Propjet is the IV-P with a turboprop instead of a recip. Same body, different engine.
Ok Duh! thank you! I guess I thought IV-P was a turboprop. Just pressurized I guess.
A FIKI SR22 Turbo would probably be more reliable for dispatch in weather. As far as I know, the IV-P is not icing certified in any way, and I expect the unprotected laminar flow short wings would not tolerate icing. If you are flying into the FLâs, you can get icing any day, any where in the US.
As the non-builder, owner you would also need to secure good maint that was comfortable and experienced with the platform and willing to sign off on maint and annual condition inspection. Another big hurdle is insurance.
If pressurization and speed was important, you should also look at something like a Cessna 340A in the $250k range. This would give you known ice, 229kt FL speeds at 34 gal/hr. You would also get 6 seats, and air stair door, plenty of space and a full fuel useful load of 600+ lbs for a range of over 1100 nm at 75%.
After some experience, insurance would likely be in the 6k or less range with an annual sim requirement ($2800).
I think the SR22 may be the better choice. Maintaining one engine and one parachute is much cheaper than two engines + extra training - the gas really adds us tooâŚ
I thought you guys might like to see this -
A Lancair IV-P with BRS chute and split leading edge wing. He quotes the cruise at 250 kts which is a bit lower than usual quoted cruise speeds, makes me think the âcirrusâ wing on it is impacting performance. Still tiny and cramped as hell, but if it lets you stretch your legs an hour sooner without white knuckling the stick through some nasty conditions it might still be worth it 
Just an update, I had briefly looked at the cessna twin a long time ago but quickly wrote it off as too complex and too big for my usual flight plan. I also looked at the Lancair Legacy for a bit but felt the bubble canopy might become a nuisance for extended cross country flights.
A few things:
What will you do with the half hour you save? Are you that big of a mover and shaker? Dislike flying that much?
What happens when your engine decides to die on final approach over mountainous terrain? I know a little about having a brick as a glider, and I know without the mandatory equipment in my picture, Iâm dead. Shit happens. I maintained that bird very well and the best known people worked in it, and shit still happens, itâs a mechanical device. What is your life worth to your friends, family, spouse, kids, business? Enjoy the flight for 30 more minutes each leg and have an additional out when you need it.
It has a chute! Not sure if the handle is red, though.[:)]
Between the chute and the cuffed wing I would imagine this aircraft has a different (probably better) safety potential. OTOH, I canât imagine there is any chute testing and other safety aspects that support chute deployment for occupant safety are not done. So there is a lot missing from a certified Cirrus. Very interesting find though, thanks for sharing.
Nicely done. Wonder why they removed the de-ice system?
Wish they had published some of the slow speed specifications. Wonder how much lower the speed is with those wings.
Didnât understand the comment on the Carbon Fiber rudder. I would have thought the CG was forward not backward.
Price is very competitive with the ES-Ps that are on Controller. This is much better finished and better avionics.
James,
I just realized that you are correct, I should have ordered the UPDT instead of the 22 because not only can I save money but I get more flight time, wonder if its too late to change it[:P][;)][:@]
Put a stopper half way on the throttle slider.
Lots said on this particular aircraft. Being from Bend Oregon, where the bulk of the LancAir aircrafts are built, all I can add is thisâŚ
Unless youâre a gymnast, LOL, they are or quickly become a pain to get in & out of and all LancAir models, including the Evolution are that way, the Legacy is the exception. May not seem like a big deal but all my local friends that have & fly continually complain, at least the forthright ones⌠Solo flying, ingress/egress, not as big of a deal⌠Getting passengers in & out ?? - My wife would not get in the ES-P I was considering prior to my Cirrus purchase⌠The âIngress SHUFFLEâ, yeahâŚI donât know ; )
Well, how many drop tests did they do? And who did: the builder or Lancair? And why, pray, tell, did it take Cirrrus so many drop tests to get CAPS right?
In other, more immortal words: youâve gotta ask yourself a question: âDo I feel lucky?â Well, do ya, punk?
Thatâs it! I have to move to Germany so I can finally learn to speak English like a native!!! [:)]
Oh I absolutely agree. The comfort factor is what this entire thread is about! And I fully recognize the importance of cabin access, even when flying solo. I also immediately recognized the fact that while BRS is very forthcoming into pushing their product, there is simply no way they were able to perform the kinds of tests Cirrus did (real world) for this guy and his kit build. FL250 has its advantages, but if I really must fly high then I suppose a mask will just have to do. The SR22 will still do 200KTAS and at least I dont have to worry about sudden decompression.
Roger is the IVP the same as a 2007 Lancair prop jet? If not how is the safety record of the 2007 Lancair prop jet?
Basically, yeah. I donât recall there being much different between the piston and turbine versions of the IV-P aside from the firewall forward. Itâs not like the Evolution which is a complete departure from those older models.
âIt ainât prettyâ would apply there, as well. [:P]
Andy beat me to it.
We found an ES-P kit that had been factory assist assembled up to the wings. We seriously looked at finishing it at the builder on the airfield where Lancair is located in Oregon.
The cockpit is far smaller than the SR22.
You cannot add a BRS chute to an existing IV or any other experimental once the body is closed.
A BRS chute has been built into a couple of new ES-P builds but not the IV or IV-P and of course never tested. So the idea of plunking in a bunch of cash and having the chute added by a builder is appealing but there is no way to tell if the chute will work because none have been pulled on an ES/ES-P or have been added and pulled on a IV/ IV-P.
The IV-P is not the ES-P. Whatâs the difference? The IV and IV-P have a much smaller wing area and is said to fly with very little forgiveness (requires real expertise). The accident stats are well known for the IV/IV-P. The ES and ES-P is based on the IV and IV-P with a larger wing area presumed to correct the finicky nature of the IV.
These things are experimentalsâŚa new build requires owners to have 51% involvement in the build and the FAA is strict regarding the required 40 hours of test flying. A comprehensive test plan must be submitted and possibly a test pilot hired to fly all those hours before you ever get to even ride in plane.
Also, one must find an engineâŚeither new or rebuild, but if you go the rebuild route you have to buy or have a core to trade.
All in all the Cirrus costs a little more but you sorta get what you pay forâŚa plane finished and with warranty. Versus one that that is all yours without warrantyâŚand nearly impossible to get insurance forâŚ