Nuther SR-22 crash/incident?

In article ,
Cary Mariash wrote:

I found that landing this plane was very tricky, control of
airspeed is critical.

I have been saying this all along. I believe the airfoil is optimized
for high speed cruise. Does anyone know of a published independent study
about the wing and airfoil Cirrus uses?

"Cary Mariash" wrote:


I have been flying an SR22 for about 7 months. My checkout took about 14
hours. I found that landing this plane was very tricky, control of airspeed
is critical. I am not a low time pilot. I have 1150 total hours in planes
ranging from a C150 to C310. The SR22 and the Mooney Bravo are the 2 planes
that have given me the most trouble trying to land.

Interesting.

I have made five landinngs in an SR-22 and noticed nothing unusual or
difficult about it.

I have about 1100 hours also, but nowhere near the variety of experience you
have--almost all of mine is in high wing Cessnas.

What did you find tricky about it?

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

Matt Barrow wrote:

"tony roberts" wrote in message
news:nospam-CABFF6.16580604062006@shawnews...

Length wasn't an issue - it just needed to be 250ft closer


Yes, but if it was 250 feet longer, he would have made it.

Depends on which end was longer. :-)


Matt

john smith wrote:

In article ,
Cary Mariash wrote:


I found that landing this plane was very tricky, control of
airspeed is critical.


I have been saying this all along. I believe the airfoil is optimized
for high speed cruise. Does anyone know of a published independent study
about the wing and airfoil Cirrus uses?

No, but the stall speed is quite high, which suggests that the airfoil
isn't optimized for slow speed flight. At least I consider 59K with
flaps to be reasonably high having flown mostly Cessna singles. If you
are a Mooney pilot, then this wouldn't be considered high.

What I don't know is what the stall characeristics are. Given the cuffs
and such on the wings, I suspect the airfoil isn't as docile as a 182 or
a Bonanza.

Matt

Dan Luke wrote:
"Cary Mariash" wrote:

I have been flying an SR22 for about 7 months. My checkout took about 14
hours. I found that landing this plane was very tricky, control of airspeed
is critical. I am not a low time pilot. I have 1150 total hours in planes
ranging from a C150 to C310. The SR22 and the Mooney Bravo are the 2 planes
that have given me the most trouble trying to land.

Interesting.

I have made five landinngs in an SR-22 and noticed nothing unusual or
difficult about it.

I have about 1100 hours also, but nowhere near the variety of experience you
have--almost all of mine is in high wing Cessnas.

What did you find tricky about it?

Airspeed control is the tricky element. It should be flown 80 kts all
the way down final. If much faster than 80 kts it can bounce
tremendously with serious porpoising afterward (believe me, I know from
experience). At much less than the 80 kts it is subject to stalling out
too soon. Both the high wing Cessnas (152, 172, 182) and my C310 where
much forgiving. They allowed a wider range of airspeed on final approach
with the ability to still have a reasonable landing.

Cary

Airspeed control is the tricky element.

So flying an approach within a knot is "tricky" to you? Hmmm...

Stefan

Dan,

I have made five landinngs in an SR-22 and noticed nothing unusual or
difficult about it.


Me neither. In fact, I found it easy to land. Speed control is important
landing any airplane, IMHO. Allowing a wide range of speeds, whether in
a Cessna or a Cirrus, is sloppy airmanship, except when adaption to wind
requires different airspeeds.

FWIW, I have but 450 hours, 70 of which in Bonanzas.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Matt,

What I don't know is what the stall characeristics are.


Utterly harmless. Just mushing down.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Stefan wrote:
Airspeed control is the tricky element.

So flying an approach within a knot is "tricky" to you? Hmmm...


Uncalled for.

Flying an approach within a knot requires concentration and more than 3
TO/Landings in 90.

An aircraft that *requires* it in this GA space is not going far. But I
don't think plus/minus 1knot is required nor that this is aircraft is
too "tricky". I believe that it may be more challenging than most SELs
most of us are flying.

Of course you are TW qualified....

"Cary Mariash" wrote:

What did you find tricky about it?

Airspeed control is the tricky element. It should be flown 80 kts all the
way down final. If much faster than 80 kts it can bounce tremendously with
serious porpoising afterward (believe me, I know from experience). At much
less than the 80 kts it is subject to stalling out too soon. Both the high
wing Cessnas (152, 172, 182) and my C310 where much forgiving. They allowed
a wider range of airspeed on final approach with the ability to still have
a reasonable landing.

The Cirrus rep. had me to use 80 KIAS on final, but I don't recall paying
very close attention to holding it exactly. He told me not to try to
full-stall the land it like a 172, but rather to fly it on nose-high with a
little power. That worked fine for me: I didn't have any excessive float or
bounce.

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM