Please don't bash a plane in which you have never flown. It just perpetuates bad stereotypes that the Lancair community does not need. As the original owner of a propjet, it makes me very concerned every time a propjet(or any Lancair) goes down. However, I find my propjet to be a very honest airplane in that she does exactly what I tell her to do. Yes, the margin for error is much less than most planes and it must be respected. Sudden large power changes must be avoided, close attention to the ball especially at slow speeds is required, and IMHO it is imperative to stay away from stall scenarios.
Having followed the Lancair community since 1999 and being a part of it since I bought kit LIV-501 in 2001, I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of accidents are pilot error-stall/spin, flying into thunderstorms or the occasional fuel
deprivation-sometimes running out of fuel or the engine not getting the fuel due to poor build or unporting of the engine. The Lancair fuel system design in the propjet has received mixed reviews due to the belly tank design. The wings gravity feed the belly tank which then feeds the engine. If one empties the wings and uses fuel from the belly tank, stops to refuel then takes off before the wings have a chance to fill the belly tank, it is possible to unport the engine particularly with a high deck angle on climb out. I have heard the fuel running into my 34 gallon belly tank from the wings on the few occasions that I have used fuel from the belly. It can take a while to refill the belly while getting the air out. This can also lead to a false sense of full fuel unless watched carefully.
I view these issues as lack of situational awareness whether on the ground or in the air and not innate problems
with the plane as long as one understands their plane. Perhaps this relates to the higher crash rate among second owners as well as lower time in a specific plane. As you point out the tail can be overpowered by the turbine engine. To help combat this, we installed Mike Custard's strakes as well as his vertical fin extension thus increasing tail authority. I suspect this helps the yaw issue to some degree.
The stall scenarios that you describe scare me and should scare any pilot but this situation can happen in any plane though admittedly more likely in a IV series due to the tight envelope and small margin of error but when we fly these planes we accept this risk and hopefully do everything to minimize it and fly them the way they need to be flown.
There have been numerous aircraft that have gotten a bad reputation over the years due to pilots not flying them correctly. The
MU-2 and Robinson R22 helicopter(in which I have over 500 hours) in particular come to mind. Once proper training was mandated the accident rates went way down. If you choose not to fly in a IVPT, that is a personal choice but please do not equate bad(or poorly trained) pilots with a bad aircraft.
The IV series and particularly the Propjet is not a docile plane but when flown within its envelope there is nothing as efficient and fun for the price in a true personal traveling plane.
David Weinsweig, MD
N750DW Propjet 285 hours
HI THERE
THE OSTRICH HAS ITS HEAD IN THE SAND
it seems everyone is avoiding the issue here with this loss of airplane and pilot.
there is really only one clue at this point; a witness says that the plane was rotating when it came out the clouds and descended into the ground.
i dont pretend to know what happened without the radar track, with the speed readouts.
A SCENARIO THAT FITS THE DATA WE HAVE SO FAR
stalling a 4P is serious business.
MAYBE DISORIENTATION; MAYBE AN AUTOPILOT MALFUNCTION; MAYBE UNEXPECTED ICING. MAYBE A TEMPORARY LOSS OF POWER all of which could cause a stall.
imagine what it would be like to be IFR and stall a Lancair 4/4P/turbine. Not Fun. OK,
so here you are. nose pointing straight down. you look over at the airspeed and you see 100 knots (flying speed right???--- wrong, and maybe wrong) do you have an AOA? it would tell you if you have lift back on the wings...OH, by the way, did your Gyro(s) tumble. do you have the ability to cage the Gyro?? or is it self righting. OH and how fast does that happen. and 100 knots is a silly low number and 200 knots is more likely within ten seconds. STRAIGHT DOWN. What's that? 41 seconds to the ground OR 20,000 feet per minute straight down.
(remember that the average 4P stalls and rotates 90-120 degrees and points straight down)
SO YOU THINK
ah, stall recovery...add power. well a little power? when that doesnt work more power. HOW MUCH RIGHT RUDDER DID YOU ADD? BETTER BE A LOT. remember the turbine engine puts out 1,950 foot pounds of torque v. the 550 foot pound of torque of the piston engine. even at idle, the turbine is putting considerable torque. My suspicion is a TORQUE ROLL and still in a stalled mode. YOW. (sorta like a Snap Roll we have all seen at Oshkosh; a snap roll is an accelerated Stall. YES STALL)
so you have twenty seconds at most to learn how to do stall recovery in IFR conditions.
BOEING BUILD LANCAIRS
when Boeing built three 4P turbine aircraft for their own purposes; (likely a fast chase plane) they found the tail surfaces unsuitable for the purpose. (remember the airplane was designed for 350 HP not 750HP) Boeing redesigned the tail feathers including using a thicker airfoil for the horizontal surface.
SO IN THE OPINION OF THE PROS AT BOEING, THE REAR SURFACES WERE INADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE
STALLS
personally i believe that every pilot of these Lancair(s) be required to see the stall of their airplane. sit in the plane and let a pro do the job. maybe if you are brave, with the "test pilot" next to you try the recovery yourself. do it under the hood?? YOW. does your gyro tumble. YOW again.
it is scary just to contemplate.
at what altitude did you do your approach to stall training? 8,500 feet, 12.500 feet. there is a reason.
personally, i would be disinclined to ride in a 4 Turbine. i'm not smart enough. but if the infidels were at the edge of the airport shooting Rocket Propelled Grenades at me...then i would gladly take my chances in a Lancair 4 Turbine.
the airplane that comes to mind in comparison is the GeeBee; Jimmy Doolittle said it was the worst airplane he ever flew. AND, just above the runway it dropped a wing 90 degrees, pointing straight down. BUT, that wasn't bad enough, it did have one worse trait. as the pilot slowed down the nose kept rising and required forward stick; just the opposite of any other airplane.
so there is an airplane made to go fast in 1931.
peter