ThirtyWest
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2014
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
So I have managed to get a hold of some performance charts for the six and Lance.
I am trying to find the benefit of the lance over the six.
Also, for takeoff performance issues we would be looking for the straight tail.
Anyway:
Looking at the cruise performance of the two books I found I can see much of a difference until you start using 75% power. At 65% the six looks to be only a hair slower. At 75% it's closer to 10 kts. Give or take as the charts aren't clear about leaning. I'd prefer to not run it too hot even if it costs a little more fuel.
Moving another question over to the proper forum now:
Is there an advantage to the Lance over, say, a six with lopresti or laminar flow kits installed? Those sites boast upwards of 19mph if I read correctly.
This is the first aircraft to be owned, and I don't know the costs associated with retractable gear.
If there is a true Six versus Lance thread I would like to read it. I'll be searching the archives in the meantime.
Thanks for the help!
I am trying to find the benefit of the lance over the six.
Also, for takeoff performance issues we would be looking for the straight tail.
Anyway:
Looking at the cruise performance of the two books I found I can see much of a difference until you start using 75% power. At 65% the six looks to be only a hair slower. At 75% it's closer to 10 kts. Give or take as the charts aren't clear about leaning. I'd prefer to not run it too hot even if it costs a little more fuel.
Moving another question over to the proper forum now:
Is there an advantage to the Lance over, say, a six with lopresti or laminar flow kits installed? Those sites boast upwards of 19mph if I read correctly.
This is the first aircraft to be owned, and I don't know the costs associated with retractable gear.
If there is a true Six versus Lance thread I would like to read it. I'll be searching the archives in the meantime.
Thanks for the help!
