Lancairs?

DavidWhite

DavidWhite

Final Approach
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
7,299
Location
49
Display Name
DW
So I've been reading a lot about different airplanes to buy some day - Lancairs keep coming up as a good fit for what I want to do, but going through NTSB reports it seems like they have killed a lot better pilots than me. Are they REALLY as dangerous as people (and the statistics would tend to indicate) they are?
 
Lotta performance - too much for some. Kinda like a Cirrus only more so. Owners I know love them.
 
A Lancair IV owner who lives in N. Dallas is former fighter test pilot, top gun instructor and all that stuff that most of us couldn't do. He tells about his upset during air work practice at altitude, and that he needed much more altitude to recover than he he ever expected.

He says it cured him of anything other than middle of the envelope maneuvers below 5k' AGL and critically heightened awareness of approach and landing speeds. He's not a "me Tarzan" kind of guy but makes it clear that he thinks Lancairs should be flown by highly-qualified pilots with training that is not normally available and/or attainable by the average run-of-the-mill GA pilots.
 
wabower said:
A Lancair IV owner who lives in N. Dallas is former fighter test pilot, top gun instructor and all that stuff that most of us couldn't do. He tells about his upset during air work practice at altitude, and that he needed much more altitude to recover than he he ever expected.

He says it cured him of anything other than middle of the envelope maneuvers below 5k' AGL and critically heightened awareness of approach and landing speeds. He's not a "me Tarzan" kind of guy but makes it clear that he thinks Lancairs should be flown by highly-qualified pilots with training that is not normally available and/or attainable by the average run-of-the-mill GA pilots.
Click to expand...

How much different is a Lancair IV from a Lancair 360? I think an RV4 might be a better airplane for me, but I sure do like the 200 knots you can get from the Lancair.
 
I test flew a Lancair Super ES and it seemed like a reasonably docile airplane albeit very heavy in roll but very light in pitch.
 
DavidWhite said:
How much different is a Lancair IV from a Lancair 360?
Click to expand...
More than a lot.

The 360s come in two basic flavors: small tail and large tail. Small tail is called squirrelly by some folks. The control stick breakout forces are very light, which leads to a lot of overcontrolling. Large tail has more drag and is more docile. Some of the original small tails have been retrofit.

The IVs are completely different animals. Check out the approach speeds and wing loading. That is enough to keep me away.
 
Just the fact that Bow-wow's top gun buddy would lump all Lancairs together with a remark like that about "unavailable training" is ridiculous.
Weird remarks, much like his comments about anything experimental. Funny, if it's not available why so many happy builders and owners? Must be magic....
Just chatted with a IVP builder today with 1300 hrs. on his. Loves it.
 
Last edited:
DavidWhite said:
How much different is a Lancair IV from a Lancair 360? I think an RV4 might be a better airplane for me, but I sure do like the 200 knots you can get from the Lancair.
Click to expand...

It's always a trade off. Going 200 knots, and landing at 55, or going 185 knots and landing at 46. :dunno:

Sounds great until the **** hits the fan and you are a glider. I'll take 46 over 55 every time. ;)
 
Last edited:
DavidWhite said:
How much different is a Lancair IV from a Lancair 360? I think an RV4 might be a better airplane for me, but I sure do like the 200 knots you can get from the Lancair.
Click to expand...

Funny you should bring this up today, as I just met a guy in a Lancair 360 at Mustang Beach Airport a few hours ago.

We compared notes. He's about 30 knots faster than my RV-8A, but also stalls 15 knots faster. The way they go so fast is by having a short, thin wing that makes landing very space shuttle-like.

The -8A also lands more steeply than your typical Cezzna/Piper/Beatch, but the stall speeds aren't radically different.

The RVs are, IMHO, a better compromise between speed and safe low speed handling. I can land the 8A in less than 1000' with ease, while still breaking 170 knots. The 360 needs twice that field length, on a good day. That translates into a lot more energy in an off-field landing.
 
How about a great "tweener" - check out a rocket.
 
DavidWhite said:
So I've been reading a lot about different airplanes to buy some day - Lancairs keep coming up as a good fit for what I want to do, but going through NTSB reports it seems like they have killed a lot better pilots than me. Are they REALLY as dangerous as people (and the statistics would tend to indicate) they are?
Click to expand...

The IV's are serious airplanes. Approach speeds are like a WWII fighter, but without the structure and huge engine to protect you if you get it wrong. Nor are most of today's pilots trained to WWII fighter pilot stick and rudder standards. Which means you've got undertrained people flying very high performance aircraft, often with unsuspecting passengers on board. :-0

The 2 seaters are hot, but the speeds aren't a lot worse than your typical Bonanza, Mooney, or Comanche. I wouldn't want on of the small tail versions with the bad stability profile.
 
The IV series is a lot different from the others such as the ES. The IV has a wing meant for speed with little though to recovery should something happen. Some of the other planes, however, are much more forgiving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top