X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:21:45 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from snt0-omc3-s8.snt0.hotmail.com ([65.55.90.147] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4427327 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:13:55 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.90.147; envelope-from=scottekeighan@sympatico.ca Received: from SNT129-W20 ([65.55.90.136]) by snt0-omc3-s8.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:13:21 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: scottekeighan@sympatico.ca Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_1c5e2084-dbe1-4b96-8e1d-39864b4a63d4_" X-Originating-IP: [174.94.36.53] From: Scott E Keighan X-Original-To: Subject: RE: [LML] Builders' advice to the Lancair Factory X-Original-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:13:21 +0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2010 22:13:21.0133 (UTC) FILETIME=[6886A1D0:01CB39A2] --_1c5e2084-dbe1-4b96-8e1d-39864b4a63d4_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree with Fredrick=2C The non P is a wonderful airplane and cannot be beat. I could not believe = that Lancair would stop selling such a fine airplane. Not everyone wants or can afford an evo= lution but still likes a retract that is resonably priced. =20 I vote to bring the IV back into the active lineup. I love the plane and i= t does give great performance. Buf to Melborne FL in 4hrs 15min at 16=2C000 burning 12.3gph. Average speed= of 215kts. =20 Scott Keighan LIV non P=2C 130hrs =20 To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed=2C 11 Aug 2010 08:24:45 -0400 From: frederickmoreno@bigpond.com Subject: [LML] Builders' advice to the Lancair Factory George wrote =93If you agree with me I urge you to lobby the "powers to be = " at Lancair to get the 4-P's back in their promotional and advertising sch= emes.=94 =20 It is good for the Lancair community to make their concerns and recommendat= ions heard to the new management at Lancair. Some clarifying statements ab= out continuing production and support of all the currently-produced aircraf= t would be most welcome.=20 =20 Let me make the case for the =93plain vanilla=94 Lancair IV=2C non-turbo=2C= non-pressurized which normally resides in the shadow of the P versions. I= t is a truly unique aircraft=2C totally unappreciated by many. I recogniz= e the =93plain vanilla=94 version may not scratch the primal urge itch to = go FASTER!=2C HIGHER!=2C FASTER!=2C HIGHER! =20 But setting primal urges aside=2C consider the following for the non-turbo = non-P Lancair IV =B7 65% LOP cruise speed at 8500 of 220+ knots on 13 gallons per ho= ur=2C the same speed as a Piper Malibu at 25=2C000 feet at less than one th= ird of the price and two thirds the fuel flow.=20 =B7 50 knots faster than a new Cirrus SR-22 at one half the price. =B7 Empty weight of 1980 pounds meaning you can put 700 pounds in t= he cabin and full fuel=2C takeoff weight of about 3200 pounds=2C and mainta= in good runway and climb performance while getting 1300 NM range with reser= ves.=20 =B7 Transcontinental=2C one day=2C one stop. =B7 Fuel costs=2C maintenance costs=2C maintenance reserve=2C and = insurance costs are all at least 30% below the piston P versions.=20 =B7 Above 160 knots IAS=2C the plain vanilla LIV has lower drag an= d thus lower fuel flow than an RV-6! And carries twice as many people whil= e doing it.=20 =B7 95% of the speed of the Legacy with the same engine=2C but with= four people on board. The 5% speed deficiency costs about three minutes p= er hour.=20 =20 Like the IVP=2C the plain vanilla IV is in a class by itself in terms of = performance=2C efficiency=2C and cost effectiveness. There is a market for= this package of benefits that compliments the market for HIGHER and FASTER= provided by the P versions. It is overlooked too often=2C but makes a lo= t of sense for old retired guys like me that like to watch the landscape pa= ss by close enough to be interesting. I have flown the flight levels=2C a= nd find them boring. =20 Fred Moreno = --_1c5e2084-dbe1-4b96-8e1d-39864b4a63d4_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree with Fredrick=2C
The non P is a wonderful airplane and cannot be beat. =3B I could not b= elieve that Lancair would
stop selling such a fine airplane. =3B Not everyone wants or can afford= an evolution but still likes a
retract that is resonably priced.
 =3B
I vote to bring the IV back into the active lineup. =3B I love the plan= e and it does give great performance.
Buf to Melborne FL in 4hrs 15min at 16=2C000 burning 12.3gph. Average speed= of 215kts.
 =3B
Scott Keighan
LIV non P=2C 130hrs
 =3B
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed=2C 11 Aug 2010 08:24:45 -0400
Fro= m: frederickmoreno@bigpond.com
Subject: [LML] Builders' advice to the La= ncair Factory

George wrote =93If you agree with me I urge you to = lobby the "powers to be " at Lancair to get the 4-P's back in their promoti= onal and advertising schemes.=94

 =3B

It is good for the Lancair community to make their = concerns and recommendations heard to the new management at Lancair. = =3B Some clarifying statements about continuing production and support of a= ll the currently-produced aircraft would be most welcome.

 =3B

Let me make the case for the =93plain vanilla=94 La= ncair IV=2C non-turbo=2C non-pressurized which normally resides in the shad= ow of the P versions. =3B It is a truly unique aircraft=2C totally = =3B unappreciated by many. =3B I recognize the =93plain vanilla=94 vers= ion may not scratch the =3B primal urge itch to go FASTER!=2C HIGHER!= =2C FASTER!=2C HIGHER!

 =3B

But setting primal urges aside=2C consider the foll= owing for the non-turbo non-P Lancair IV

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B 65% LOP cruise speed at 8500 of 220+ knots on = 13 gallons per hour=2C the same speed as a Piper Malibu at 25=2C000 feet at= less than one third of the price and two thirds the fuel flow.

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B 50 knots faster than a new Cirrus SR-22 at one= half the =3B price.

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B Empty weight of 1980 pounds meaning you can pu= t 700 pounds in the cabin and full fuel=2C takeoff weight of about 3200 pou= nds=2C and maintain good runway and climb performance while getting 1300 NM= range with reserves.

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B Transcontinental=2C one day=2C one stop.

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B Fuel costs=2C =3B maintenance costs=2C mai= ntenance reserve=2C and insurance costs are all at least 30% below the pist= on P versions.

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B Above 160 knots IAS=2C the plain vanilla LIV h= as =3B lower drag and thus lower fuel flow than an RV-6! =3B And ca= rries twice as many people while doing it. =

=B7 =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B&= nbsp=3B 95% of the speed of the Legacy with the same e= ngine=2C but with four people on board. =3B The 5% speed deficiency cos= ts about three minutes per hour.

 =3B

Like the =3B IVP=2C the =3B plain vanilla I= V is in a class by itself in terms of performance=2C efficiency=2C and cost= effectiveness. =3B There is a market for this package of benefits that= compliments the market for HIGHER and FASTER provided by the P versions.&n= bsp=3B =3B It is overlooked too often=2C but makes a lot of sense for o= ld retired guys like me that like to watch the landscape pass by close enou= gh to be interesting.  =3B =3BI have flown the flight levels=2C and= find them boring.

 =3B

Fred Moreno

=

= --_1c5e2084-dbe1-4b96-8e1d-39864b4a63d4_--