BeechTalk - BT - TTx vs SR22T

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Jun 2020, 16:25

Username Protected wrote:

When you say that there is "no option" but to repack the chute, what happens if you don't? Do little Cirrus faeries come out and chop the wings off your airplane? Its not like they can't void the warranty, it would be long expired at that point. I suppose that your insurance provider could cancel coverage.

Basically it is required for airworthiness. It is the same as flying without a current annual. It isn't just about insurance, it is a violation of the regs.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Jun 2020, 16:25

Username Protected wrote:

When you say that there is "no option" but to repack the chute, what happens if you don't? Do little Cirrus faeries come out and chop the wings off your airplane? Its not like they can't void the warranty, it would be long expired at that point. I suppose that your insurance provider could cancel coverage.

It is a required item because it is an airworthiness limitation.

Mandatory to comply, no ifs, ands, buts, even for part 91 operations.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jun 2020, 00:09

If I remember correctly BRS wanted the repack business but Cirrus told them “no way!”

A little competition would be nice. Still waiting for the parachute on my airplane.

I would really like to see a push for the chute on here once again.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jun 2020, 12:29

Does Cirrus have limitations on maintenance, or annual, work that can be done by IA's that are not Cirrus authorized service centers?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jun 2020, 12:34

Will be interesting to see what happens when some airframes hit repack #3. Suspect a number get scrapped at that point.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jun 2020, 14:40

Username Protected wrote:

Does Cirrus have limitations on maintenance, or annual, work that can be done by IA's that are not Cirrus authorized service centers?

No. The only things held captive to a Cirrus Authorized Service Center are the parachute reefing line cutter replacement, and a chute repack. And only because those aren't covered in an A&P's privileges under current FAA regs. So even a properly trained CASC tech cannot do those outside of the CASC if he leaves the facility.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jun 2020, 15:46

This isn't a swipe, but an honest question, isn't the chute required because of unfavorable stall characteristics?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jun 2020, 15:53

Username Protected wrote:

This isn't a swipe, but an honest question, isn't the chute required because of unfavorable stall characteristics?

IIRC it was just because Cirrus didn’t want to spend the time/money to demonstrate the recovery and used the chute as an alternate method of compliance.

I read somewhere that EASA made them demonstrate stall/spin recoveries anyway and the design did fine.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jun 2020, 15:55

Username Protected wrote:

This isn't a swipe, but an honest question, isn't the chute required because of unfavorable stall characteristics?

Not in the least bit Chip. I've flown many different types and among them all the Cirrus has some of the most benign stall characteristics. The cuffed outer wing panel is the primary feature that's responsible for such a docile stall. The outer wing panels remain fully attached in the stall and aileron control is also maintained. I've done many stalls in the SR's and have yet to be able to get a wing to drop.

There's some explanation in the article below about stall and spin characteristics and certification history of both the SR's and Cessna 350/400:

http://whycirrus.com/engineering/stall-spin.aspx

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2020, 21:47

Username Protected wrote:

This isn't a swipe, but an honest question, isn't the chute required because of unfavorable stall characteristics?

The chute was required by Cirrus founder Alan Klapmeier, due to his previous experience of a mid air collision and the desire to have an option other than death.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2020, 21:54

Can someone post the “true” real world speeds and FF’s for
8,000’
12,000’
15.000’
in the g5&6? Close to MTOW is fine. Useful with full TKS an the AC that is std I believe?

If it has been posted for the Gen 5 and 6 I’ve missed it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2020, 22:57

Username Protected wrote:

Will be interesting to see what happens when some airframes hit repack #3. Suspect a number get scrapped at that point.

Why would they get scrapped when they get to their third repack?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2020, 23:45

Username Protected wrote:

Why would they get scrapped when they get to their third repack?

Because they didn't get scrapped after the 2nd repack and it's gotta happen sometime, right? :rofl:

3rd repack is the next best chance. Well, until the 4th repack. Or the 5th....

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jun 2020, 00:46

Username Protected wrote:

Will be interesting to see what happens when some airframes hit repack #3. Suspect a number get scrapped at that point.

Why would they get scrapped when they get to their third repack?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jun 2020, 09:15

So you guys are saying that owners are going to throw away an asset worth six figures because it needs a $10k-ish scheduled maintenance item? Owners hang new engines that are worth 30-40% of the airframe all the time.

I'm not buying it.

TTx vs SR22T - why didn't the TTx succeed?