Author Topic: Cirrus Killer from Cessna (Read 1183 times)

Chairboy · « **Reply #15 on:** November 22, 2005, 09:27:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Golfer
I find the perfect solution to the nudging kneeboard is a nice, tight dress

I'm 6'2, and I've had my share of nudged kneeboards too. Once, in a Cessna 152, I was on short final or flaring when my kneeboard caught the yoke.

That was pretty exciting.

I've found that flying something that you don't wear like a backpage (eg, not a 152) that has more room really helps out. I miss my Warrior II I trained in, that was pretty roomy. The 172 I've been flying is ok too, haven't had any probs with the kneeboard in it, but I guess I'm so busy staring at that misplaced wing (who puts wings on TOP anyhow?) that I haven't had a chance to appreciate it.

StSanta · « **Reply #16 on:** November 22, 2005, 12:24:20 PM »

I rather like Cessnas myself. We got an old C-182 with a 300+ hp engine. Had a pilot who liked Vietnam style flying and it was plenty exciting to be 5 men with no seatbelts, on the floor + the pilot.

It's a steady workhorse. Pretty cheap running costs. Seems to hold up quite well too. Static lines have been bouncing off the side of ours for several decades and sure it has some dents, but all in all it's in surprisingly good condition.

From a passenger's perspective it's a nice aircraft.

dynamt · « **Reply #17 on:** November 22, 2005, 02:48:25 PM »

Keep in mind that a 177RG will cruise at 150Kts. putting it right in the same category as an SR20. It also has better range and payload.

I would think that a cleaned up Cardinal would be a great starting point for Cessna. I'm partial to high wings. They don't get stuck in snow banks so easy.

Think about the speeds seen with the 210. Now put that engine in a 177.

Golfer · « **Reply #18 on:** November 22, 2005, 02:57:05 PM »

Show me the Cardinal RG you've been flying! I want one and will pay cash...

Best we do is 135kts just like the Arrow cousin at Piper.

They've got the same motors...IO-360s at 200hp.

The Cirrus is a much more aerodynamically efficient airframe...with fixed gear. The SR20 gives you an honest 150kts TAS...not in a high power descent or groundspeed with a tailwind.

Hell...in a Mooney M20J-201 I file for 150KTS and it's the slickest of the slick with a 200hp IO-360. Cirrus has done something right...

But on the other hand the Cardinal is my favorite Cessna. I like the looks and the sports car feel of that low to the ground fun to fly people mover. With a 950lb useful load...it's a dead tie with the SR20 without the glass, interior room and parachute.

Doh...wrote down a 320 for the Mooney not 360...durrrrr ::drool::

dynamt · « **Reply #19 on:** November 22, 2005, 03:10:01 PM »

Ok you got me. Trade a Plane does list it at 149Kts 75%. Probably a little generous on their part. Still, I gotta wonder what a cleaned up 177 with an IO540 will do.

Golfer · « **Reply #20 on:** November 22, 2005, 03:28:32 PM »

There might be one out there with speed mods...but the only one that does any good is the exhaust fairing. You'll pick up 9 kts with that.

With that big engine the wings would rip off...they flex a bunch as it is

I'm interested to see at least a drawing of this Cirrus killer. You can get a free demo of an SR22 if you'd like...just give them a call and they'll send one of many of their demo planes out to your airport and they'll show you what it's all about.

The SR20 and 22 are the same airplane. The SR22 has a longer wing which is basically a 3 foot wingtip. The spar does go all the way to the end, but if you were to look at one and then another...the SR22 has a row of fasteners about 3 feet inboard from the wingtips...that's where the SR20's wing stops. Interior space is the same. It's all about the Motor...or all about the Overstock.com woman...wooooow.

dynamt · « **Reply #21 on:** November 22, 2005, 03:47:10 PM »

There's no doubt that Cirrus has a good bird. I first sat in one of their prototypes about 10 years ago at Sun n Fun. Liked it right from the get go.

Of course back then they were projecting a selling price of about 140K for an SR20.

I can't swing 400K+ for a an SR22. A Seneca II (Known Ice), looking at the blizzard outside...that's the ticket. 140K will do it too.

Chairboy · « **Reply #22 on:** November 22, 2005, 04:45:28 PM »

Dynamt, have you seen the Columbia? All the features of the Cirrus and more, without unrecoverable spins. Heck, the Columbia 400 even comes with built in cabin pressurization. The Cirrus SR-22 (which cruises best in O2 country) leaves the pilot to rely on nose breathers. Finally, it's the fastest single engine prop in general aviation, not to mention long legged. An unmodified Columbia that a customer picked up at the factory in Bend, OR flew non-stop to Dallas-Fort Worth. That's pretty impressive, in my books.

brendo · « **Reply #23 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:43:37 PM »

Do you guys really mean unrecoverable spin, or do you mean that spin recovery is not reccommended in this Cirrus.

Spin recovery is no big deal in most aircraft.

Chairboy · « **Reply #24 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:56:04 PM »

The only approved way to recover from a spin in the Cirrus is to deploy the airplane parachute. The POH specifically says that you must not 'waste time' trying to recover from the spin.

Golfer · « **Reply #25 on:** November 22, 2005, 06:00:43 PM »

You're not approved to get into the spin in the first place.

If you find yourself in one you must deploy the CAPS system (the parachute).

The parachute is the deciding factor in Gross weight also...rather than stalling speed as usually the case. The parachute anchors can only hold so much weight.

I was recently told about someone loading it up to over 7000lbs (lead bricks maybe...thats a lot of weight!) and on departure it still climbed out at 1000fpm. That's impressive...

Habu · « **Reply #26 on:** November 22, 2005, 06:00:52 PM »

Most times when a company goes for performance they do so by cutting back on head room. A smaller frontal profile = less drag = more speed. Of course for big guys like me I will not even consider a plane with a cramped cockpit (like a Mooney or Diamond) no matter how fast they go.

So I hope Cessna keeps with their generous cockpits even if it costs them a few knots airspeed.

Lots of really fast homebuilts out there. But you sit in one and you see that your knees hit the underside of the instrument panel and you Dave Clarkes hit the canopy and your shoulder is in contact with your passenger and the other is pressed against the cold window.

Now imagine staying in that position for 4 hours on a cross country flight. You might enjoy it at first but I am sure it gets old fast.

I have never sat in a Cirrus so I am not sure how they fit taller pilots. I will have to try one out soon and see.

dynamt · « **Reply #27 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:47:59 PM »

Habu,

I know what you mean. Went for a ride in a Lancair 360(2 seat home built),
Yikes.. I don't fit. 6'2" 225#s.

Cirrus is a very roomy airplane. You will like it.

Golfer · « **Reply #28 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:56:51 PM »

I'm 6'0 and 230lbs...with the holidays coming up that doesn't look to change...ruh ro!

I fit just fine in a Cirrus with lots of head room, shoulder room and leg room.

Here's an excerpt from the POH on spins...

Do take note that it's not certified because it hasn't been demonstrated by a test pilot that the airplane can recover. That doesn't mean it can't recover from a spin...they just didn't test that aspect because of the parachute.

Here's a page on the cabin dimensions...very much roomy.

Habu...have you tried on a newer Mooney? (Ovation or Bravo) Those new cockpits are better than they were in the past, and the instrument panel doesn't feel (to me at least) like it's laying on your lap as it does in the M20J. It's still like sitting in a sports car...but it's a good change.

Chairboy · « **Reply #29 on:** November 22, 2005, 08:04:47 PM »

Very cool diagram! The Cherokee Warrior, by comparison, is 41" wide and 49" tall.

The Columbia 300-400 is actually 51" tall, and 49" wide, so a little more headroom.