http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2007/03/06/212408/brs-trials-jet-sized-recovery-chute.html
Link to BRS trials jet-sized recovery chute article.
Interesting tidbits. Two designs for 3600 and 5500 lbs. I recall reading a BRS document that indicated Cirrus has a deal for the 3600 lb design. What’s the max gross weight of the Diamond Jet?
Also, the increase of 18kg (40 lbs) in weight of parachute material to recover a plane with increased gross weight from 3400 (SR22) to 3600 lbs.
Cheers
Rick
In reply to:
Link to BRS trials jet-sized recovery chute article.
Interesting tidbits. Two designs for 3600 and 5500 lbs. I recall reading a BRS document that indicated Cirrus has a deal for the 3600 lb design. What’s the max gross weight of the Diamond Jet?
Also, the increase of 18kg (40 lbs) in weight of parachute material to recover a plane with increased gross weight from 3400 (SR22) to 3600 lbs.
Cheers
Rick
You’re talking about the SR-22 G3TN here.
New molded wing with long range tanks.
oops.
Even retrofitted to a G1 or G2 would be a good deal: 200 lb MGTOW increase less 40 lb extra for the 'chute would make for a real hauler–more than 700 lb full fuel payload, like the older 182’s and 182RG’s!
I recall that the initial specs for the SR20 published in the mid-late '90’s projected a 700 lb payload. Certification and manufacturing realities trumped that possibility, but it would be nice to see a new 4-place ASEL with that kind of payload again.
In reply to:
Even retrofitted to a G1 or G2 would be a good deal: 200 lb MGTOW increase less 40 lb extra for the 'chute would make for a real hauler–more than 700 lb full fuel payload, like the older 182’s and 182RG’s!
I recall that the initial specs for the SR20 published in the mid-late '90’s projected a 700 lb payload. Certification and manufacturing realities trumped that possibility, but it would be nice to see a new 4-place ASEL with that kind of payload again.
Kevin: I could be wrong (wouldn’t be unusual), but I was under the impression that the limiting factor for the '22 was stall speed and or brakes more than the limits of the parachute. Have you heard something different?
In reply to:
…I was under the impression that the limiting factor for the '22 was stall speed and or brakes more than the limits of the parachute…
A back-of-the-envelope calculation says Cirrus could increase max gross by nearly 500 lbs and still keep stall speed to the max allowable 61 KCAS. (Calculation: w2 = w1*(v2/v1)^2; v1 = current stall speed, guessed to be 57 KCAS as I could only find the 59 KIAS value in the POH; v2 = 61 KCAS, max stall speed for a single-engine aircraft; w1 = current max gross of 3400 lbs). The brakes would have to dissipate over 30% more energy, assuming the brakes alone were used to stop the heavier, faster moving aircraft. I understand heavy-duty brakes are available, though I don’t know if they can handle that much additional heat.
If you do some research you will see that it comes down to the chute.