If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Greg,
Sorry if I am calling your baby ugly, but... I get information from lots of different pilots. That means that I may end up spreading some bad poop, but I am open to being refuted. The information you are disagreeing with mostly comes from a very experienced pilot who is a COPA member, but does not own a Cirrus. I have no reason to suspect his lack of objectivity or that he has an axe to grind. He is very knowledgeable. I know someone who recently aquired an SR 22 on brokerage, so perhaps I will be able to get a better experience with the plane. Cirrus reps do not demonstrate the plane well enough for people to make a decision, you are right about that. My only agenda is safety, and frankly, Cirrus has a poor rating. You can make excuses all day, but the facts are the facts. They have killed too many people in too short of time with too few planes. Has Cirrus done good things for aviation, maybe they have. On the other hand, maybe they are hurting it with their bad record. Have you thought to consider the black eye that BRS has over this whole thing? The anti parachute crowd has lots of ammo now, thanks to Cirrus. How about the anti composite folks? I think composites are safer, but thanks to Cirrus, it doesn't necessarily look that way in reality. Whether anyone can recover from a spin @1000 feet is an interesting discussion, but you are using it as a straw dog. I don't care what the answer is, I know that if you take off in a Cirrus, and I take off in almost any other new single, the odds are in my favor. Enjoy getting there faster, those few saved minutes may be a large percentage of the rest of your life. I hope you are paying attention to all your fellow owners who are dying and being careful. Lastly, if you want to make a point, correct my facts, spelling, grammer, or disagree with me, then that is great. I will likely learn from it. On the other hand, if you want to question my motives or insult me, stay on the porch. We KNOW as an owner of an SR22 that you have an agenda, but I would rather take each post at face value rather than prejudging them. "Greg" wrote in message om... "Dude" person, I have really been reluctant to add a post to this thread because I don't think I have seen so much misinformation in my life, but I feel an obligation to correct patently false statements which I can refute from a position of knowledge. I have been flying an SR22 for 2 1/2 years and have been a COPA member for 3 years. You said that there are problems with the engines needing work at 700 hours. This is absolutely false. If this were happening, it would be all over the COPA forums and I read them almost everyday. I have not read the first report of an engine needing major work at 700 hours and your statement about the interconnection between the prop and throttle being problematic to the engine is so ridiculous as to be humorous. I also have a very good relationship with my Service Center and we have had a lot of conversations about various Cirrus issues, major engine work at 700 hours has never been mentioned. And shock cooling problems??!! Huh? I have never had this problem even once. As far as slowing the plane down, I have never had a problem with THAT either. I have had to start slowing down a little sooner BECAUSE I WAS GOING FASTER TO START WITH! I have flown an ILS down to the middle marker at 120kts (faster than the cruise speed of a 172) and dropped flaps to land in the normal touchdown zone. It's just not a problem and I have never wished I had speed brakes. By the way, THAT is the correct way to spell "speed brakes". And ANOTHER thing, if anybody thinks they are going to recover from an inadvertent spin in less than 1,000' in any common four place or six place airplane without hitting terra firma first, they are living a fantasy. You just might barely make it if you are well practiced in spins in the aircraft you are flying and perform spins on a regular basis and you are at a very light weight. However, it will not happen like that. It will happen unexpectedly, probably when you are heavy with an aft CG, while you are doing something else like changing to departure control frequency. You look up from the radio to see the world spinning. You have less than five seconds to figure out what happened and determine the correct control inputs. You must execute them perfectly, or you die. Depending on the plane, loading, and pilot proficiency in spin recovery, I would not expect many scenarios like this to end favorably with less than 2,000' for an average pilot. Geez, this thread has the worst signal to noise ratio I have seen in a long time. You know, it started out with just some guy asking for a little information, I don't think he wanted an earful of crap from someone with an agenda. Until you fly a Cirrus for more than a demonstration flight, you would do well to stick to verifiable facts. Greg "Dude" wrote in message ... "Thomas Borchert" wrote in message ... Dude, This could reduce the stalls, at least on approach. Oh? So how many have stalled on approach again? Right, none. Yet. Don't get so frigging defensive. My point is that the Cirrus can be hard to slow to approach speed. It takes more care than many other planes because it is slick, and you cannot control the pitch of the prop to add drag. If you had speed breaks you would allow the pilot more options to control descent given that right now the system that governs the RPM/MP has limited ability to slow the plane without cutting the throttle. Bottom line is that if a person has speed breaks, he is less likely to fly slow because he can shed speed whenever needed. It would also reduce the severe shock cooling they are seeing due to their engine control system. So you can prove damage through shock cooling? Wow! I know no one else who can. And where is the connection to the "engine control system"? Presently, according to some COPA members, there are many people having excessive engine wear and needing lots of cylinder work early. One suspected reason is shock cooling due to pilots cutting throttle to get the plane down without gaining too much speed. The cirrus design simply adds more penalty to poor vertical planning than most planes, and so the engine is often asked to pay the price. Another theory is that the engines are constanlty being run at set rpm's that may not be the best rpm's or the smoothest. The pilot cannot control it. Bottom line, the phony Fadec system isn't really all that good. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Boeing Boondoggle | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 77 | September 15th 04 02:39 AM |
New Cirrus SR22 Lead Time | Lenny Sawyer | Owning | 4 | March 6th 04 09:22 AM |
Fractional Ownership - Cirrus SR22 | Rich Raine | Owning | 3 | December 24th 03 05:36 AM |
New Cessna panel | C J Campbell | Owning | 48 | October 24th 03 04:43 PM |