Wed Jul 06, 2011 11:31 pm
Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:39 am
Thu Jul 07, 2011 7:58 am
Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:21 am
Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:16 am
Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:35 am
Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:50 pm
k5dh wrote:Looks like we have some WIXers who don't agree with USAF's choice for its new introductory trainer. Not trying to be a wise-guy here, but if the Cirrus SR-20 isn't "the one", then what airplane would have been a better choice for the mission? If you do the basic calculation of 25 airplanes for $6.1M, the price per unit works out to $244K each. I'm sure there are less costly alternatives available, but are they better suited? USAF apparently doesn't think so. Working in the defense industry as I do, I can't imagine that it would be cheaper to have someone design and build a custom airplane for this mission. I'm not a pilot, and I don't keep up very well with the civilian lightplane market, so I don't know what to suggest. If somebody can educate me, I'm ready to learn!
Thu Jul 07, 2011 2:39 pm
Well said.gale_dono wrote:At that price, compared to what the rest of the defense industry is getting for little or no production aircraft these days it's a deal of the century.
Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:57 pm
Thu Jul 07, 2011 6:18 pm
In terms of avoiding an accident, one problem with the Cirrus is its unforgiving handling compared to other basic four-seaters. For pilots accustomed to learning about an impending stall by feeling reduced airloads on the flight controls, the Cirrus provides much less stall warning. This is due to spring cartridges that continue to resist flight control movement even when the airplane is not moving. In other words, the flight controls feel similar whether you're flying or stalled.
Once a pilot has gotten sloppy with airspeed, the plane is harder to keep level with rudders in a stall than a Cessna or Diamond; if in a deep uncoordinated stall, the Cirrus wants to drop a wing and go into a spin.
Once in a spin the SR20 and SR22 are virtually impossible to recover, according to the test pilots.
A Cirrus pilot's only option is to pull the big main CAPS parachute and hope that he or she has not built up too much speed for the cords. A couple of new owners in Parish, NY managed to stall and spin their plane all the way down from 5000' AGL on April 24, 2002.
Cirrus uses wet wings rather than an aluminum fuel tank tucked inside the wing. Any crack in the plastic from an accident turns into a fuel leak, and the planes have had a tendency to catch on fire after crashing
One unusual preflight item are Telatemp patches on the brakes, viewable through a circular hole in the wheel pants. On August 4, 2005 a Cirrus pilot who used his brakes to abort a takeoff taxied off the runway and shut down to inspect his pitot tube. Upon exiting the aircraft, he found "the landing gear engulfed in flames" and a lot of the wing burned up.
Cirrus's theory is that the brake seals fail when overheated, either via aggressive braking on landing or by dragging the brakes during taxi. Upon the next landing, hitting the brakes hard heats them up and results in some fluid leakage. The fluid catches on fire. Cirrus issued an Airworthiness Directive and added the Telatemps (might be nicer to have more robust brakes!).
Thu Jul 07, 2011 7:20 pm
k5dh wrote:Looks like we have some WIXers who don't agree with USAF's choice for its new introductory trainer. Not trying to be a wise-guy here, but if the Cirrus SR-20 isn't "the one", then what airplane would have been a better choice for the mission? If you do the basic calculation of 25 airplanes for $6.1M, the price per unit works out to $244K each. I'm sure there are less costly alternatives available, but are they better suited? USAF apparently doesn't think so. Working in the defense industry as I do, I can't imagine that it would be cheaper to have someone design and build a custom airplane for this mission. I'm not a pilot, and I don't keep up very well with the civilian lightplane market, so I don't know what to suggest. If somebody can educate me, I'm ready to learn!
Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:50 pm
Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:24 pm
Russ Blow wrote:First off I have never flown the SR 20 or any Cirrus. I would have to wonder why not go with a modern version of the Cessna T 41 / 172/ 182 as a trainer. The Cirrus has arguably a worse safety record than the Cessna and it is my understanding has some unusual stall characteristics and that spin recovery is implemented by deploying the ballistic chute. However if airspeed is above 133 kts the chute cords may fail which could easily occur if a inexperienced pilot mistook a spiral from a spin and pulled the chute.
Here is a fairly in depth report posted and updated by an owner who is also a ATP and CFII. I took the liberty to post up a few quotes taken from the article that would concern me using the aircraft in a training role. I understand a good trainer should have at least some " bite " to it but question using any aircraft in that roll that cannot be recovered safely from a spin routinely.
http://philip.greenspun.com/flying/cirrus-sr20In terms of avoiding an accident, one problem with the Cirrus is its unforgiving handling compared to other basic four-seaters. For pilots accustomed to learning about an impending stall by feeling reduced airloads on the flight controls, the Cirrus provides much less stall warning. This is due to spring cartridges that continue to resist flight control movement even when the airplane is not moving. In other words, the flight controls feel similar whether you're flying or stalled.
Once a pilot has gotten sloppy with airspeed, the plane is harder to keep level with rudders in a stall than a Cessna or Diamond; if in a deep uncoordinated stall, the Cirrus wants to drop a wing and go into a spin.
Once in a spin the SR20 and SR22 are virtually impossible to recover, according to the test pilots.
A Cirrus pilot's only option is to pull the big main CAPS parachute and hope that he or she has not built up too much speed for the cords. A couple of new owners in Parish, NY managed to stall and spin their plane all the way down from 5000' AGL on April 24, 2002.
Cirrus uses wet wings rather than an aluminum fuel tank tucked inside the wing. Any crack in the plastic from an accident turns into a fuel leak, and the planes have had a tendency to catch on fire after crashing
One unusual preflight item are Telatemp patches on the brakes, viewable through a circular hole in the wheel pants. On August 4, 2005 a Cirrus pilot who used his brakes to abort a takeoff taxied off the runway and shut down to inspect his pitot tube. Upon exiting the aircraft, he found "the landing gear engulfed in flames" and a lot of the wing burned up.
Cirrus's theory is that the brake seals fail when overheated, either via aggressive braking on landing or by dragging the brakes during taxi. Upon the next landing, hitting the brakes hard heats them up and results in some fluid leakage. The fluid catches on fire. Cirrus issued an Airworthiness Directive and added the Telatemps (might be nicer to have more robust brakes!).
Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:33 pm
Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:33 am