new twin concept from Cirrus

Matt,

It was my (mis?)understanding that a diesel is, HP/lb, heavier than a
standard aircraft engine, especially when getting into the higher (over 250)
HP models. Correct?


Not necessarily, but the big Thielert at 350 HP is heavier than an IO-520/550.
60 pounds or so.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

It was my (mis?)understanding that a diesel is, HP/lb, heavier than a
standard aircraft engine, especially when getting into the higher
(over 250) HP models. Correct?

Not necessarily, but the big Thielert at 350 HP is heavier than an
IO-520/550. 60 pounds or so.

On the other hand, the diesel airplane will typically require less fuel in
order to complete the same mission as the avgas airplane. The saved fuel
weight can offset some or all of the weight penalty of the heavier engine.

Of course this does not apply when topping off the tanks - but in that
case, the diesel airplane gains a lot in range.

So it looks like there is a free lunch after all - at least when not
counting the acquisition costs! :-)


Greetings,
Markus

Markus,

On the other hand, the diesel airplane will typically require less fuel in
order to complete the same mission as the avgas airplane.


Yes, but fuel is not usually stored at the very front end of the plane (think
CG).

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On 9 May 2006 07:26:35 -0700, "Kingfish" wrote:

I'd read several references about Cirrus developing the P-Jet, which I
assume would seat four including pilot. This got me thinking about
other segments they might explore. Considering the success of their
SR20 & SR22 series, what are the chances of a SR-derived twin?

It would be great to see more light twins in the market, especially
more fuel efficient ones, but I don't think Cirrus will develop a
twin. Here is why.

In my mind, people buy twins for a few reasons:
#1. Safety (whether real or perceived)
#2. Useful load / size
#3. Coolness factor
#4. Performance improvement over single

For Cirrus to develop a twin, they would have to tap a market large
enough to offset their development costs.

Refering to the above points (wrt to market).
#1. Cirrus already is capturing a big chunk of the safety market b/c
of the chute. Personally, I would rather have two engines, but there
are a lot of pilots (and spouses) who like the chute.

#2. Useful load/cabin space. The twin will always be able to haul
more, but Cirrus could introduce a 6 seat single with a bigger engine
(310-350hp) to cover part of this requirement.

#3. Coolness factor. Two props is cool, but so is a glass plane and
cockpit. Of course, I guess two props, a glass plane, and glass panel
would be coolest then!

#4. Performance improvement. The SR22 is already pretty fast -
faster than most singles. They could add turbo (instead of another
engine) to get another 20-30 kts to compete against the light twins
speed and climb.

Because the SR22 is such a capable plane, I think that the available
increase in market to Cirrus for developing an SR-twin is quite small.
Since the Baron, Seneca, AdamA500, and DiamondTwin are in production,
and are all capable planes, it would make for tough competition.

I would love to be proven wrong, and see Cirrus or Lancair introduce
something at Oshkosh, but I think both of these companies are better
(financially) to focus on derivatives of their current product line
than introducing a new product.

"Kingfish" wrote:
If the Klapmiers can make a business case for a twin I
think they'd sell quite well,

I doubt it. Look at the market for used twins: it's a wasteland.

Small market + enormous development & certification costs = no twin from
Cirrus.

If I had to guess about the next big news drom Cirrus, I'd say it will be
something forward of the firewall.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

All good points. Probably the best argument against the twin is that
Cirrus' singles are so damn fast already. I read recently about a
turbonormalizer STC for the SR22 that boosts the cruise up to 200kts.
Not a cheap mod for an extra 15kt on the top end, but the climb is
probably pretty impressive past 8k feet. I think the next big thing
could be diesels, and a Thielert or SMA might be a nice addition to a
fast airframe.

In article .com,
"Kingfish" wrote:

All good points. Probably the best argument against the twin is that
Cirrus' singles are so damn fast already

nah - people seem to wants twins for night over-the-mountains and for hauling
more stuff

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Kingfish,

I think the next big thing
could be diesels, and a Thielert or SMA might be a nice addition to a
fast airframe.


I may have reported this here already, but I live in Hamburg, Germany,
home of the Thielert group. And at the Hamburg airport, I have seen
what seemed to be a prototype of an SR-22 fitted with the big 350-HP
Thielert. So there's hope, I guess. From what I hear, Cirrus has pretty
much given up on SMA. But I may be wrong...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

("Thomas Borchert" wrote)
I may have reported this here already, but I live in Hamburg, Germany,
home of the Thielert group. And at the Hamburg airport, I have seen what
seemed to be a prototype of an SR-22 fitted with the big 350-HP Thielert.


Clipboard and a white lab coat are all you'll need. Go poke around and
report back.

Thanks. :-)


Montblack
In this country we call it pulling a "Rockford".
http://www.timstvshowcase.com/rockford.html

Montblack,

Clipboard and a white lab coat are all you'll need. Go poke around and
report back.


I was more vague than I could have been because I have been asked to...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)