Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:50:52 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail.indian-creek.net ([209.176.40.9] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 2998556 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:13:38 -0500 Received: from VAIO (sl16.du.indian-creek.net [209.176.40.32] toucan@78055.com) by mail.indian-creek.net with SMTP (IOA-IPAD 4.0) id 3F6RT00 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:16:02 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: <006501c3f6f2$9015eb60$2028b0d1@VAIO> From: "Jim Cameron" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Turbocharged ES X-Original-Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:13:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0062_01C3F6C0.4485F7D0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0062_01C3F6C0.4485F7D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So, the ES will now follow in the footsteps of the Cirrus and = Columbia and offer a turbocharged version. ES builders will now have = the option of paying a lot more money for another antique engine design, = with the added attraction of cylinder life in the 500 hour range, much = higher fuel burn, and a higher pilot workload. This for the benefit of = a few more knots. Hmmm ... =20 Anyone with any experience with the ES knows that it is already = nose-heavy with the IO-550. Keeping heavy stuff 'way back and going = with the lighter composite props tames the problem adequately, but more = extreme measures are going to have to be taken to handle the extra 95 = pounds or so that the TSIO-550 will add out in front. The wing really = needs to be moved forward, probably about two inches, and this will = cause other problems in the cabin. The bottom of the back seat is = already too long in the ES, due to the location of the shear box for the = main spars. The front seats have to be cantilevered aft of the two = bulkheads that cross underneath, and moving those forward will make for = all kinds of difficulties. In my opinion, the ES is the best of all the Lancair designs, for = several reasons: It really carries four people, fuel, and bags. It = travels at a very respectable speed, and has good range. It's easy to = fly. The fixed gear makes for lower operating and insurance costs. = Check the stat's for accidents and you'll find the ES is a very safe = airplane. A well-instrumented ES can be built for a lot less money than = a comparably equipped Columbia or Cirrus would cost. Why mess with it? Jim Cameron Medina, TX (Builder of two ES's) ------=_NextPart_000_0062_01C3F6C0.4485F7D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

So, the ES will now = follow in=20 the footsteps of the Cirrus and Columbia and offer a turbocharged = version. =20 ES builders will now have the option of paying a lot more money for = another=20 antique engine design, with the added attraction of cylinder life in the = 500=20 hour range, much higher fuel burn, and a higher pilot workload. = This for=20 the benefit of a few more knots. Hmmm ...

Anyone with any = experience with=20 the ES knows that it is already nose-heavy with the IO-550. = Keeping heavy=20 stuff 'way back and going with the lighter composite props tames the = problem=20 adequately, but more extreme measures are going to have to be taken to = handle=20 the extra 95 pounds or so that the TSIO-550 will add out in front. = The=20 wing really needs to be moved forward, probably about two inches, and = this will=20 cause other problems in the cabin. The bottom of the back seat is = already=20 too long in the ES, due to the location of the shear box for the main=20 spars. The front seats have to be cantilevered aft of the two = bulkheads=20 that cross underneath, and moving those forward will make for all kinds = of=20 difficulties.

In my opinion, the = ES is the=20 best of all the Lancair designs, for several reasons: It really = carries=20 four people, fuel, and bags. It travels at a very respectable = speed, and=20 has good range. It's easy to fly. The fixed gear makes for = lower=20 operating and insurance costs. Check the stat's for accidents and = you'll=20 find the ES is a very safe airplane. A well-instrumented ES can be = built=20 for a lot less money than a comparably equipped Columbia or Cirrus would = cost. Why mess with it?

Jim Cameron

Medina, TX

(Builder of two ES's)

------=_NextPart_000_0062_01C3F6C0.4485F7D0--