That's the best marketing I've ever heard for retractable gear !
it's a safety item !
awesome


Beech need to hire the Cirrus marketing team and go with that one

Here is the reason a buddy's wife gave why she picked the Cirrus. Because she can shut the engine off and pull the chute. Does not require luck or skill to get the plane down if he has a heart attack.

BWTDIK?

Tim

Rick,
I totally agree the Columbia was the hands down winner in the early going. It was easily 10 knots faster and had better stall qualities. The side stick of the Cirrus was not true feeling stick. It was more like a stick welded to the flight controls of a Cessna 172. We had a deposit on the Columbia and waited a year for it to be built. It came time when we could get the deposit money back the wait time on the Cirrus was only three months; at that time things were very bad in Bend. The parachute had a factor but Cirrus was the company actually delivering airplanes. Had Lancair kept to a good production schedule maybe things would have been different.

I am new to this forum so this post may be a bit rambling since I want to cover several things I have read in this thread.

First, here is my disclosure statement. I fly a 2006 SR22 I bought used and updated to R9 avionics. My best friend flies a V-tail Bonanza with a three tube Aspen set. I tell him that despite the fact that he flies a forked tail doctor killer that I like flying with him and I feel safe since he isn't a doctor. He says that I fly the modern day doctor killer but that is ok since I'm not a doctor either.

This thread has been great to read. As a Cirrus pilot I am used to lots of Cirrus hatred and people posting urban myths as fact rather than doing their homework. People on this thread seem to be having a rational discussion. Refreshing.

I am a member of the "All planes are beautiful, just some are prettier than others" club and believe that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My friend understands why I prefer my Cirrus and I understand the reasons he prefers his Bonanza.

Something about the new G5 that's not mentioned much is the increase in flap extension speed from 119 to 150. That's a big deal. I wish I could afford the new SR22T. I am envious when I hear my friend talk about using his Bonanza's high gear extension speed as a speed brake when he needs to come screaming in on approach.

I know several people who have traded from a Baron to an SR22T. The issue is mostly operating cost.

The Cirrus is spin recoverable. That it isn't is one of those urban myths. Unlike some planes, you can't just take your hands off of the controls. You have to push forward assertively. Standard PARE with assertive elevator push.

The BRS system has been shown to work at up to 180 knots and with the plane inverted. The POH operating range is very conservative.

No one on the ground has ever been hurt from a Cirrus coming down under canopy. A common comment from people on the ground is that the chute firing is quite loud and caused them to look up and see the plane. On the other hand, a jogger was killed on a beach by a Columbia doing an engine out landing.

There has never been a post crash fire when coming down under canopy. One Cirrus was on fire prior to the chute being pulled.

FYI, if you search the NTSB files form 1/1/1999 to 1/22/2013 with and without the keyword "fire" you get 28% of the Cirrus records having the word "fire" and 29% of the Beech 36 records having the word "fire." Of course if Cirrus and Beech owners look at the Diamond record they will both be envious.

The SR22 lands fast and has a max gross of 3400 (now 3600) pounds. The tires are small and the gear springy. I sometimes look longingly at the large tires and the shocks on my friend's Bonanza. That is especially true when I am considering going into a grass field.

The reasons to not like the chute are $$$, payload and space. Saying it doesn't add a useful option is being in denial. Pilots routinely select a single over a twin because of economics. There's nothing wrong with that. However, if you are out over the Atlantic and an engine fails, a second engine is nice. Similarly, if you are on a long trip and ceilings below you are zero/zero then the chute is nice if you have an engine out.

Many cases where a chute pull has been needed could have been prevented by better piloting. Then again many fatal crashes could have been prevented by better piloting. Just because a pilot was stupid or poorly skilled doesn't mean he and his passengers deserve to die.

When I was initially looking at a Cirrus, I discussed what I saw as a poor safety record with an insurance agent. He said they had seen it numerous times and that it would get better as time in type increased. He was prescient. In 2012 at an NTSB conference in Washington, GA flying was broken out more finely with a class labeled personal. That removed instructional and corporate flying. The GA accident rate for personal flying was 2.26 for 2009. The Cirrus personal flying rate is estimated at around 1.82. If you plot kinetic energy on landing (max gross X stall speed squared) vs. percentage of accidents that are fatal you get a scatter plot that has a pretty good fit to a straight line. The higher the landing kinetic energy the higher the percentage of accidents that are fatal.

Cirrus aircraft are flown a lot. If you assume the use profile of the A36 and the SR22 are the same then Flightaware gives a good indication of relative fleet flight hours. Flightaware will usually show significantly more SR22 aircraft in the system than Beech 36 aircraft. Taking a range from 1/1/2008 to 1/22/2013 the number of fatal accidents in the NTSB system are 41 SR22 and 37 Beech 36. A Flightaware snapshot from about two years ago showed 45 SR22's and 26 BE36 aircraft in the system. If you add in the chute pulls as fatals the SR22 numbers to BE36 numbers would be close to the ratio of estimated relative flight time.

On a personal note, with its superior fit and finish, I wish Beech had been more aggressive at improving the A36. The current Cirrus product is massively different from the original double sided tape and velcro product.

End of my rambling thoughts.

Great post, Paul!

Welcome to BT.

Thanks Nate.

His estate must be large and her health excellent..... And her name could either be Canidia, Martina or Locusta.... Does he like honey?

+1. This is oh so true. In case of a landing where you don't like it, LOW SPEED and movement as parallel as possible to the surface that does not give is the recipe for survival. Together with 4 point shoulder harnesses, so you don't need a Chiro adjustment before egressing....
A stall speed well above 70kn (so almost 20% higher than singles) definitely plays a role in higher fatality rates for Twins and some homebuilts. And we all know that the relationship of impact energy and speed is not linear....
Everybody should explore the low end of their performance envelope at varying loads in order to land as slow as possible in case of a forced landing.... And that includes low speed turns using your feet in case you have to get into a tight spot.

His estate must be large and her health excellent..... And her name could either be Canidia, Martina or Locusta.... Does he like honey?

Great post Paul.

Parachute or not, you still have to post pictures. It's the rules!