Javier Henderson wrote:

"C J Campbell" writes:


"Javier Henderson" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" writes:


http:\\http://www.airplanenoise.com/article....%20Cirrus.pdf

Biased as hell, but some good statistical comparisons.

Some of those comparisons are based on flawed data (airframe life,
engine TBO).

Actually, the data are not flawed. Let's see you come up with something that
proves it wrong.


I did post the link to TCM's datasheet on the engine, stating a
TBO of 2000 hours.

The lifetime of the airframe was recently lifted to 12,000 hours.

I'd think this would be something Cirrus would be happy to announce. So
I'm surprised their Aircraft/FAQ page still says "The SR22 airframe was
initially certified for 4,350 using data derived from the SR20 test.
Cirrus is nearing completion of the same structural tests used to extend
limits of the SR20 and anticipates that the SR22 will soon be rated for
the 12,000-hour life."