A discussion about Harmon Rockets. 210kts (faster than Brians ES), 15 GPH, 3,000 FPM, 210 degree roll rate, 35 kt stall no flaps (yup I verified that). Should that Lancair go away which I lots of experience in (more than Brian)? 1-2 person mission now.

The Rocket is a wonderful airplane and might be a good IV-P replacement with a much safer low speed envelope with a similar high speed potential for the mission.

Any thoughts>

250hrs now?

Wait, what?

Click on preferences, left side click on foes, add his name and submit. You won’t have to see any of his threads or responses.

But honestly, you are being a little dramatic about it don’t you think?

This is the best thread in months!

Wow. Must be quite a sensitive subject.

“Lancair IV-P vs Harmon Rocket II”

Didn’t seem terribly sensitive to me...

I was looking forward to the discussion.

deleted

Matching rockets

I'm seriously thinking of building a F1 Rocket here in France. It involves a bit of paperwork as experimentals over 200hp get a lot of scrutiny but it's already underway.

Happy to hear comments / stories about what seems to be an incredible aircraft!

Imagine a 1065lb empty airplane with 330ish HP. The acceleration is intense, the climb rate is jet like, the handling is nimble with 210 degree roll rate yet it is stable/not twitchy, cruises at 210kts, aerobatic, and has a super benign low speed envelope. The thing loops and rolls from level flight like an RC airplane. With 56 gallons, it has some decent range, the seat is comfortable and there's a decent amount of baggage room behind the rear seat. It's an excellent formation platform also and just plane fun to fly. It's super easy to land for anyone with some above average tailwheel experience. I never really got the RV thing until they stuffed a big motor in there. I get it now; the RV series which the Rocket is an extension of is just fun flying.

I love my Lancair and have had never had an issue with it's quirks but the odds of survival in an engine out scenario are significantly higher in the Rocket than the Lancair. People razz me about the IV-P which I believe there is some truth behind so the Rocket might be a safer alternative. I'm going to ponder if the Rocket meets my local mission and I think it will.

The build quality/metal work is superior on these two machines. Mine was the 16th Rocket built by this guy with 25 prior RVs. No airplane is perfect but this one might be a 9.8/10.

Compared to my 185, landings in the Rocket seem relatively benign. It wants to track straight while on the ground, which you might not predict given the 300+hp and light weight.

It is a simple, straightforward airplane to own and operate, much like an RV. Easy to move around on the ground without a towbar. Very roomy up front, a little tight in the rear for 6 footers. The cockpit can get a bit sunbaked in summer weather.

Coming from slower airplanes, the rapid acceleration is something to mind - it can be slippery. It will climb at 5,000fpm from SL with no pax. And you’re sometimes glad when it does as the glide isn’t overwhelming, particularly with any bank; I typically start a gradual base turn when abeam and land near the displaced threshold.

210kts TAS and amazing bubble-canopy visibility was a gamechanger for me coming out of draggier Cessnas.

Overall a terrific 1.5 person plane with many positive attributes- lite acro, cross country speed and economy, reasonably affordable, Experimental avionics // flexibility, center-line seating and visibility, amazing climb performance.

I just assumed 3000fpm as that's what the efis pegged out at but 5000fpm doesn't shock me. I had the chance to fly in the Mustang a few weeks ago and I think the Rocket might out perform it down low

I have over 2000 hrs in Rockets. Mostly in my EVO, but I Owned a Harmon for awhile too.

First off, The Rocket is a fantastic airplane. I fly my F-1 EVO all over America. I run lower power to get range. With 1 SOB it is 205 KTAS @ 12.5 gph or 210 @15 gph. If I slow down to 195 The fuel flow drops to about 11 gph. It love altitude. @17K it will do 198 @ >10 gph.

On correction, the 35 Kia's stall speed is not even close to being realistic. A light Rocket with limited fuel might fly at 35 Kts, with full power hanging on the prop. The angle of attack would be so ridiculously high that the pitot tube would be reading far below the real aairspeed. That is a hovering maneuver, not flying, and if the Tailwheel touched the ground in that regime, the mains would hit hard enough to put tire marks on the bottom of the wings.

Power off approach speed for a 3-point is 70 KIAS when crossing the threshold. Touchdown is just over 50 KIAS. Any slower than that will require power and that is a perfect set up for a prop strike.

I had a blockage in my flow divider and deadsticked it into a grass runway without breaking a sweat. A non-event. I was up in the teens when it started losing power and it took what seemed like forever to circle down and land. With the prop back, I think I could thermal on a good day...

Highly recommend the Rockets. Great airplane....

I would so rock one of these.

They go for about 100k? What’s the difference between harmon and rocket?