; not really sure it's needed. I don't think the slow speed handling is any worse than any other twin/jet/fast single.

I would pass on the wing cuff mod. Vgs much cheaper. Hear they make the landings a little softer. Nose doesn't drop so hard after touchdown.

As far as stall characteristics yours might have stalled nice straight ahead.....this time. But don't count on that every time. That's the point you might be missing. The wing is so critical with respect to laminar flow that a sparrow taking a dump on the wing just might make your next stall take you inverted. Len Fox will attest to this. He has done more first flights and testing than anyone. 9/10 stalls go great. Same plane same day and the 10th ends upside down.
Slow speed handing in a certified plane is predictable. Not necessarily in the Lancair. Don't get slow. Don't test this theory. Others have and thought theirs was the one good straight flying plane. Didn't turn out well for them.
Not saying you can't handle this plane. But you need to reboot the brain about its predictability. 95kts + it's predictable. Below that you are a test pilot on every flight.
There is no reason what so ever to go practice slow flight in it. I can't remember the last time I went out in the citation X to practice slow flight, and it's predictable. Oh, that's because I never have. We used to go do full stalls in the actual plane years ago till the training dept finally realized how stupid that was. But even then it was a certified plane. Predictable. But slow flight isn't part of its designed mission. Get up, go high,go fast, then land, fuel and do it again. That's the similarity to a certified jet. Ends there.