Something different
- Thread starter milleR
- Start date
milleR
Well-Known Member
Lancair IV-P
Very nice. I’ll bet it rips!
milleR
Well-Known Member
Thanks! She’ll hit 245 firewalled, but normal cruise is 230 KTAS and about 15.5 gph LOP in the FL’s. The deice equipment takes about 10-15 knots off her speed but that’s a worthwhile trade imo.
That’s impressive.
Many, many moons ago I had 1/2 interest in a Twin Comanche. (Loved that plane!) We ran her pretty conservatively and planned on roughly 150 knots / 15 gph.
milleR
Well-Known Member
AoA is the stall warning system. It's part of the Garmin avionics, not a dedicated vane, but seems to work really well.
milleR
Well-Known Member
For a twin I don't think the twin Comanche can be beat in the efficiency department. I had a friend with an E model mooney many years ago and that thing would do about 150 true on 10 gph, but not much beats the mpg of something like @killbilly last RV. But for me time is still a significant factor, so I'm happy to burn a little more gas to get where I'm going an hour or two faster.
///AMG
Well-Known Member
Haha sorry that was a context-less callback to that weirdo who came on here a few years back yelling at everyone about his AoA vanes, or why we should buy them or something that I am forgetting. He had videos.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
I can’t remember exactly how it was done in my RV but I had a pseudo-AOA system in the RV that used a combination of data from the pitot and the AHRS to give a reasonable approximation of a true AOA-vane system. It worked fairly well from my testing, but I honestly never pushed the envelope with trying to stall it at higher speeds. Bit beyond my Ken, that was.
Wanted to. But my RV was fat, and couldn’t get it light enough to carry me, an instructor and enough gas to make aerobatics a meaningful endeavor.
milleR
Well-Known Member
It was good. The single biggest thing for me was dispatch reliability, I canceled exactly two flights because of a mx issue in 11 years and 1,000+ hours of flying, the plane was just always ready to go. She would do anything from long cross countries with moderate ice and low IFR to 3000' runways with no problem. As a family hauler, I couldn't have asked for a better machine. She was safe, reliable, comfortable, efficient and a joy to fly and own.
Expenses have gone up significantly in the last several years though. Fuel has more than doubled in price, parts are more expensive and shop rates have risen since good A&P's are getting hard to find and can get (and deserve) top dollar. An easy annual/100 hour/200 hour inspection would run around $12-15K but there were a couple of years where that could easily climb into six digits if there were any major components that needed work (for me it was a couple cabin windows, ACM, and a prop governor over that time but ymmv). Two years ago I had to get a second stage turbine wheel AD taken care of on both engines and the props overhauled, so that one hurt. Badly.
When I first got the plane I budgeted about $1,000/hour for operating expenses. Today that wouldn't even cover fuel at current prices in the Mid-Atlantic, so I'd guess it's around 2-3x that when taking into account engine, avionics, and P&I reserves.
Last edited:
Richman
JC’s Resident Curmudgeon
Twinkies are great, and the support group is fantastic, but they do require TLC from MX who know what they’re doing, and there are a couple of issues that require attention.
No different than any other twin, but like there is no such thing as a “free” cat, there is no such thing as a cheap twin.
milleR
Well-Known Member
Sadly, nothing built in the 60’s or 70’s is going to be cheap or easy to maintain. Which is a true shame because those were some of the best planes made.