X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:50:13 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m26.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.7] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2605272 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:29:25 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.7; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-m26.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id q.c1b.1fa61d2a (41810) for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:16 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:16 EST Subject: Re: [LML] 320/360 efficiency and economy - hole in the market? X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1198078096" X-Mailer: AOL 9.0 VR sub 5006 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1198078096 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en In a message dated 12/19/2007 12:32:26 A.M. Central Standard Time, =20 fredmoreno@optusnet.com.au writes: I have been pondering Lorn=E2=80=99s commentary about how his 320 cannot be= beat for=20 efficient and cost effective cross country cruising. =20 With oil probably permanently above $70-80/bbl and avgas at $5 a gallon, he= =20 makes an excellent point. Efficiency (particularly cost efficiency) should= =20 be a key figure of merit. =20 However, Lancair has gone upscale and offers only expensive, fire-breathing= =20 kit airplanes. This list has noted that a Legacy starts at $200K complete= d,=20 and works up. =20 Has Lancair left a hole in the market place? =20 If one could produce a relatively simple, fast and efficient lower cost kit= =20 for 320/360 engines, is there a currently untapped market?=20 The most efficient cross country airplane I have found is the Dyn-Aero MCR=20 Sporter which has one kit version (short wings) that carries two people at=20= 160=20 knots on 100 Rotax horsepower =E2=80=93 fixed gear no less. But it lacks t= he sex=20 and beauty of the Lancair family airplanes. And we all know that airplanes= =20 have to be beautiful, particularly after all that labor.=20 Is it time to bring back the Lancair 320, upgraded, simpler, even slicker,=20 and keep it inexpensive? Fred, =20 Consider Van's Aircraft RV-7A (360) or RV-9A (320) at $28,000 for a fast=20 build kit and the Legacy FG (390) at $39,000. Note that the Legacy has sol= ved=20 certain aerodynamic problems present in the 200/300 series Lancairs plus=20 offering a larger cabin. I doubt that a glass fast build 300 like plane co= uld be=20 kitted for much less than the Legacy FG. Modern fixed gear aircraft do not= =20 lose much speed, gain in payload and panel space (reduces the need for cert= ain=20 switches and lights). Ask any ES flyer. =20 We need a CAFE test. Let's suppose plane X is 3 gal/hr more efficient than= =20 plane Y where efficiency calculated over equal distances and the speed=20 difference is not greater than 50 mph. Let's also say that X base cost is=20= $12,000=20 more than plane Y. That would be 3000 gallons if measured in $4 gallons of= =20 fuel or 1000 hours of flight time if measured in flight hours. At 100 hour= s=20 per year, plane Y would fly for ten years before its base costs would catch= up=20 to plane X. OK, ok, ok - I know that Y would have to fly longer over the=20 woods and thru the air to grandma's house (but not that much longer). =20 I'm not sure that there is a performance hole that hasn't been filled by th= e=20 FG Legacy or an RV. =20 Grayhawk Fly Faster and Cheaper with Manageable Risk.=20 Retired persons need to set goals and engage in activities that exclude=20 shuffleboard and bingo games. =20 Flying LOP is marginally acceptable. **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes=20 (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=3Daoltop00030000000004) -------------------------------1198078096 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en
In a message dated 12/19/2007 12:32:26 A.M. Central Standard Time,=20 fredmoreno@optusnet.com.au writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D3>

I have been pondering Lorn= =E2=80=99s=20 commentary about how his 320 cannot be beat for efficient and cost effecti= ve=20 cross country cruising. 

With oil probably permanentl= y=20 above $70-80/bbl and avgas at $5 a gallon, he makes an excellent point.&nb= sp;=20 Efficiency (particularly cost efficiency) should be a key figure of=20 merit. 

However, Lancair has gone up= scale=20 and offers only expensive, fire-breathing kit airplanes.   This=20= list=20 has noted that a Legacy starts at $200K completed, and works=20 up. 

Has Lancair left a hole in t= he=20 market place? 

If one could produce a relat= ively=20 simple, fast and efficient lower cost kit for 320/360 engines, is there a=20 currently untapped market?

The most efficient cross cou= ntry=20 airplane I have found is the Dyn-Aero MCR Sporter which has one kit versio= n=20 (short wings) that carries two people at 160 knots on 100 Rotax horsepower= =E2=80=93=20 fixed gear no less.  But it lacks the sex and beauty of the Lancair=20 family airplanes.  And we all know that airplanes have to be beautifu= l,=20 particularly after all that labor.

Is it time to bring back the= =20 Lancair 320, upgraded, simpler, even slicker, and keep it=20 inexpensive?

Fred,
 
Consider Van's Aircraft RV-7A (360) or RV-9A (320)=20= at=20 $28,000 for a fast build kit and the Legacy FG (390) at $39,000.  Note=20= that=20 the Legacy has solved certain aerodynamic problems present in the 200/300 se= ries=20 Lancairs plus offering a larger cabin.  I doubt that a glass fast build= 300=20 like plane could be kitted for much less than the Legacy FG.  Modern fi= xed=20 gear aircraft do not lose much speed, gain in payload and panel space (reduc= es=20 the need for certain switches and lights).  Ask any ES flyer.
 
We need a CAFE test.  Let's suppose plane X is 3 ga= l/hr=20 more efficient than plane Y where efficiency calculated over equal distances= and=20 the speed difference is not greater than 50 mph.  Let's also say that X= =20 base cost is $12,000 more than plane Y.  That would be 3000 gallons if=20 measured in $4 gallons of fuel or 1000 hours of flight time if measured in=20 flight hours.  At 100 hours per year, plane Y would fly for ten years=20 before its base costs would catch up to plane X.  OK, ok, ok - I know that Y would have to fly longer over the wo= ods=20 and thru the air to grandma's house (but not that much longer).
 
I'm not sure that there is a performance hole = that=20 hasn't been filled by the FG Legacy or an RV.
 
Grayhawk
Fly Faster and Cheaper with Manageable Risk.=20
Retired persons need to set goals and engage in=20 activities that exclude shuffleboard and bingo games. 
Flying LOP is marginally=20 acceptable.



= See AOL's top rated recipes and easy ways to stay in shape for winter.
-------------------------------1198078096--