DavidB. wrote:What led me to post about the Cirrus web site is not if the planes are any good or not, they look awesome.

I agree, and I'm also not trying to disparage the airplane. This thread got me interested in the Cirrus phenomenon, and a little google digging turns up a lot of interesting info. For one, Cirrus owners are a fiercely loyal bunch, which says something about the airplane. But there's also a lot of criticism out there about it's flying qualities, and specifically the spring loaded side yoke providing little airspeed feedback. It doesn't seem like a great system to me, but a pilot has to fly the airplane they're in. Kind of like the criticism of the Lancair IV series I guess; any airplane will punish you for improper airspeed management, especially down low. Preaching to the choir here, I know.

Cirrus has done a great job of attracting people to general aviation with a fresh, attractive, modern product. It will be interesting to see how the safety record of the ICON A5 plays out (if it's successful), as they are attempting to do the same thing, but at an even lower price point. If Cirrus tends to attract people with more money than sense (over generalization, I'm actually just jealous!), then what kind of crowd will the ICON attract? Me maybe?

courierguy wrote:On a somewhat related subject, in my area there have been a few fatal highly publicized motorcycle accidents that shared a common thread: they were brand new fully decked out Harleys that simply did "a Corey Lidle". Perfect day weather wise, they just missed a curve. These were very low time riders with the necessary cash to play biker, but not the training or experience to pull it off.

There's a little bar in Genoa, NV. Local bikers gather there to drink and socialize. For some, that's mostly what they do, get on the bike, ride to the bar, get on the bike, try to ride it home. Most get there. East bound, Genoa Ln. is a mostly straight 3.7 mile stretch with just one 18 degree turn at near mid-point. There's a white cross with faded plastic flowers off to the side of that gentle turn where a retired fireman didn't.

Some of the Choppers (motorcycles-do you capitalize that?) that are built are called "Bar Bikes" because the seats and driving positions are only good for bar hoppin' .....

lc

Another thought. Does alc mix with motorcycles any better than with guns and airplanes?

I'd point out that there has been a lot of discussion in the last few years regarding accidents happening in the Idaho and Montana back country......The question that's often asked is something along the lines of "Was that pilot qualified to fly in the mountains, or in and out of back country strips?"

So, you could apply the same logic as some have applied to the Cirrus: Should there be a REQUIRED training program before a pilot is permitted to fly in the mountains or to remote strips?

How do you handle web forums like this one? It could certainly be argued that some folks "discover" the back country on the web, followed by a little "internet flight instruction" and then off they go into the hinterlands. So, is that "right"?

And, where do you draw that line?

I believe the Cirrus is a very safe and capable aircraft, just like the Bonanza is. If there REALLY is a higher than "normal" accident rate, it's almost assuredly caused by the pilot, not the airplane.

So, we just need to eliminate pilots from aviation, and everything would be hunky dory eh?

Oh, wait, that's what the "UAS" industry is shooting for right now.....

MTV

Looking at the Cirrus website, I think it's wonderfully targeted at a completely different market than myself. Having been upside down in the back seat of one because I was the smallest person in the shop, and therefore the most likely to be able to access things under the front seat from the back seat, I can also say they're definitely not designed to be owner-maintained, but are very nicely, ergonomically laid out for the pilot and the nonflying passengers, even in the back. They're Bentleys, not king-cab pickup trucks.

And like the high-performance luxury car, they're not marketing to people who want specs and performance, they're marketing to people who want cool and go fast and happy wife and status symbol. As for their much-vaunted parachute system, yes, it's over-hyped... but we're talking about selling an expensive luxury to a non-flying public and that person's spouse, who has likely been raised on only what they know in the media - the same kind of people that think guns kill people, not the criminals wielding them, so trigger locks will prevent deaths. The BRS becomes a talisman against the unknown and scary bad spirits that make small airplanes always crash in the news and in the movies, and makes the ignorant and fearful spouse buy the idea "but these airplanes are different and safe because they have BRS!"

People are people, and they're strange and a little illogical, no matter how civilized they think they are. Great marketing therefore is always slightly illogical, because it's trying to alter which way you jump before you think, and let you rationalize your purchasing decision after the gut decision has been made.

Are they the new doctor-killer? Well, if they manage to bring in a lot of people new to aviation, then you'll have the inevitable result of new pilots with little skill and little judgement in a high-performance airplane - just like sixteen year olds in a high-performance car, but without the growth-spurt clumsiness. Some will mess up and recover, and get wiser, some will never push the boundaries enough to mess up that badly, some will seek out training and become great sticks, and some will die.

If we think hard enough, we can all come up with somebody's son or daughter that failed to live long enough to graduate, because they were driving over a thousand pounds of steel and fiberglass that can go up to 80-120mph, and they made one fatal mistake. No amount of regulation - short of, as MTV noted, taking all pilots out - will ever cure the accident rate. I'd rather we have the freedom to live and die on the road and in the sky than to be stifled by well-meaning regulations and smothering committee-approved safety.

Bar Bikes. Yep, that is all those are good for. Not to get off subject here, but after 20 years in the other end of the motorcycle business (Ducati, BMW, KTM) I have seen plenty of crashes and lost a few friends. Most of my fiends and customers were ATGATT (All the gear all the time) type guys. With that comes a desire for training, trackdays with training, and suspension before engine mods.

I have bailed off a few bikes, never broke a bone. I also pick where I go fast carefully. The race track only costs about $150 a day, less for supermoto, and off road is even cheaper. Hospital bills, helicopter rides, and reckless driving tickets are all more than $150.

Harley types (not all of you are idiots, sorry for the reference) often comment on track days as being dangerous, and nuts. Yet these guys get on thier bikes with 2 or more beers in them, a leather vest, a skid lid, and jeans. There was an accident once in Bend where a lady pulled into the center lane to make a left, didn't realize it was chipseal, and crashed going about 20 MPH. Her helmet (if it can be called that) fell off and she smashed her head, killing her leter that week. The same week I had been racing supermoto and had fallen at 45 to 50 mph 10 times during the weekend (bad day of wet racing) I was sore as hell, but until the last crash where I hit some hay bales, I was still riding. So whos the crazy one there?

Saw another wreck. Guys in typical bar hopping gear nailed a deer at about 40. He died. On the same road a BMW rider nailed a deer slowing down from 70 (slowed down fast with servo brakes and ABS) hit the deer, flew off the bike, and slid a ways. He broke a finger from deer impact and was in my shop the next day buying new gear (wanted exactly the same stuff that saved his ass) and getting a repair estimate.

I see a big simularity between this web site, the attitudes on training and saftey (whats that helmet thread, 30 pages or so?) and another site called ADV Rider. ADV Rider is the backcountry touring motorcycle site. Lots of big KTM and BMW dual sport riders there who do some very impressive trips like the TAT or the WBDR and the OBDR.
I think the common bond here is self reliance and survival over anything else. Doesn't matter if it is on foot, skis, wings or wheels, you are alone out there and your decisions from the moment you decide to go decide the out come of your survival. PLB, Spot or not. No one is comming to help you that quick, YOYO.

D.

I built and recently fly an experimental taildragger that has one similarity to a Cirrus: I installed a BRS. There's a Yahoo site that I followed during my build where occasional flame wars would erupt over the BRS topic. In the end, I decided to outfit my plane with a BRS as an insurance hedge against the two unthinkable scenarios of mid-air collision and structural failure. For me, by installing the BRS, I felt that now I could put nearly every unforeseen emergency in MY CONTROL when flying, which has immense meaning when flying with my young kids on board.

just my feelings but the wrong people in the left seat of any aircraft will give the same result. several years ago going into Supher creek ID the remains of several aircraft in the fence on the aproach end 180 and such. I have lost several around here when they get a 180 and think its bullet profe.

On Saturday a week ago I was stuck at KRAS with crosswind exceeding the demonstrated maximum for my Arrow, when a Cirrus landed there. Unfortunately, I was in the FBO building and did not see his approach, but he nailed it on the first try. I thought it was a positive endorsement for the airplane, considering that the day before I could not close the landing twice (had rudder reaching the stop on final).

Maximum demonstrated crosswind capability is by no means the maximum capability of the airplane. It's a good rule of thumb for low time pilots to use until they've built up a greater capability themselves, but a good pilot who knows the airplane he is flying and has had much crosswind experience can far exceed the maximum demonstrated crosswind capability of the airplane, very safely. Like all aviation skills, it takes training, and practice, practice, practice.

Cary

Cary wrote:Maximum demonstrated crosswind capability is by no means the maximum capability of the airplane. It's a good rule of thumb for low time pilots to use until they've built up a greater capability themselves, but a good pilot who knows the airplane he is flying and has had much crosswind experience can far exceed the maximum demonstrated crosswind capability of the airplane, very safely. Like all aviation skills, it takes training, and practice, practice, practice.

Cary

That depends on the individual airplane. The maximum demonstrated crosswind of a particular model of airplane is simply the maximum crosswind that was encountered during the normal flight test program. Some aircraft have a maximum demonstrated crosswind of 9 knots. Others were flight tested in Kansas.....

So, it MAY be true that an accomplished pilot can successfully exceed the maximum demonstrated crosswind listed in the POH of an airplane, but for some of them, you'd best be really good in the airplane.

MTV

I think that's what I said, different words, same message.

Cary

zaitcev wrote:... I thought it was a positive endorsement for the airplane, considering that the day before I could not close the landing twice (had rudder reaching the stop on final).

Yep, the Cirrus has outstanding crosswind capability - it has very good rudder authority. Of course it needs the right pilot for good crosswind landings. The other Cirrus strength is fast crosscountry flying. It is not made for backcountry airports - it can be done, I've had a Cirrus into some pretty short strips, and a few not-so-smooth runways - but it is not comfortable in this role. Safety has been average; not up to the expectations of all the safety features the aircraft has. There seem to be two pilot problems - not enough training in critical decision making to keep the pilot out of trouble - and a reluctance to actually use the parachute when its called for. If you do get a Cirrus, or fly a Cirrus, join the Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association - and participate in their CDM programs and their pilot proficiency program - there is a large safety difference between active COPA members and the rest of the Cirrus pilot population.

Pay attention at 2:30 or so...

dayooper wrote:I built and recently fly an experimental taildragger that has one similarity to a Cirrus: I installed a BRS. There's a Yahoo site that I followed during my build where occasional flame wars would erupt over the BRS topic. In the end, I decided to outfit my plane with a BRS as an insurance hedge against the two unthinkable scenarios of mid-air collision and structural failure. For me, by installing the BRS, I felt that now I could put nearly every unforeseen emergency in MY CONTROL when flying, which has immense meaning when flying with my young kids on board.

soyAnarchisto wrote:Pay attention at 2:30 or so...

dayooper wrote:I built and recently fly an experimental taildragger that has one similarity to a Cirrus: I installed a BRS. There's a Yahoo site that I followed during my build where occasional flame wars would erupt over the BRS topic. In the end, I decided to outfit my plane with a BRS as an insurance hedge against the two unthinkable scenarios of mid-air collision and structural failure. For me, by installing the BRS, I felt that now I could put nearly every unforeseen emergency in MY CONTROL when flying, which has immense meaning when flying with my young kids on board.

That is a Rans S9 or 10 Not a 7