Lancair 360 - need info

[PAustin]

Anyone on here own a Lancair 360? I'm looking for REAL WORLD numbers and specs from an actual owner. My wife and I are strongly considering downsizing and selling our Bonanza. One of my main concerns is useful load. I'm 5'11 and 215. My wife isn't a 110 model either.

Also, if anyone knows of one in Iowa that I could at least sit in, let me know.

Thanks,

Paul


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mikegreen]

try koreystafford@gmail.com

 

[FORANE]

I own a Lancair 235/320 pic in my user id.
I have an O-320A originally 150hp rebuilt with 10:1 pistons.
I cruise 180kts burning around 6.5-7 gph above 10,000.
Climb solo 2000 fpm through the first 2k-3k, 1500 fpm through 8k, 1000 fpm through 10k, 800 fpm through 12k.
120kt downwind and gear speed, 110kt base, 100kt final, cross numbers 80-90kt.
I try to avoid runways less than 3500 ft day and 4500 ft night.
I am 6-0 210 and fit fine though I do use a Halo headset as the other type rubs the canopy. So, 5-11 215 will fit and be snug but quite comfortable for long trips. I am occasionally thrown into the canopy in turbulence. Useful load for me is 450lbs plus full fuel.

There is another POA user here username COMA I believe with a 360.
You will get more guidance possibly n the Lancair forum:
http://lancairtalk.net/index.php?sid=4f01fb68eb554370f3adc8e844415849

There are guys on the Lancair forum with 360's and claim 200-220hp who claim over 220kt cruise.

 

[PAustin]

Thanks for your input. I was concerned that with my wife and I in it, we wouldn't be able to carry any fuel to go anywhere. I would hate to just sit there and make motor noises. Hahaha....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[James331]

IMO that's a upgrade from a Bo

I try to avoid runways less than 3500 ft day and 4500 ft night.

That more runway than I require for a max gross PC12 or C208B

 

[Dav8or]

IMO that's a upgrade from a Bo



That more runway than I require for a max gross PC12 or C208B

Yeah that's the big downsides to the two seat speedsters. Limited to long runways and you're in a hell of jam if you're caught out over countryside and the engine quits. Imagine landing at 80-90 kts in a farmer's field with, or without the aid of 5" wheels. Remember the plane is built 100% of fiberglass and that construction technique is not known to hold together well in high speed crashes.

In aviation there is always a trade off. That is the trade off here. Speed for a margin of safety and operational flexibility.

 

[AdamZ]

I own a Lancair 235/320 pic in my user id.
I have an O-320A originally 150hp rebuilt with 10:1 pistons.
I cruise 180kts burning around 6.5-7 gph above 10,000.
Climb solo 2000 fpm through the first 2k-3k, 1500 fpm through 8k, 1000 fpm through 10k, 800 fpm through 12k.
120kt downwind and gear speed, 110kt base, 100kt final, cross numbers 80-90kt.
I try to avoid runways less than 3500 ft day and 4500 ft night.
I am 6-0 210 and fit fine though I do use a Halo headset as the other type rubs the canopy. So, 5-11 215 will fit and be snug but quite comfortable for long trips. I am occasionally thrown into the canopy in turbulence. Useful load for me is 450lbs plus full fuel.

There is another POA user here username COMA I believe with a 360.
You will get more guidance possibly n the Lancair forum:
http://lancairtalk.net/index.php?sid=4f01fb68eb554370f3adc8e844415849

There are guys on the Lancair forum with 360's and claim 200-220hp who claim over 220kt cruise.

Ask Coma ( Kieth) about getting slammed into the canopy when headed back from Osh. He also has some great video posted on YouTube.

 

[James331]

Yeah that's the big downsides to the two seat speedsters. Limited to long runways and you're in a hell of jam if you're caught out over countryside and the engine quits. Imagine landing at 80-90 kts in a farmer's field with, or without the aid of 5" wheels. Remember the plane is built 100% of fiberglass and that construction technique is not known to hold together well in high speed crashes.

In aviation there is always a trade off. That is the trade off here. Speed for a margin of safety and operational flexibility.

People don't hold together on high speed crashes ether.

I just don't believe that a 360 requires more runway than a PC12

 

[Henning]

Yeah that's the big downsides to the two seat speedsters. Limited to long runways and you're in a hell of jam if you're caught out over countryside and the engine quits. Imagine landing at 80-90 kts in a farmer's field with, or without the aid of 5" wheels. Remember the plane is built 100% of fiberglass and that construction technique is not known to hold together well in high speed crashes.

In aviation there is always a trade off. That is the trade off here. Speed for a margin of safety and operational flexibility.

It's not meant to hold together, it's meant to disintegrate as it absorbs energy, and it does very well at it. The finer it disintegrates the less chance it provide a projectile to pierce you. Watch with the carbon chassis race cars, the car literally disintegrates around the driver in a severe hit.

 

[Dav8or]

It's not meant to hold together, it's meant to disintegrate as it absorbs energy, and it does very well at it. The finer it disintegrates the less chance it provide a projectile to pierce you. Watch with the carbon chassis race cars, the car literally disintegrates around the driver in a severe hit.

Yeaaaahh... riiiiight. These planes are designed to break away and protect their occupants... riiight, sure...

 

[FORANE]

People don't hold together on high speed crashes ether.

I just don't believe that a 360 requires more runway than a PC12

Some will operate out of shorter strips. Indeed I have landed on a 2000 foot runway once when there was about a 35-40kt direct headwind. The problem is when it gets slow the sink rate goes way up so speed is needed to fly it onto the runway with minimal sink. It has 5 inch wheels which do not absorb much impact especially as the tires require 40+ psi or you will get pinched tubes / flats. It has tiny, very short travel shocks which don't absorb much. My elevator lacks the authority to holds the nose off once the mains touch so if touchdown is not very flat it will bounce which has lead to PIO gear collapse in some cases.

The Lancair instructor taught me to cross numbers at 90kts. I have since whittled it down to 80kts but really cannot decrease less than that due to factors described above. I have around 900 hours on mine. My opinion with 900 hours in type is that routinely operating out of runways shorter than I described is possible but removes any margin of safety.

 

[Henning]

Yeaaaahh... riiiiight. These planes are designed to break away and protect their occupants... riiight, sure...

Everything that is designed as a composite structure is, because that is the nature of plastic based composite construction. It doesn't crumple and fold, it bends/compresses then either bounces back or explodes.

 

[Dav8or]

Everything that is designed as a composite structure is, because that is the nature of plastic based composite construction. It doesn't crumple and fold, it bends/compresses then either bounces back or explodes.

Yep and when it explodes, you are ejected.

 

[Henning]

Yep and when it explodes, you are ejected.

With race cars it sometimes ends up with a comical picture of a driver sitting on the track with a wheel in his hand and no car. When Carbon Fiber goes, it turns to dust, poof, it disappears. This is favorable because there are few shards and splinters while in the mean time it turned a hell of a lot of kinetic energy into that explosive force, and that, along with lack of things to slice you up, is why you can survive and walk away from some incredible high speed crashes in modern race cars.

The down side to fiberglass is it produces shards.

 

[jesse]

IMO that's a upgrade from a Bo



That more runway than I require for a max gross PC12 or C208B

Why do you find that hard to believe? The PC12 at gross has 8 lbs per HP.

The Lancair 320 is more like 12 lbs per horse power.

I didn't double check either number so I could be wrong

 

[nauga]

When Carbon Fiber goes, it turns to dust, poof, it disappears...

This isn't really the case in aviation accidents as any investigator will attest; however, inhaling carbon fiber dust is a serious hazard in addition to the shards that remain following a breakup.

Nauga,
who does not want to cough up a lung

 

[Henning]

This isn't really the case in aviation accidents as any investigator will attest; however, inhaling carbon fiber dust is a serious hazard in addition to the shards that remain following a breakup.

Nauga,
who does not want to cough up a lung

Yes, but those sections didn't fail, they absorbed and rebounded. The failure mode of carbon fiber is that nasty dust.

 

[Bill Watson]

It's not meant to hold together, it's meant to disintegrate as it absorbs energy, and it does very well at it. The finer it disintegrates the less chance it provide a projectile to pierce you. Watch with the carbon chassis race cars, the car literally disintegrates around the driver in a severe hit.

Yeaaaahh... riiiiight. These planes are designed to break away and protect their occupants... riiight, sure...

The absorbing energy thing does work in certain situations with certain airframes. I totaled a PIK20b sailplane some years ago. Flew it straight into a wooded hillside while still carrying some ballast. THIS WAS NOT MY SHIP OR ACCIDENT

Every component was broken - both wings, stab, fin, tail cone, most control surfaces. I did a 180 on the way from the tops of the stunted trees to the ground. The fuselage was split thru the cockpit. Sitting on the ground in the split fuselage, holding the stick, I was able to radio "Foureyes is okay" to get the calvary going. Then I stood up and walked out.

My only injury was a bleeding scratch on my stick thumb's knuckle where the cracked plexiglass canopy hit me.

 

[PAustin]

There are shards with carbon fiber as well. I flew all carbon fiber radio controlled helicopters and when you blast a hole in the ground with a 12 pound heli at 80-100 mph the carbon can and does go flying.

Our rotor blades are all carbon fiber with a little foam in them.

Walking over to the carnage you need to be carful of picking the pieces up. I've been stabbed many times by shards of carbon fiber pieces.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tlrussell]

With race cars it sometimes ends up with a comical picture of a driver sitting on the track with a wheel in his hand and no car. When Carbon Fiber goes, it turns to dust, poof, it disappears. This is favorable because there are few shards and splinters while in the mean time it turned a hell of a lot of kinetic energy into that explosive force, and that, along with lack of things to slice you up, is why you can survive and walk away from some incredible high speed crashes in modern race cars.

The down side to fiberglass is it produces shards.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/watch-...rbon-fiber-to-fibers-of-carbon-in-crash-test/