http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraf ... ginal.html

Wow. That is some serious performance.

Has anyone on here ever flown the IVP? If so, thoughts and impressions?

-Neal

270 is getting it done. But the thing is tiny. Build a tiny Bonanza and you'd get the same speed too.

$600K+ for the piston version, $1.2 Million for the turbine and you've still got an "experimental" airplane.

They need to get them certified. They'll take all of Mooney's business.

I saw the Lancair piston buzz the field at Sun N Fun. It was screaming FAST! Sheldon Upthegrove had a opportunity to fly it during Sun N Fun. He posted his experience on BT a while back. As I recall, he said speeds of around 220 knots down low with power left. I'll email Sheldon so he can jump in with his personal experience.

It's impressive but not my deal. I don't know how I could get comfortable with a small, thin aircraft manufacturer, with a new design, that only has a couple of shelves for replacement parts....that is if I'm writing the check.

It's a shame that it's too risky to support inovation.

The plane is VERY nice. The one in the picture (427LE) is the one I flew. I was like the 2nd "civillian" to fly it. It handles well and flys like a bat out of .....somewhere. I was flying in the heat of the day, around 1:30. The wing loading made the thermals hardly any issue at all. We made a total of 3 passes in the "parade".

As far as being small, sitting in the front 2 seats I would disagree. It has a lot more room than a Bo both in width & height. Now the rear 2 seats, and not having the barn doors of the Bo, it is tighter getting in, but I have not sat in them. I'm a pilot you see. I sit up front.

I will post pics tomorrow of our formation flight. We were doing 220k at 500', screaming along. Then we did a slow speed pass. Great handling at any speed. Lancair really did their homework on the aerodynamics. The glide ratio IIRC is like 15-1.

Much lower stall speed than the IV-P. The IV-P is a plane that has to be flown like a fighter or you are dead. Extremely high fatality rate for crashes because of the high stall speed. Wimpy landing gear also. There is one on you tube that they are running the engine standing still, and it just collapses. I'll pass.

The Lycoming fadec is still being tweaked, but looks very promising. No hot start issues here.

The thing sits REALLY high compared to any other single I've flown in. Not as high as a Pilatus or a TBM, but probably 1/2 way between the Bo & a TBM. Totally different sight picture landing, but man is that landing gear nice! The landing gear is really
beefy. No scrimping here. Did I mention how soft is makes your landing?

NEGATIVES:

The price has jumped significantly which is a big minus. At $600k it was pricey. Now with the mandantory factory assist etc....it is $750k or even $800 finished. That includes the G900 panel with a special middle dedicated engine box. But too high IMHO.

I think the entire package should be put back at the $600k range for maximum everything. $500k and I'd go for it. Maybe I'll buy one used in 2 years.

I've flown both the Piston and Turbine Evolution, they are both impressive airplanes...

I dont have my notes here but we were doing mid 230 kts at FL 210... the airplane will easily do 250 at FL250... the Lycoming engine will only be certified to 250, not a limiting factor in an Experimental, but keeping any piston engine cool at FL270 will be a tall order....

The turbine was just stupid fast.... but it was unpressurized when I flew it...

The Evolution has an incrediblly roomy comfortable cockpit. It is quiet. It flies very well. I have flown formation in both and they handle wonderfully even in tight photo formation.

It lands like a dream and the piston climbs good, and the Turbine climb is ridiculous....

The EI2 engine has lots of potential and looks very promising... It will be interesting to see what it costs and if they can keep it cool at FL250..... If they can, they have a winner in both the engine and the airframe.

The Turbine is just a wonderful airplane in everyway!!!! If I had a pile of cash, I would have one.

The story i did will be out in Kitplanes soon.

If you are talking about the wingless turbine on you-tube, it is my understanding that the airplane was purchased in a state of partial completion. The new owner did not understand that hydraulics were required to keep the downlocks on the gear in place. There were no hydraulics on the airplane.

Personally, I think the IVP is an absolutely awesome airplane. Engineering for maximum performance, rather than maximum durability, is attractive. I can't imagine how much speed would be realized if our Bo's and Baron's were as smooth as a glass airplane. Speed is much easier to obtain by reducing drag than by increasing horsepower.

Ever think a Cessna 150 with an o-200 could go 250 MPH or get 45 MPG? OK....that will never happen, but there is a two-seat airplane that uses the same engine that can. Yes....it's "plastic".

Thanks for the write-up's guys. Very interesting to hear from people who have flown all 3 of them. To the first posts about the cost and the size for what you get, I would say that like all airplanes, this is a compromise. To be able to go that fast is worth the money to some people. Not everyone has a need for club seating and big rear cargo doors like the Bonanza has...some people's normal mission is just one or two people and long distances. The Evolution could be perfect for that kind of mission. I know someone with a 2005 TBM700 C2 who is selling because of the overhead and expenses and will be acquiring a turbine Evolution as soon as possible. Why? Same speed...much cheaper to own/operate. He routinely flies 1300 miles with just himself or one other. I will say that the extra $300k for the turbine version and the extra 20 or 30 kts may not be worth it for a lot of people. But hey, it doesn't matter to me...I'm just hoping that the IVP's come down in price by the time I'm ready to buy because that thing is a mini airliner with its blistering speed.

-Neal

My hangar neighbor has a IVP. He has a beautiful paint job with that paint that changes color as the viewing angle changes. It has a three tube Chelton EFIS system and is very fast we were cruising a 250 kts without even getting at the serious altitudes. The cabin is really small, it's a four seater but you would have to have your legs removed to fit in the back seats. Because of the small cabin when the pressurization kicks in it takes out your ear drums. Nice plane but I wouldn't trade my Beechcraft for one.

Russ

"Evolution Vs. IVP
It’s inevitable that the Evolution will be compared to the Lancair IVP, the company’s premier homebuilt product, but there’s very little similarity between the two airplanes other than carbon-fiber construction, side sticks and the nameplate.

In fact, the Evolution is an all-new, clean-sheet airplane deliberately intended to correct those features of the Lancair IVP that some owner/builders suggested needed revision."

Ia agree that it's a mini airliner. If it's you and one other all the time it's a great option.

But is this a better option? www.viperjet.com

I admit it... I've had a secret love affair with the Evolution ever since it was announced. Doug, I'm looking very much forward to reading your article.

Problem for me is, with a family, it just isn't a practical airplane. As empty nesters down the road, I can see myself blazing a trail in one at > 300 ktas... lot can happen between now and then though.

I love it, except for the engine choice.

Why only a 30 knot difference (on paper) between the PT6 and the Lycoming?

The fuel flow they quote on the PT6 is only 25gph... Can that be correct?

Here are 2 pictures of our formation flight. The first is level flight, the second is with a 45 degree bank. I'm glad I didn't have the stick in my hand. This was VERY close formation flying.

Jason,

The speed difference is more like 60 knots. 270 vs 330.

Here is a good comparison.