Cirrus SR22 demo flight

"Ben Hallert" ben.hallert@gmail.

Are you a Cirrus owner? Some of your posts seem to suggest it, or that
you're a fan.

I'm a fan of empirical reality. Cirrus makes and markets a product that is
deeply attarctive to small plane owners. The evidence of this is their
sales figures.

Can you provide some more personal insight into the
plane that we should know? My main beef right now is just buying
inside the depreciation window, like I said. I certainly didn't mean
to set off your 'defend cirrus' circuit!

The "plane as investment" concept is for committed dreamers. I'm this way
whenever I encounter misinformed statement about a subject that interests
me. Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was either
a joke or slothfully misinformed.

It's an awful pretty plane, and the cockpit looks nice. I'm very
interested in seeing how those and other similar composites fair going
forward. I'm also a fan of the Lancair Columbia. Maybe not the same
market, but both seem to have some real similarities and great
potential.

The cost of flying your own plane is the impact on your available resources,
the amount you pay to look at it and the amount you pay to fly. Everyone
with a couple hundred grand in cash and the itch to fly tries to balance
these. That amount of cash can get you into a new Cirrus, or Cessna or a
few other planes. It can also get you into a used Cheyenne or a few other
turboprop planes. There are myriad issues to consider. Insurance and
maintenance are two areas where a new light single shines. Especially if
you have partners. Glass cockpits with approach, weather and traffic
information improve situational awareness, especially for infrequent flyers.
Whether any individual pilot is actually at less risk depends on how they
use these tools. Nothing new there. How much money you got? What kind of
flying do you want to do?

moo

Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was
either a joke or slothfully misinformed.

That's not... entirely correct. The POH for the SR-22 says that the
only method of spin recovery is to activate the CAPS (Cirrus Airframe
Parachute System).

Of course, like I said, other then that, it looks like a fine aircraft.

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message
ups.com...
Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was
either a joke or slothfully misinformed.

That's not... entirely correct. The POH for the SR-22 says that the
only method of spin recovery is to activate the CAPS (Cirrus Airframe
Parachute System).

Of course, like I said, other then that, it looks like a fine aircraft.


Yes, we all know what the book says about spins my question is...

Your are flying along in a Cirrus and one way or another you get into a spin
at plenty of altitude (yes plenty of altitude could mean lots of thing but
work with me hear) to recover.

Do you pop the chute before trying normal spin recovery techniques?

Of course not, but my understanding is that the SR-22 design makes
normal spin recovery very difficult, and that it doesn't meet the FAA
designation for spin-resistant, as defined:
"the airplane may be demonstrated to be spin resistant by the
following: (i) During the stall maneuvers...the pitch control must be
pulled back and held against the stop. Then, using ailerons and rudders
in the proper direction, it must be possible to maintain wings-level
flight within 15 degrees of bank and to roll the airplane from a
30-degree bank in one direction to a 30-degree bank in the other
direction; (ii) reduce the airplane speed using pitch control at a rate
of approximately 1 knot per second until the pitch control reaches the
stop; then, with the pitch control pulled back and held against the
stop, apply full rudder control in a manner to promote spin entry for a
period of 7 seconds or through a 360-degree heading change, whichever
occurs first. If the 360-degree heading change is reached first, it
must have taken no fewer than 4 seconds. This maneuver must be
performed first with the ailerons in the neutral position, and then
with the ailerons deflected opposite the direction of turn in the most
adverse manner. Power and airplane configuration must be set in
accordance with Sec. 23.201(e) without change during the maneuver. At
the end of 7 seconds or a 360-degree heading change, the airplane must
respond immediately and normally to primary flight controls applied to
regain coordinated, unstalled flight without reversal of control effect
and without exceeding the temporary control forces specified...and
(iii) compliance must be demonstrated with the airplane in
uncoordinated flight, corresponding to one ball-width displacement on a
slip-skid indicator, unless one ball-width displacement cannot be
obtained with full rudder, in which case the demonstration must be with
full rudder applied."

According to an AOPA writeup, Cirrus requested an exception to FAA spin
resistance/recovery requirements by proposing the ballistic parachute
as an equivalent recovery device. Consequently, any problems with
using standard spin recovery techniques have been paper-worked over.

I understand that most unintentional spins take place at altitudes
below realistic recovery altitudes anyways, but as PIC, it's my
decision whether or not I want to fly an aircraft, and as a buyer, it's
my decision on whether or not I like the 'whole package' for a plane.
I'm not trying to convince people that the Cirrus is evil, far from it.
Like I said, it's a great looking plane with a lot of very nice
features. That said, it doesn't meet my _personal_ criteria for safety
yet.

Hey, give me 10 years and I might change my mind, but I'm not sure how
my personal decision not to buy the aircraft can be construed as an
attack on the Cirrus community, much less an example of 'badthought'
that must be corrected.

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message

I understand that most unintentional spins take place at altitudes
below realistic recovery altitudes anyways, but as PIC, it's my
decision whether or not I want to fly an aircraft, and as a buyer, it's
my decision on whether or not I like the 'whole package' for a plane.
I'm not trying to convince people that the Cirrus is evil, far from it.
Like I said, it's a great looking plane with a lot of very nice
features. That said, it doesn't meet my _personal_ criteria for safety
yet.

In one, barely significant area. Do you fly at night?

moo

Sure, I fly at night. Again, why does my personal decision not to buy
the plane agitate you?

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message

Sure, I fly at night. Again, why does my personal decision not to buy
the plane agitate you?

WRT to agitation, you're projecting. Your logic sucks. You base your
"personal decision" on the fact that the parachute might need to be deployed
for spin recovery. Yet you fly at night. The likelihood of an engine
failure exceeds the likelihood of an unintentional spin at a recoverable
altitude. Do you carry night vision equipment? Get it now?

moo

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message

Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was
either a joke or slothfully misinformed.

That's not... entirely correct. The POH for the SR-22 says that the
only method of spin recovery is to activate the CAPS (Cirrus Airframe
Parachute System).

Backpeddling is so very unattractive. Care to repost your claim that I was
actually responding to? Didn't think so. And, BTW, is the above *exactly*
(since you're becoming such a stickler for accuracy) what the POH says?

moo

Not sure I understand what you mean. I wrote:
I'm not sure I want a plane who's first recovery
technique for everything is 'pull the silks'

to which you responded
educate yourself on the subject.

I asked if you were a Cirrus owner because I wanted to hear some first
person experience. You didn't answer, but you did say:

Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was
either a joke or slothfully misinformed.

My response was that you might be mistaken, as the actual Pilots
Operating Handbook for the SR-22 says that you should deploy the
parachute to get out of a spin.

Somehow, you interpret this as a backpedal. Not sure how it would be
backpedaling, or where your anger is coming from. Is my personal
decision to not buy an SR-22 yet somehow hurting you?

Can't we all just... get along?

"Ben Hallert" wrote in
Not sure I understand what you mean. I wrote:
I'm not sure I want a plane who's first recovery
technique for everything is 'pull the silks'

to which you responded
educate yourself on the subject.

Because the "silks" aren't the first recovery procedure for "everything".

I asked if you were a Cirrus owner because I wanted to hear some first
person experience.

No. But I have a couple hours in one and the sales rep let me put it
through some pretty serious unusual attitudes. It's a puppy *unless* you
get it in a serious spiral. Then the ASI winds up like the planes I'm used
to in a power on vertical dive. Obviously, I didn't attempt a spin. Lands
very fast and flat too (and is not too hard to injure) which, I understand,
is a significant problem for pilots transitioning from a 172 or similar Vso
plane. The rep had me approach at a good twenty knots over Vso (60 kts
IIRC) right to the numbers and appeared more anxious than when we were doing
stuff like power on falling leaf maneuvers. Apparently he's had some close
calls with pilots used to slower landing planes.

You didn't answer, but you did say:

Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was
either a joke or slothfully misinformed.

My response was that you might be mistaken, as the actual Pilots
Operating Handbook for the SR-22 says that you should deploy the
parachute to get out of a spin.

Somehow, you interpret this as a backpedal. Not sure how it would be
backpedaling, or where your anger is coming from. Is my personal
decision to not buy an SR-22 yet somehow hurting you?

Dude, is English your second or third language? You disparage the Cirrus
unfairly by claiming that recovery from "everything" requires use of the
parachute. It doesn't. And, I'm not angry. This is Usenet. It's a
discussion forum. Hyperbole is the norm.

moo