And yet, not every SR22 pilot will pass it.

It just takes some time to think at 300 knots. And to develop the right speed control.

Mike C.

I think you have taken Jay's comment too literal. He said he "didn't brake", but I'm sure he used the brakes to some extent lightly. I took his comment to mean he didn't use heavy braking that would have been required on a minimal length runway.

He also said something about it being uphill.

Under the same circumstances, If you ask him to land and absolutely not to touch the brakes at all, he'd refuse to show you that if he is smart.

So, it is a statement, not "proof".

Mike C.

Um wrong (this is assuming I know the part of the video you are discussing). Hearsay is the report of another person's words by a witness. Jay was the pilot, he can state if he used the brakes or not. Now, you may choose to disbelieve him because of your own bias against the plane or him or experience that you feel somehow applies to the situation. But it is not hearsay.

Also, why is landing and not touching the brakes difficult to believe if there is a slight incline on a long runway?

Tim

Edited to "testimony".

Mike C.

Edited to "testimony".

Mike C.

Edited to "testimony".

Mike C.

Edited it to "statement".

Mike C.

ok, now I am going on a complete thread drift.
A long time ago; I was taught hearsay is when one person relates what another witness/participant has stated. Testimony, is what a witness or participant of the event states.

So how does Jay, as the pilot of the SF50, relate not using the brakes qualify as closer to hearsay?

Tim

Edited it to "statement".

Mike C.

As I always say, if you can't argue with someone on the merits, just nit pick them to death.

ok, now I am going on a complete thread drift.
A long time ago; I was taught hearsay is when one person relates what another witness/participant has stated. Testimony, is what a witness or participant of the event states.

So how does Jay, as the pilot of the SF50, relate not using the brakes qualify as closer to hearsay?

Tim

Only if I repeat Jay's statement. Jay making the statement, is attesting to something. Now, if Jay is the participant of the event being related, than he is a direct witness. If you are the witness, your statement is a testament. Therefore, in the giving of the testament, it is a testimony.

Now, I am not a lawyer, so maybe lawyers have overlaid additional specific meaning to the words beyond what the English language stipulates.

Tim

And for us non-lawyers: Jay seems like a level headed fellow. He has actually flown the plane and says it stops easily. Someone else who hasn't set foot in one says it's hard to stop. Draw your own conclusions.

To get off the semantics and back to the issue at hand, in the Eclipse we have actually tried the "no-brake" scenario. We had an engine shut down already in flight. So we landed and shut down the second engine on rollout and sat back to see what would happen. We stopped without any braking before the end of the runway, but not by much. It was a 10,000-foot runway.

Not to take sides here, but I wouldn't want to count on an SF50 stopping in 5000 feet with no brakes, especially if the engine is still going. Of course the SF50 has a little more frontal area and is therefore not quite as slick as an Eclipse on rollout, and its touchdown speed is a few knots slower, so it's likely to be a tad shorter for a no-brake rollout.

Ken

One next to me on the signature ramp at VNY today. Surprised how much bigger it looks in person... the cockpit is like a huge bubble. Very cool looking airplane.