I understand it's a very an interesting story but FAR too much thread drift...

Jean-Michel,

In the Bonanza, you can turn the middle seat around to be forward facing, take out the aft seats and have a 4 seater with a huge baggage compartiment in less than 15 minutes. One day we brought back 400 bottles of champagne from Reims. Lasted quite some time.

My friend bought his 1978 A36 fairly standard. After gaining experience and his IR rating, he added a Powermaster IO550, TN and O2 (installed locally), a couple years later he added TKS (installed at Friedrichshafen). So the Bonanza can grow with you as you gain experience. He has the non-FIKI TKS which works very well (no heated stall warning, no dual fluid pump). The 400 lbs gross weight increase is a major benefit from fitting the TN. TKS weighs 100 lbs when fully filled, The TN adds 70 lbs. I can send you the W&B data for his aircraft to compare if you want.

I have flown his aircraft from Belgium to Stuttgart, dropping off one passenger, then to Lugano, across the Alps at FL180, dropped off another passenger and had a good lunch, then returned to Belgium before dark. O2 make you much less tired if flying long trips at 10000 ft. The passengers don't need it, they go to sleep. At the very minimum I would carry a portable O2 bottle.

I used to fly nearly every weekend to LFMD because my parents had an appartment in Golfe Juan. I fly to major airports, coming in at 150 kts on the ILS or to very short grass strips such as EBSH or LSPV. A friend of mine who upgraded from Cirrus to BE36 compares the Cirrus to a Porsche and the BE36 to a Bentley. He is scottish and flies to places like Yemen etc.

Don, I am using them for illustration purposes.
you're absolutely right, about supercritical designs, if I remember, they were originally designed by a NASA design team a long time ago. They are used in a lot of new airliners like the A 380. And it make not sense to use a SC on a slow aircraft.

But... that was what the CIRRUS pilot told us when I asked her if I could stall or spiral dive the aircraft.
but TONY, who owns a G5 turbo, says that the stalls are more benign in the CIRRUS than in the G36!

It will be very interesting, for all of us, since you have the right background, if you can find out what the truth is.

Looks like it is time to start a CIRRUS talk site.

JM,

Were you not allowed to take the two planes through the stall series, spirals and recoveries? I spent a fair amount of time in my original Cirrus demo doing spiral dives, power on and off stalls turning and straight ahead and other maneuvers. I treated the stick and the rudders VERY roughly in that flight to see how dynamically stable it was. I almost made myself airsick! I assure you that my statements are correct. Perhaps Jim or Nate will chime in with their comparative experience as well.

Mark & Dirk remind that the seats can be turned around in the A36 and that does, in fact, give a huge luggage area. Also, with the turbo normalized airplane's forward cg tendency you should be able to use it to carry a lot although you do need to do a careful W&B in that configuration as the passengers are further aft.

One other thing: You mentioned taking your dog on trips. It will undoubtedly be easier in a G36 to load the dog than in the Cirrus.

Since you asked, Tony:

The Cirrus is much more benign in the stall series than a Bo...well, than my F33 was. Power on stalls always made me nervous in my F33...the airplane really wanted to markedly drop a wing. In the Cirrus you can...if you want...do pretty full aileron swings whilst fairly deep into a stall. You probably can make it spin, but the stall is very, very benign. Really, it is as benign as my Carbon Cub which has VG's.

I have heard that the laminar flow wing on the Cirrus doesn't carry ice as well as the Bo does, and I believe it.

I agree with you, Tony...the airplane is much more comfortable in turbulence than the Bo was. Final point...it took a while to figure it out, but squeaking it on is pretty easy...and while speed control is important, it isn't hard to make up the difference in the last few feet.

Jim

JM, I'm certain the Cirrus wing profile is not a supercritical design - its is a laminar wing airfoil. The moral of this story is not to believe everything your sales person tells you especially as it relates to technical aerodynamic design details...

That being said, some highly aggressive laminar wing designs, like those used in Cirrus' VK30 kitplane, a NASA NLF(1)-0414F, can exhibit abrupt stall behavior if they have highly extensive laminar characteristics, especially those with a 'Stratford' type pressure recovery. These wing sections are highly efficient and very highly laminar (70%+ laminar in the case of the NLF(1)-0414F) but have very violent stall characteristics.

In the case of the SR20/SR22, Roncz and Cirrus worked hard to develop less aggressive laminar wing sections and incorporated outboard wing profiles designed to stall in a much more benign fashion. The outboard wing leading edge droop you see on the Cirrus ensures that the outer portion of the wing continues 'flying' and remains unstalled when the inboard portion of the wing begins to stall.

I've stalled the airplane several times and it stalls like a baby. Lots of warning and plenty of control through the stall. I haven't stalled a Bo to compare but I hear they are well behaved as well.

I had the feeling that she did not accept me to stall the plane or to do any spiral dive because the plane was unstable.... the result of her poor behaviour is that I am going to buy a BONANZA.
Anyway, I think that my wife will feel better in the Bo. and my son loves it.
So when I will be in Wichita to pick up the plane we can make a formation flight CIRRUS/BONANZA..... It is going to be a long waiting time

Dirk,
the G36 with tips and without turbo has already a MW of 4100 lbs.
I think that I am going to fly the plane for awhile without the turbo.If I, then, feel that I need it I will add it.
Are you still flying to LFMD?

I propose that we all establish a new rule when it comes down to airplane selections. If we run all the #'s and do all the pros and cons between two particular airplanes and still feel the need to start a thread to help with the decision process, we should simply save all the worry, stress and anxiety and buy them BOTH.

We all have worked too hard our entire lives to subject ourselves to such stress. Afterall, it's only $$ right? What the heck else you gonna do with it?

JM - you go first...

JM - it was only a brief blurb above, but someone rightly pointed out that you can't have tip tanks AND FIKI.

Although you stated that you may not do turbo, and without turbo, you may not need tip tanks. With turbo, IMO, you really do.

Wonderful idea indeed, Don
I think that you're ready to take a Cabinet position in our Government! They are masters when it come to spend twice the budgeted money on worthless programs.
If you want me to give you the phone number of our finance minister, just ask!

Beechraft confirmed me, in writing, that I can have tip tanks AND FIKI. and both CAV aerospace and D'SHANNON said the same thing.....
I need the tips tanks for the added gross weight 3650---4100 lbs.
At this stage I am still not fully convinced that I need the turbo.

Beechraft confirmed me, in writing, that I can have tip tanks AND FIKI. and both CAV aerospace and D'SHANNON said the same thing.....
I need the tips tanks for the added gross weight 3650---4100 lbs.
At this stage I am still not fully convinced that I need the turbo.

Yes - I didn't say you couldn't have TKS - just not FIKI.

Unless they've recently changed it.