cirrus aircraft

I think the Cirrus is the best plane in its class at this time. If I had the
need for that type a plane it would be tops on the list.
I find it hard to believe it wont fly level without the autopilot.

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Morgans,

There are other ways to deal with a stick or column, and being
crash-worth.
Telescoping under pressure, break-away, and airbags are all strategies
that
work well.


And can be found in which aircraft?

None that I know of, but that was kinda' my point. Instead of going to a
side stick, or center stick, the manufacturers that are designing new
product, could just as easily gone with one of the crashworthy strategies I
mentioned.
--
Jim in NC

Gwengler,

Airbags are optional in all Mooneys and new Cessnas and can be
retrofitted to the new production Cessnas as well.


They are standard in new Cirrii and Lancairs, too.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jonathan,

However, neither one has a long-term cost of
ownership or reliability history.


That's because they are, well, NEW!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jonathan,

Even the SR22 isn't any faster than other light
aircraft that possess more stable flying characteristics.


more stable? How and where did you get the idea that the SR22is not?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jonathan,

No, but my car is largely still made from the same type of materials. I
don't need a computer to drive it straight. And just about any mechanic
and body shop can fix it.


If your engine is still the same and any mechanic can still fix it without
special, "modern" tools and electronics, then you ARE driving a 60s Chevy.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Aluckyguess,

I find it hard to believe it wont fly level without the autopilot.


And it will.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Montblack wrote:

("Jonathan Goodish" wrote)
[snip]

I think the Lancair (or Columbia as they're calling themselves) are the
better airplanes. However, neither one has a long-term cost of
ownership or reliability history.


How many Columbias are up? What's Cirrus on ...2,000.

http://www.cirrusdesign.com/
Cirrus

http://www.flycolumbia.com/
Columbia


History teaches that pilots are willing to take chances on airframes,
but not on engines, which is pretty logical. The Grumman fleets are
pretty small and yet there's still enough guys with PMA out there to
make keeping one in the air pretty straightforward. Plus neither Cirrus
nor Lancair have retractable gear, which is probably one of the biggest
bugbears in terms of maintenance.

That isn't logical at all to me. An catastrophic engine failure is a bad
deal, but a very survivable deal in most cases. A catastrophic airframe
failure is rarely survivable. What logic are you seeing that I'm missing?


Well it may not be logical but even the FAA does it. If I build my airplane
and put in a non-certified engine I have a 40 hour phase 1 test period. If I
use a certified one on the exact same airframe, installed by the same me I
have a 25 hour phase 1 test period.

In article ,
"Aluckyguess" wrote:

I think the Cirrus is the best plane in its class at this time. If I had the
need for that type a plane it would be tops on the list.
I find it hard to believe it wont fly level without the autopilot.

I should clarify: it *will* fly level without the AP (and I said so in
my original post). What I find challenging is trimming out the pitch in
high speed cruise. It won't roll on you, but it sure will climb (or
descend) if you don't watch it like a hawk.

FWIW, I really love my Cirrus (well, it isn't really mine, but I love it
anyway :-) All the grousing about it from people who don't have one
sounds like sour grapes to me.

rg

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Jonathan,

Even the SR22 isn't any faster than other light
aircraft that possess more stable flying characteristics.


more stable? How and where did you get the idea that the SR22is not?

Back two or three days ago, in this thread. The observation came from one
or two Cirrus drivers.
--
Jim in NC