This was an incredibly helpful video. I own a Piper Cherokee 140. And the purpose of that airplane was to get me through my private and instrument rating. After recently passing my instrument checkride, I think my airplane has fulfilled my goal for her. My mission, like yours, is travel and exploration. I have family that lives about 600 miles away in multiple directions and I like the idea of being able to get to them much more frequently. In my airplane that's about 6 hours of flying plus a fuel stop. My 140 fit my training goals perfectly, but I'd now like to spend a little less time getting there. I really really like your approach of adding one thing at a time. I know you said you didn't plan it that way but I think it's smart. I came to your channel thinking I'd let you convince me to get into a lancair - maybe a 320. But your approach has changed my mind. I got my complex endorsement flying the Arrow that my CFI owns, and it was incredibly similar to my little 140. I pretty much greased all the landings during my checkout. Perhaps a speed demon like your airplane will be my 3rd airplane, but I think you've convinced me that the Arrow needs to be my next airplane in order to reduce the number of new things I introduce. Thanks for this video! It was very very helpful to me!
Appreciate the comment! Glad you enjoyed the video, and happy to hear you are taking things at a pace that works for you. And yes, the Legacy will make a _fine_ 3rd airplane :)
I can appreciate the gradual transition from a trainer airplane to a faster airplane. But I think private pilots make too much of a big deal out of it. If we compare our learning curve to what they do in the air force, they get on turbines very quickly. so it almost seems as we're building barriers for ourselves sometimes. We need to respect the machines for what they are. Don't try to do with an Arrow what you would with a 152 and vice-versa. Also be proactive, always, in your learning. I climbed into my Mooney at 65 hours and after 10 hours was pretty comfortable and after 20 hours everything was automatic, just like it was in the 172 I trained on initially. It worked for me, but might not work for everybody.
Thanks for the comment! I'm not sure that I agree that "private pilots make too much of a big deal out of it", or at least that's not how I intended to come across or what I'm trying to suggest. I've said this in a few of my videos: everyone's path, comfort level, and risk tolerance is unique to them. My personal approach is all about managing risks at every step. There is nothing in my past decades of flying that even remotely resembles what military pilots go through - I never had the intensity, consistency or even the time (and often the motivation) to claim any parallels with how they develop and stay current. I suspect that many if not _most_ GA pilots share that in common with me. At the very least, the weekend warriors do. Hope this helps. Happy flying!
I spent 650ish hours instructing in DA20s, and have even more time in aluminum types and less in fabric types - and yes, when I think of owning, I always dream in composite construction
EASA definitions High-performance aircraft (HPA) is a term used in type certification but is not clearly defined. However CS 23.2005 defines two performance levels: ”(c) Aeroplane performance levels are: (1) Low speed - for aeroplanes with a Vno or Vmo ≤ 250 knots calibrated airspeed (KCAS) or a Mmo ≤ 0.6; and (2) High speed - for aeroplanes with a Vno or Vmo > 250 KCAS or an Mmo > 0.6.” The term ‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ is defined in Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 as follows: “‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ shall mean: (i) an aeroplane: - with a maximum certificated take-off mass exceeding 5700 kg, or - certificated for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nineteen, or - certificated for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or - equipped with (a) turbojet engine(s) or more than one turboprop engine, or (ii) a helicopter certificated: - for a maximum take-off mass exceeding 3175 kg, or - for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nine, or - for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or (iii) a tilt rotor aircraft;” HPA is not an endorsement in itself. Certain theoretical knowledge Requirements must be met before undertaking the first type or class rating on an aircraft defined as HPA. Those who have passed the ATPL-theory already meet the requirement. Experimental aircraft aren’t covered by EASA regulations and fall under national regulations, hence you can’t get an EASA class rating for an experimental aircraft. Since experimental aircraft aren’t type certified they can’t be classified as HPA by EASA either. Since the Lancair Legacy has a Vno of 220 KCAS and an MTOM of 998 kg, is SP, with a MOPSC of 1 and has a reciprocating engine it would fall outside the single pilot high-performance complex motor-powered aircraft category anyway.
Am currently looking at the 320 series or the legacy. What items did you find in the first lancair that caused you to back out of the purchase? Like you plane, and have about an hour in a 360. Safe flying
A couple of questions: Being just under 6ft 4 inches tall, could I fit in a Legacy? Also, given sufficient ratings/experience is insurance for the Legacy easy to obtain?
Thanks for the question, Ethan. I'm 6'1" and have no trouble, and I could still have thinner seat cushions (by a couple of inches). 6'4" is probably close to the limit, so I'm not sure. Your best bet is to get a Legacy pilot to take you up and do some flying :) Insurance was not an issue. I'd heard doom and gloom from so many people that I almost didn't check. Glad I did. However, I live in Canada and it's a different environment here. I've never checked in the US. I do have American contacts who would probably be willing to chat if you are serious.
@@PiInTheSky thanks for the reply. There are a few Legacy owners at the airport that I usually fly out of. Will speak with them about doing a fit-check and see if they might take me flying.
@@crazyconsAh, I see, and sorry to hear that as it eliminates some of the most capable aircraft. There are no restrictions in North America (Canada nor the US) on Experimental/IFR, provided they are equipped and registered to fly IFR.
Excellent path, that’s how it’s done if you want to become a safe pilot! I own a legacy turbine conversion …on EEPC and I never looked back! (PPL IFR ME-Land Jet Rated Phenom 100/300) Will never sell my pocket rocket 😂
No, I didn't consider this plane, and from a pure speed point of view, they appear to be so close that it would be hard to tell them apart. I've never seen a venture in person nor met a pilot who had time on one. I had a few factors in mind when shopping: size of fleet, looks, safety record, ability to find an instructor/training, and so on.
@@PiInTheSky Thanks, I was really looking for a fast plane to travel to my clients (I'm a realtor), I have about a 100hours in a 152, do you think I could handle a lancair legacy with proper training and what should I look for when buying one?
@@coltonhoppe A 152 is a pretty different experience... kinda like comparing a canoe to a jetboat. I expect the transition would take a significant amount of time. Getting used to speed is one thing but pilots have to "stay ahead" of the plane and there are few shortcuts for that. Having said that, everyone's different, but I would recommend something more forgiving to build time in.
250kias is above mach 1 at FL400. That is indeed high performance. Also Vne is kind of a bad criteria, that speaks to structural strength, not performance. And yes sleek planes are good. So much missed potential in GA. Especially in small turbofan engines. Imagine a pressurized Lancair at half the weight in carbon fiber and with two small jet engines so you zip at 700km/h at FL400 with better fuel economy than a cessna 172. In a plane that costs LSA money.
What do you think about the safety record of Lancair? I want one so bad, have one I can buy but the high stall speeds and crash stats of Lancair scares the heck out of me.
Thanks for the comment. Which aircraft safety record are you referring to? As far as speeds go I think every pilot has to make that decision based on their confidence, skill and interests. It should also be pointed out that not all high-performance aircraft are created equal ... the Vso speed of my Legacy is 57 KIAS.
This was an incredibly helpful video. I own a Piper Cherokee 140. And the purpose of that airplane was to get me through my private and instrument rating. After recently passing my instrument checkride, I think my airplane has fulfilled my goal for her.
My mission, like yours, is travel and exploration. I have family that lives about 600 miles away in multiple directions and I like the idea of being able to get to them much more frequently. In my airplane that's about 6 hours of flying plus a fuel stop. My 140 fit my training goals perfectly, but I'd now like to spend a little less time getting there.
I really really like your approach of adding one thing at a time. I know you said you didn't plan it that way but I think it's smart. I came to your channel thinking I'd let you convince me to get into a lancair - maybe a 320. But your approach has changed my mind. I got my complex endorsement flying the Arrow that my CFI owns, and it was incredibly similar to my little 140. I pretty much greased all the landings during my checkout.
Perhaps a speed demon like your airplane will be my 3rd airplane, but I think you've convinced me that the Arrow needs to be my next airplane in order to reduce the number of new things I introduce. Thanks for this video! It was very very helpful to me!
Appreciate the comment! Glad you enjoyed the video, and happy to hear you are taking things at a pace that works for you. And yes, the Legacy will make a _fine_ 3rd airplane :)
Look into Mooneys as well, great speed, range and low fuel consumption.
@@TheBarzook They're definitely in consideration.
I can appreciate the gradual transition from a trainer airplane to a faster airplane. But I think private pilots make too much of a big deal out of it. If we compare our learning curve to what they do in the air force, they get on turbines very quickly. so it almost seems as we're building barriers for ourselves sometimes. We need to respect the machines for what they are. Don't try to do with an Arrow what you would with a 152 and vice-versa. Also be proactive, always, in your learning. I climbed into my Mooney at 65 hours and after 10 hours was pretty comfortable and after 20 hours everything was automatic, just like it was in the 172 I trained on initially. It worked for me, but might not work for everybody.
Thanks for the comment! I'm not sure that I agree that "private pilots make too much of a big deal out of it", or at least that's not how I intended to come across or what I'm trying to suggest.
I've said this in a few of my videos: everyone's path, comfort level, and risk tolerance is unique to them.
My personal approach is all about managing risks at every step. There is nothing in my past decades of flying that even remotely resembles what military pilots go through - I never had the intensity, consistency or even the time (and often the motivation) to claim any parallels with how they develop and stay current. I suspect that many if not _most_ GA pilots share that in common with me. At the very least, the weekend warriors do.
Hope this helps. Happy flying!
I know I'm two years late, but this was an incredible video. Great job.
Thank you for the kind words!
Great presentation, Very nice outline of a pilots progression. Gave me several tips and things to think about. Thx!
Thanks Tim, glad you enjoyed!
Love your video series... I just started at YKF as a new Airport Duty Manager. Hope to see you around!
Thanks Tim .. congrats on the new role!
Excellently produced video! Great narrative, script, and voice over with pleasant upbeat flow!
Thank you for the awesome comment, glad you liked the video.
Beautiful plane! This is the bird I'm looking at after the Piper Lance I'm in now. Great job with the videos, and I can't wait for more!
Thank you for leaving the comment! There will be more shortly :)
Have watched every video! Please keep them coming!
Even I couldn't do that :) Glad you enjoyed, thanks for the comment!
I spent 650ish hours instructing in DA20s, and have even more time in aluminum types and less in fabric types - and yes, when I think of owning, I always dream in composite construction
It's difficult not to love the curves and appeal of composite aircraft :)
I really enjoy your videos. Great work! I fly a Cherokee 6, but I've always admired the Lancair Aircraft. Best wishes from Kentucky!
Thanks Brent, appreciate the comment!
Happy Pi Day. We're at Kitchener on Saturdays and will keep an eye out for Pi in the sky.
Thanks for the comment ... sounds good, looking forward to meeting you!
May be you have some training as a writer too Kurt? Well written narrative indeed. Your airplane is my fantasy. Thanks for posting.
Thank you for the comment and the compliment, Jimmy. Glad you enjoyed!
EASA definitions
High-performance aircraft (HPA) is a term used in type certification but is not clearly defined. However CS 23.2005 defines two performance levels:
”(c) Aeroplane performance levels are:
(1) Low speed - for aeroplanes with a Vno or Vmo ≤ 250 knots calibrated airspeed (KCAS) or a Mmo ≤ 0.6; and
(2) High speed - for aeroplanes with a Vno or Vmo > 250 KCAS or an Mmo > 0.6.”
The term ‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ is defined in Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 as follows:
“‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ shall mean:
(i) an aeroplane:
- with a maximum certificated take-off mass exceeding 5700 kg, or
- certificated for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nineteen, or
- certificated for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or
- equipped with (a) turbojet engine(s) or more than one turboprop engine, or
(ii) a helicopter certificated:
- for a maximum take-off mass exceeding 3175 kg, or
- for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nine, or
- for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or
(iii) a tilt rotor aircraft;”
HPA is not an endorsement in itself. Certain theoretical knowledge Requirements must be met before undertaking the first type or class rating on an aircraft defined as HPA. Those who have passed the ATPL-theory already meet the requirement. Experimental aircraft aren’t covered by EASA regulations and fall under national regulations, hence you can’t get an EASA class rating for an experimental aircraft. Since experimental aircraft aren’t type certified they can’t be classified as HPA by EASA either.
Since the Lancair Legacy has a Vno of 220 KCAS and an MTOM of 998 kg, is SP, with a MOPSC of 1 and has a reciprocating engine it would fall outside the single pilot high-performance complex motor-powered aircraft category anyway.
Thank you for the info!
Am currently looking at the 320 series or the legacy. What items did you find in the first lancair that caused you to back out of the purchase? Like you plane, and have about an hour in a 360. Safe flying
A couple of questions: Being just under 6ft 4 inches tall, could I fit in a Legacy? Also, given sufficient ratings/experience is insurance for the Legacy easy to obtain?
Thanks for the question, Ethan. I'm 6'1" and have no trouble, and I could still have thinner seat cushions (by a couple of inches). 6'4" is probably close to the limit, so I'm not sure. Your best bet is to get a Legacy pilot to take you up and do some flying :)
Insurance was not an issue. I'd heard doom and gloom from so many people that I almost didn't check. Glad I did. However, I live in Canada and it's a different environment here. I've never checked in the US. I do have American contacts who would probably be willing to chat if you are serious.
@@PiInTheSky thanks for the reply. There are a few Legacy owners at the airport that I usually fly out of. Will speak with them about doing a fit-check and see if they might take me flying.
@@Ethan-bu2zy Happy to help. What part of the world do you live near?
@@PiInTheSky I live in Winter Park, FL (suburb of Orlando) and usually fly out of X04/Apopka and occasionally out of ORL/Orlando Executive airport.
@@Ethan-bu2zy Thanks, just checking :) You're a long way from both airports I hangar at else I'd have volunteered. Good luck!
I'm currently looking at a Super Legacy that is for sale. Would you mind answering a few questions about the Legacy privately?
For sure Steve, you can reach me at cgxpiinthesky@gmaill.com.
If we could only use experimentals for IFR flights, this would have been my choice too. As it currently is, I had to bu a Beechcraft instead...
You can fly IFR in an experimental provided it is properly equipped. Most of my flights are IFR.
@@PiInTheSky In the US, but not in Europe 😭
@@crazyconsAh, I see, and sorry to hear that as it eliminates some of the most capable aircraft. There are no restrictions in North America (Canada nor the US) on Experimental/IFR, provided they are equipped and registered to fly IFR.
@@PiInTheSky I know and I am genuinely jealous!
Excellent path, that’s how it’s done if you want to become a safe pilot! I own a legacy turbine conversion …on EEPC and I never looked back! (PPL IFR ME-Land Jet Rated Phenom 100/300) Will never sell my pocket rocket 😂
Great comment; for me it was safety above all. Thank you.
Can you comment on cost to own and operate the Lancair? Thanks!
When looking at aircraft to buy did you do any reaserch on the questair venture, if so what do you think about it? Isn't it faster?
No, I didn't consider this plane, and from a pure speed point of view, they appear to be so close that it would be hard to tell them apart. I've never seen a venture in person nor met a pilot who had time on one. I had a few factors in mind when shopping: size of fleet, looks, safety record, ability to find an instructor/training, and so on.
@@PiInTheSky Thanks, I was really looking for a fast plane to travel to my clients (I'm a realtor), I have about a 100hours in a 152, do you think I could handle a lancair legacy with proper training and what should I look for when buying one?
@@coltonhoppe A 152 is a pretty different experience... kinda like comparing a canoe to a jetboat. I expect the transition would take a significant amount of time. Getting used to speed is one thing but pilots have to "stay ahead" of the plane and there are few shortcuts for that. Having said that, everyone's different, but I would recommend something more forgiving to build time in.
How you doing?-Like, amazing video.Pi!😯
Thank you!
250kias is above mach 1 at FL400. That is indeed high performance. Also Vne is kind of a bad criteria, that speaks to structural strength, not performance.
And yes sleek planes are good. So much missed potential in GA. Especially in small turbofan engines. Imagine a pressurized Lancair at half the weight in carbon fiber and with two small jet engines so you zip at 700km/h at FL400 with better fuel economy than a cessna 172. In a plane that costs LSA money.
What do you think about the safety record of Lancair? I want one so bad, have one I can buy but the high stall speeds and crash stats of Lancair scares the heck out of me.
Thanks for the comment. Which aircraft safety record are you referring to? As far as speeds go I think every pilot has to make that decision based on their confidence, skill and interests. It should also be pointed out that not all high-performance aircraft are created equal ... the Vso speed of my Legacy is 57 KIAS.
2 or 4 seater? For the 4 seater I would skip the 4p and go for the lx7
@@jonasbaine3538 It all depends on what you want to do and how much money you have to spend on it :)
I would really like this plane a lot more if you could get a “fold up bike” through that baggage door, then it’s useful purpose would ten times over.
Isn't that what one's 2nd plane is for? :)
A hundred hamburger now a days is a trip around the corner to McDonalds.