banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 21:12 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7667 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355 ... 512  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 05:10 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 10/31/14
Posts: 534
Post Likes: +255
Aircraft: eclipse
Username Protected wrote:
Just read in latest issue of Flying magazine, the max demonstrated x-wind for the Vision jet is 16kts. Does that surprise anyone? I realize this is not a limitation. But it seems low to me. TBM is 20kts and Cessna TTx is 23 kts. Just curious.
Thanks


Crosswind number is a regulatory based on stall speed. You will almost never find a manufacturer put in a demonstrated speed which is higher then the regulatory requirement.

Tim


Tim
I don't think so. I think it's based on rudder effectiveness. The Eclipse has 30 knot demonstrated crosswind

Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 08:22 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 06/20/12
Posts: 273
Post Likes: +46
Location: Oklahoma
Aircraft: C-90, Evolution
I thought max demonstrated crosswind component was whatever crosswind a test pilot was able to "demonstrate" during certification that a safe landing could be done at.

Mike


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 09:32 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 09/02/09
Posts: 8415
Post Likes: +8303
Company: OAA
Location: Oklahoma City - PWA/Calistoga KSTS
Aircraft: UMF3, UBF 2, P180 II
That is my understanding as well Mike. Since we have all seen, and heard, of pilots landing safely while exceeding this limit I wonder how the manufacturer actually determines the certified limit to be?

_________________
Travel Air B4000, Waco UBF2,UMF3,YMF5, UPF7,YKS 6, Fairchild 24W, Cessna 120
Never enough!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 09:47 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 01/31/09
Posts: 5233
Post Likes: +3026
Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
Username Protected wrote:
That is my understanding as well Mike. Since we have all seen, and heard, of pilots landing safely while exceeding this limit I wonder how the manufacturer actually determines the certified limit to be?


There is no certified crosswind LIMIT. It is just what the test pilots have demonstrated in whatever crosswind they had. They often do not go searching to find the aircrafts true limit.

_________________
Allen


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 10:53 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/13/13
Posts: 351
Post Likes: +209
Aircraft: M20R
From AC 23-8C: (https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/med ... 023-8C.pdf)

Section 9. Ground and Water Handling Characteristics

2. § 23.233 Directional Stability and Control.
b. Procedures.
(1) Crosswind.
(a) The airplane should be operated throughout its approved loading envelope at gradually increasing values of crosswind component until a crosswind equivalent to 0.2 VSO is reached. All approved takeoff and landing configurations should be evaluated. Higher crosswind values may be evaluated at the discretion of the test pilot for AFM inclusion.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 11:04 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 10/13/15
Posts: 35
Post Likes: +24
Aircraft: PA46-500TP
I had heard the same thing about the max demonstrated crosswind in the POH being just the maximum the test pilots happened to encounter during the certification process. It didn't make sense to me that in the several years of test flying Cirrus didn't see anything greater than 16kts. A google search turned up a flying magazine article that clarified a lot of the questions. Main takehome points were:

1. At a minimum a manufacturer has to show that the airframe can be safely landed in a direct crosswind equal to 20% of Vso without exceptional skill. If they do that they have met the requirement. For most single engine airplanes that stall at 60kts this minimum would be 12kts.
2. The max demonstrated crosswind is not limiting unless the manufacturer says so. So using that as a limitation is up to the manufacturer, not the FAA. Of course a company is free to use whatever limitations they want to in their opspecs.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 11:06 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 11885
Post Likes: +2848
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
Tim
I don't think so. I think it's based on rudder effectiveness. The Eclipse has 30 knot demonstrated crosswind


Check Debbie's post. She posted the relevant FAR. Eclipse decided to go beyond the regulatory requirement. That is the option of the manufacturer.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 16:42 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 10/31/14
Posts: 534
Post Likes: +255
Aircraft: eclipse
Username Protected wrote:
Tim
I don't think so. I think it's based on rudder effectiveness. The Eclipse has 30 knot demonstrated crosswind


Check Debbie's post. She posted the relevant FAR. Eclipse decided to go beyond the regulatory requirement. That is the option of the manufacturer.

Tim

Tim
In a crosswind you bank one way and use the rudder to keep straight. Sooner or later you run out of rudder and that's your max crosswind.

Cirrus obviously met the certificate requirements but I question the rudder authority.
Time will tell

Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 16:49 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/08
Posts: 1136
Post Likes: +887
Location: San Diego CA.
Actually, it's the horizontal component of lift cancelling crosswind drift. Available bank angle at touch down is the limiting factor. On take off one could conceivably have too little rudder authority but there is no published take-off crosswind value.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 17:05 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/30/15
Posts: 1697
Post Likes: +1712
Location: Charlotte
Aircraft: Avanti-Citabria
Username Protected wrote:
Just read in latest issue of Flying magazine, the max demonstrated x-wind for the Vision jet is 16kts. Does that surprise anyone? I realize this is not a limitation. But it seems low to me. TBM is 20kts and Cessna TTx is 23 kts. Just curious.
Thanks


Blue ribbon is for first place
Red ribbon is for second place

Cessna TTX will handle 23-25 knots crosswind just fine. I tell any passengers aboard it will be fun for me and interesting for them.

26-27 knots and it could be fun "or" interesting

30 knots I'm out. Been there, done that and got the brown ribbon.

If the Vision will not safely handle 25-27 knots crosswind then I would cross it off...of my six years from now used market search

Brown ribbon is for dumb

_________________
I wanna go phastR.....and slowR


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2017, 18:49 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/04/11
Posts: 1712
Post Likes: +242
Company: W. John Gadd, Esq.
Location: Florida
Aircraft: C55 Baron
Blue ribbon is for first place
Red ribbon is for second place

Cessna TTX will handle 23-25 knots crosswind just fine. I tell any passengers aboard it will be fun for me and interesting for them.

26-27 knots and it could be fun "or" interesting

30 knots I'm out. Been there, done that and got the brown ribbon.

If the Vision will not safely handle 25-27 knots crosswind then I would cross it off...of my six years from now used market search

Brown ribbon is for dumb[/quote]


I thought the brown ribbon was something else entirely.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 21 Jun 2017, 15:51 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/16/10
Posts: 2031
Post Likes: +886
Location: Wisconsin
Aircraft: CJ4, AmphibBeaver
I'm starting to like the plane, but I'd be really concerned about the operating economics with the low rate of climb described in the Flying article. If ATC is going to off-route you to keep you out of the way, or worse....hold you down until far enough away from other departures and arrivals, the range will be affected.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 24 Jun 2017, 18:24 
Offline




User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 30426
Post Likes: +10535
Location: Minneapolis, MN (KFCM)
Aircraft: 1970 Baron B55
Username Protected wrote:
I thought the brown ribbon was something else entirely.

Brown ribbon is what you get if someone's sitting on the white ribbon during a crosswind landing that almost didn't work out well.

_________________
-lance

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 24 Jun 2017, 20:37 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/15/11
Posts: 2388
Post Likes: +1055
Location: Mandan, ND
Aircraft: V35
If they really wanted to test beyond Vso 0.2, they should just come out to Bismarck, about any day. Uffda, the wind blows all...the...time... Lately anything less than 30 knots people are starting to call "light and variable".


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 25 Jun 2017, 16:44 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/04/11
Posts: 1712
Post Likes: +242
Company: W. John Gadd, Esq.
Location: Florida
Aircraft: C55 Baron
Username Protected wrote:
I thought the brown ribbon was something else entirely.

Brown ribbon is what you get if someone's sitting on the white ribbon during a crosswind landing that almost didn't work out well.




Sounds like I was thinking along the right lines-stripes after all. :thumbup:


I have nephews that resemble that remark.

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7667 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355 ... 512  Next




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

Jump to:  

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 2007-2024

.blackwell-85x50.png.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.Marsh.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.