Not sure what your points are here. The SR-22's POH/AFM states that in case of spin, pull the chute. 'Nuff said.
As for all of the other chaff in your note, not much point in responding.
I was amused by the comment about side-sticks making it seem like an aerobatic aircraft. I've never seen an aerobatic aircraft with a side-stick, only center sticks. The ones I've owned, rented, and flown all had center sticks. Gliders and powered. Where are you coming from with this comment? And the 777? Waah!
Have a good new year's. And be careful with the Cirrus.
I've spent a lot of time flying the SR-22 (and SR-20 and many others). It's a slippery machine which isn't too terrible when compared with some very old and/or odd machines.
The fact that the Cirrus has a poor design is borne out by the accident and incident numbers. It has the worst in the industry for a brand-new design. And despite the parachute.
Sorry to have hit a nerve with you, but I'm not sure what you do know. I've flown with CFIs who were afraid to do a slip. Many are afraid to do spins. Many are afraid of truly unusual attitudes.
The suit involving Cirrus and the deaths of its two owners, an ATP (airline transport pilot for those who are reading this who aren't aviation nuts) and a commercially-rated pilot, is a case in point. They apparently entered a flat spin. Huh? In a well-designed airplane? Two days after they bought it and went through factory training? You're kidding, aren't you?
If you're interested in flying some very good designs, try gliders. I've a lot of hours in them and can tell you that in comparison the Cirrus is a poor aerodynamic design. The fact that the Cirrus requires the parachute (apparently to satisfy the FAA spin requirements), the wing cuffs, and the required flat landing attitude are all testiments to this.
Do you know of any other airplane which can't recover from a spin without requiring a parachute? Nuts.
Actually...the insurance rate on the Cirrus is high due to 24 fatalities since its introduction. By comparison, the Diamond DA-40/G1000 I own has an insurance rate 1/4th as high (for the same hull value and liability coverage) since there has only been one fatal accident (which happened just a few weeks ago, most likely due to flight into terrible weather).
The Cirrus has a relatively poor aerodynamic design for such a new airplane. The parachute does not improve its flying characteristics. It has had a similar accident rate to the Cessna 172, a plane which has been out for 50+ years.
The BRS is a great system. It does not offset poor piloting or poor aerodynamic design, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure what your points are here. The SR-22's POH/AFM states that in case of spin, pull the chute. 'Nuff said.
As for all of the other chaff in your note, not much point in responding.
I was amused by the comment about side-sticks making it seem like an aerobatic aircraft. I've never seen an aerobatic aircraft with a side-stick, only center sticks. The ones I've owned, rented, and flown all had center sticks. Gliders and powered. Where are you coming from with this comment? And the 777? Waah!
Have a good new year's. And be careful with the Cirrus.
The fact that the Cirrus has a poor design is borne out by the accident and incident numbers. It has the worst in the industry for a brand-new design. And despite the parachute.
Sorry to have hit a nerve with you, but I'm not sure what you do know. I've flown with CFIs who were afraid to do a slip. Many are afraid to do spins. Many are afraid of truly unusual attitudes.
The suit involving Cirrus and the deaths of its two owners, an ATP (airline transport pilot for those who are reading this who aren't aviation nuts) and a commercially-rated pilot, is a case in point. They apparently entered a flat spin. Huh? In a well-designed airplane? Two days after they bought it and went through factory training? You're kidding, aren't you?
If you're interested in flying some very good designs, try gliders. I've a lot of hours in them and can tell you that in comparison the Cirrus is a poor aerodynamic design. The fact that the Cirrus requires the parachute (apparently to satisfy the FAA spin requirements), the wing cuffs, and the required flat landing attitude are all testiments to this.
Do you know of any other airplane which can't recover from a spin without requiring a parachute? Nuts.
IMHO, of course.
Actually...the insurance rate on the Cirrus is high due to 24 fatalities since its introduction. By comparison, the Diamond DA-40/G1000 I own has an insurance rate 1/4th as high (for the same hull value and liability coverage) since there has only been one fatal accident (which happened just a few weeks ago, most likely due to flight into terrible weather). The Cirrus has a relatively poor aerodynamic design for such a new airplane. The parachute does not improve its flying characteristics. It has had a similar accident rate to the Cessna 172, a plane which has been out for 50+ years. The BRS is a great system. It does not offset poor piloting or poor aerodynamic design, though.