Are you kidding me? The astetics of the evolution is gorgeous! What a beautiful plane!

@Captndarty

2 жыл бұрын

Now way. The windows kill the ascetics. Terrible looking and poor visibility. And no they don’t have to be that round for pressurization.

Amazing, so firm, so fully packed!

Awesome video! Well done!

Excellent stuff bro

I had researched the SR 22 but never heard much about its competition. Thanks for putting this video together.

@speedomars3869

Жыл бұрын

This plane is NOT a competitor with Cirrus. It is a different animal entirely. It is carbon fiber and has a chute, but that is the end of the comparison. Cirrus does not have a jet-prop option and is not pressurized.

@kize32

Жыл бұрын

JMB VL3 is SR22 competition

@speedomars3869

Жыл бұрын

@@kize32 Wrong. The JMB is a two seater with retractable gear and cruises at 150kts. It uses a Rotax light sport engine. It is basically a light sport with retractable gear, a 20kt too fast cruise speed which disqualifies it as SLSA. The SR22 is a fully certified aircraft, four seat (a fifth seat for a child) with fixed gear, a Continental non turbo IO-550 with 310hp (high performance) and a constant speed prop. And cruises at 165kts.

@vincent5

Жыл бұрын

@@kize32 that’s even more wrong haha

The Evolution with the PT-6A turboprop engine is nothing short of incredible. Solid, well designed, easy to fly, turbine reliability, very comfortable and roomy, great payload, with jet like performance. Very few others out there can cruise at 300kt in the flight levels above most of the weather and then land at 61kt (stall speed) which incidentally is the same as a Cirrus SR22. Stall characteristics are so benign practicing them is really a non-issue which is something you wouldn't want to do with a Lancair IV. One other thing that makes the Evolution truly remarkable is its near sail plane glide ratio. At 18:1 it’s about twice that of any comparable airframe. It's so great that at its typical cruise altitude it within glide range of an airport in the lower 48 states. If you can competently fly a Cirrus SR22/Bonanza/Cessna 210 you can fly the Evolution if you commit to the training needed for its high performance and flying in the flight levels. Its truly a docile plane to fly with tons more power. Even thought it is marketed as a "kit plane" it really is not. Almost all Evos are professionally built with the owner partnering with a "professional contract build/maintenance shop that has extensive expertise with the plane and composite construction. All the complicated and integrate work is completed by the professionals while the more basic work is completed by the owner to meet the FAA rules. In essence the professional build shop ensures each plane is built to meet very high quality standards and then tested by certified test pilots thoroughly before being turned over to the owner. In my opinion most Evo's are built better than certified planes. Regarding its accident history. The reality is most of the accidents have been due to pilot error and not airframe issues. Problem is the Evo's performance attracts an owner/pilot that can afford it but may not have the ability, experience or commitment to training to fly a plane with this kind of performance. The Evo's jet like performance can easily get ahead of an owner/pilot not ready, prepared and trained for it or fails to maintain proficiency. It's one thing to cruise around at 170kt / 8,000ft in a Cirrus or Bonanza but entirely another at 300kt / 28,000ft in the flight levels where you are mixing it up with the big air carrier jets. In reality it's not the plane but the Pilot that's the Evo's Achilles heel. Recognizing this, the Evolution Owners Group has in recent years worked hard to develop and implement a certified recurrent training and safety program with professional training organizations like Elite Pilot Services. They have also worked closely with the build/maintenance shops to maintain the fleet and sponsor improvements and advancements for the Evo including many safety products like the BRS ballistic parachute system now being available, new advanced avionics & autopilots and cutting edge thermo radiant heat de-icing systems, military grade door seals just to name a few. Despite other comments about the manufacturer (Evolution Aircraft Company) being out of business the are in fact still in business and actively support the fleet with parts and factory support. While the Evo is not currently in production, it may not stay that way for long. With only about 90 in existence they are becoming highly sought after and if you are lucky enough to own one its not uncommon to get unsolicited inquiries from others looking for one. Nothing out there competes with it in its price/performance category. How do I know all of this, well I own and fly one.

@Dwaynesaviation

2 жыл бұрын

The Evolution is as great as it gets

@DaneJasper

2 жыл бұрын

Are they in business, and are kits still available? Or just supporting the existing fleet?

@blaze6655

2 жыл бұрын

@@DaneJasper Yes. Evolution Aircraft Corp just announced a manufacturing JV with JMB Aircraft in Czech Republic to resume production.

@abel4776

Жыл бұрын

@@blaze6655 Oh nice! The JMB VL3 is already a spectacular platform from a respected company. I'm excited to hear about their collab.

@speedomars3869

Жыл бұрын

The SR22 over the numbers speed is 71kts. The SR22T over the numbers speed is 79kts. The roll probems in the Evolution caused crashes and that led to insurance issues. But now Evolution may be back as the company is partnering with JMB in the Czech republic.

You need to do a follow up video on the LX7 for the lancair 4P and evolution.

@andrewday3206

2 жыл бұрын

The LX7 is impressive and possibly faster. I believe the Evolution is wider and overall larger inside…

@speedomars3869

Жыл бұрын

The LX7 is a IVP with a different wing attached. The engines are not new either.

1:23 previous Lancairs were NOT metal aircraft. Composites have been Lancair’s mainstay forever.

@StudioRV8

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, not sure where he got that information. They were NEVER metal.

@jeffstillwell6802

Жыл бұрын

Dumb robot…

My beautiful new ✈ aircraft

Once again in your videos I have to say that a G3X is not inferior in any way to a G1000. The G3X has to be paired with a external GPS nav/comm and autopilot, but that's a feature: ot makes it much more customizable than the G1000. Most people get a g3x and a gtn 750, but you can up to 4 g3x screens and a gtn 750 and a gtn 650 and a g5 just for good measure. And FYI, the G3X is now offered for certified aircraft also.

Nice sales pitch!

Its ground counterpart is the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution

Nice plane. I'd have a hard time picking it over a Meridian.

This video is idiotic. Lancair’s were NEVER, EVER “metal airplanes”

Austin meyers favourite aircraft he has the turbine model I cant afford one😂 but i can get to with some fun with a digital with as realistic physics , fm model as possible

Woah woah woahhhhh

9:08 You need to correct the video. You say it climbs at 1500 ft/min, but the video shows 15,000 ft/min? I prefer the video's rocket climb.

@wernerdanler2742

Жыл бұрын

I noticed that too. Just a typo. Or was it? Mmmm

Climbs much slower at 15,000ft/min. Typo in the bottom right 9:10

Is this airplane pressurized?

Lets do a Cozy MKIV with this engine

👍

Didn’t the manufacturer close it’s doors due failures?

What is the useful load, can it fit 4/6'3 guys or is plane made for 2 adults and 2 kids under 10

@lannvannoy5350

2 жыл бұрын

My understanding is, 4 adults and 225 pounds of luggage

@blaze6655

2 жыл бұрын

Useful load with full fuel is about 950lbs. Limiting factor is tires. Plenty of hp for more payload if you wanted to chance the tires. Back seats would be cramped with two 6’3 guys but it’s doable. Two adult females would be very comfortable. Front has plenty of room. Way more than a Piper Meridian.

Is Evolution Aircraft still in business?

@Dwaynesaviation

Жыл бұрын

Not in the US... they closed down and moved to Czech to work with JMB aircraft

Hi

What model Lancair had a metal fuselage?

@thezeek2745

2 жыл бұрын

None

Lancairs were composite

Have a look at LX7 aircraft 😉 Same but better and cheaper

@Kavack

2 жыл бұрын

Huge difference in useful load. I don’t see pricing of lx7

@flymachine

2 жыл бұрын

Doesn't compare, youre better off comparing the Evo to a TBM

@thezeek2745

2 жыл бұрын

Cheaper. You have to an IV-P to convert into an Lx7. And it’s a million just for the upgrade

All Lancair's are composite, none of them were metal, its impossible to make those complex shapes out of metal unless it is melted and cast in a mold to form those shapes. I have been in aviation with my father since the 1980s and the first Lancair 235 to get a write up in an aviation magazine was a composite airframe.

15000ft per min lol

@Dwaynesaviation

2 жыл бұрын

What?

@robertodiniz7314

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dwaynesaviation there is a mistake on the Piston Slide

@robertodiniz7314

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dwaynesaviation other than that good vídeo! A lot of work I can see

@Dwaynesaviation

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much... I highly appreciate

Half the text is copied verbatim from Flying magazine, and the rest of the information just seems to be rephrased. Do you pay them royalties for using their journalists’ work?

One major problem. 1.5 million dollars and it's a kit plane you have to build yourself. Therefore very very far from the greatest 4 seater.

From a company no longer in business. Good luck finding parts & support maintaining this complex plane. Beautiful bird but not practical given the lack of support.

@dwightbarnell4295

2 жыл бұрын

back in production this summer I've heard.

@arthurbrumagem3844

2 жыл бұрын

@@dwightbarnell4295 a friend of mine has his in Oregon at the “ plant “ getting a stronger nose wheel assembly put on. Fast plane but I don’t think I would want one

@dwightbarnell4295

2 жыл бұрын

@@arthurbrumagem3844 Not right now anyway, not until the company comes back online and the insurance rates go back down. I have heard the nose assembly is a little on the weak side.

@arthurbrumagem3844

2 жыл бұрын

@@dwightbarnell4295 my friends collapsed on landing a couple of years ago. Having a turbo prop rebuilt isn’t cheap or fast

@blaze6655

2 жыл бұрын

@@arthurbrumagem3844 there is a newly engineered HD front nose gear now available. Much beefier than the first gen unit. Ours just had it installed. Nose problem issue is now a non issue.

And no icing protection! All at around 1.2 million. It will be flying around looking like an ice cube most of the time.

@blaze6655

2 жыл бұрын

That’s not true. There are several Evolutions equipped with traditional inflatable de-ice boots. Problem is boots extract a speed penalty of about 20-30 kts as they dirty up a bit the Evo’s super smooth laminar airfoil which is why most owners haven’t elected to go that route. But that’s not the only option. The super advanced German Villinger electric thermo deice system is in flight testing on three Evo’s as of this writing. So far it’s proving to be very effective, robust and efficient. The system is only 5 nano meters thick which does not interfere with the Evo’s laminar airfoil unlike traditional inflatable boots so there is no speed loss with the Villinger system. So far about 20 Evo’s are in line to have the system installed after testing is complete.

@abel4776

Жыл бұрын

@@blaze6655 Just heard that they now have BRS parachute? Or was this always a feature?

@blaze6655

Жыл бұрын

@@abel4776 it’s an option if desired. Several have BRS parachutes installed.

@abel4776

Жыл бұрын

@@blaze6655 Nice! The Cirrus Vision Jet has competition now. Excited for the Evo.

@alexs3187

Жыл бұрын

@@abel4776 now? It’s been around for a while

The range sucks. LX7 have a 2100nm . on top of that , the plane is ugly, back window is a fail . . I dont get it!

It's not a great plane. It's very fast, and very difficult to fly. They did cost 7 figures to build but people sell them for far below a Cirrus because they're near impossible to insure- for a reason... They end up as smoldering craters at a ridiculous rate. They're not great planes.

@zendoc49

Жыл бұрын

thanks for setting the record straight

@av8rshane491

Жыл бұрын

LX7 is a much better airplane.

@EVOT-N621SS

Ай бұрын

You are confusing the evolution with the lancair IVP. Totally different planes and vastly different safety records

Looks like a Cirrus could be a better choice

@Kavack

2 жыл бұрын

Why? More expensive, slower and less useful load.

@flymachine

2 жыл бұрын

in what sense?Unless youre referring to the vision jet which also falls short, the SR22 is smaller, much slower, unpressurised, can't fly nearly as high, less useful load and all that for a higher cost...???

@alexs3187

Жыл бұрын

Honestly, a used Malibu or Meridian might be better than both.

Why can’t you just narrate in a normal voice???

Great design and concept, FAST! But, too hot for the average pilot and most of them were crashed causing the company to go out of business! And former Lancair designs were COMPOSITE, not metal! Poor research on this video!

@thezeek2745

2 жыл бұрын

That’s the lancair IV-P. This is a safe plane. Part 23 stall numbers.

@joncox9719

2 жыл бұрын

@@thezeek2745 Yes, but still a "HOT" plane that is too much to handle for the "average" pilot! One of the more perplexing crashes was in the Phoenix area, the guy lost electrical power, "No big deal" on a beautiful crystal clear day and crashed a perfectly good plane and was killed! Most aren't up to the performance!

@abel4776

Жыл бұрын

@@joncox9719 Lack of training? Still don't understand how he crash landed on the golf course.

@speedomars3869

Жыл бұрын

The Corvallis was composite as was the IV-P. The Evolution ran into trouble when some of them were crashed by low-skill pilots. Insurance companies backed away from them. The planes are fine, but not everyone can be a customer or be able to pilot one.

Turbine Prop not Turbo Prop

@DaneJasper

2 жыл бұрын

Turboprops are turbine-engine prop planes. The Evolution is an example, or the King Air, PC-12, TBM, etc.

@caryconrad3298

2 жыл бұрын

@@DaneJasper in the 40s this in-distinction started, it was wrong then and is still wrong, my private crusade

@blaze6655

2 жыл бұрын

I think the naming convention started with the other name descriptions for the three general classes of turbine engines: TurboJet TurboFan (both high and low bypass) TurboProp I agree all use a turbine engine as their core power source, its just the method of "final or primary drive" that differentiates them, each having a sweetspot on the performance/altitude/fuel efficiency curves an airframe designer/manufacture selects for its mission profile. How it got shortened to "Turbo" is a mystery to me.

Another awkward side stick control.

@abel4776

Жыл бұрын

Said the same thing until I realized that I always flown the 172 yoke with my left hand. It's natural.

@alexs3187

Жыл бұрын

@@abel4776 exactly!

Poorly written, horribly presented and factually incorrect.