Trying out the Cirrus SR22 GTS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mt. Olympus
Age: 59
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trying out the Cirrus SR22 GTS
Yesterday I morning I had the chance to fly a demo, fully-featured, full-extras Cirrus SR22 GTS at the Icarus Athens AeroExpo, at Tatoi AB (LGTT) for 30 mins.
I thought I'd share this experience.
Here is the photo-story, complete with comments, based on my limited flying experience
.
Trying out the Cirrus SR22GTS at the Icarus Aero Expo
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
I thought I'd share this experience.
Here is the photo-story, complete with comments, based on my limited flying experience
.Trying out the Cirrus SR22GTS at the Icarus Aero Expo
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
Last edited by ThinkRate; 27th Jul 2008 at 14:47.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mt. Olympus
Age: 59
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see you didn't get yourself photographed with the two lovely ladies like Kyp did 
Well spotted!!! That was the thing, wasn't it? The ladies weren't there and neither was Kyp... Last I heard he was in Black Forest, Germany... Go figure!
LOL
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mt. Olympus
Age: 59
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, as far as I could see the terrain (and navdata) elements were very accurate. The only thing I could mention here (which I forgot to mention to the Cirrus pilot) was the fact that the E-TAWS system started yelling at me (terrain! terrain!) on short final.
Was this because the airfield was marked as pure navdata (but no runway etc -see MFD in the pictures) or because I was coming down like a bat out of hell?
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
Was this because the airfield was marked as pure navdata (but no runway etc -see MFD in the pictures) or because I was coming down like a bat out of hell?
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An american friend of mine had a flight recently - he is an owner of an SR22. He said that he found it a little over complicated compared to his own, and that the price was very high for a single engine piston aircraft. If I remember correctly, it sells for around $350,000.
He gave me the brochure - I think I'll have it framed!
He gave me the brochure - I think I'll have it framed!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the G1000 is marginally more complicated than the Avidyne, hence the comments from someone transitioning form the Avidyne to Garmin.
I would guess an alpha numeric keypad would marginally simplify the application and increase the speed of engaging a number of the functions.
Despite my own preconceived idea that I would prefer the G1000 before using the Avidyne this has not be born out.
Integrating the autopilot is a far more significant step forward (available with the current version of the G1000). I suspect the go around function may also be a genuine step forward although I have not yet used this function.
Auto throttles will be the next genuine step forward.
I would guess an alpha numeric keypad would marginally simplify the application and increase the speed of engaging a number of the functions.
Despite my own preconceived idea that I would prefer the G1000 before using the Avidyne this has not be born out.
Integrating the autopilot is a far more significant step forward (available with the current version of the G1000). I suspect the go around function may also be a genuine step forward although I have not yet used this function.
Auto throttles will be the next genuine step forward.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mt. Olympus
Age: 59
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
$350k for which part? An SR22 with this in is about $540k.
I believe that the SR20GTS (or even the SR20-G3 with some extra goodies added) are a more realistic proposition at between $300 and $370K.
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
Life's too short for ironing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Scotland, & Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am sitting at the computer in the guest lounge at Cirrus HQ in Duluth, reading this, surrounded by Cirrus aeroplanes and merchandise. The folks were talking about the new Garmin screens on the way here - neat to see it in your photos.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With oil at $140, shouldn't it be a criminal offence to manufacture a 310 hp fixed gear aeroplane?
(looking for an emoticon of laughing while rolling all over the floor)10-20kt is nearer the mark, IMHO.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mt. Olympus
Age: 59
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-20kt is nearer the mark, IMHO.
The SR22 cruise speed at 75% is already at 185kts and the SR20 at 156kts (200hp). Comparing that to the Trinidad (TB20 -250hp max cruise of 163kts), it sounds about right.
I did ask the Cirrus guy though about fixed-gear and water ditching at these high(-er) approach speeds and he (naturally) said that the approved procedure here also is using the BRS system.
The landing gear is part of the overall impact energy absorbing system in order for the BRS system to be effective.
TR
--------------------------------------
ThinkRate! ThinkRate! Don't Think!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thinkrate, I think the answer lies elsewhere.
Cirrus have a slippery airframe, which I would hope is much better than a TB20.
It is anybody's guess how much extra IAS that alone would give them for the same HP (250) because we don't have a retractable similar airframe to compare, but I would bet it is a good 20kt.
Then they chuck away 10-20kt in those huge wheels sticking out.
They they add 50HP.
It does add up - within the limits of plausibility.
Cirrus will never admit this because their marketing case in the USA hangs on fixed gear being a smart thing.
The only similar airframe I can think of which is retractable is the DA42, which I have flown a couple of times and which does the same speed as the TB20 (140kt) at the same total fuel flow (11GPH) despite having a huge lump of a second engine to drag through the air. OK, the engine efficiency is slightly different and the energy value of the fuel likewise, but physics is physics and in this case we are again looking at a slippery airframe which chucks away a lot of the advantage by the drag of the second engine.
I gather that an SR22 does the same MPG as a TB20, at reasonable (say 65%) cruise settings.
Cirrus have a slippery airframe, which I would hope is much better than a TB20.
It is anybody's guess how much extra IAS that alone would give them for the same HP (250) because we don't have a retractable similar airframe to compare, but I would bet it is a good 20kt.
Then they chuck away 10-20kt in those huge wheels sticking out.
They they add 50HP.
It does add up - within the limits of plausibility.
Cirrus will never admit this because their marketing case in the USA hangs on fixed gear being a smart thing.
The only similar airframe I can think of which is retractable is the DA42, which I have flown a couple of times and which does the same speed as the TB20 (140kt) at the same total fuel flow (11GPH) despite having a huge lump of a second engine to drag through the air. OK, the engine efficiency is slightly different and the energy value of the fuel likewise, but physics is physics and in this case we are again looking at a slippery airframe which chucks away a lot of the advantage by the drag of the second engine.
I gather that an SR22 does the same MPG as a TB20, at reasonable (say 65%) cruise settings.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lymington
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...the E-TAWS system started yelling at me (terrain! terrain!) on short final.
I've got a feeling that the terrain warning is not GPS sourced. If you fly towards terrrain in the G2 SR20 that I fly, the screen shows a radar style output, low resolution & very blocky. There's a "terrain inhibit" switch near the key.
I've got a feeling that the terrain warning is not GPS sourced. If you fly towards terrrain in the G2 SR20 that I fly, the screen shows a radar style output, low resolution & very blocky. There's a "terrain inhibit" switch near the key.
Life's too short for ironing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Scotland, & Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With millions of cars, truck, container ships, jets, and all the other aeroplanes the world over, plus all the other oil-based fuel burners I can't think of, would it really make a blind bit of difference to the oil production if Cirrus put their gear up or down?
If designing an aircraft that burns fuel were to be made an offence, where would Cessna, Learjet, Dassault, Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, and all the other manufacturers go? Most of their aircraft burn more fuel in taxi than a Cirrus does in an hour's flight.
That said, there's no harm in everyone trying to reduce their fuel usage, as whichever supermarket advert says, every little bit helps. But in the big picture, I doubt gear up or gear down on a Cirrus will make any dent in the annual oil consumption.
Our pilot when I was in Duluth the other day showed us the newest model (possibly the one you flew ThinkRate? - GTSX with Garmin screens) before we left. A mere $650k, with orders for 160 of them in the last 4months! Thats 160 folk with significantly more money than me
If designing an aircraft that burns fuel were to be made an offence, where would Cessna, Learjet, Dassault, Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, and all the other manufacturers go? Most of their aircraft burn more fuel in taxi than a Cirrus does in an hour's flight.
That said, there's no harm in everyone trying to reduce their fuel usage, as whichever supermarket advert says, every little bit helps. But in the big picture, I doubt gear up or gear down on a Cirrus will make any dent in the annual oil consumption.
Our pilot when I was in Duluth the other day showed us the newest model (possibly the one you flew ThinkRate? - GTSX with Garmin screens) before we left. A mere $650k, with orders for 160 of them in the last 4months! Thats 160 folk with significantly more money than me
I'm just kidding. I do think it would be nicer if Cirrus made a fairly clean aeroplane very clean. Secretly, I'm just embarrassed after asking the Cirrus test pilot where the gear lever was... 