banner
banner

10 Jun 2025, 13:52 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Garmin International (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 14:00 
Offline



 Profile




Joined: 03/17/14
Posts: 1371
Post Likes: +621
Location: Aspen Boulder, CO (ASE)
Aircraft: 1988 Bonanza B36TC
Does anyone have direct pilot experience with a Lancair ES or Columbia 400?
I have a friend interested in one.
He's a smart guy, but low time.
I have flown several of the 320 and 360 powered ones, but never one of these.
This has a TSIO 550 engine so is going to have lots of power and be fast as heck.
I wonder about stall behavior, stall and spin recovery and approach speeds and overall control sensitivity, among other things,esp for a new pilot.
He says that unlike Cirrus, Lancair did go through spin testing for this plane and the VSO stall speed is 62 knots, not great, but not bad.
Also is it really a 4 place plane or is the back seat fit only for small kids.
One thing that worries me is only one door so not good if you had a forced landing and had to get out.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 14:10 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/13/10
Posts: 20211
Post Likes: +24876
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Aircraft: Prior C310,BE33,SR22
Why do people keep bringing up spin testing? :pullhair: As though it says anything about any particular plane... :scratch:

If you get into an inadvertent spin, it's probably going to be near the ground (in the pattern)....and you're dead.

------------------------------------------

Bill,

Search on BT: lots to read...

Recent threads on the Lancair:

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=108929&hilit=Lancair
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=103634&hilit=Lancair
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=105903&hilit=Lancair

_________________
Arlen
Get your motor runnin'
Head out on the highway
- Mars Bonfire


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 14:21 
Offline



 Profile




Joined: 03/17/14
Posts: 1371
Post Likes: +621
Location: Aspen Boulder, CO (ASE)
Aircraft: 1988 Bonanza B36TC
Arlen, I don't want to make this topic whooly about spin testing. If you love Cirrus that it fine for you, even without the spin testing.

For me and especially for a new pilot in a high performance plane, it would be an advantage to have the spin qualities a proven factor, rater that just advertising blather. Maybe you never do acro, but the Lancair can and spin character is part of advanced acro.
I have never spun a plane near the ground, but I have a number of times up high and recovered.

Anyway, I wasn't asking about your opinion of spin testing, I am trying to help a friend with Lancair info.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 15:19 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/13/10
Posts: 20211
Post Likes: +24876
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Aircraft: Prior C310,BE33,SR22
Username Protected wrote:
Arlen, I don't want to make this topic whooly about spin testing. If you love Cirrus that it fine for you, even without the spin testing.

For me and especially for a new pilot in a high performance plane, it would be an advantage to have the spin qualities a proven factor, rater that just advertising blather. Maybe you never do acro, but the Lancair can and spin character is part of advanced acro.

I have done aerobatics (still do sometimes). If you hate the Cirrus, that is fine for you, whether Europe did lots of spin testing on it or not.
Quote:
I have never spun a plane near the ground, but I have a number of times up high and recovered.

I assume those were practice spins and not "inadvertent," which is what I referenced.
Quote:
Anyway, I wasn't asking about your opinion of spin testing, I am trying to help a friend with Lancair info.

And, that's why I provided 3 recent BT threads about the Lancair.

You're welcome.

_________________
Arlen
Get your motor runnin'
Head out on the highway
- Mars Bonfire


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 16:20 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/19/08
Posts: 12160
Post Likes: +3541
Aircraft: C55
You are not going to be doing advanced acro is a Lancair ES or Columbia 400, so anything to do with spins is a non-issue. If you are flying anything past a 152 and can't stay out of a spin it is time to hand in your license. Learn how to AVOID a spin.

_________________
The kid gets it all. Just plant us in the damn garden, next to the stupid lion.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 16:37 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/01/14
Posts: 2280
Post Likes: +2042
Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
The Lancair ES is a good flying airplane. Should be an easy transition. But I'm sticking to my guns that taildraggers make the best pilots.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 16:50 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/14/13
Posts: 6410
Post Likes: +5145
Flies like a slightly more nimble cirrus, with a much larger rudder

Nose wheel is strut based which is a great improvement over cirrus

I love mine, I don't think I'd go for a TSIO based on the fuel burn vs power output


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 17:19 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 11/25/08
Posts: 5103
Post Likes: +6038
Company: Tornado Alley Turbo/GAMI
Location: Ada, Oklahoma
Aircraft: N11RT
Username Protected wrote:
Does anyone have direct pilot experience with a Lancair ES or Columbia 400?
I have a friend interested in one.
He's a smart guy, but low time.
I have flown several of the 320 and 360 powered ones, but never one of these.
This has a TSIO 550 engine so is going to have lots of power and be fast as heck.
I wonder about stall behavior, stall and spin recovery and approach speeds and overall control sensitivity, among other things,esp for a new pilot.
He says that unlike Cirrus, Lancair did go through spin testing for this plane and the VSO stall speed is 62 knots, not great, but not bad.
Also is it really a 4 place plane or is the back seat fit only for small kids.
One thing that worries me is only one door so not good if you had a forced landing and had to get out.


Bill,

I have a fair amount of time in a C 400. And some of the others. The TSIO-550 engine is a bit "difficult".

the C-400 will vapor lock on climb out on a hot day pretty hard unless you get the boost pump going. Ask me how I know.

As far as the spin testing stuff - - I don't particularly like the low speed handling of the C-400, but it is certified.

But NEITHER of those aircraft would I recommend for anyone less than a rather experienced pilot.

Others may disagree. On the other hand, consider that I have been doing flight instruction for 48 years.

_________________
It is not how hard you run the engine.
Rather, it is how you run the engine hard!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 18:43 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/17/08
Posts: 6496
Post Likes: +14299
Location: KMCW
Aircraft: B55 PII,F-1,L-2,OTW,
I compare the 350/400 to the Cirrus SR-22/22 turbo...

My perception of the Columbia 350/400 is they very well built airplanes. Probably better than the Cirrus.

But, They are not as comfortable, the 400 is really short on up elevator authority. A normal approach with 2 in front is done at full aft stick and you just fly into the runway. It works, but I don't like it.

As for spin testing. Cirruses have been spun, and recovered, many times, but since they had the parachute they did not have to certify the spin characteristics....

The biggest advantages I see to the Cirrus is the Chute, the size of the fleet and the service network, and the creature comforts. The Cirrus wins big on all of those, so if I were in that market, I would opt for a Cirrus....

_________________
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
MCW
Be Nice, Kind, I don't care, be something, just don't be a jerk ;-)


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2015, 19:01 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/03/12
Posts: 2281
Post Likes: +707
Location: Wichita, KS
Aircraft: Mooney 201
I was one of the first engineers on the Columbia program when the goal was to simply certify the ES and make it easier to build in a factory. After a thorough Part 23 flight test evaluation, it was quickly decided that a complete redesign was needed to make it meet the certification requirements for handling and low-speed behavior. The Columbia looks very similar to an ES but shares no common parts, and especially from the aero configuration/design standpoint.

Read into that what you want but there is huge difference between the two planes.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 29 Jun 2015, 12:34 
Offline



 Profile




Joined: 03/17/14
Posts: 1371
Post Likes: +621
Location: Aspen Boulder, CO (ASE)
Aircraft: 1988 Bonanza B36TC
Thanks, Scott, my friend seems to think that the Col 400 is much the same aerodynamically as the ES. Reading between the lines, it seems you are saying the ES is much better. I'll pass this along.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 29 Jun 2015, 12:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/27/10
Posts: 10790
Post Likes: +6891
Location: Cambridge, MA (KLWM)
Aircraft: 1997 A36TN
Username Protected wrote:
Thanks, Scott, my friend seems to think that the Col 400 is much the same aerodynamically as the ES. Reading between the lines, it seems you are saying the ES is much better. I'll pass this along.
I think you're reading between the lines backward...


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 29 Jun 2015, 12:48 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/14/13
Posts: 6410
Post Likes: +5145
Username Protected wrote:
We are looking to get into an ES-P. You raised a few questions in your description.

1. since the nose is heavy, doesn't stall result in a nose down pitch movement? Will a wing drop suddenly Or is that manageable?

The wing won't just drop unless you are in a stall. As Isaac said, just don't go there. Why would you? When I train in any aircraft, I don't do stalls because there's no benefit. Learning to fly at near stall is very important however, and learn to use the AOA system.

2. pressurization is more complex but way more comfortable and the ES-P has a 28k ceiling, correct?...

That's correct, but that's not where you will normally fly the airplane. I have flown my COL4 (and ESP) at 3500' or lower on many trips due to headwinds. Pressurization is more comfortable yes. WAY more comfortable....no. If you have pressurization, a good A/C is a must unless you always fly in the Northern lattitudes

3. isn't there extended baggage area in the rear with the rear sets down? about how big is the baggage area? Golf clubs are the biggest item we need to carry.

Yes, you can extend the baggage floor in the baggage compartment, and yes golf clubs will fit, however you have to be very careful with W&B doing this. Solo or with two people you can probably get away with two small golf bags and minimal luggage. The baggage door is rather small, however you can build it to be larger. Since the pressure bulkhead is right behind the rear seats, no you can't fold them down.

4. i am 6 feet tall...how is headroom?

It depends on the interior and thickness of the seat cushions. You can lower the seat pans and use minimal cushion and it's fine. With a headset on, it's a tight fit to the edge of the door frame. I'd suggest cutting the door frame down as much as possible, and rounding off the corners to help. You'll also need to extend the seat rails, or use 3rd party seat rails to get more rear travel.

5. we will be running the TSIO-550-E with a four blade prop and one side electronic ignition. do you have experience with that engine? does it behave?

That is a very good engine as long as you operate it correctly. Get instruction from someone who knows this engine inside and out. I would not recommend electronic ignition on even one side. In a non turbo airplane I see the benefit, but on a turbo there is no benefit, and more reasons not do have it.


6. did you fly an ES-P at FL25 or higher? what was KTAS at that altitude? Ground speed? 75% power LOP? GPH?

In a Turbo airplane, it doesn't know what altitude it's at. It runs at the same power setting no matter what the altitude. Normally, 30"mp, 2400-2500rpm, 16-17gph LOP. Ground speed is strictly a function of upper winds. You'll usually have headwinds no matter which way you go. :-) TAS at FL250 will be around 220-225KTAS. If you want to run ROP at around 23-25gph, then you can go faster but if you are in that big of a hurry, you have the wrong airplane.

7. would you equip with RDD Therm-x deicing?

Depends on where you normally fly, but keep in mind it's not a FIKI installation. Your TAS will breduced.

8. how is the ES-P in a cross wind?

I've had a 25kt nearly direct crosswind a few times and could have probably handled more than that.

Thanks...


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 09:53 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/27/08
Posts: 192
Post Likes: +23
That is a very good engine as long as you operate it correctly. Get instruction from someone who knows this engine inside and out. I would not recommend electronic ignition on even one side. In a non turbo airplane I see the benefit, but on a turbo there is no benefit, and more reasons not do have it.

Can you explain why one electronic ignition is a bad idea?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Lancair Question?
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 15:50 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/14/13
Posts: 6410
Post Likes: +5145
Username Protected wrote:
That is a very good engine as long as you operate it correctly. Get instruction from someone who knows this engine inside and out. I would not recommend electronic ignition on even one side. In a non turbo airplane I see the benefit, but on a turbo there is no benefit, and more reasons not do have it.

Can you explain why one electronic ignition is a bad idea?


On a turbo fixed timing is desired, no need to advance timing as manifold pressure drops


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next



B-Kool (Top/Bottom Banner)

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

Jump to:  

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

.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.rnp.85x50.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.SCA.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.concorde.jpg.