12 Nov 2025, 03:50 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 00:01 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 12190 Post Likes: +3074 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hypothetically, I'm curious to know how many people here would be willing to purchase an experimental airplane that is built about the size of a B36TC (possibly slightly larger) but made of carbon fiber, 6.5 psi pressure, 6 seats, forward baggage as well as in cabin, 1000 lbs useful load, 1300 nm range at 300 kts on ~40-45 gph.
I have some really good ideas and think that it can be done. I know it wouldn't be a cabin class airplane, but a 300 kt airplane would get you to your destination much faster thus you won't have to be in the smaller cabin for as long.
All this for the $1-1.3m range. What say you? Gerry, Lancair Evolution is selling just fine. It is outside my price range, but obviously they sell enough to stay in business. Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 00:07 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/17/10 Posts: 1626 Post Likes: +276 Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hypothetically, I'm curious to know how many people here would be willing to purchase an experimental airplane that is built about the size of a B36TC (possibly slightly larger) but made of carbon fiber, 6.5 psi pressure, 6 seats, forward baggage as well as in cabin, 1000 lbs useful load, 1300 nm range at 300 kts on ~40-45 gph.
I have some really good ideas and think that it can be done. I know it wouldn't be a cabin class airplane, but a 300 kt airplane would get you to your destination much faster thus you won't have to be in the smaller cabin for as long.
All this for the $1-1.3m range. What say you? Gerry, Lancair Evolution is selling just fine. It is outside my price range, but obviously they sell enough to stay in business. Tim
I like the Evolution, but it's only 4 seats. I wish they would have made it a 6 seater and then I'd be sold. That's the point of what I'm asking here. Who would still buy the 4 seat Evolution if there was a 6 seat option available?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 00:48 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 05/23/08 Posts: 6062 Post Likes: +714 Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
|
|
It wont happen. What you are talking about is an Epic and it cost $2m. Its an homebuilt with all its drawback. Username Protected wrote: Hypothetically, I'm curious to know how many people here would be willing to purchase an experimental airplane that is built about the size of a B36TC (possibly slightly larger) but made of carbon fiber, 6.5 psi pressure, 6 seats, forward baggage as well as in cabin, 1000 lbs useful load, 1300 nm range at 300 kts on ~40-45 gph.
I have some really good ideas and think that it can be done. I know it wouldn't be a cabin class airplane, but a 300 kt airplane would get you to your destination much faster thus you won't have to be in the smaller cabin for as long.
All this for the $1-1.3m range. What say you?
_________________ Former Baron 58 owner. Pistons engines are for tractors.
Marc Bourdon
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 04:03 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/17/10 Posts: 1626 Post Likes: +276 Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hypothetically, I'm curious to know how many people here would be willing to purchase an experimental airplane that is built about the size of a B36TC (possibly slightly larger) but made of carbon fiber, 6.5 psi pressure, 6 seats, forward baggage as well as in cabin, 1000 lbs useful load, 1300 nm range at 300 kts on ~40-45 gph.
I have some really good ideas and think that it can be done. I know it wouldn't be a cabin class airplane, but a 300 kt airplane would get you to your destination much faster thus you won't have to be in the smaller cabin for as long.
All this for the $1-1.3m range. What say you? It wont happen. What you are talking about is an Epic and it cost $2m. Its an homebuilt with all its drawback.
Well, I think it can happen. The epic is a nice thought but IMO is too much money to buy and fly for the performance. What I suggested would be smaller, more like a Baron. Maybe slightly bigger. Cost at the $1m range would put this plane in the wheelhouse of just about every person that buys a new Bonanza, Cirrus, etc. I know if I was looking for a new plane it would be very had to pass up something like this, experimental or no.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 04:06 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/17/10 Posts: 1626 Post Likes: +276 Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don't see many people pumping 1.3 million into an experimental and I especially don't see many people that can afford a 1.3 million dollar airplane spending the time it would take to build an airplane of this complexity.
Robert Well, all I can say is Lancair has been selling experimental planes for years now. So there has to be a market. Plus, I read somewhere that the home built market is growing 90% faster than the certified market. Sounds like things are shifting this direction. BTW, the plane I'd like to build, I would try to design it to comply with FAR part 23 so that potentially some day it could be certified.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 07:46 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 10/27/10 Posts: 10790 Post Likes: +6894 Location: Cambridge, MA (KLWM)
Aircraft: 1997 A36TN
|
|
|
Full disclosure: I'm a used aircraft kinda guy. No way would I buy a new G36 over my A36, even though the G36 is nicer in several ways.
If I was going to spend $1.3MM and had your proposed airplane's mission in mind, I'd be looking at an older TBM. Certified, turbine, proven, built, readily marketable, and has a much nicer cabin than the B36-class airplane.
I admit that I don't understand the pilots who plunk down the better part of a million to be the first guy to own a new G36, so I'm sure there is a segment of the airplane buying market who disagrees with me and may agree with you. Even they might be reluctant to bet on a brand-new, experimental, new composite material design.
I wish you the best of luck, and love seeing innovators bring ideas to aviation. I worry that your uphill climb is a steep one, though.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 10:14 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/17/10 Posts: 1626 Post Likes: +276 Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Full disclosure: I'm a used aircraft kinda guy. No way would I buy a new G36 over my A36, even though the G36 is nicer in several ways.
If I was going to spend $1.3MM and had your proposed airplane's mission in mind, I'd be looking at an older TBM. Certified, turbine, proven, built, readily marketable, and has a much nicer cabin than the B36-class airplane.
I admit that I don't understand the pilots who plunk down the better part of a million to be the first guy to own a new G36, so I'm sure there is a segment of the airplane buying market who disagrees with me and may agree with you. Even they might be reluctant to bet on a brand-new, experimental, new composite material design.
I wish you the best of luck, and love seeing innovators bring ideas to aviation. I worry that your uphill climb is a steep one, though. Yes, a TBM would be a very good choice. I guess my goal is to bring that kind of performance to the market at a price point that many could get in to as well as having a much lower cost on parts for annual, and significantly lower operating cost. The biggest reason why a TBM can be hard for some to swallow is because of the $20-40k annual costs (if we are referring to a comparably priced TBM). I've just recently been convinced of two things. Composite is the wave of the future. Extremely light and strong, doesn't lose strength when it flexes (like all metals do) and it essentially gives an airplane no hull life limit. On top of that and if you want real performance with safety the only place to innovate is in the experimental market. Beechcraft is a perfect example. When was the last time they innovated with the Bonanza? The market place has been pretty stagnant from an innovation standpoint because of how restrictive the FAA certification process is.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: Experimental Posted: 28 Dec 2013, 11:14 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/05/09 Posts: 67 Post Likes: +3
Aircraft: Bonanza A36
|
|
|
Something along the lines of an Extra EA-500? Always wondered why the EA-400 never caught on.
|
|
| 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
|
|
|
|