Cirrus demo

[Dan Luke]

My entry was one of those drawn at OSH for a 2-hour checkout in an SR-22, and
we finally coordinated everything and made the flight yesterday. The
following are my impressions of the aircraft:


Getting aboard is easier than in most low-wingers because of the two large
doors. The seats are firm and comfortable and the front cabin is roomier
than a Bonanza.

A hot start was easy with the experienced Cirrus demo pilot to help. Taxiing
is simple by using differential braking, but I would prefer a steerable nose
gear--crosswinds require riding one of the brakes to go straight. The rudder
and brake pedal forces are heavier than my Cutlass RG.

The PFD and MFD were a bit bewildering at first simply because I hadn't
learned the scan yet. There are electronic checklists on the MFD that are
easy to use, and getting the airplane ready for takeoff was simple.

We aborted the takeoff roll because of an open door warning. It doesn't tell
you which one and doesn't annunciate until you advance the throttle for
takeoff, so we had to do the drill twice before we had the proper door
secured. Once we'd sorted that out, I shoved the throttle full forward and
waited for 70 knots rotation speed. This took rather longer to arrive than I
expected; the SR-22 is not a short field airplane. After rotation, I pitched
to +12 degrees for Vy and retracted the 50% takeoff flaps at 80 knots IAS.

Climbout is pretty brisk for someone accustomed to a 180 hp 172RG--about 1200
fpm, IIRC. The ailerons are very crisp and responsive, but I found I needed
to re-trim them at various times, something I'm not used to. The electronic
trim seemed to work well, contrary to reports I've read of its being over
sensitive. The airplane was out of yaw trim and I had to hold right rudder
the whole flight, which was annoying. Yaw trim can only be adjusted on the
ground.

As we climbed to 4500', we spent a while setting up the autopilot for rate of
climb and altitude preselect. It was at this point that I realized the
Cirrus is a systems management airplane. There is an awful lot going on,
it's happening fairly quickly, and the slippery Cirrus can get badly out of
shape on you in a hurry. In my airplane, the autopilot is a good helper. In
the Cirrus, it's an indispensable crew member for single-pilot IFR;
definitely a no-go item if it's inop. Furthermore, the pilot must be razor
sharp on pushing all those buttons and twisting all those knobs if he plans
on making approaches in IMC or he will quickly find himself miles behind the
situation when crunch time comes. This is not an airplane that confers extra
safety by virtue of its advanced systems--rather the reverse, IMO.

At 80% power, 65 deg. ROP, the SR-22 made 178 KTAS at 4500 feet. Wow! That's
great...uh-oh, look at the fuel burn: 19.7 GPH. Woof! Glad it was on
Klapmeier's credit card! Coming back, we ran 65% power, LOP and got 158
KTAS at 5500 feet and burned 11.8 GPH.

We vectored ourselves for an ILS at Hammond, LA and I found the airplane very
easy to manage on my first attempt at a hand-flown approach. The PFD has
some nice cues for the pilot to keep himself on the localizer and the Cirrus
came down the glideslope quite nicely. Of course, it would have been even
nicer if I'd let George do it, as I'm sure I would in IMC.

In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me fly
100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some getting
used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times. After that, I
found the Cirrus quite easy to land.

I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy an
airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold, I'll be
in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[Montblack]

("Dan Luke" wrote)
> My entry was one of those drawn at OSH for a 2-hour checkout in an SR-22,
> and we finally coordinated everything and made the flight yesterday. The
> following are my impressions of the aircraft:


Nice report. I'd like to see more of that kind of writing in the Flying
mags.

More real, less gush.


Montblack

[Darkwing]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
> My entry was one of those drawn at OSH for a 2-hour checkout in an SR-22,
> and we finally coordinated everything and made the flight yesterday. The
> following are my impressions of the aircraft:
>
>
> Getting aboard is easier than in most low-wingers because of the two large
> doors. The seats are firm and comfortable and the front cabin is roomier
> than a Bonanza.
>
> A hot start was easy with the experienced Cirrus demo pilot to help.
> Taxiing is simple by using differential braking, but I would prefer a
> steerable nose gear--crosswinds require riding one of the brakes to go
> straight. The rudder and brake pedal forces are heavier than my Cutlass
> RG.
>
> The PFD and MFD were a bit bewildering at first simply because I hadn't
> learned the scan yet. There are electronic checklists on the MFD that are
> easy to use, and getting the airplane ready for takeoff was simple.
>
> We aborted the takeoff roll because of an open door warning. It doesn't
> tell you which one and doesn't annunciate until you advance the throttle
> for takeoff, so we had to do the drill twice before we had the proper door
> secured. Once we'd sorted that out, I shoved the throttle full forward
> and waited for 70 knots rotation speed. This took rather longer to arrive
> than I expected; the SR-22 is not a short field airplane. After rotation,
> I pitched to +12 degrees for Vy and retracted the 50% takeoff flaps at 80
> knots IAS.
>
> Climbout is pretty brisk for someone accustomed to a 180 hp 172RG--about
> 1200 fpm, IIRC. The ailerons are very crisp and responsive, but I found I
> needed to re-trim them at various times, something I'm not used to. The
> electronic trim seemed to work well, contrary to reports I've read of its
> being over sensitive. The airplane was out of yaw trim and I had to hold
> right rudder the whole flight, which was annoying. Yaw trim can only be
> adjusted on the ground.
>
> As we climbed to 4500', we spent a while setting up the autopilot for rate
> of climb and altitude preselect. It was at this point that I realized the
> Cirrus is a systems management airplane. There is an awful lot going on,
> it's happening fairly quickly, and the slippery Cirrus can get badly out
> of shape on you in a hurry. In my airplane, the autopilot is a good
> helper. In the Cirrus, it's an indispensable crew member for single-pilot
> IFR; definitely a no-go item if it's inop. Furthermore, the pilot must be
> razor sharp on pushing all those buttons and twisting all those knobs if
> he plans on making approaches in IMC or he will quickly find himself miles
> behind the situation when crunch time comes. This is not an airplane that
> confers extra safety by virtue of its advanced systems--rather the
> reverse, IMO.
>
> At 80% power, 65 deg. ROP, the SR-22 made 178 KTAS at 4500 feet. Wow!
> That's great...uh-oh, look at the fuel burn: 19.7 GPH. Woof! Glad it
> was on Klapmeier's credit card! Coming back, we ran 65% power, LOP and
> got 158 KTAS at 5500 feet and burned 11.8 GPH.
>
> We vectored ourselves for an ILS at Hammond, LA and I found the airplane
> very easy to manage on my first attempt at a hand-flown approach. The PFD
> has some nice cues for the pilot to keep himself on the localizer and the
> Cirrus came down the glideslope quite nicely. Of course, it would have
> been even nicer if I'd let George do it, as I'm sure I would in IMC.
>
> In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me fly
> 100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some
> getting used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times.
> After that, I found the Cirrus quite easy to land.
>
> I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy an
> airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold, I'll
> be in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.
>
> --
> Dan
> C-172RG at BFM
>

Cool deal, always fun when it's on the other guys dime!

-------------------------
DW

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Dan Luke > posted:

> My entry was one of those drawn at OSH for a 2-hour checkout in an
> SR-22, and we finally coordinated everything and made the flight
> yesterday. The following are my impressions of the aircraft:
>
Nice write-up! The SR-22 is one of those planes that I'd like to get into
one of these days, but like you, the price would not make it a practical
first-choice for a purchase.

Thanks!

Neil

[rps]

I've been flying SR-22s exclusively over the 18 months. I used to fly
Cessnas (172 and 182) before that.

Between flying the Cessnas and the Cirrus, I took a break from flying
for many years.

Back in the saddle, it took me a little while to get used to the SR-22,
but much of that was just knocking off rust in my technique and
proficiency. I adapted to the SR-22 relatively quickly (greased
landings after the first 2 or 3 bounces). It took me a little while
longer to get used to programming the Garmins and using the PFD in IMC.

My family takes comfort in knowing that if I pass out during a flight,
they just have to find flat ground, retard throttle and stick, and
deploy the CAPS 'chute below 130 knots.

Now, I would go back to the six-pack steam gages (especially
vacuum-driven) and they would not go back to a plane without a 'chute.

[john smith]

> In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me fly
> 100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some getting
> used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times. After that, I
> found the Cirrus quite easy to land.

What speed did you fly the ILS? Power? Configuration?

> I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy an
> airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold, I'll be
> in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.

Thanks, Dan! You have re-affirmed my affection for the 182, 210 and
Bonanza. Just think how many more airports are available to you with
these airplanes.

[Morgans]

"rps" > wrote
>
> Now, I would (???) go back to the six-pack steam gages

I assume you intended to put "not" in there?
--
Jim in NC

[Dan Luke]

"john smith" wrote:

>
> What speed did you fly the ILS? Power? Configuration?
>

About 100 KIAS, 50% flaps. Don't remember the power setting for sure,
but I think it was 11".

[Mike Rapoport]

"john smith" > wrote in message
...
>> In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me
>> fly
>> 100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some
>> getting
>> used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times. After
>> that, I
>> found the Cirrus quite easy to land.
>
> What speed did you fly the ILS? Power? Configuration?
>
>> I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy an
>> airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold,
>> I'll be
>> in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.
>
> Thanks, Dan! You have re-affirmed my affection for the 182, 210 and
> Bonanza. Just think how many more airports are available to you with
> these airplanes.

According to Raytheon and Cirrus the current Bonanza take more runway than
the SR22. According to
http://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane97.shtml
they both use about the same runway distance

Mike
MU-2

[Newps]

Mike Rapoport wrote:

> "john smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me
>>>fly
>>>100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some
>>>getting
>>>used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times. After
>>>that, I
>>>found the Cirrus quite easy to land.
>>
>>What speed did you fly the ILS? Power? Configuration?
>>
>>
>>>I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy an
>>>airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold,
>>>I'll be
>>>in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.
>>
>>Thanks, Dan! You have re-affirmed my affection for the 182, 210 and
>>Bonanza. Just think how many more airports are available to you with
>>these airplanes.
>
>
> According to Raytheon and Cirrus the current Bonanza take more runway than
> the SR22. According to
> http://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane97.shtml
> they both use about the same runway distance

You need real world numbers. My S35, at 3500 MSL and 850 under gross
which is a typical weight when I'm just farting around the local area,
needs 550 feet to get airborne and the same 550 feet to get stopped.
What does the Cirrus do at that weight? The real deal killer is having
to stay on pavement. My plane was designed for rough strips. The
Cirrus falls apart if the pavement isn't perfectly smooth.

[Mike Rapoport]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
>> "john smith" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>>In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me
>>>>fly
>>>>100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some
>>>>getting
>>>>used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times. After
>>>>that, I
>>>>found the Cirrus quite easy to land.
>>>
>>>What speed did you fly the ILS? Power? Configuration?
>>>
>>>
>>>>I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy
>>>>an
>>>>airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold,
>>>>I'll be
>>>>in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.
>>>
>>>Thanks, Dan! You have re-affirmed my affection for the 182, 210 and
>>>Bonanza. Just think how many more airports are available to you with
>>>these airplanes.
>>
>>
>> According to Raytheon and Cirrus the current Bonanza take more runway
>> than the SR22. According to
>> http://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane97.shtml
>> they both use about the same runway distance
>
> You need real world numbers. My S35, at 3500 MSL and 850 under gross
> which is a typical weight when I'm just farting around the local area,
> needs 550 feet to get airborne and the same 550 feet to get stopped. What
> does the Cirrus do at that weight? The real deal killer is having to stay
> on pavement. My plane was designed for rough strips. The Cirrus falls
> apart if the pavement isn't perfectly smooth.

I would hardly call a S35 a "current" Bonanza.

Mike
MU-2

[john smith]

In article et>,
"Mike Rapoport" > wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >
> >> "john smith" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>
> >>>>In the pattern, the airplane is easy to manage. The Cirrus guy had me
> >>>>fly
> >>>>100-90-80 on downwind-base-final. The roundout altitude takes some
> >>>>getting
> >>>>used to. I tended to round out high my first couple of times. After
> >>>>that, I
> >>>>found the Cirrus quite easy to land.
> >>>
> >>>What speed did you fly the ILS? Power? Configuration?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I enjoyed the SR-22, but I think I will decline the opportunity to buy
> >>>>an
> >>>>airplane that costs twice as much as my house. When I get '87D sold,
> >>>>I'll be
> >>>>in the market for a nice used Bonanza or 210.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks, Dan! You have re-affirmed my affection for the 182, 210 and
> >>>Bonanza. Just think how many more airports are available to you with
> >>>these airplanes.
> >>
> >>
> >> According to Raytheon and Cirrus the current Bonanza take more runway
> >> than the SR22. According to
> >> http://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane97.shtml
> >> they both use about the same runway distance
> >
> > You need real world numbers. My S35, at 3500 MSL and 850 under gross
> > which is a typical weight when I'm just farting around the local area,
> > needs 550 feet to get airborne and the same 550 feet to get stopped. What
> > does the Cirrus do at that weight? The real deal killer is having to stay
> > on pavement. My plane was designed for rough strips. The Cirrus falls
> > apart if the pavement isn't perfectly smooth.

> I would hardly call a S35 a "current" Bonanza.

Old, new and current are relative terms when it comes to aviation.

[nrp]

>Old, new and current are relative terms when it comes to aviation.

Especially when you look at what fraction of the Bonanzas were built
before and after the S series.