Thank you Dave,

Another small point that will need a better explanation than my TLAR one.

Flutter speed: TLAR definition: Flutter speed is the beginning of NOT GUUD.

If flutter speed is 15% higher than VNE then an airplane with a VNE of 190 might have a flutter speed of 220ish.

Columbia with VNE of 235 would have a flutter speed of around 270 suggesting actual strength is stronger than just delta on VNE speeds.

Am I in left field with a catchers mitt or kinda close?

I've had a front row (and behind the scenes) seat to watch the rise and fall of the Lancair Columbia 400... it hurts my heart. What a great airplane!

This issues are many. It some ways it was just a comedy of errors.

The Utility category certification was a mistake, Lance told me himself he felt like it was a mistake. However, the overall issue is much larger than that. The FAA certification process made the aircraft grossly overbuilt... this has happened to most composite airframes, but for some reason not the Cirrus.

The Lancair engineers estimate that the aircraft is 225% overbuilt!

As said above, it is HEAVY. Just hook a towbar on it and you'll know immediately.

It is a Cadillac in the sky and glides through turbulence better than anything in it's category. I agree that the Cirrus is lighter on the controls and a bit more fun to fly... but it is a BMW M3... the Columbia 400 is a BMW M850!

If Lance could have secured funding for the expansion of the manufacturing facility and operation with out getting involved with the Malaysians... we'd be having a very different conversation.

It was not at all the 2008 crisis... the bomb went off prior to 08. The takeover by the Malaysian investor did two things simultaneously, they removed the Lancair name (IMHO because it was Lance's name) and the rumors went around that they were owned by a Chinese company. The result was a steep decline in desirability and orders.

Yes, Lancair was out-marketed and out-chuted by Cirrus and Cirrus would have still dominated the market, but Lancair would have had a nice niche.

What Cessna bought for $25M was a fraction of what it was just a few years prior, it was already on a downhill slide. There is no doubt that they exasperated the problem with a serious of unfortunate decisions, moving the production from Bend was number one.

Mexico was a complete Charlie Foxtrot.

At the end of the day, the airplane is dead. Cessna will never sell it. It's a Bonanza / Baron competitor. They won't produce it because they make more money off selling one Longitude than a fleet of Columbia 400's.

You know who should build it again, or at least something almost identical?

Cirrus.

I know two fellows that bought a late (not new) model Cirrus. One guy was a former Cirrus owner and financially able. The other guy needed to convince the wife, so naturally the chute was at the top of his “marketing” plan as well.

I am biased against private label products based on first hand experience. The acquiring company’s people don’t accept the product like the people who designed and developed it.

Even though Cessna owned the product line, I never thought of it as “theirs”, and when considering a purchase, in my brain, it was always someone else’s product with a Cessna badge.

I had the pleasure of working with the team of engineers that developed the SR and I know a couple of the key engineers who helped design the Columbia/TTx. Both are great airplanes designed by very capable engineers. It's very interesting as the style of both a/c matches the style and personalities of those who developed them. The TTx is all about performance and the 'sports car of the air' mentality. The SR was developed with ergonomics, the pilot and its passengers in mind. Performance was important but a secondary priority. Because the priority of the pilot and its passengers were paramount, the SR hit the target market more effectively and appeals to a greater segment than the TTx did. The TTx tends to appeal to those who are all about performance.

I have a hangarmate with a relatively new TTx and I've flown it a number of times and he has flown my bird. He very much prefers the TTx and I very much prefer the SR both for different reasons. I find the TTx more cramped and not nearly as ergonomically pleasing and less user friendly as the SR. I also do not prefer the G2000 system and REALLY don't like the placement of the touchpad, which is located low and on the center console. To interact with it requires a 'heads down' view and is dangerous in my opinion when hand flying in IFR conditions. The G1000 and G1000+ both have a 'heads up' placement of the keypad that allows you to keep your eye outside or on the screens while interacting with it. I much prefer the G1000 and I think that might be the reason that Cirrus didn't bite on implementing the G2000 in the SR.

His TTx is a little bit faster. I think we determined that overall he's roughly 7kts faster on average than I am. He prefers that but the speed comes at a cost of a narrower cabin cross section and less internal volume. I prefer the extra space and comfort over the speed delta, myself but that's just my 0.02.

Columbia is lighter on controls in my opinion.

I can’t image a better panel than Perspective in my Cirrus.
It makes IFR flying a piece o cake.

G3X Touch- have you flown one?

no, I came close to buying an LX7 with it but RDD was having trouble getting it build. Slight thread drift but similar airplane....any news on LX7

They have more orders than they can handle is my understanding, previous owner of my airplane got his delivered and loves it, I find it very curious that none of the proud new owners are showing up online with their success stories

Wonder if they have a NDA or something

I haven't flown a TTX/G2000, but I really like the G3000 system and prefer it over the G1000. It may just be the placement of the touch controller in the TTX is a little more "head down" than in the M600... but some airplanes place the G1000 keypad in a weird place. The Piper M350 basically has it on the floor - which is about as head down as you get. The Diamond DA62 doesn't come with one unless you order it as an option and then it's a flip up part of the center armrest.

But I think the touch controller syntax makes the system operate more intuitively than all the knob-twisting, button-pushing and nested menus of the G1000. Just my opinion though.

I think the market moved away from pure performance to a combination of safety/comfort and performance. And Textron just missed or didn't really care what piston customers wanted but built/tweaked the TTX to be what their engineers wanted. But undoubtedly there were numerous factors.

If the LX7 was certified, that would be the perfect machine for me. However, the IVP has an absolutely horrific accident record and although I know little about the differences between the IVP and LX7 I really doubt you can make a few modifications that results in a dramatically different safety record. It's good they put a BRS on board but from what I remember of the IVP, a good chunk of the accidents were low alt stall / spins that will generally not fair a whole lot better with a BRS.

At the end of the day, I can't see spending roughly $1M on an experimental anything that you intend to take on long IFR cross country missions at high altitudes. No matter what an experimental manufacturer tells you, their development and testing efforts aren't nearly as rigorous as Part 23 certification. FIKI testing, structural testing, fatigue testing, flutter testing, lightning testing, spin testing are all done for a very good reason in Part 23. If I'm going to fly serious missions, I want to be in a bird that's undergone the rigors of Part 23 certification.

I just don't understand this fascination with the parachute option,

in my opinion, just a waste of payload and increased costs.

Then why speak up? They completely replace the wings and tail, eliminating the issues with the IVP, they are also building them all out of the same jig, correcting potential alignment issues home builders have, leading to standardization, and perfection

I can’t understand blindly talking down something versus researching it with a few clicks

The major downside is they have not addressed the insurance market options, it’s expensive $800-$1m range, and look what happened to the evolution

Smart money is sitting on sidelines for these planes until those issues are resolved

Then you don't understand the nature of the majority of wives and the vast majority non-pilot passengers.

Line up 100 wives and or non-pilot passengers and put the TTx next to the SR and explain that the SR has a chute and the other does not. Explain that the TTx is slightly faster than the SR and whatever other differences you think favor the TTx. Then ask them which one they want to fly in. Their overwhelming choice will answer your question.

Honestly, for my personal preference, the chute isn't an enormous factor. However, for my wife, it has turned her from a very reluctant flyer into a very enthusiastic flyer. How do you put a price tag on that??

Ask them how many would want a second engine?

Cirrus has killed the twins.
3rd inning mercy rule, close the concessions, turn out the lights
No rematch needed.

Ask my wife which airplane she would rather fly in.
My beautiful fast pressurized strong Aerostar or the Cirrus (shoulda removed 2 spark plugs on her first flight)

I told her if she loved me she would put up with my Aerostar affliction

She loves me