| Author | Message | ||
     george strehlow |
I'm in the process of selecting a kit and wanted to hear from others who've been through this... The Express Builder's program makes me think the Express is the way to go, but I'm also considering the Lancair ES and the KIS TR-4 any thoughts? | ||
| CHARLEY SCOTT |
George, I have built a Glasair 1-FT, flown it for 10 years almost 900 hours. I am now building an Express for more room, people and baggage. I would choose the Express over the other 2 kits you mention for the following reasons; value, more airplane for your$, ease of building, safty, the vinylester resin is safe and easy to use and is very strong, The TR-4 is a good airplane but much smaller than the Express and not as strong as I would like. There are other minor reasons if you would care to discuss them. E-mail me, | ||
| Tom Hutchison |
George, I faced the same delima (sp?) you did last spring. I visited both Lancair and Express (they both are in the NorthWest as I am). Lancair was obviously a larger facility and much fancier. However I really didn't like the way they approached a prospective customer (me) They were much more concerned with going to Sun N Fun than spending time with me. I wasn't able get a demo flight so I can't compare the flying qualities. It was the Builder Assist program that really sold me on Express. Last spring Lancair didn't offer a builder assist program for the ES (I still don't know if they do.) For about the same money as a ES fast build kit I was able to purchase the Express and do the Builder's Assist. Feel free to ask any other questions. Enjoy the web site. Tom Hutchison Express Millineum Builder | ||
| CBROS |
George: I have been putting off answering your request for recommendations regarding selection of a kit airplane to construct as I expect that I will get carried away. My brother and I have been building an EXPRESS from an original Wheeler kit which we purchased in 1989. We worked some evenings and most weekends in a hangar at the Livermore, CA (LVK)airport through 1993 when I retired. My brother retired in 1995 and we have since worked pretty much full time on the project since. We have assisted other builders - mostly with the construction of Cruciform tails and the project does not run our lives, but 10 years is a loooooong time. We are nearly finished. I recently visisted the factory to observe the "Builder Assist Program" personally so that I could accurately report on it in the newsletter that I edit for EXPRESS builders and was amazed to find that the process goes pretty much as advertised. A new builder could easily compress several years of effort into say, six months and go home with a complete airframe. Or, if you don't really like building, throw some money at the project and opt for a factory firewall forward package, factory instrument panel, factory upholstry and factory paint and fly it home. Bottom line is that I know of no other similar factory supported program that even comes close to the EXPRESS. The builder assist program has generated many improvements to the basic kit which GREATLY simplifies construction. You couldn't go wrong simply buying and building a copy. In addition it is a great flying machine. If you will send me your mailing address I will send you a copy of the newsletter which discusses my visit to the factory. Bill Copeland | ||
| george strehlow |
Wow, I'm glad to read all of these positive responses. I really am pretty much convinced, that the Express Millenium with the builder assist program is the way to go. I guess I find myself torn between getting in the air and incorporating all of the elements I have seen on competing designs and other aircraft: *Sidestick controls (ok please go easy on me I hate yokes to and learned to fly in gliders 15 years ago) The room for charts and logs this opens up and the added safety in case of a crash or hard landing seems worth it... I guess a compromise would be the single stick ala Jerry Sjostrand. *Doors with a frame. If you look at the doors on the Lancair and the KIS there is an inside "shell" that adds stiffness. The demonstartor I saw at Oshkosh seemed to have pretty flimsy doors that would be difficult to hold open for taxiing on a hot day... *Some type of BRS Parachute. This seems to make a lot sense to me. Not only can it be used for in flight stuctural failure but can make an engine failure over rugged terrain or water a *lot* more survivable and might even help out to shorten the landing roll in an emergency... Any thoughts? George | ||
| george strehlow |
Newsletter Bill I am very interested in receiving your newsletter, here is my address: George Strehlow 1247 N Paulina 2F Chicago, IL 60622 Or email me (click on the link above) George Strehlow | ||
| Tom Hutchison |
George, You have brought up several good points/questions regarding the Express. Let me add my $0.02 worth: Side Sticks I liked the side sticks on the Lancair ES, felt nice and comfortable. I never got a demo flight so I don't know what they are like to fly with. I asked Larry if Express had considered redesigning to side sticks. He felt you gave up a lot of flexibility by not being able to switch hands. Also the fatigue factor of not being able to switch hands. Makes sense to me! Center Stick(s), Side sticks, each has its advantages/disadvantages. No clear winner for me. Door Frames I do believe the new Millennium design has addressed the stiffer door. I haven't worked on my doors yet so I am not sure. Larry could confirm it. Remember the old demonstrator has been improved tremendously. Of course, there is always room for more improvement. And that's why we build experimental aircraft so we can improve on the designs. Ballistic Parachute Interesting idea, a'la Cirrus SR20. I don't think I would want to attempt engineering one for an experimental AC. There are a tremendous number of engineering obstacles. And how would someone ever flight test it. If a ballistic parachute for the AC was that important to me I would buy a Cirrus. However, short of an FAA airworthiness inspector, I don't think anyone would stop you from developing one. Go for it! Another word about the Builder Assist program. As I get close to my next two week session (9/13 - 9/26) I think about all the time and aggravation I am saving. Having the use of all the jigs, cradles, materials etc. is very valuable. We want to build airplanes, not one-time cradles and jigs, and the time you don't waste "head scratching" over how to do something or fixing screwups makes the cost of the program is well worth it to me. Well enough for now. Tom Hutchison | ||
| Chris M. |
Hi George, You've raised some good questions here. Just a couple things to throw in from the factory's standpoint... The doors on the new Express Millennium have been beefed up a bit. I can tell you though, that even with the old demonstrator's door construction, I've never had a problem taxiing the aircraft with it open on a hot day and getting good airflow throw the cabin. It's a pretty easy thing to do. As for side sticks... I'd have to agree with both Larry and Tom as to the lack of flexibility and fatigue factor. The first time I flew a side stick airplane, I noticed just how much I used my left hand for other things.... one being scratching my right arm. I do realize that everyone's preferences are different though. There is another current Builder Assist Builder who flew the ES demonstrator just before flying the Express. You might want to get his thoughts to consider. Let me know if you'd like to contact him. If you get the opportunity, come on out and visit us at the factory. Also, we'll be in Merced, CA this upcoming weekend (9/10-9/12) for the Golden West Fly-In. Either way, come on out and see the new Millennium demonstrator. I really think you'll like what you see! Like Tom said, it incorporates a number of significant improvements over the older kit versions (not to say the older versions were bad though) Take care and feel free to give us a call if there's anything we at the factory can do for you. Sincerely, Chris Michalak Express Aircraft Company, LLC (360) 352-0560 | ||
| Dave Lee |
I'm trying to decide between a Lancair ES and an Express also. Most questions have already been answered but I hope someone could enlighten me on a few others: 1) Jerry S. (sorry forgot his last name) posted on another Express list that the Express does not get off the runway even as fast as a Cessna 172. He says he flys his in ground effect to build enough speed to climb out. This sounds inefficient to me. The Lancair claims a 600 ft rollout! 2) Concerns about excessive interior and exterior noise have been brought up. Is the Express that much louder than other similar aircraft? I will ask other questions of the two company's reps at Castle next weekend. Thanks in advance for any input. -Dave PS: Tom Hutchinson said above that Lancair didn't exactly treat him with too much courtesy. I place a VERY high value on customer relations (especially in the kit plane business!) and all things being equal, I would spend my money with the company which showed respect and common courtesy. | ||
| behoppe |
I would have to add that Lancair treated me like a 3rd class citizen. They didn't have the time nor desire to talk to me. I didn't think much of it until a friend of mine (a retired 747 pilot from FedEx) approached Lancair at Sun-n-Fun this year to buy the Columbian and they totally blew him off. He promptly walked over to the Cirrus booth and paid cash for their new production plane. | ||
| Gary Markwardt |
I seriously considered three 4-place kits and have probably looked at just about all of them at either Oshkosh or Sun-n-Fun airshows. The 3 I seriously considered were the KIS Cruiser, Lancair ES & the Express. I took two years after my retirement to finally decide that the Express builder assist program was the way to go. KIS was my first choice for a long time. But, two things turned me off. I monitored the internet builder's list for well over a year and it was filled with complaints about lack of factory support which was probably not that unusual. I visited a builder in Chicago & was really excited about building it. Then I tried to get a ride at both Oshkosh '98 & Sun-n-Fun this year. I never got to fly it & the factory reps didn't seem all that concerned about getting me in it. I posted my concerns on the kisbuilders list & got a note back from Rich Trickle (the owner) basically saying he thought a lot of the builders were just whining too much about the factory. SCRATCH KIS. My wife & I took a trip out west last May to fly both the Lancair ES and Express . The Lancair ES is a nice airplane. However, the main disadvantages vs. Express that I saw were one door only -- passenger side, side sticks (sexy, but not as functional as center sticks) and much less rear seat room. Also, the builder assist program seemed to be aimed at the Lancair IV rather than the ES. They treated us generally okay, although I thought the $150 charge for a demo flight of 0.7 hrs. was a bit stiff for a guy who flew out from MI just to check out their airplane. I flew in the right seat & the demo pilot did not let me do any take offs or landings. Makes one wonder what is so tricky about T/O & landings (being a relatively low time pilot). I have also had the "cold shoulder" treatment from some Lancair folks at airshows, but not at the factory. I was impressed, but not overwhelmed. Nice facility, nice airplane. I toured Express with Chris & flew the Express demonstrator with Larry the very next day at Olympia, WA. So, the comparison to Lancair ES was easy. I flew the Express & Larry was in the right seat. I did the T/O and three touch and gos, stalls & steep turns with no problems. The airplane climbed at 2000'/min. with no sweat and T/O roll was as good or better than the ES. Both Larry & Chris were really interested in our needs & answered all our questions. The builder assist program for little more $ than the Lancair ES kit with the wing mating option was the final clincher. Go with the Express Millenium. I've been out for two sessions now and have the fuselage, tail feathers & control surfaces basically done with factory supervision and tooling. I'm still sold. | ||
| dave lee |
After talking with the reps of Lancair and Express at the Golden West fly-in at Castle (MER) airport in California, It seemed that the Lancair people were too busy (snobby?) to spend time answering questions. Plus they didn't have an ES for me to check out:-( So I spent most of my time with the folks at Express. Wow, what a difference. They were extremely friendly and courteous, without being pushy or hard selling. I learned that most of my concerns regarding the Express have been dealt with and they continue to innovate. I still haven't ruled out a Lancair ES however and plan on visiting Lancair and Express to demo both aircraft before deciding. | ||
| Tom Hutchison |
The following was posted on behalf of a Seattle Express builder Chris and Larry, I thought you might find this interesting. Boeing has made several changes over the years that switch part materials between fiberglass and carbon fiber base materials. Interior parts such as overhead stow bins, ceiling panels, and side wall panels started out as fiberglass parts. When they designed the 777 from scratch, they changed them to carbon fiber to save weight and to use state of the art materials. Other airplane models followed this design improvement. Yesterday Boeing approved changing several of these parts back to fiberglass. The reasons were interesting, cost and weight! Turns out that these parts do not need an optimum strength to weight ratio. It was overkill at a high price. Boeing will save money by changing back to fiberglass. The change actually saves weight too because several of the parts do not need the high strength material when a minimum amount of layers is needed to maintain manufacturing quality. It is Boeing's goal to produce the most functional airplane that can maximize the bottom line for themselves and for the airlines. So cost is the most important measure in all decisions, after safety and the regulatory requirements of course. If a study was done on the cost of your competitors parts and their need to use carbon fiber, I bet most of the parts would be changed to fiberglass. Fiberglass parts made today are much better quality than they would have been years ago. Manufacturing processes are simply much better than they used to be, and the allowable strength factors are much better understood than they used to be. I know you always get asked why you do not use carbon fiber. The answer is usually because of the cost. But there is more to it than just cost. Perhaps you could make a simple display board to show a trade study on a sample part that shows how fiberglass is the better material. I know you do not have much to do these days and you have all kinds of time for projects like this. Ha Ha! Sincerely, Shane Mahoney | ||
| Maucl1 |
Amen to Shane Mahoney's message, but some clarification is in order. I worked as engineer at the company Boeing bought their graphite material from. The material to be changed out for fiberglass was graphite honeycomb! To my knowledge no amateur built airplanes are being built with graphite honeycomb. Papa 51 uses graphite prepregs but I don't see the honeycomb. Maybe the price of $10,000 per cubic foot turns them off. Some companies are just economy minded. Mike AuClair Express FT /S90 Retro builder PS They generate lots of scrap! | ||
| Tom Hutchison |
Jerry Sjostrand told me he picked up a large sheet of carbon fiber panel in Seattle at the Boeing surplus outlet. He used it to build his removable cargo floor. Lancair uses Nomex honeycomb in thier prepregs. Tom | ||
| Peter Zuber |
After many years, I'm getting ready to purchase a 4+ place kit. Useful load is very important to me, so I've been focussing on the CompAir line. Like some others, I did not seriously consider Express because of the initial accidents when first released. After going to a local air show and seeing an Express, I was impressed. Well, actually, I would say blown away(!) A beautiful plane that seemed to be carefully thought out and had all the specs I was looking for. Anyway, I went home and read Bill Cox's article from Plane and Pilot (95) and he mentioned the bad rep the plane initially had. According to the article, he says NTSB did flutter tests and verified the design was sound. I know Martin Hollman was pretty adamant about this kind of thing being a potential problem with various homebuilts, so if this is the case, it seems a very positive outcome for the Express and very encouraging to any builder. So my first question is, can anyone give me more details about this testing and what was learned? Another real concern of mine is high altitude, high temperature T/O. I plan on moving west (CO, UT, etc.) and having a turbo would be preferred as well as a high lift wing. I read Dave Lee's post about an extended T/O run required, so it raised that question. Can anyone talk about the Express's performance under these conditions? My last question is the RG version. What impact will it have on useful load? Thanks! | ||
| Peter Zuber |
After many years, I'm getting ready to purchase a 4+ place kit. Useful load is very important to me, so I've been focussing on the CompAir line. Like some others, I did not seriously consider Express because of the initial accidents when first released. After going to a local air show and seeing an Express, I was impressed. Well, actually, I would say blown away(!) A beautiful plane that seemed to be carefully thought out and had all the specs I was looking for. Anyway, I went home and read Bill Cox's article from Plane and Pilot (95) and he mentioned the bad rep the plane initially had. According to the article, he says NTSB did flutter tests and verified the design was sound. I know Martin Hollman was pretty adamant about this kind of thing being a potential problem with various homebuilts, so if this is the case, it seems a very positive outcome for the Express and very encouraging to any builder. So my first question is, can anyone give me more details about this testing and what was learned? Another real concern of mine is high altitude, high temperature T/O. I plan on moving west (CO, UT, etc.) and having a turbo would be preferred as well as a high lift wing. I read Dave Lee's post about an extended T/O run required, so it raised that question. Can anyone talk about the Express's performance under these conditions? My last question is the RG version. What impact will it have on useful load? Thanks! | ||
| chrish |
I am on the verge of selling my (stunning) glasair 11S FT with a view to buying a fastbuild Express 90 kit. The glasair is, alas, a little to small. I am tremendously impressed with the construction and flying qualities of the glasair and would like to know from some of you out there who may have experience with both aircraft whether the Express is as good in design, quality of components and handling qualities as the glasair. Chris Hamilton South Australi | ||
| Tom R. Hutchison |
It turns out Bech-Techni (I think that is how its spelled) builds both the fiberglass parts for the Glasair/Glastar and the Express Series 2000. So if you like the quality of the Glasair parts, you will like the Express parts. If I remember my Express history correctly, (go ahead and jump in here Bill C.) Mr. Wheeler the original designer of the Express was a Glasair builder first. So I expect he made a lot of his design decisions based on his experience with the Glasair. The major diferences, other than the fixed gear and the larger size, is the two piece wing. The Express also uses "centerline hinges" on the rudder which I like better than the piano hinge on the Glasair. In general the tail feathers seem larger in proportion to the Glasair. Based on what I have heard, the Express has better, i.e. more stable handling qualities than the Glasair. Perhaps someone else who has flown both can comment. Tom | ||
| Eric and Larry Hoppe (Behoppe) |
After reading through these messages again, I must be the only left handed person who owns an Express. My first thought when I saw the side mounted stick of the Lancair was " How in the heck am I going to write down what the tower tells me and fly at the same time unless I always fly right seat?!?!?" The center stick is definitely the way to go both for the switch-off fatigue factor and for us southpaws. ---eric hoppe | ||
| Gary Markwardt (Gmark) |
I'm currently building an Express left handedly. I agree with Eric's comments. After flying the Lancair ES & Express on two consecutive days, I concluded Express was the way to go for three reasons -- 1)center stick (critical for those who like to write left handed while flying); 2)two doors vs. one; 3)Larry Olson (Lancair was rather aloof & snobbish I thought). |