Cirrus SR22 demo flight

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?

"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

Michael,

See my other reply in the thread. In short, it demands significantly
more of the pilot, despite the fancy avionics - and it's more than the
average low time pilot is consistently capable of.

As broad a statement as that is, I don't think it's true. Also, your
original post said something else: it said you had to intervene because
it was a Cirrus. I still don't buy it.

1965 Bo, while a nice plane, is still a *1965* Bo.

And still a faster, roomier, better-flying airplane than the Cirrus. I
would much rather have a 65 Bo that had been gone through and cleaned
up than I would a new Cirrus.

I know you think so. You know I don't think so. There's no ultimate truth
in this.

The sales numbers are there. Unfortunately, near as I can tell most of
them are being sold to low time pilots who have no business in them.
Those who have been around for a while don't see the value. That says
something too.

Can you back up that sweepingly broad statement with ANY facts? They are
ALL dumb and unexperienced? ALL the more than 1000 that shelled out two
or three times than what they had to in your opinion? ALL those airplane
owners that created the market of new single-engine piston aircraft? That
sustain companies like Cirrus, Lancair and Diamond? All too dumb and
unexperienced to see the light?

Come on, you can't really believe that.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

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.

In article .com, Michael wrote:
Let me tell you, a 1969 Arrow sucks rocks in comparison.

Wrong comparison.

In new aircraft, the right comparison for an Arrow would be the Diamond
DA-40 rather than the Cirrus (or Lancair). I have flown the DA-40, and I
do greatly prefer it to the Arrow (even a new one) - it's easier to get
in and out of, has a back door, stick instead of yoke, looks much
better, faster on 20 less horsepower and doesn't have the maintenance
involved with retractable gear or CS prop.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

In article . com, Ben Hallert wrote:
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).

How often do spins happen in that class of plane that are at a
sufficient altitude to recover from? I suspect there are very few
Bonanza, Comanche, Saratoga or C210 spins that occur at a high enough
altitude to recover (with or without a full airframe parachute). If I
were buying an aircraft like that, that particular line wouldn't even
figure in my purchasing decision.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

On Wed, 04 May 2005 16:20:24 -0000, Dylan Smith
wrote:

In new aircraft, the right comparison for an Arrow would be the Diamond
DA-40 rather than the Cirrus (or Lancair). I have flown the DA-40, and I
do greatly prefer it to the Arrow (even a new one) - it's easier to get
in and out of, has a back door, stick instead of yoke, looks much
better, faster on 20 less horsepower and doesn't have the maintenance
involved with retractable gear or CS prop.

And it is available with the Thielert-diesel-engine. My club currently
has a demonstrator on the line. Really great airplane, 135 KTAS on 6
gph and almost incredibly easy to fly. Purchase is a little bit on the
expensive side, though.

I would love to try out a Cirrus one day to see if the Star and the
SR20 are by any means comparable.

Tobias

Dylan Smith wrote:

In new aircraft, the right comparison for an Arrow would be the Diamond
DA-40 rather than the Cirrus (or Lancair). I have flown the DA-40, and I
do greatly prefer it to the Arrow (even a new one) - it's easier to get
in and out of, has a back door, stick instead of yoke, looks much
better, faster on 20 less horsepower and doesn't have the maintenance
involved with retractable gear or CS prop.

I think you forgot the most important point: It's fun to fly.

Stefan

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?