As long as you can’t fly airways with an experimental in (most of) Europe, isn’t the MTOW a mute point?
Correct, but not many will buy a FL250-300 capable plane for VFR 
The MTOW is NO point at all for an experimental Evolution. Besides, very few would buy a € 800k 4 seat piston aircraft of any category, so the piston Lancair Evolution is kind of a mute point in itself But the piston version makes somewhat more sense than the TP version because of the broader market for piston powered airplanes, in particularly used airplanes. It also can be used economically at lower alt. It is a much more usable aircraft for lots of more people.
Peter wrote:
Unless it could be STCs below 2000kg, like the Seneca or the Meridian.
Recently, I started a thread about whether this is actually supposed to work. Nobody replied AFAIK. Because that document I referenced said something to the effect that the highest approved MTOW counts. If I understood it correctly. So if that hardware can legally fly at 2,3 tonnes, nobody cares whether you have an STC that changes it on paper to 1999 kg. And a move like this makes perfect sense to curb avoidance.
Martin wrote:
Recently, I started a thread about whether this is actually supposed to work. Nobody replied AFAIK. Because that document I referenced said something to the effect that the highest approved MTOW counts. If I understood it correctly. So if that hardware can legally fly at 2,3 tonnes, nobody cares whether you have an STC that changes it on paper to 1999 kg. And a move like this makes perfect sense to curb avoidance.
To which somebody will respond by bundling some other airframe change together with the gross weight STC so that the highest approved weight for that particular airframe configuration is 1999 Kg.
Silvaire wrote:
To which somebody will respond by bundling some other airframe change together with the gross weight STC so that the highest approved weight for that particular airframe configuration is 1999 Kg.
Yes. But that makes it more difficult and more expensive. Lowering MTOW on paper shouldn’t require any flight testing. But it wasn’t clear from that document if that’s enough – whether it should be highest MTOW for the entire type (which seems silly) or a variant and what exactly would make a variant.
Airlines (especially some of the cheaper variety) frequently operate jets at below-book MTOW to cut charges, so shurely can’t be that difficult to do.
Just to keep it on track (somewhat). A new issue of SportAviation came yesterday. Lancair has one full page ad of the piston Evolution. It’s only a picture of the airplane and the text: 220 kts, 16 gph, for 2200 nm. It uses the “new” Lycoming iE2 (single lever, double redundant FADEC, 350 hp, aka TEO-540). Then I remembered I had read about this aircraft and engine before, a long time ago. It turns out that Kitplanes tested the prototype 6 years ago (prototype aircraft with a prototype iE2) in a lengthy article. Already at that time they had 5 piston Evo’s flying, but it’s a bit unclear if they all had the TEO-540 or some other engine.
Look at the price! and the build time! This is 6 year old data. This aircraft is basically a pressurized Cirrus with retracts. It takes 1500 h to build, and it ends up costing more than even the most equipped certified Cirrus. The TEO-540 is probably the most expensive piston engine out there, I have no idea what it cost, but it cannot be all that much more than a big turbo Continental used in the Cirrus? The question is, what exactly is it you pay for? Carbon shell body and wings does not cost that much to produce, not even close, it’s only a fraction of this.
Their web page now announce the estimated cost to be US$895k for a piston Evo. They also explain the building process. It’s done at the factory, and a builder only need to build for 200-250 h. You can hire professional help to do those 250h. I think it’s safe to say that a new “homebuilt” piston Evolution will cost US$ 950k at least, all in all. The turboprop is estimated to be US$ 1.415M. To me these prices are completely insane, but a person with lots of money to spend, it’s no problem of course. Considering what you get for that money though, it is obvious that Lancair has a good scheme going, selling extremely expensive carbon composites to a selected audience.
$900k sounds a lot but there are people paying $1M for a new gadget-loaded (e.g. IR camera) SR22, and the piston Evo massively outperforms the SR22 in all relevant aspects.
If their claim of having been designed for Part 23 certification is true, this is an amazing aircraft. Otherwise, the 61kt Vs is likely to be the biggest fiction item (in terms of Part 23 certification controllability etc) like on the smaller Lancairs, and that translates to needing a lot more runway than an SR22. But in the USA, where lots of tarmac is common, this is a marketable proposition.
I see these planes on FR24, in the Eurocontrol system, FL100-200, doing figures like 250kt. The numbers are very small but when you see one, they are really impressive.
Obviously this is not a Cirrus… which has a really slick cockpit, designed by Porsche or BMW (?) and really looks the business. But you are looking at way more knots for the same money. It appeals to a different group of people.
