Lancair 320

Looks like a rebuilt; maybe had a gear up or?
Looks like it would be a good efficient cross country traveler. I would add an autopilot, ads-b in/out and a weather display.
I am not sure but it may be a small tail like mine. The small tail lacks the elevator authority to hold the nose off the ground when the mains touch. In order to avoid a bounce and PIO one must learn to land it with limited descent rate and just above stall by flying it onto the runway.
The horizontal row of screws aft of the cowl and fore of the cockpit suggest the header tank is removable. This is good as in order to access the brake master cylinder it must be removed and not all are built to be removable.
 
FORANE said:
Looks like a rebuilt; maybe had a gear up or?
Looks like it would be a good efficient cross country traveler. I would add an autopilot, ads-b in/out and a weather display.
I am not sure but it may be a small tail like mine. The small tail lacks the elevator authority to hold the nose off the ground when the mains touch. In order to avoid a bounce and PIO one must learn to land it with limited descent rate and just above stall by flying it onto the runway.
The horizontal row of screws aft of the cowl and fore of the cockpit suggest the header tank is removable. This is good as in order to access the brake master cylinder it must be removed and not all are built to be removable.
Click to expand...

Are nose wheels castering? They look like they would snap off if it shimy.
 
Funny they didn't mention the gear up landing,and repairs made in the add.
 
Stingray Don said:
Always bugs me when a seller fails to mention something that significantly affects the value of an aircraft. Yes you have to do your own due diligence and the information is not difficult to find. It just makes me wonder what else the seller isn't disclosing.
Click to expand...

Indeed, just shows he's willing to omit anything for a sale, imwouldnt touch this plane with a 10' pole, not because of the gear up (we all know properly repaired damage is no issue) but because of the seller.
 
James331 said:
Indeed, just shows he's willing to omit anything for a sale, imwouldnt touch this plane with a 10' pole, not because of the gear up (we all know properly repaired damage is no issue) but because of the seller.
Click to expand...

Agreed....
 
I wonder if he attempted to use the dump valve to get the gear to fall. One of the items during the condition inspection is to drop the gear while it's on jacks to verify the system is operational.

I'd want a lot of detail on the repair, but an IFR 320 with a Garmin 430 for $62k is a good start. Agreed that it should've been included in the description.
 
I was interested in Lancairs, but ultimately dropped it because of the many accident reports and discussions like this, here at PoA.

Please excuse my silly question, but are there Lancairs which you would consider safer and more forgiving than others?
 
You could get a decent Glasair RG for that price with aerobatic approval to boot. A few knots less though.
 
I see the gear as an opportunity. After ensuring the repair was thorough, it could be used as a bargaining point! (non-NDH airplanes don't immediately scare me off)
 
German guy said:
I was interested in Lancairs, but ultimately dropped it because of the many accident reports and discussions like this, here at PoA.

Please excuse my silly question, but are there Lancairs which you would consider safer and more forgiving than others?
Click to expand...

It does depend on what you buy.

The Lancair IV/IV-P is roughly as forgiving as a swept-wing jet with the reliability of a piston aircraft, and no stick pusher. Don't stall the thing, ever.

The 320/360 is more forgiving than the IV. When Bill Harrelson took me for a ride in his 320 at Wings 2008, he did a full stall demonstration for me. It was definitely one of the less forgiving stalls out there, but it was very manageable. Compare that to the retired U2 pilot I talked to who built a IV-P. His words: "I stalled it once and it did a split S on me. After that, I put in an AoA indicator and said I'd never stall it again."

The Lancair ES(P), which later became the Columbia 350/400, was designed to be Part 23 certifiable. That's why it became the Columbia. I haven't stalled one, but my understanding is that they are more docile aircraft. Similarly, my understanding of the Evolution was that it was designed to be Part 23 certifiable. I would believe it, having flown it and looking at the wing. I didn't stall the Evolution when I flew it, but I did find it very easy to fly and I would believe forgiving as well.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I see the gear as an opportunity. After ensuring the repair was thorough, it could be used as a bargaining point! (non-NDH airplanes don't immediately scare me off)
Click to expand...

Same. The 310 was geared up something a few years after I was born. The Aztec I'm sure was damaged at some point, but the first 20 years of logs were missing.

Damage history really doesn't bother me.
 
Bbbut it has a zero time engine and prop. That's good, right ;) .
 
dell30rb said:
Whats the cruise speed on one of those? 220kts?
Click to expand...
It will easily hit 220 kts on every descent of 500 - 1000 fpm with that prop, but cruise will likely be around 180 kts with that prop. I have a MT 3 blade and while it has been a good prop it is definitely a little slower in cruise. Of course it will get off the ground better than the popular Catto as well as provide some braking effect which these airframes lack.

bnt83 said:
Are nose wheels castering? They look like they would snap off if it shimy.
Click to expand...
Yes, castering nose wheel but with vertical shimmy damper:
http://www.lancairowners.com/nosegearmaintenance/
There have been a couple incidences of nose gear failure, but it seems the majority of them are pilot induced or stem from a lack of maintenance and inspection. The overcenter link in the webpage linked above (1st pic) has had instances of getting wallowed out and eventually failing causing nose gear collapse. The small tail variant especially lacks elevator authority to hold the nose off when landing so the nose gear may be subject to the stress of a trainer... There is also a secondary strut which holds the overcenter link in place as well as aids in its descent; this secondary strut may be a neglected maintenance item resulting in collapse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top