Standard Cirrus

[Walt Connelly]

Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? Good, bad indifferent? Flying tail, pros and cons? I am new to gliding, Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34. Would this be a reasonable next step?

Walt

[Kevin Neave[_2_]]

Delightful glider.

All flying tail - not really any pros or cons just different. You have a
lot of elevator authority and low loads so if you waggle the stick you'll
waggle the glider. Personally I liked the fact that I didn't have to
continually adjust the trimmer.

Airbrakes - without the double paddle mod they're pretty poor. With the
mod they're similar to other glass gliders from the same era (Libelle,
ASW15). Need to get your circuits & speed control sorted, less forgiving
than the barn-door airbrakes on a Discus or LS4.

Transition from 1-34 - No comment 'cos I haven't flown a 1-34, but
probably no different to the transition to any other glass single seat.

Find someone who's flown one a lot & talk to them. Try to avoid the
opinions of people who haven't!

Kevin

At 01:55 17 March 2011, Walt Connelly wrote:
>
>Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? Good, bad
>indifferent? Flying tail, pros and cons? I am new to gliding,
>Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
>Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
>Walt
>
>
>
>
>--
>Walt Connelly
>

[[email protected]]

On Mar 16, 9:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

This would be a reasonable step given some intermediate glider
experience. Get a good check out from a knowledgable
instructor and ideally, a pilot that is skilled in type.
Good Luck
UH

[Grider Pirate]

On Mar 16, 6:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

Yes, but so is pretty much any 15 meter glass ship. If you're looking
at a Standard Cirrus, I'm guessing money IS an object. In near the
same price range don't rule out Libelles or Jantars. You've read it
here many times - the trailer makes a big difference.

[Mike[_28_]]

Or ASW 15s ;) but watch max gross.

Mike

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

G-102 would be excellent.

On a side note: Grider Pirate should really be Grider Pirot. Makes me
wany to sing "Put a feather in his cap and called it Macalloni." (Sorry
for the bad linguistic joke; if you don't get it, look up "macaronic"
-- and I know it is still bad.)

At 13:57 17 March 2011, Grider Pirate wrote:
>On Mar 16, 6:55=A0pm, Walt Connelly wrote:
>> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? =A0Good, bad
>> indifferent? =A0Flying tail, pros and cons? =A0I am new to gliding,
>> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
>> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>>
>> Walt
>>
>> --
>> Walt Connelly
>
>Yes, but so is pretty much any 15 meter glass ship. If you're looking
>at a Standard Cirrus, I'm guessing money IS an object. In near the
>same price range don't rule out Libelles or Jantars. You've read it
>here many times - the trailer makes a big difference.
>

[JC]

The Cirrus is a very nice ship and transition should not be a problem.
Resting your arm on your leg to keep a steady hand is not a bad idea
until you get used to the low stick forces. When you raise the gear
you might waggle a bit. A regular tail would be better but the all
flying tail is not really an issue.
I find it more pleasant to fly than the Jantar. The handling is nice
and the cockpit is comfortable. Visibility is also very good.
If you get one be sure to check the C.G., in particular if you plan to
winch launch.
I don´t like the L´Hotellier connectors and the little pins but you
get used to them. If it´s a pre ´75 model that has a sort of hook that
connects elevator control pay close attention during assembly as it´s
possible to connect improperly. The newer ones have a different system
that´s more foolproof but with a slight amount of wear in the fittings
the tail can get quite wobbly.
For assembly it really helps to make the little arm with a stub pin to
hold one wing in while inserting the other. I think there is an
article in the Standard Cirrus website on this as well as the tail
assembly issue.
As Grider Pirate says, a good trailer is really important. Another
option in almost the same price range is the Pegase and it´s a more
modern design.
Good luck!

Juan Carlos







On Mar 17, 10:57*am, Grider Pirate > wrote:
> On Mar 16, 6:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
>
> > wrote:
> > Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> > indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> > Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> > Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> > Walt
>
> > --
> > Walt Connelly
>
> Yes, but so is pretty much any 15 meter glass ship. *If you're looking
> at a Standard Cirrus, I'm guessing money IS an object. *In near the
> same price range don't rule out Libelles or Jantars. You've read it
> here many times - the trailer makes a big difference.

[Andy[_1_]]

On Mar 16, 6:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

The combination of CG hook and a tail skid or small tail wheel can
make takeoffs more demanding in a cross wind than for gliders with
nose hooks and decent size tail wheels. It that respect it's probably
no different from the ASW 19 that I have many hours in.

I have not yet flown either of my club's standard Cirri but I have
towed them and been quite alarmed by the lateral excursions seen in my
mirrors on takeoff roll.

Before attempting a cross wind takeoff suggest you talk to someone
that actually knows how position the glider on the runway and how to
use the controls. Hint - the glider should be positioned towards the
upwind side of the runway and pointed downwind. Full downwind rudder
should be applied before moving and held until it becomes effective.
The angle to head the glider downwind, and the offset upwind of center
line, depend on the magnitude of the crosswind, the width of the
runway and the tendency of the glider to weather-vane.

This technique allows the full width of the runway to be used twice
and the glider glider should be under control and tracking straight
before returning to the upwind side of the runway. If it isn't a
release is called and the next attempt is made with a bigger lateral
offset and/or larger heading downwind.

It's not nearly as difficult as the description may make it sound.
Some people seem to have a problem holding full downwind rudder when
the glider is already heading downwind at the start of takeoff roll
but it is essential to maintaining control.

Andy

[BruceGreeff]

Very nice glider.
I have had years of fun with mine.

Somehow everything else feels heavy on the controls.
She will teach you circuit planning and speed control...

Lots to love.
Early models are a little hot on landing because of low washout.
Built like a little tank - hard to damage.
The Tost lilliput wheel is a bad joke - zero brakes and tends to get
fatigue. There is a disk brake mod.

Real performance about 1:35 I have never made >400km, but #57 has 8
flights greater than 500km in the logbook, and there are <1400 hrs on
the log...

The Kestrel is much more "ladylike", but less fun to fly. It DOES have
1:44 which takes some getting used to.


As has been gone over repeatedly - in this class - the trailer is most
important, then the airframe condition. Expect to spend money on
improving the instruments.

Then - Fly the paint off the wings and build some happy memories for
when/if you graduate to more performance...
--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

[Jock Proudfoot]

The all-moving tailplane, a feature of many designs of that period due to
its theoretically higher efficiency, caused less than desirable high-speed
stability characteristics, and so modifications were made to the early
design. Even so, the glider is still very sensitive in pitch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schempp-Hirth_Standard_Cirrus

[Tim Taylor]

On Mar 16, 7:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

Like the other I loved the little Cirri. The one thing not mentioned
is your crew will love it too. Until I got my Ventus 2 my crew always
told me all my other gliders were never as nice as the Std. Cirrus.
The wings are light and it is easy to rig if you do it right (wrong
and it will not go together).

I put about 500 hours and many flights over 500k on serial number 17.
Still one of my favorite gliders. Watch the speed control on final
and learn to slip and they can be put in to about any field. A few
knots makes a big difference on float, I found 48 on short final
worked very well to get it down where you wanted, 55 knots and it
would float forever.

[[email protected][_2_]]

For more detailed info, suggest look at the Std Cirrus website, and
join the message board of same if the answers you seek are not
apparent.

http://www.standardcirrus.org/

Aerodyne

[Jock Proudfoot]

The all-moving tailplane, a feature of many designs of that period due to
its theoretically higher efficiency, caused less than desirable high-speed
stability characteristics, and so modifications were made to the early
design. Even so, the glider is still very sensitive in pitch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schempp-Hirth_Standard_Cirrus

[Bruce Hoult]

On Mar 17, 2:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?

They are still an excellent glider. There are many here in NZ and from
time to time an up and coming pilot gives the modern standard class
ships a fright in one.

I think it would be a useful thing to have a flight or two in an
original model Janus before flying the Cirrus, if there is one nearby.
It's the two seater that is the most similar, although keep in mind
that the Cirrus has better handling.

[Eric Greenwell[_4_]]

On 3/16/2011 6:55 PM, Walt Connelly wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? Good, bad
> indifferent? Flying tail, pros and cons? I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?

I did transition to a Std Cirrus with about your experience, and I
enjoyed flying it, but sold it in two years because I got tired of poor
airbrakes, poor wheel brakes, and sensitive elevator with lots of
feedback in turbulence. I did not miss it.

There are better choices, with much better airbrakes for safer landings,
conventional elevators so you don't have to hold the stick in both hands
over 75 knots, wheel brakes that work without modification, more crash
protection. They cost more money, but there is a good reason for that:
they are better gliders in several ways. If you can afford one with auto
hook up controls, especially the elevator, make that a priority.

A good trailer is good, too, but a safe, comfortable, pleasant to fly
glider is more important. You can always work on the trailer and improve
it, but most of us can't do much for the glider.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what
you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

[Eric Greenwell[_4_]]

On 3/17/2011 4:01 PM, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2:55 pm, Walt Connelly<Walt.Connelly.
> > wrote:
>> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? Good, bad
>> indifferent? Flying tail, pros and cons? I am new to gliding,
>> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
>> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> They are still an excellent glider. There are many here in NZ and from
> time to time an up and coming pilot gives the modern standard class
> ships a fright in one.

The bar has been raised substantially for "excellent". The Std Cirrus is
now "OK" at best.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

[Peter F[_2_]]

By your reasoning Eric the Ferrari 250 GTO (Possibly the most desirable car
in the world) is also a pile of crap.

It's unstable, unreliable, has poor brakes and is not much quicker than a
modern family saloon.

The Cirrus (with modified brakes) is no worse than any of it's
contemporaries, and is definately better than a Libelle.
The wheelbrake & crashworthiness are also the same as others of the same
era.

The "holding the stick with both hands above 75kts" is nonsense.

To get the first generation "Safety Cockpit" the OP would need to go for
an ASW24 - twice the price, twice the running costs, doesn't climb very
well and glides marginally better.

A Discus, climbs about as well as the Cirrus, glides about as well as the
24, doesn't have a "Safety Cockpit" - Costs 3 times the Cirrus

ASW27, ASG29, JS1, V2, D2 - all megabucks compared to the Cirrus

The Cirrus is *still* an excellent glider

At 02:03 18 March 2011, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>On 3/17/2011 4:01 PM, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>> On Mar 17, 2:55 pm, Walt Connelly > wrote:
>>> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? Good, bad
>>> indifferent? Flying tail, pros and cons? I am new to gliding,
>>> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
>>> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>>
>> They are still an excellent glider. There are many here in NZ and from
>> time to time an up and coming pilot gives the modern standard class
>> ships a fright in one.
>
>The bar has been raised substantially for "excellent". The Std Cirrus
is
>now "OK" at best.
>
>--
>Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
>email me)
>- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
>http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
>

[Derek C]

On Mar 17, 1:55*am, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

I have several hundred hours in this type. My briefing when I first
flew one was 'Don't worry if it feels like the control are
disconnected and don't let go of the stick'. It does have very light
control forces and no stick free pitch stability whatsover. However it
is perfectly nice to fly and most pilots wouldn't even notice the lack
of stick free stability. Even if you do let go of the stick, provided
it is properly trimmed, it takes quite a few seconds to go out of
control in the form of a phugoid. It is not the only glider that does
this.

Points to watch out for is that the ailerons are not particularly
effective at the start of the ground run until you get the tail up and
a bit of speed, and the airbrakes are not very effective unless they
are fitted with the double paddle modification. Also if winch
launching, don't ram the stick hard forward to contain the rotation as
it is just possible to stall the elevator with a powerful winch. Just
hold the stick about two-thirds forward and hold it there until
established in the full climb.

Derek C

[Eric Greenwell[_4_]]

On 3/18/2011 2:25 AM, Peter F wrote:
> By your reasoning Eric the Ferrari 250 GTO (Possibly the most desirable car
> in the world) is also a pile of crap.
>
> It's unstable, unreliable, has poor brakes and is not much quicker than a
> modern family saloon.

The Std Cirrus is no Ferrari (i.e., possibly the most desirable glider
in the world), nor would I recommend the Ferrari to a driver with the
experience level of the person asking about the Std Cirrus.

> The Cirrus (with modified brakes) is no worse than any of it's
> contemporaries, and is definately better than a Libelle.

Yes, I understand the wheel brakes can be improved, as I implied. My 301
had excellent wheel brakes (the glider I got after my Std Cirrus) -
don't know about other Libelles.

> The wheelbrake & crashworthiness are also the same as others of the same
> era.

Not a great recommendation!

> The "holding the stick with both hands above 75kts" is nonsense.

Not on my Std Cirrus - G forces (like encountering a thermal) would
cause it to apply elevator in the same direction, aggravating the
situation. It's very easy to feel this "positive feedback" on the stick
while cruising in the >75 knot speed range in turbulent (thermals or
ridge) conditions. The cause is the elevator circuit is unbalanced
mechanically for vertical G forces.

It had a distinctly different high-speed behavior than the conventional
elevator stick ships I've flown since then, all of which were very
steady at high speeds in turbulence.

> To get the first generation "Safety Cockpit" the OP would need to go for
> an ASW24 - twice the price, twice the running costs, doesn't climb very
> well and glides marginally better.

It's not necessary to go that new to get a worthwhile improvement, such
as the LS4 offers. Besides the cockpit improvement, most newer gliders
offer automatic hookups, which may be more important in improving safety.

> A Discus, climbs about as well as the Cirrus, glides about as well as the
> 24, doesn't have a "Safety Cockpit" - Costs 3 times the Cirrus
>
> ASW27, ASG29, JS1, V2, D2 - all megabucks compared to the Cirrus
>
> The Cirrus is *still* an excellent glider

And if the Std Cirrus defines "excellent", how do we describe an ASW28
or an LS8?

I got the impression the person asking the question was not enamored
with the the Std Cirrus, but was trying to do a cost/benefit analysis. I
was encouraging him to think beyond the basics and consider the value of
buying more safety and a nicer flying glider.

Just in case it's not clear: I owned a Std Cirrus for two years
(1978-1980), flew it for 500 hours, and had a lot of fun in it; however,
it's 45 year old design, and now there are many better choices. I don't
think it's a dangerous glider, but it does have characteristics less
suited to a relatively new pilot than, say, an LS4, or other newer gliders.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what
you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

[Tony[_5_]]

The only problem I have with an ASW-28 or LS-8 is I can't buy a nice
example with a good trailer for under 20K

>
> And if the Std Cirrus defines "excellent", how do we describe an ASW28
> or an LS8?
>
> I got the impression the person asking the question was not enamored
> with the the Std Cirrus, but was trying to do a cost/benefit analysis. I
> was encouraging him to think beyond the basics and consider the value of
> buying more safety and a nicer flying glider.
>
> Just in case it's not clear: I owned a Std Cirrus for two years
> (1978-1980), flew it for 500 hours, and had a lot of fun in it; however,
> it's 45 year old design, and now there are many better choices. I don't
> think it's a dangerous glider, but it does have characteristics less
> suited to a relatively new pilot than, say, an LS4, or other newer gliders.
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
> email me)
> - "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarmhttp://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what
> you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

[Derek C]

On Mar 18, 6:43*pm, Tony > wrote:
> The only problem I have with an ASW-28 or LS-8 is I can't buy a nice
> example with a good trailer for under 20K
>
>
>
>
>
> > And if the Std Cirrus defines "excellent", how do we describe an ASW28
> > or an LS8?
>
> > I got the impression the person asking the question was not enamored
> > with the the Std Cirrus, but was trying to do a cost/benefit analysis. I
> > was encouraging him to think beyond the basics and consider the value of
> > buying more safety and a nicer flying glider.
>
> > Just in case it's not clear: I owned a Std Cirrus for two years
> > (1978-1980), flew it for 500 hours, and had a lot of fun in it; however,
> > it's 45 year old design, and now there are many better choices. I don't
> > think it's a dangerous glider, but it does have characteristics less
> > suited to a relatively new pilot than, say, an LS4, or other newer gliders.
>
> > --
> > Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA -

The main advantages of the Standard Cirrus is that you can get 90% of
the performance of the latter types for 40% of the cost. It is also a
good Club Class glider on handicap.

Derek C

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:48:17 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

>On Mar 16, 9:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
>> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
>> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
>> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
>> Would this be a reasonable next step?
>>
>> Walt
>>
>> --
>> Walt Connelly
>
>This would be a reasonable step given some intermediate glider
>experience. Get a good check out from a knowledgable
>instructor and ideally, a pilot that is skilled in type.
>Good Luck
>UH

I've been flying a Std Cirrus for about 20 years.
Transition from Grob G103 Astir Jeans was easy.
Indeed, the 'all-moving tail' can be a source of pilot induced
oscillation. Simply lock your wrist on your knee, and move the stick
with your fingers.
Try not to buy a ship older than serial # ~175. After ~1972, the wing
washout has been increased from -.75° to -1.5°, making the sailplane
safer to land, and improves rolls and climbing.

Willy VINKEN - OO-ZNY

[Hagbard Celine]

On Mar 16, 6:55*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> Okay folks, your thoughts on the Standard Cirrus? *Good, bad
> indifferent? *Flying tail, pros and cons? *I am new to gliding,
> Commercial Add on, 140 flights and approx 100 hours, mostly in 1-34.
> Would this be a reasonable next step?

From Dick Johnson's test of a Standard Cirrus:

"One of the outstandingly good features of the Standard Cirrus is its
well-arranged cockpit. It is capable of fitting large pilots
comfortably, has room for a normal-size instrument panel, and yet
provides the pilot with excellent visibility. The controls operate
freely and are well located. The side-hinged canopy opens and closes
with ease and is much more convenient than the non-hinged removable
type which usually must be placed on the ground or handled by an
assistant when entering and exiting the cockpit.

Mediocre flight characteristics on the Cirrus B are its longitudinal
stablility, controll and stalling. The longitudinal stability is
relatively low compared to the PIK-20 or Schweizer 1-35, and this
requires some additional pilot attention to maintain aero tow position
or fly at constant airspeeds. At high airspeeds the control stick
elevator pressures are quite low, and care must be taken not to
overcontrol. Some warning is given at stall, but the roll-off is
rather rapid and it apparently will enter a spin rather quickly. The
earlier Standard Cirrus A was reported to be worse in that regard, and
for that reason the wing washout was increased about .75 degrees. For
the above reasons, I would recommend that pilots with less than about
100 flying hours should not fly the Standard Cirrus. Experienced
pilots with current proficiency should have little difficulty, and to
those I recommend the Standard Cirrrus B as an excellent sailplane.

Fig. 1 shows that its measured flight performance is relatively good,
indicating an L/D max of about 35.9 at 51 knots calibrated airspeed,
and about 440 ft./min. sink rate at 90 knots calibrated airspeed. The
reason for the emphasis on the words "calibrated" is that one of the
less-good features of the Standard Cirrus B is its large airspeed
system errors.

The earlier Standard Cirrus A reported by Paul Bickle in reference 1,
had its static ports located on the forward fuselage sides near the
instrument panel. This location produce suction at all airspeeds,
which caused the airspeed indicators to read considerably high at all
speeds. At stall this error amounted to about 2.5 knots high for the
Standard Cirrus A, whereas the Standard Cirrus B shows one knot low,
or a difference of 3.5 knots in indicated airspeed. This was excellent
brochuremanship and resulted in many people believing their new Cirrus
possessed 4 mph lower stalling speeds. At high airspeeds both the A
and B models show considerable static port suction, such that the
indicated airspeed is about seven knots above its correct calibrated
airspeed. Again good brochuremanship, but no help in contest flying."

And Derek Piggot's opinion:

Early versions of the Standard Cirrus were rather under-braked and
might be a problem for early field landings. The later Cirrus 75 has
an improved wing and better airbrakes and a few Standard Cirrus have
been modified to have a double area airbrake blade similar to that on
the Pirat. This appears to be a worthwhile modification as it
considerably improves the power of the airbrakes. The all moving
stabilizer and spring trimming make it sensitive, if not 'twitchy' at
higher speeds. With the c.g near the aft limit, inexperienced pilots
may run into pitching problems, so to improve stability the initial
flights should be made with extra ballast in the cockpit to bring the
c.g. well forward. Pilots should be carefully briefed to avoid
overcontrolling, particularly just after take-off on aerotow. In all
other respects the Standard Cirrus is a nice machine with good
handling and stalling, and a competitive performance. It is only
suitable for the very competent Bronze C pilot and is perhaps a better
second glass glider.

[gfoster07k]

I flew serial number 208 for about 15 years and enjoyed it but I think
there are characteristics that have not been mentioned in this thread
that you should be aware of. I found assembly easy and mine had the
older style connections to the controls and that meant inserting the
safety pins by Braille behind the spars. I got reasonably good at it
but some friends with the same plane really struggled. If the Cirrus
has had the mod to put an inspection hole behind the cockpit that is a
plus.

Another factor is the location of the instrument panel. It is very
far forward and if you tend to recline in the cockpit and have normal
to short arms, you will not be able to reach the instrument or radio
controls without undoing the belts. I also had to put an extension on
the tow release so that I could reach it.

The oxygen bottle is located in a position that cannot be reached from
the cockpit and thus must be turned on and off before and after the
flight. I have seen a system built to cure that with a long extension
bolted to the bottle valve but it was a Rube Goldberg at best. It is
also a bear to get in and out to refill.

The canopy is very sensitive to heat and can distort enough on a hot
day to render it almost impossible to close and seal and the same is
true on a very cold day. These issue were not unique to my plane. I
know other Standard Cirruses with the same problem.

There are not many good places to put batteries in a Stand Cirrus and
if you plan to use two batteries and change them with each flight, be
very aware of their location on any plane you buy. Some locations
require that you be sure to install and remove the batteries with the
wings out. it is very annoying to get the plane put together and
remember that the batteries go in first. I solved that by locating
the batteries in front of the wheel well but just be aware of this.

The CG tow hook necessitates a hard rubber (or equivalant) tail wheel
or you will be all over the place on take off.

All the other issues about poor brakes, marginal spoilers, and high
speed sensitivity of the all flying tail are certainly true but I
found they were just things that one adapts to and soon forgets. I
transitioned to the Standard Cirrus from a Grob 102 after only 18
hours (3 in the 102) and found it to be very easy to fly. My comment
at the time was "Just like a big Piper Cub." with gentle stalls, lots
of warning and could climb very well because it could be flown so
slowly with confidence.

For what it is worth.

Greg Foster