Looking for fast single piston aircraft

Right, but there is a solution:

BeechTalk - BT - FS: $299 new price IceBox Portable Air Conditioner

art

 

These work incredibly well. I used one of the same design to cool the rear of a pickup camper (similar cubic feet to a 4 seat cockpit) when I went camping earlier this summer. 25 degree drop in temperature in 20 minutes.

 

I built my own, so far I have $94 in parts and about 6 hours of labor. Here's my materials list:

Shoreline 600GPH bilge pump

Attwood turbo 4000 bilge blower

Coleman 28Qt Marine cooler(I would use something else next time)

Ford Focus AC evap core(junkyard pull)

5" speaker grill(junkyard pull)

Cigarette lighter plug and 8' of 16Ga wire, 2 barrel crimp unions

3' of 3/4" clear poly hose

6 zipties

4" 90deg PVC duct

1 tube blue room temp RTV.

 

Cool well I'm down to a Bonanza Debonair/V35, Cessna 182RG and Commander 114. Love the comfort of the Commander and two doors but my only real concern are parts availability and local A&P in Northern California familiar with how to work on them. I have time in straight leg 182, 172RG and Bonanzas and the Bonanza most fun to fly. Bud
get under 100k since I'm cash buyer and want reserves for fuel, hangar, insurance and MX.

 

You always hear this sentiment, re getting an A&P who is familiar with xxx airplane. Typically the biggest maintenance concern on an aircraft is the engine, of which there are only two brands (L and C), neither of which is specific to a aircraft type. Next concern on a retract would be the gear, but maintenance manuals do exist and any competent mechanic should have no trouble doing things right. For gear the Cessna's would be the most problematic, IMHO. The rest of the airplane is pretty much the same as any other. Having worked extensively on Mooney's and Cessna's I can not think of a single system or feature that required unique type experience to troubleshoot or repair. Just find a good mechanic who has a few yrs experience and can think with a degree of common sense.

 

Like exotic cars the MX is more expensive than purchase price unless buying brand new

 

In my experience maintaining a M20 for 24yrs and a 308 for a little over 2 that statement is not close to being true. I will caveat that statement by saying I do most of my own maintenance. Handing over any mechanical vehicle, including a Chevy, to a shop with instructions to 'fix it' will make your wallet much lighter.

 

Are you saying that the plane is more expensive to maintain than a used Ferrari?

 

parts in a plane age by the calendar or hours ofusewhich means the plane is grounded from use when the "bell rings" While car parts age only when they fail... A plane can make any Ferrari look like its in the cheap seats when it comes to maintainance invoices

 

No, what I'm saying is that maintenance costs are not, in general, greater than purchase price. Of course that depends on what you buy initially. Buy a beater, airplane or car, and yes you will be spending more than purchase price to may it a dependable and safe vehicle. But start out with something that as been well maintained and there is no reason to expect huge expenses.

If we are talking single engine, piston powered, non-pressurized airplanes there are few, if any, parts which age by calender.

 

time to certification, time to replacement, time to overhaul, tags or cards rule the value of an airplane... a plane that is "used up" has a lower value than a plane that has been reset to "zero"... when buying a plane one really pays for what they get... once got a very recent used up plane that seemed like a good project, the reality was that it needed a ton of money to bring it back to airworthy... time that it couldn't be used or sold... it would have been more cost and time effective to get a "good" plane that is immediately useable...

 

So let's say you have a choice between buying a used Ferrari F430 or an older high performance airplane which would you choose and why?

 

I just came across this as I have been looking at Lancair aircraft. This is a good read, as he debated 4 seat vs 2, factory built vs "kit built", etc. I cannot believe how efficient and fast the home built composite aircraft are and that you can buy used ones for under 100K with that performance. 8gh and over 200 mph? In 1991 a Lancair set a record for four place at 360 mph? See below:

New Designs for the 1990s
The first Lancair found an enthusiastic reception among pilots looking for a high-performance, cross-country touring machine. The two-place Lancair 320 and 360 followed. Next was a four-seat version, the Lancair IV, and a pressurized variant. In February 1991, the Lancair IV shattered the speed record for planes in its class by averaging 360.3 mph between San Francisco and Denver.

KS Flight Log: Flying the Lancair 360

Flying the Lancair 360

Transitioning from a Warrior, Archer, 172, Diamond or Grumman Tiger to the Lancair 360 is a significant leap. This article will give you an idea of what it's like to fly the Lancair compared to the airplane you might be flying now.


The Mission: Why the Lancair 360?
If you want to dive into the details of flying the airplane, skip this section and move onto the next. When I lost access to the 172 that I was renting from a friend, I decided to pull the trigger and take the first steps to owning an aircraft. I'd read years before that it was critical to identify your 'mission' when buying an airplane. What are you going to do with the airplane? Is it going to be for primary training? Short hops in the local area with a few passengers? Long trips by yourself? Long trips with the family? The list goes on.

My mission was to fly IFR frequently, and as cheaply as possible, but mostly by myself. My roundtrip time needed to be relatively short, but during that time, I wanted to go as far as possible (if that makes sense). So, I needed a fast, cheap airplane, where payload was not really a concern. I wasn't a glass guy, so an older steam gauge panel would be fine with me.

My list quickly dwindled down to a Diamond DA-40, the Grumman Tiger, a Mooney 201, and as a complete pipe dream, either a Glasair or a Lancair 360. I say that, because the last two were experimental kit planes, which was a cause for concern as a first time buyer.

I had a soft spot for the DA-40. It's a beautiful airplane, relatively efficient, super easy to fly, and more importantly, something I had already flown before (I completed my PPL training in the DA-40 after being dragged, kicking and screaming from the DA-20 A1, the 80hp precursor to the modern DA20 C1 Eclipse). The downside here was that prices started around $130k. For the money, it was not a particularly fast airplane, either, around 135-140kts, just a small step up from the 120kt 172.

The Grumman Tiger promised to be a lot of fun to fly, even though it had a yoke rather than a stick. $60-80k would get me into a mid-late 70's model, but I would need to spend time finding the right one. Money being a big issue, I quickly decided that the DA-40 would lose out to the Tiger, unless I could buy one through a partnership.

The Mooney 201 was attractive in terms of speed and efficiency, but not so much on the operating costs. An acquaintance at the airport told me he was happy if his annuals cost him less than $8k each year. You'd be struggling to have kept up with the Keith-shaped-blur as I ran screaming from that proposition.

Really, a 2 seater?
Let's talk for a moment about the "2 seater" situation. Before ruling it out, you should think about how often you fly solo. In my case, it's 90% of the time. Every now and then, I'll take ONE other person. Out of the several hundred flights that I've taken, maybe 5 of them have been with more than one passenger. For that reason, I opted to not to rule out a 2 seater. Other than the Piper Dakota and maybe the 182, 4 seater GA singles are really 3 person airplanes. I took a hard look at my flying and worked out that the performance and efficiency of the 2 seater outweighed the disadvantage of not being able to take one extra passenger from time to time. I figure if I REALLY want to take 2 people up at the same time, I'll rent a 172 from the local flight school and split the costs to keep it reasonable.


Buying it
Slowly, slowly, I started looking more at the Lancairs. Hmm...10gph, 200kts, low wing, stick, same cost as the Tiger. I made a tentative call to get an insurance quote and was pleasantly surprised. With my instrument rating and just under 300hrs of total time, it came in around $2200/yr, even with 0 complex time or time in type. I was told the number would drop to around $1500-1600 once I had 50-100hrs in the airplane.

After speaking to a couple of Lancair owners about their maintenance costs, I quickly realized that I was onto something special. This plane fit the mission more than any certified plane I'd looked at. It was time to consider an Experimental. I did as much research as I could, and eventually pulled the trigger when I found a plane with a standard powerplant and prop, 1200hrs on the airframe, was being flown regularly, and was IFR capable. It was the least experimental Experimental that I could find.

I had a pre-purchase inspection done, which went well, so I stepped it up to a full annual. May as well go whole hog, and reset the clock while I'm at it, right? The plane was ferried from Kentucky to Jersey by the owner's CFI, who would serve as the demo pilot, as well as my instructor if I went ahead with the deal.

The demo flight went great. I'd already reviewed copies of the logs prior to the aircraft coming to Jersey, so there wasn't much more to do other than wire the funds, and bind the insurance.

Flying the Lancair

Equipment/System review

DSCN3456.JPGVarious aspects of this article will make more sense if you're aware of how the plane is equipped and configured. This Lancair 360 has a 180hp O-360 4 cylinder engine and a 2-blade constant speed prop. It has retractable gear and flaps. The flaps are controlled by an electric motor. The flap switch itself does not have discrete positions, or an indicator to display the position of the flaps. It simply has an up/down position, with a spring to return it to center.

The aircraft has electric aileron and rudder trim, and mechanical elevator trim. Having aileron and rudder trim is imperative, in my opinion, to be able to cover such a wide performance envelope (60-220KIAS).

Vne is 235kts, with the yellow arc starting around 185kts. Gear extension and operating speed is 123kts, max flap extension speed is 100kts, with stall speed in the landing configuration typically around 60KIAS (I do not know what the KCAS is, that performance chart has not been developed for this airplane, the joys of an experimental, you have to do it yourself!) It would be handy to have the KIAS/KCAS conversion figures to determine a textbook approach speed based on 1.3 times the calibrated stall speed, but I'm doing ok without it for now, using 80-85kts as the situation dictates. I'm comfortable landing on a 2000ft strip with no headwind, so there isn't any urgency to come up with an even slower approach speed.

Avionics-wise, we have a standard intercom with music input, a single KX-155 nav/com, and a panel-mounted, IFR-approved, Garmin 420 GPS/COM. That means we have two com radios, but only one nav. There is a standard nav head hooked up to the KX-155 on the far left of the panel, with glideslope. Additionally, there is an HSI in the center of the panel, however, it is only hooked up to the GPS, there is no selector. So, GPS approaches are flown with the HSI, however, LOC/ILS/VOR approaches are flown with the real nav radio, way on the left side of the panel. It's quirky, but eventually you do get used to it. It takes a lot of concentration to ignore the HSI during the non-GPS approaches.

There is a STEC-50 autopilot, with heading hold, altitude hold, and nav mode, slaved to the GPS. Right now, though, engaging altitude hold is a sure fire way to induce a steep climb or descent. I'm going to need to have it checked out, along with a number of other small items this winter.

We have a fuel totalizer on the bottom of the center console that talks to the GPS. It tracks fuel flow, fuel remaining, and fuel remaining at destination (hence the GPS linkage).

There is a EDM-700 engine monitor, tracking CHT and EGT on all 4 cylinders, OAT, and inlet air temperature.

There is carb heat, an alternate static source, an electric fuel pump (also useful if the engine isn't achieving the published fuel flow on the ground at max power), and a ram air system. This can be engaged in the air to recover 1 - 2" of manifold pressure, particularly at high speeds.

The fuel system is certainly interesting. The aircraft has 2 wing tanks (16g each) and an 11g header tank, just in front of the panel. The engine ONLY runs from the header tank. Fuel must be periodically transferred from the left/right wing tanks to the header. This aircraft does not have fuel gauges for the wings, however, there is a sight gauge for the header in the cockpit, allowing you to directly witness the level of fuel in the header. Once the wing tanks are dry (evidenced by the presence of air bubbles in the fuel lines, a short segment of which are visible in the cockpit), the fuel in the header tank becomes the only supply of fuel. If you've kept it relatively full (around 10 gallons), this gives you 1 hour of usable fuel left at cruise power.

The fuel system can be operated manually, or automatically. In auto mode, the pumps will engage whenever the header fuel falls below a certain threshold, and then cutoff once the header is full. This system is nearly useless, as it completely misreads the amount of fuel in the header in anything but smooth, level, unaccelerated flight (read: never).

In various videos on this site, you'll hear me say, "pumps on" or "pumps off", this is not in reference to a traditional electrical fuel pump to back up the engine pump (called a boost pump in this airplane), but is instead a reference to the TRANSFER pumps described above. A blue light on the panel lights up when the transfer pumps are running.

Preflight
The plane is so small, the pre-flight is relatively quick. Check the gas/oil, remove cowl plugs, chocks and pitot cover, crack the canopy, verify gear switch down and emergency release valve secure, then switch on the master. Flaps down, lights and pitot heat. Kill the lights and heat once checked. Walk around checking the control surfaces, tires, brakes and wheel well. The hinge pin on my left gear door seems to inch its way back, maybe 1/4" after each flight. Every few flights, I push it forward again. I'll have it tightened on the next inspection or trip to the shop. I check the connections in the elevator assembly closely, then check the rudder. Arriving at the front of the airplane, I check the screws that are keeping the cowl on. One or two of them have gotten loose in the past, but normally only after the cowl has been removed and reattached.

In the summer months, when the warm-up time will be minimal, if I'm IFR, I'll get the clearance and program the GPS prior to engine start. On colder days, I know I might be waiting for a little while for the engine to warm up before being able to leave, so I'll use that time to handle those tasks instead.

Startup
Climbing in to the plane is a science in and of itself. I won't attempt to describe it here, but once you know how to do it, it's quick and easy. Before climbing in, I arrange the belts of the 4 point harness in a specific manner to minimize the hassle of putting it on once seated. The plane really surrounds you when you sit down, it's completely immersive. The seat is reclined compared to a 172, it's very comfortable. I attach the 4 point harness and put on my headset, which is also placed in a specific place on the cargo shelf so it can be reached relatively easily.

Prior to securing the harness, I decide if I'm going to have the vents closed, partially open, or completely open, based on the temperature. They're located near your calves, so they're impossible to reach with the belts on. Much better to take care of it on the ground. The vents on a panel seem to get very little airflow.

Check breakers, verify gear down and emergency gear valve secured (it's near knees, so it is possible to kick the valve when getting in/out of the plane if you're not aware of it....guess how I know that!). Close canopy, but keep unlocked if it's warm weather. That way, you can crack the canopy open a couple of inches when taxiing to stay comfortable.

My Lancair has a O-360 engine, not fuel injected, so starting is oh-so-simple. Master on, mixture rich, crack the throttle, use primer as necessary (4 shots for cold start), crank engine. It fires pretty immediately when primed correctly. Immediately lean the mixture and shoot for 1000rpm, watching for oil pressure, and then checking temps across the board. Then, engage the alternator and verify the voltmeter swaps from 12ish to 14ish. Lately, I've been having to increase the rpm to 1500-1600 very briefly for it to kick in.

Avionics on, increase power, and start the taxi. I complete the rest of the checks once I'm far away from the restaurant. My parking spot is very close to the outdoor tables. I've had lunch/dinner there when ppl start up in that area, and it is a big conversation disruptor, so I try to minimize my time in that spot by getting out of there right away, and finishing up what I have to do somewhere else.

Taxi
The plane doesn't have nosewheel steering, using differential braking to get things done. Once you're underway, brake usage is minimal to keep it straight. I'd started out my flying in a DA-20, which has the same arrangement, so this wasn't a big deal. It's fairly important to try to keep the nosewheel relatively straight before coming to a stop. Failure to do so will mean that when you attempt to start moving again, the plane will keep turning, and requite a lot of effort (power and brakes) to get it back on track.

The nose sits very high when on the ground, pseudo-tail dragger style. Shorter pilots/passengers will not be able to see the taxiway over the cowl. My head nearly touches the canopy, and I can just barely see over the cowl if I sit up relatively straight. For the most part, I just look out the left side, using the wing's proximity to the edge of the taxiway as a guide, while looking up ahead as best I can.

The run-up is as complex or simple as you want to make it, depending on your school of thought. After a lot of reading, I've abandoned the notion of doing 3 full cycles of the prop, limiting it now to just 1 partial cycle. Instead, I simply ensure the prop governor kicks in during the takeoff roll. On a cold day, you'll need to hold short for a while waiting for the oil temp to come up to a reasonable figure before doing the run-up. I use the time to think about the route and emergency procedures, particularly if I'm going to be IFR.

Takeoff
I read a while ago about a technique employed by some Tiger pilots, which also uses differential braking for steering. They point the nose slightly to the right prior to the takeoff roll, anticipating the left-turning tendency that will certainly be present when they apply full power. I've found it very helpful in the Lancair, although I never do it quite enough, and still require a healthy amount of right rudder early on, and even a touch of right brake at the very beginning. Rotation is supposed to be at 60kts. I don't rush the process at all, preferring to let the plane rise off the ground when it's good and ready. Right at 60kts, I'll begin easing the stick back, very slowly, until the nose lifts off.

Here's where it gets a bit tricky. With cruise trim, my airplane has a tendency to roll to the left when the gear is brought down in the pattern. This can be countered with judicious use of right aileron trim, or simply maintain a little manual aileron deflection in the pattern. After trying it both ways, I've settled on the the latter. That means, though, that immediately after takeoff, right aileron is needed to keep the wings level. In many of the earlier videos, you can see me fail to remember this, resulting in a slight left turn at wheels up, followed by a correction to the right.

Using trim to counteract isn't a great idea. If you do, then when you pull the wheels up, the plane will want to turn to the right, requiring aileron to correct, and trim to relieve the pressure. I'd rather just leave the trim setup for cruise, where the plane spends the majority of its time.

If the plane is carrying two people, the CG will be slightly further back, making the elevator even more sensitive. My first takeoffs out of Lincoln Park with a full load resulted in a noticeable tendency to porpoise. It took great concentration to avoid this, although it's gotten easier on subsequent flights. If you anticipate it and keep the control inputs extremely light, the problem does not occur.

Climb out
I keep the nose as low as practical until reaching 125kias. If it is a 4000ft+ runway, I will basically keep the plane level, clean up the gear and flaps and let the plane accelerate as quickly as possible. Upon reaching the end of the runway, or 125kias (whichever occurs first), I will ease into a climb and maintain that speed, usually resulting in a 1500fpm climb. This keeps the cylinder head temperatures (CHTs) right around 400F, which is about as high as I want to see them go.

Whenever I have the time to do it, I will pull the RPM back slightly (still wide open throttle) for noise considerations. It's important not to pull the prop too far back, though, while in this high power condition, otherwise you run the chance of causing detonation.

The initial climb is one of the busiest times in the airplane. Between the configuration change, trim changes (elevator and rudder), pitching for speed, and if you're IFR, adhering to the departure clearance, there is a lot going on. The workload eases up once established in the climb, but at first, it's a bit like drinking from a fire hose, for me at least!

It's worth noting one significant difference here between the experience of flying this airplane versus more traditional GA singles. Those planes will typically climb at 80-90kts, a far cry from the Lancair. What this means is that from a navigation and airspace perspective, you need to be on your game when flying the 360, the moment the wheels leave the ground. Initial waypoints and altitudes come up in the blink of an eye. Within seconds after takeoff, you're already at the airspeed you'd associate with high speed cruise in a 172! The scenery whizzes by, and landmarks that are usually only seen a few minutes into the flight come and go before you know it.

Be sure to use caution if taking off shortly after a single engine GA aircraft departs. I've left what I thought would be ample room behind 172's and a Grumman Cheetah, only to find myself blowing past them very shortly after takeoff, even with what I considered to be an ample initial buffer. Show courtesy for the other aircraft, let them know that you have them in sight, and which side you'll be passing them (you should be on their right, where possible). You will be passing them with a 60-70kt closure rate, so plan for it.

On a standard day, I can cruise climb at 140-150kias at around 1000fpm, or use the hustle mode at 125kts and 1500fpm. Vx and Vy should be avoided at all costs, other than brief stints for terrain/weather avoidance. While the published figures are probably accurate, they are not practical for everyday use, and will be devastating for engine cooling. Compare the air inlets on the 360 to those of a 172 and you'll see why the Lancair needs the speed.

As of the time of writing, I haven't tried this yet, but the leaning procedure I will be following from now on will be to gradually lean to keep the EGT's constant with the figure seen during the takeoff roll (or shortly after takeoff, if I neglect to make a note prior to that.) Leaving the mixture 'full rich' during the climb will effectively richen the mixture as the plane gains altitude, due to the thinning of the air. Thanks to John Deakin's old articles on AVWEB for this tip, along with many others.

Above about 8000ft density altitude, the mixture can be set pretty much anywhere you want, a normally-aspirated engine is no longer producing enough power (even with wide open throttle) to warrant the protective rich mixture.

Enroute
Reaching cruise altitude, ideally 8-9k, I've found it's good to overshoot the altitude by 100ft, level out briefly, then descend 100ft to the target altitude. This gets the airplane up to its cruise speed a little sooner than simply leveling off and watching the airspeed wind up slowly. 21"-22", the typical manifold pressure associated with full throttle at that altitude, will yield roughly 175kias. With an aft CG and medium load, TAS is usually right around 200.

From here, it's a matter of monitoring the fuel level in the header tank. For cruise efficiency, I like to get the CG back as far as practical by letting the header tank run down to about 4 gallons in smooth air, then switching on the pumps, running it up to around 8 gallons, then switching them off again. Repeat until ready for descent. I have a recurring reminder configured on the Garmin 420 to flash a MSG every 15 minutes, saying, "check header". If the header gets below about 3 gallons, a red LOW FUEL LIGHT illuminates on the center column. I've seen it light up during a descent when the header was already fairly low.

There's plenty to keep you busy between fuel monitoring, navigating and talking with ATC. I will normally check the outside air temp (OAT), dialing that figure into the airspeed indicator along with the pressure altitude. This will result in the True Airspeed (KTAS) being displayed on the outer ring of the airspeed indicator, which provides a real indication of how the airplane is performing at the time.

If I'm navigating under IFR, I'm primarily using the GPS, backed up where appropriate with the NAV radio. That way, I can fallback to using the VOR if the GPS stops working (for any number of reasons).

Time permitting, I will pull up the performance page on the Garmin 420 to double check my TAS (read from the outer ring of the airspeed indicator) and check winds aloft to see how they track with the forecast. If I'm feeling frisky and ATC isn't busy, I'll try call Flight Watch to provide a PIREP and get updated weather at the destination if it's been a long flight, or if I wasn't able to get updated weather immediately before the start of the leg.

The view from 8-9k is fairly relaxing if there are no clouds. If there are clouds at 4-5K, they will move along relatively quickly. I've only had one flight so far where being at 9000ft had me in IMC. Actually, while we're talking about IMC, it's critical to spend some time getting a feel for the control pressures required to execute small altitude corrections. At 200KTAS, it takes VERY little to enter a 500fpm climb or descent. It's more important than ever to keep that scan going.

If you are in and out of clouds, expect to see them blowing by at some pretty serious speeds, and be prepared to throttle back if it's a rough ride. The Lancair has higher wingloading than a 172, which means that at a given airspeed, the 360 will provide a smoother ride in bumpy air. The thing is, though, you'll never be flying at the same speed as a 172 when you're in cruise. Don't let the smooth feel lull you into a false sense of security. You'll want to slow down in bumpy air, unless you enjoy the sound of your head cracking against the canopy.

Descent
Well, now the fun really begins. If you're VFR and you've been cruising up at 8-10k, you will do well to actually do some top of descent planning to give you a smooth, efficient ride back down to the ground. You can pull the power way back and maintain 175-180kias (basically, cruise speed) during the descent if you like. That will give you a 4-5gph burn rate, or maybe even less for a solid 15 minutes throughout the descent. Or, you can leave the power more or less where it is and just ease the nose down slightly. Pitching for 500-700fpm will give you about 200kias....absolutely booking for a 180hp GA single. Throw in a typical tailwind (if you're lucky) and you'll see 240-245 over the ground during your descent. That takes some getting used to, no doubt about it.

Approaches

Instrument approaches can happen considerably faster in the 360 than they do in a 172. I flew my first few at 130-140kts for most of the procedure, with gear out and 120kts over the FAF. Eventually, I became comfortable with keeping the speeds much higher throughout the procedure. This might seem counter productive, but having done it a few times in IMC, I can say that as long as you stay ahead of the airplane, it actually makes the approach easier, simply because you ultimately spend less time executing the procedure, and hence, less time in IMC. The one exception to this would be a non-precision approach to absolute minimums. I have only experienced this once, and it was when I had relatively little time in IMC in the airplane, but I found it helpful to be slower at the FAF to be able to make it down to MDA in time to spot the field. That, and under such conditions, you want to be in a position to land the plane when you do spot the field, rather than spending precious time trying to slow down.

The task of staying ahead of the airplane (an absolute requirement for IFR flight in any aircraft) is made a little harder by the speed and workload, but not impossibly so. You simply have to start the process of picking up weather and briefing approaches a little further out than you otherwise might in a slower moving aircraft. It's probably best to deal with time, rather than distances, when looking ahead at the work that needs to be done.

The stick forces required to fly the procedures are minimal. Care needs to be taken in IMC, though, to not over control the aircraft, particularly when making altitude changes. If you push the nose over, you can enter a 2000+ fpm descent in a heartbeat. Again, though, if you stay on top of it and maintain situational awareness, the approach is over that much faster. On a bumpy day, that can be a wonderful thing.

The same is true for flying the pattern on a relatively bumpy day (either a VFR flight, or an IFR flight with a visual approach at the destination). On a recent flight, I was IFR at 9000ft, loving life in a 30kt tailwind, in silky smooth air. At around 4000ft, the ride started getting a little bit bumpy, so I prepared myself for a rougher ride down low. Knowing this, I delayed any further descent as long as possible (ATC-permitting, of course) and kept my speed up as much as practical (just below the yellow arc). When I did break out, I kept my altitude high until the last possible minute, then descended into the pattern, entering at about 150kts (nobody appeared to be flying in the pattern at the time, so I did not need to be concerned with sequencing). As I slowed down to gear extension speed, I felt the plane being pushed from side to side by the gusty winds. I made a relatively short approach, and was down on the ground in very little time.

I spoke to other pilots who flew on the same day in the same air in 172's, and they said they were kicked around a lot. It was a non-event in the 360, not because the plane has any magical powers, but because I flew a profile that minimized my exposure to those elements. I stayed higher for longer, then once I was in the rough stuff, it was over and done with much faster than if I'd been puttering around at 90kts. The higher wingloading of the 360 meant that my brief stay at 90-120kts at the tail end of the pattern was a more pleasant experience than the equivalent ride in a 172.

High Speed Pattern (arrival)
VFR patterns are an absolute pleasure in the airplane. The one caveat is that you have to know what your options are for slowing down during the transition from the enroute environment to the pattern. The good news is that if it's done properly, it can be done relatively quickly. Even more good news, if you fail to plan ahead (ie. you're on a glidepath that looks good, but you're way too fast), the plane can be turned into a brick with just a little bit of effort. Flown incorrectly, though, you'll find yourself never getting slow enough to get the gear out, and you'll blow over the numbers at 160kts, with almost no power dialed in. I learned that the hard way on my first solo flight back home as I tried to make a stop at Lincoln Park after getting a little bit frazzled by the bumpy ride at one of the other interim stops (Greenwood Lake). People on the ground thought I was buzzing the airport...little did they know it was actually a botched landing attempt!

I say that to illustrate how clean and fast the airframe is. It is all but impossible to descend and slow down with the airplane cleaned up. However, if you level off, or even enter a slight climb (totally non-intuitive, but stay with me), the speed will bleed to the point where you can get the gear out. Keep the plane level and you'll slow through 100kts at which point you can add flaps, get the prop to max RPM and easily enter a much steeper descent, around 1200fpm at 80kts. You will re-intercept the glideslope that you were forced to abandon earlier due to your high speed.

Put simply, you can arrive at fairly high speed, power back, level out, dirty up the plane, then drop like a rock if need be. That's not necessarily how you'll want to do it every time, but it's great to know that the plane can do it. Doing so will minimize your time in crappy, bumpy air, and get you on the ground as soon as possible.

So, let's run through a high speed arrival. Obviously, this should be done only if traffic will not be a factor. Do NOT come charging into a busy pattern at 180kts, you'll cause a sequencing nightmare, and will generally be regarded as a total tool. But, if nobody is around, you want the practice, or you simply need to get down fast, then here's what you can do...

Assuming you're on the 45 downwind entry, you can roll out on downwind at 180kts, at pattern altitude, and at the 'normal' distance from the field. You don't have to fly a wide downwind, even with the additional speed. Keep the power back. Abeam the numbers, you'll still be at 150-160, so no chance for the gear yet. Keep an eye out the window to call the 45 point, then turn base. By now, you'll be inching towards 122kts, so reach for the gear, then pitch for 100kts. The faster you slow down, the sooner you can enter the maximum drag profile, so don't be tempted to drop the nose once the gear comes out. All you will do is cover a lot of ground, and get stuck at 110-120kts. Keep the turn going onto final and upon reaching 100kts, get the flaps out, prop all the way forward if you're not there already.

Congratulations, you're now the proud owner of a brick. Depending on winds, you will either need to add power sometime on final (stiff headwind), or maybe just a shade on short final (light/calm wind).

If you start a descent abeam the numbers, you will not get to a point where you can dangle the gear and flaps. Get the plane dirty, even if it means staying high for a while, then rejoin your intended glidepath from above. If you use this technique, you can salvage even the most ridiculous of situations.

Closed traffic
The insanity above notwithstanding, let's run through a more civilized lap of the pattern, starting just after a normal takeoff. Truth be told, my impression after 50 or so hours with the airplane is that it's not really cut out for continued laps of the pattern, especially not a busy pattern. For a start, the POH states that the gear should not be cycled more than once every 3-4 minutes. Let's go for just one lap, though. The upwind, crosswind and final are, without question, going to be flown faster than a 172. If you're willing to perform unnatural acts, you can fly the downwind at a speed which would be compatible with a briskly flown 172, but that's about the only portion where speeds will match.

The two takeaways from that are: 1) don't expect any of the pattern to resemble the picture you see in a 172, and 2) be prepared to make modifications to the pattern to allow for other traffic.

Unfortunately, the climb on upwind and crosswind is probably the least compatible portion of the pattern. As described a few sections earlier, the 70-90kt climb that you'd do in a 172 is not going to be practical in the Lancair. You're going to need 120kts (well, my plane does, at least). This speed is needed to keep the engine cool. As recommended in the AIM, turn crosswind 300ft short of pattern altitude.

As a result of the slightly higher speeds, your turns in the pattern will be a little tighter to yield the desired ground track. Don't worry, you quickly start using 30 and 45 degrees as standard bank angles without giving it a second thought. Pattern altitude will be there before you know it, so turn downwind while leveling off and pull the power back from wide open (28-29") all the way to 12-13". That should give you about 120-125kts in a clean configuration, just a shade below gear extension speed. It's a BIG power reduction, akin to pulling back to 1200-1300rpm in a 172. Thankfully, the constant speed prop hides the magnitude of the power change, so your passenger (singular) won't have a heart attack.

You've reached pattern altitude quickly, but you've also flown the pattern at a higher groundspeed. The end result should be that your ground track will more or less match what you're already flying today in the 172, it'll just happen in less time. Abeam the numbers, gear down....cabin gets noisy. If you keep the plane level, the additional drag of the gear should get you down to 100kts without a power change if you're patient, but if you want it sooner, then pull an inch or two of manifold pressure (if you do this, though, you'll need to add it back on final, I promise). Reaching 100kts, get the flap party started. Call the 45 from your touchdown point and start the left base. It doesn't matter what your flap or altitude situation is, start the turn (traffic permitting, of course).

Keep 90-100kts on base to final, adding full flap whenever the mood strikes you, and start pitching for 80-85kts. Whatever power you subtracted below 13" earlier, be prepared to add it back in. From this point on, miniscule changes in power and pitch will have deep ramifications for your glide path and speed, respectively. Even seemingly large departures below the glide path will only need a stab 1-2" of manifold pressure for a couple of seconds to fix the problem. Like everything else about controlling this airplane, the pitch/power situation is a touchy one. It makes for a highly enjoyable and interactive experience, though. There's great satisfaction to be found in a steady, smooth approach with a consistent glide slope and minimal power changes.

And, like the other phases of flight, you'll be over the numbers before you know it. The pattern is brief indeed. I took up a friend who is a 172 pilot, and he was fairly gobsmacked at how quickly we blew through the pattern. It wasn't just the high speed portion of the arrival. Even the base and final go by very quickly in comparison. Do not be overwhelmed by it....eventually you'll grow to love it. The end result is that you're concentrating and working for less time than you would in most other aircraft. This is a blessing in rough conditions!

This is probably a good time to mention that the airplane has a devastating record of stall/spin accidents, particularly in the pattern. Do NOT get slow. In the high drag configuration, it only takes a few seconds to bleed extra speed off on final, so there's no need to reduce to your final approach speed until you've finished making your turns.

If you feel like you're overshooting the extend centerline on the base to final turn, no biggie. Overshoot it! Just keep the turn going and reintercept it from the other side. Only if you're completely aware of your angle of attack should even dream of tightening the turn, and even then, it should be done with caution. Many a Lancair has gone down in this scenario, giving it reputation of being hard to fly.

Like most airplanes, if you fly it by the numbers, it is predictable and enjoyable. I have relatively little time in the airplane, with most of my experience prior to this being in DA-20's and 172's, and I have had no problem transitioning to the 360. It is orders of magnitude more fun to fly, if you pay attention to flying the numbers during critical phases of flight. It does NOT let you get away with certain mistakes, though, unlike a 172 which lets you get away with absolutely anything. Know where the danger zones are, and be acutely aware of them during those phases of flight.

Landing
I struggled during the initial training with landing the 360, partially because I was flying from the right seat, partially because of the control sensitivity, and partially because of the different sight picture compared to the 172. The plane sits a little lower than the 172. A number of times, I made nice, smooth landings....about 2 feet above the runway. The next two feet, were less pleasant.

Whether you've flown the high speed pattern, or a more traditional entry, either way, you should be at around 80kts or 85kts on short final, depending on your weight at the time, plus any gust factor. It is absolutely critical to allow for gusts. The plane does not enjoy being at less than 80 for very long. My understanding is that drag increases very rapidly with the onset of angle of attack with this airfoil. Pitch for 80 and hold that attitude. If you're slightly low, add power. Do NOT yank the nose up.

If you do use 80kts, the float will be minimal. I've seen videos of guys who are clearly coming in much faster than this, and they float, no kidding, for a solid 2000ft down the runway. That's great if you have a 5000ft+ runway, but it's not necessary, and just exposes you to a risky environment, floating inches above the ground, for longer.

So, here we are, coming up on the numbers at 80kts. At what is probably 15-20ft (I'm taking a guess here, you'll work it out during training), ease the power back and gently transition the flare, arresting the descent. My touchdowns are at 60-62KIAS (based on watching the videos, obviously I can't check in real time).

It's harder to land than a 172. The controls are so touchy (at first), it's almost comical. I've heard the issue is more severe in the small tail 360 (which is what I fly), compared to the 360 Mk2 (large tail). Try not to balloon. It's a fine line between arresting the descent and starting a climb, but with practice, you'll nail it. I haven't had to contend with any sort of ballooning other than a couple of times during the first day of training.

The landing happens quickly. The reduction from 80kts to the 60kt touchdown speed is very fast (I suspect much of that is actually not a real speed reduction, but simply an increase in angle of attack, leading to an error in the indicated speed. I'm guessing the calibrated speeds are a little closer together than the 60/80 figures I've been quoting). I consider this to be a GOOD thing. There's not point buggering around for an extended period of time, 12 inches above the runway.

I'm sure entire books could be written on the subtle techniques for landing, but I'll simply say that the higher approach speed takes some getting used to, particularly if you're flying into fields that you've always flown into. My home airport is a relatively short runway, 40ft wide. The approach felt considerably faster the first 10 times. Now, it's completely normal, with every landing being a non-event.

Come in with the right airspeed, and the landing is simple once you are used to the control sensitivity. Come in too fast, though, and you'll be floating for quite a while. Come in too slow, and...I have no idea what happens, I've never tried it, but I suspect that is the regime in which the airplane gets its nasty reputation, so don't go there!

Start flying your current airplane to a strict set of numbers. If you can routinely hit those numbers, life will be simpler for your transition. I suspect a similar figure for a 172 is about 60kts/65kts (compared to 80kts/85kts for the 360), based on my experience with both airplanes.

A word about The Article
An F-16 test pilot wrote an article about the handling characteristics of the Lancair 360 Mk1 with a Lycoming O-360 (my airplane) or IO-360. I studied the information closely, and was a little disturbed about what I read. In short, the control inputs required in certain configurations (flap/gear/CG), and certain speeds, are not what would normally be expected for that situation. Instead of requiring steadily increasing back pressure, the required inputs become reversed for a period of time, if I remember the article correctly.

I have to be perfectly honest....I'm normally pretty aware of the stick inputs that I'm making at any given time, and I was fully prepared for the 360 to feel awkward or non-intuitive, but I simply haven't noticed any difficulties in the handling, in any of the configurations. Up is up, down is down, and you do whatever is needed with the stick/trim to make it work. In my airplane, once the gear is out, and the speed reduction begins, I start adding up-trim until I run out, then I start adding flap. By the time I'm on final with full flap, I find I still need some back pressure to hold the desired attitude. I believe this is a result of how the trim range was setup, and may NOT be the case in all 360's. I don't have 'enough' trim for landing, but on the other hand, I have all I need for flight up to 220KIAS, hands off.

At no point, though, do I feel like I'm doing anything unnatural with the stick to make the plane do what I want it to do. In short, I haven't felt the pain described the author of the article.

That said, I will re-read the article and pay attention to the situations that it outlines for my next flight and then update this article, if appropriate.

Conclusion
The plane kicks, at last count, 38 types of ass! I have never flown anything that comes close to providing this level of challenge or enjoyment. The Diamond DA-20 is probably the closest thing, being a clean, efficient, low wing airplane with a stick, but even then, there are big differences. Bear in mind, you climb out at 125-150kts at 1000-1500fpm, and then cruise at 170-180KIAS (all the way up to 9000ft, for a TAS of around 200kts). If you're even remotely thinking about cross country trips, this is a monster airplane. Even if you're just looking to do 60-90 minute legs for your weekly $100 burger, this plane can nearly double your travel radius. Airports which were once "long trips" that you might only visit on a special occasion become 'quick' trips. Airports which were simply not practical to visit, 400-600 miles away become the new 'long trips' (2-3hr legs). It changes the game, pure and simple.

If you're looking to punch some holes in the sky, this will punch some pretty big holes. Pitch up at 180kts and climb 1000ft in no time at all, still doing 120kts as you level out. Circling for a 45 entry has never been this much fun. With a tight turn, you look directly above you through the bubble canopy, and you can effectively see the airport behind you, and track it all the way through the turn. Try that in a 172. The plane goes where you point it, and lets you do some really fun stuff. I've been in descents well in excess of 3000fpm in a steep bank and felt completely relaxed and in control. I've had the plane up to 220KIAS (Vne is 235), and everything felt great. I've flown the plane at low altitudes in high speed cruise, and it's given me nothing but confidence. The controls are so crisp and precise, it's just awesome to behold.

If you're looking for an IFR platform, this will let you seek out the smooth air, spending less time in the gunk on the way in and out, although it can get away from you if you're not paying attention. Throttle back in the hold and sip 4-5gph, if not less. Blasting in and out of clouds at 200kts is something that everyone should experience.

It is truly a versatile airplane. 200kts, 10gph. Need I say more??

 

The Lancair became the Cessna Columbia/Corvalis. Lancair is still building kits, however, if you want to build one yourself.

 

Nice write up on the Lancair. I've been curious on this model as they are rare compared to other planes. I need to fly one sometime.

 

Created with Camtasia Studio 5

Somehow I subscribed to this a number of years ago and find it informative. If the video will play, it compares the Mooney M20J-201, Cessna Cardinal, Beachcraft Debonair, and Piper Arrow.

 

You need camtasia to watch the video :-(

 

I chose the airplane. Flying courses through my veins. I can fly from Dallas to Los Angeles in under 8 hrs and return anytime I want or need to, weather permitting. The 430 is neat, cool, fast and fun, but of severely limited utility. The far less expensive 308 satisfies my Ferrari fix quite well.

 

I would think anyone wanting to go fast in a single might want to start looking at the early VTails--1966 and up---and if you need more room, a Piper Lance, while handling like a truck--has decent speeds and room for 6 whie in AC and doing 150 or so---its tough to beat.

We did about 120 hours in one before getting a C Baron.

Reasonable Bonanzas are available and a true treat to fly.

 

I don't have Camtasia and I could see it just fine.

BTW, It is not a video at all... just a voice reading power point type slides for 45 minutes.



Someone needs to spell and grammar check his slides...

 

Cool well what kind of plane did you buy Glen? Flying courses in my veins as well even more so than my other passions of sailing and scuba diving. I can afford both an older Ferrari 360 and Bonanza airplane for the cost of just the F430.

 

I'm on my third plane, an '82 Mooney 201. It's a fantastic airplane for many reasons, though a 201 may not be up to your mission...

 

Looking at planes also. What about a Bellanca Viking, or a maule?.

 

Viking is discussed on page one of this thread. Maule is in a different category altogether-- no one ever accused a Maule of being "fast."

 

Nice I like Mooney but I don't fit well in them and need more useful load. Bonanza is what I'm looking at. With a 360 Spider and Bonanza would be fun!