Or the LX7. At www.lx7aircraft.com. Those are IV-Ps with a new wing and tail assembly. Retractable or fixed. Continental or PT6. No build required as they take and modify an existing airframe. More expensive than the Mako but pressurized with a turbine option.
Same wing as the Evolution?
Though, I am not Joel, but they donāt have the same wing as Evolution. Itās complete new design. Some more information here.
Right, but even if we assume that the available options are as effective as a FIKI system on a certified airplane, without the actual FIKI certification (which I understand is impossible in Experimental), doesnāt that limit the utility of the ice protection, since you canāt legally fly in areas of known icing?
Are you going to fly a piston single in areas of known icing conditions, FIKI or not?
Just to confirm, itās not an Evolution wing on the LX7. The wing and tail were designed by RDD Enterprises, who sell the LX7. They used to be a build shop for Evolutions but moved out to do different things, including the Perlan 2 glider which is one wild airplane. One of the big issues with all these experimental, high altitude and high performance airplanes is insurance. Others have checked more than I have, but insurance (if available at all, Iām not sure you can even get a new policy on an Evolution now for example but I could be wrong), is very expensive, like 4-5x the cost of a Cirrus for example. Thatās an implied effective increase in the purchase price.
For example, if the Mako costs $550,000 to build but costs $20,000/year to insure, itās effective purchase price is more than 550k even though you pay that toll over time, compared for example to a used G5 that costs $7000/year. These are just hypothetical figures, not based on anything. But I think the insurance rates for these are pretty high.
On the de-ice topic, in the Cirrus the FIKI system is more robust that the TKS system, so you do get a benefit there even if you get into inadvertent ice. As a result, saying that a plane uses TKS fluid doesnāt mean its capabilities are the same as a FIKI-certified TKS-equipped plane, or one with boots. The capabilities of the electric de-ice planes (e.g., therma-wing like the LX7) are hard for me to evaluate.
a good friend of mine has a 2003 Lancair 4 and if I remember correctly his annual insurance is around the $4K range, and thatās with full retractable gear. His annuals run around $2K per year. I just recently spoke to an aircraft finance company and they do provide funding on experimental aircrafts but she did say the rates are slightly higher. Another interesting fact that my friend mentioned was that it you performed the complete build of your plane you can get a builder classification which allows you to perform your own general repairsā¦but I have not confirmed if that is true or not.
The builder gets the repair station certificate and can do anything.
A non builder buyer can still do all repairs and modifications, the only thing you canāt do is the annual condition inspection
It is true and Phil has it right. I like to break things down into two areas with an experimental amateur built aircraft.
-
Maintenance or modifications. Anyone can do that. Anyone. My mother in law could have. Trust me she didnāt know what a wrench was, but she was qualified under the rules. The rules are, there are no rules.
-
Condition inspection (the equivalent of an annual inspection for an experimental aircraft) requires either the builders certificate or an A&P rating. Ideally, at a minimum, this is where poor work or bad modifications are caught.
Iām not sure thatāll be accurate. The Mako and LX7 have wings more similar to the ES than the IV. Thereās a guy selling an ES-P that contends the insurance is comparable to a Cirrus.
The Mako is new though. My guess would be no more than $1-2K a year over an SR22.
All the info I can gather on the electric systems are they work fantastically well when they work, the problem is a failed controller or belt takes them out.
Define high power lop? I really try to understand the red fin concept and at what to run the engine.
At 8000 ft or do, I pull back to 75% and lean to 65% - and that gives me around 160.
Better options ?
Mario,
Running high power LOP means NOT reducing power to 75% before going LOP. To do this you must respect the red fin and at lower altitudes need to run more than 25 or 50 LOP(depending on what MFD you have Cirrus had different goals in the engine management system).
See this old Wiki for more (much more). Read it and then ask your questions. https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/member/sr_aircraft/w/copapedia/254.lop-operation.aspx
To give you an idea of the difference I routinely fly at 8000 feet about 72% power and around 172 TAS. There are probably more to it than just high power LOP between your and my speeds. For example I do not have TKS panels. The point is running the Cirrus way (best power) is hard on the engine and best economy is too slow. There is a better way.
Thanks Roger
I fly a G6 na.
āMario,
*Running high power LOP means NOT reducing power to 75% before going LOP. To do this you must respect the red fin and at lower altitudes need to run more than 25 or 50 LOP(depending on what MFD you have Cirrus had different goals in the engine management system). *
See this old Wiki for more (much more). Read it and then ask your questions. https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/member/sr_aircraft/w/copapedia/254.lop-operation.aspx ā
He flies a G6. This link takes him to the old Avidyne article which is going to confuse him with terms like eMax and āNormalize.ā I rewrote that article for Perspective:
Thank you Dan.
Thanks Dan, very helpful
Any pireps on a flight in a Mako?
How about the actual insurance rate for an instrument rated pilot with 2,000 hours?
1 Like
Dan,
Can you repost this document. Iāve read Gordonās which I believe is the Avidyne version.
Thanks!
The link does not work on the new site.
This discussion was an education. 2 years old, but I suspect little has changed, in terms of opinions, correct?
I did some Google searching, which, by internet/social media standards, makes me an expert, right?
Anyway, I found this video to be interesting.
