31 Jan 2026, 12:23 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Dec 2016, 20:54 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 02/13/10 Posts: 20441 Post Likes: +25711 Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Aircraft: Prior C310,BE33,SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: They keep advertising high speed cruise 300 kts. Curiously, economy cruise (240kts) in the SF50 is about as fast as my high-speed cruise (235kts) (Columbia 400) at the same altitude. The SF50 is bigger, more comfortable, pressurized, has better avionics, has a parachute, and it sounds much cooler. Oh, and it costs more.
_________________ Arlen Get your motor runnin' Head out on the highway - Mars Bonfire
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 17:37 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 09/02/09 Posts: 8740 Post Likes: +9490 Company: OAA Location: Oklahoma City - PWA/Calistoga KSTS
Aircraft: UMF3, UBF 2, P180 II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Don't forget the chick factor....much higher on a Vtail JET! I've seen a lot of the guys on the waiting list. A v tail anything ain't gonna help...
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 18:39 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 07/15/12 Posts: 152 Post Likes: +134
|
|
The Type Certificate finally showed up online. Looks like it did get certified to 28,000' after all. This seems interesting "Exemption No. 11092 dated October 23, 2014, §23.177(b), use of electric roll trim for static lateral stability" What happens in a complete electrical failure? http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_an ... H_Rev1.pdf
Last edited on 23 Dec 2016, 18:50, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 18:46 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 05/22/09 Posts: 5643 Post Likes: +1121 Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Aircraft: 1977 A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Don't forget the chick factor....much higher on a Vtail JET! I've seen a lot of the guys on the waiting list. A v tail anything ain't gonna help...
_________________ It is possible to fly without motors, but not without knowledge and skill.WW
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 19:58 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 03/03/11 Posts: 2103 Post Likes: +2216
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The Type Certificate finally showed up online. Looks like it did get certified to 28,000' after all. This seems interesting "Exemption No. 11092 dated October 23, 2014, §23.177(b), use of electric roll trim for static lateral stability" What happens in a complete electrical failure? http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_an ... H_Rev1.pdfAren't there a bunch of planes that don't have manual roll trim as a backup?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 20:14 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/12/14 Posts: 276 Post Likes: +201 Location: KISP Long Island
Aircraft: Cirrussr20
|
|
Username Protected wrote: They keep advertising high speed cruise 300 kts. Curiously, economy cruise (240kts) in the SF50 is about as fast as my high-speed cruise (235kts) (Columbia 400) at the same altitude.
Go to Flight Aware, look under KDLH for SR50. I see numerous flights filed for 280-296 kt at 28,000. Seems to me Cirrus jet performs as planned.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 21:01 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/01/10 Posts: 3503 Post Likes: +2477 Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Aren't there a bunch of planes that don't have manual roll trim as a backup? Yes, there are. For example, the Mustang's aileron and rudder trim are electric only. Electric-only trim isn't a problem, especially for a plane like the SF50. Falcon jets have electric trim as well.
_________________ Previous A36TN owner
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 24 Dec 2016, 00:23 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 07/15/12 Posts: 152 Post Likes: +134
|
|
|
It's not the fact that it's electric trim thats of interest, it's the fact that it's the exemption for "use of electric roll trim for static lateral stability". implies without electric roll trim working,the aircraft becomes static laterally unstable.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2017, 02:07 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21202 Post Likes: +26696 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The request was for objective data, something I have been looking for also. It has oddly been lacking. Must exist since you have to have an AFM to give a plane to a customer. Now that it is out there, do have some FA tracks. Here is a flight: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N1WA ... /KSRQ/KTYS2 hours to go 540 nm, 27 minutes to climb to FL280. Winds at that time were 250 degrees at 14 knots, effectively net zero wind for the direction of flight, so the cruise speed appears to achieve 300 +/- knots. Previous flight was 24 minutes to FL270. Climb rate, in *January*, sucks. Wait until the hot weather of summer. Compare: Cirrus SF50, 6000 lbs MGTOW, total thrust 1846 lbf, climb rate ~1700 FPM. Eclipse EA550, 6000 lbs MGTOW, total thrust 1800 lbf, climb rate 3424 FPM. EA550 has less thrust, same weight, and makes twice the climb rate. This means the SF50 has a lot of drag, most likely due to the V tail and the engine arrangement. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2017, 02:15 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21202 Post Likes: +26696 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It's not the fact that it's electric trim thats of interest, it's the fact that it's the exemption for "use of electric roll trim for static lateral stability". implies without electric roll trim working,the aircraft becomes static laterally unstable. No, it isn't for that reason. It is that the regs require the ability to turn the airplane with either aileron *OR* rudder. Cirrus didn't want to put in an aileron rudder interconnect (which kind of defeats the redundancy anyway and ruins control system feel, too), and that's harder with a V tail in any case, so they argued you could "fly" the airplane with the electric roll trim. Here is the text of the exemption: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guida ... /11092.pdfFlight test results show the level of safety provided by § 23.177(b) remains satisfactory. Cirrus has demonstrated the use of the electric roll trim control system, as part of the approved type design, for lateral control in the event the primary roll controls system becomes disconnected
The Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Limitations must show that the electric roll trim system must be operational for flight.So if your aileron control system fails, you cannot fly the airplane laterally on rudder (or at least, not well enough to meet the reg), so you have to use the electric aileron roll trim to fly the plane. Thus the electric roll trim is a no go item if it fails. I'd like to see a video of a landing done using solely electric roll trim on gusty day. Could be very interesting! Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2017, 07:18 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 10/31/14 Posts: 564 Post Likes: +271
Aircraft: eclipse
|
|
Username Protected wrote: A year ago, Cirrus stated the got climb to max in 20 minutes... Outside conditions are sea level ISA with no wind. The profile shows a takeoff ground roll of 2,036 feet, followed by a climb to the maximum altitude of FL280 in 20 minutes. The climb burns 32 gallons/214 pounds of fuel and covers 64 nm.http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... ce-numbersAnd for the Eclipse a climb to 28,000 takes 13 minutes and burns 23 gallons/149 lbs and covers 50 nm More performance less fuel I love it 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2017, 09:10 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If Cirrus delivers the fifth SF-50 to a customer (to avoid any shenanigans with fake early deliveries, an industry tradition) by Jan 1st, 2018, 3+ years from now and more than 10 years after the program was started, then I will never post again on this forum. If they fail to, you will never post again on this forum.
Have we got a deal? :-)
If you start arguing that 3 years isn't enough time, then you are basically saying the SF-50 really is vaporware right now.
Mike C.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2026
|
|
|
|