Why doesn't Cirrus make an SR-22 with retractable gear? Seems to me that it is a great airplane that is really fast, but could be a lot faster with RG. Is that not correct? It would be a big reduction in drag I would think. Guess I could be wrong though. Would definitely be heavier that I know so the UL would go down. Maybe that is the issue.

Cirrus has proven that a well designed fixed gear is as fast (or dam close) as a retract. The retract adds a lot of cost, complexity and other issues.
Therefore, there is no business reason for Cirrus to do so.

Tim

They did extensive computer modeling on the fairing design and discovered they could get within 5 kts... they determined the downsides of gear maintenance and gear up incidents outweighed the value of the retract.

The gear on a Cirrus doesn't create all that much drag. I suspect that if the gear drag was eliminated they'd see less than a 5 Kt speed increase.

We'll there ya go. Y'all answered my question. I still think it would look cooler flying but I'm sure they aren't too interested in that.

Thats what I was thinking.

hey, 5kts is 5kts!

And 50 pounds less useful load and possibly less available fuel.

Retract gear doesn't give you nearly as much speed as expected. The Super Musketeer and Sierra are nearly identical airframes with 200hp and the Sierra only gets you about 5-7 kts... and that's from a relatively draggy Mouse gear with no cowling.

... and I guess at higher speeds it makes a bigger difference, but not as much as expected.

........ right?

True but the amount of drag created increases at the square of velocity. On a slow plane like a Musketeer it matters 4x less than on my Baron going twice as fast... or something like that

I say, we gather together the shekels to place the first certificated composite aircraft back into production - and it sort of looks like a Cirrus retractable!

Sorry, but the Windecker Eagle is MUCH prettier than any Cirrus. But that's an interesting example of the value of smooth, slick airframes. It had the same IO-520 as it's peers and still with no rivets or metal seams I don't recall it being much if any faster than the conventional construction competition.

But Randy might find it interesting that I believe it was designed by a dentist. Must be that orthodontia work paid pretty well

George

Speaking of sleek, high-performance retracts that pre-date the Cirrus, does anyone remember this bird?

Bellanca Skyrocket II

General characteristics:

Crew: one pilot
Capacity: 5 passengers
Length: 27 ft 0 in (8.23 m)
Wingspan: 35 ft 0 in (10.67 m)
Height: 9 ft 0 in (2.74 m)
Wing area: 183 ft2 (17.0 m2)
Empty weight: 2,490 lb (1,129 kg)
Gross weight: 4,200 lb (1,905 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Continental GTSIO-520F, 435 hp (325 kW)

Performance:
Maximum speed: 340 mph (547 km/h)
Range: 2,300 miles (3,700 km)
Service ceiling: 30,000 ft (9,100 m)
Rate of climb: 2,080 ft/min (10.6 m/s)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellanca_Skyrocket_II

My former professor at Ohio State, Gerry Gregorek did some work on this airplane and was always one of his favorites. The performance was incredible...

Pros, IMO

1. fixed gear got them sold without retract time by first time/low time pilots . Great business decision. think insurance premiums .
2. cheaper construction costs maybe/probably.
3. some speed penalty, they say negligble.
4. probably helps absorb energy when BRS used.
5. I am sure I missed some other benefits

Cons, IMO
1. If I am going to fly a "fast" airplane I want to look good doing it. I am only practical to a point. My V tail meets my aesthetic needs and then some. When they build a retract the aesthetics may make it worth a look . ( pun intended)
2. I doubt Cirrus has been waiting for my opinion and will probably never build it. If I just wanted to sell product I wouldnt either unless I knew it would be a successful decision. The current plan seems to be working just fine.