When Cirrus first announced the SR20, and continued to develop when I ordered in June 2000 (delivery expected may 2002) they promised;
More safety with CAPS; it took some trouble, already saved a live; they delivered.
Reasonable useful load, took some time; they delivered.
Good MFD, took some change; they delivered, best ever.
Reliable avionics, took vacuum out , gave all electric, great move !
160 knots speed; well, not far from it !
ADF / DME ; well, for the Elbonians over here in Europe that still rely on low cost NDB’s until the 30 billion Galileo system (European equvalent of GPS) is ready, still no joy.
Cirrus retreated and now say ADF and/or DME will be no option anymore. 337 is difficult because Cirrus wants no holes drilled in to the skin.
Why not offer a 2.0 model with ADF as an option, and replacing the GNS 420 all together[H] ?
Redundancy is also having 2 GS receivers besides 2 VOR’s for Europe, where GPS is still not legal (reference only, sometimes a substituteor DME)[:@])
That still leaves me with one of the best airplanes ever built (for 250K) which is IFR certified, but only as such legally useful in the US.
Just an opinion from the other side (but still a member of the “Church of Cirrus”) looking forward to delivery. Any thoughts ?
you are correct insofr as DME is a must in several European countries, including the Netherlands and Germany. I did intensive study on this, and it is 100%. You are wrong stating that the LBA or other European authorities overrule the FAA. If you read carefully what the FAA okayed (using GPS instead of DME and ADF), they RESTRICTED this okay to the 50 US states and added that no US aircraft may use GPS in a country where it is not endorsed. Interesting: In Germany you may use GPS to replace a VOR (not allowed in USA). So, the rules are DIFFERENT, not one good and the other bad. Main reason (in Germany) why GPS may not be used to replace DME is because the coordinates of the DM in the Jepp data base are not quality assured by the DFS.
Now, my plane is just in at General Enterprises. Rob van Doorn is checking out what can be done. Most likely the Bendix King KN 63/ KDI 572 will solve the problem. Just give him a couple of more days to find out - I´ll keep you posted.
Allas yes. The LBA (Germany) for instance overrules the FAR of using GPS instead of DME. That is what I have heard from a well known COPA member. The fact that the plane is N-registered doesn’t change that. Same of course with FM-immunity. Certain American airlinrs use special planes with FM-immune avionics to/from Europe. And it even applies to the American airforce. B-52’s flying over our head are 50 years old, but must be FM-immune to fly to Europe[:P] !
Hi Jaap,
well I’ve been following these discussions since we took delivery of our Cirrus here in Europe.
The ADF/DME-thing is something I’m still unsure about, and your post puzzles me a little, but concerning FM-immunity: All I have heard so far is contrary to what you posted. Unlike the BRNAV requirement, I thought the FM-immunity thing was not for a certain airspace, but for an aircraft registration, (e.g. a german one).
BTW, does anyone know if the NAVs on the Cirrus are FM-immune by european standards? If yes, we could quickly end this part of the discussion. Unfortunately, the aircraft sales people here are not so clear about these points, as this might have a negative effect on the already low sales numbers around here.
Always appreciate some Euro-Talk here on the COPA forum!
Cheers,
Phil
N199CD
Tim,
what do you know about Italy?
IFR I know require DME on board.
But some one from Aeroclub Italia told me that an N number flying in Italy can fly with is apparate (like Cirrus).
In same way, from ENAC, answer it’s been the opposite.
Yes Phil, we can quickly end the FM-immunity talk because the Garmins are FM-immune, and the 420/430 even have the 8,33 frequency space required in the future for IFR use (maybe only above a certain altitude ore level).
And you are right, sales people always point out the good things.
Of course Cirrus is so far ahead of all others that regulations can’t keep up with them[:)]
Luckely for their biggest market, the FAA has a listening ear, so the discussions in the US are more about GPS direct.
The CAA’s / JAA in Europe only have concerns about the local state airline.
While it seems fairly logical to me that we still require a DME for an ILS/DME approach and an ADF for an NDB approach, one thing I am unclear about is whether e.g. an ADF is needed in Europe to operate under IFR (for certification purposes as oppossed to flying an approach). So, if I have an N reg airplane that is ok for IFR in the US, can I then fly it IFR in Europe under the restriction of having to meet certain requirements for a given approach (DME, ADF)? I guess the second altimeter requirements in some countries goes into the same chapter… Glad for any tips
Chris
(difficult for me to explain this in english but…)
There are agreement beetwen FAA and JAR (and/or national corporations).
My research on DME/ADF need for to fly IFR in Europe with an N# seems to indicate you can fly it.
This is been one of the first question I did to Cirrus General Enterprises peoples.
Honestly, when I/you ask about this matter, I think there is to many “smoke” and the situation isn’t reaaly clear.
I assume that Cirrus see to Europe like a good opportunity for to achieve his plan to sell more ariplane (that they are producing/will produce), now much more than before “September 11”, so, we can ask, and they should answer soon and well I suppose.