Modifications to SR20 prototypes

Guest Discussion
1

I’m busy trawling through the FAA database in order to update my production list that lives in the Misc section on the site (what you haven’t had a look yet?).

Anyway according to the FAA, two of the SR20 prototypes have been modified:

s/n 3 N203FT has had an engine change it now has an IO-550 (a-la-SR22).

s/n 1 N200SR has also had an engine change, but this time with a P&W PT-6A turboprop!!! I bet it goes like a rocket!

So if anyone is near the factory soon and can confirm these two changes, I’d love to hear from you.

What would be really great would be if you could get hold of a photo of these two to send to me please!

My thanks to anyone who can help.

Regards,

2

Never mind the photo - I want a copy of the STC! [H]

-Curt

3

I’d take those details with a grain of salt. N200SR is also shown as being a 1981 model!! And since the airworthiness certificate type is shown as “standard” it casts doubt on the engine type. N203FT, OTOH, is shown as “experimental”, so it’s quite possible it was used as a prototype for the SR22.

4

I looked mine up the other day, N147CD and discovered that I had a Lycoming engine!

Last time I checked the oil it was a Continental!

Not sure how good the data is on the FAA web site!

http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm

Ian

5

You are so right! I had not noticed the model date or the fact that it is standard!

The FAA database is full of errors, but up to now I’ve not noticed too many for Cirrus aircraft.

The two most noticeable are:
SR20 s/n 1039 (N24XT) is shown as s/n ‘S039’.
SR22 s/n 0211 (N555FK) is shown as an SR20.

(Not forgetting Ian’s Lycoming powered machine of course)

I have no doubt that there are a lot of smaller errors that will come to light as I research further.

Like it or not, it is still the best source of data for researchers like myself.

N203FT could be the second SR22 prototype, the web site has pictures of N140CD s/n 1023 as the prototype SR22.

Still, a turboprop Cirrus DOES sound fast doesn’t it!

Cheers,

6

In reply to:

(Not forgetting Ian’s Lycoming powered machine of course)

For a time, all SR20s being entered in the FAA database were listed as having “Lycoming O-360” engines.

I corrected mine by corresponding with the FAA, and I alerted them to the fact that ALL SR20s should be listed as Continental IO-360s, suggested that they check the type certificate if they don’t believe me, and then that they should update all the SR20 records.

Not sure if they ever did, though.

Steve

7

Sounds real fast, but by the time you pressurize it and add 150 or so gal of Jet A payload should be about a pound and a half.

8

If I’d thought about this, I could have answered my own question!

Putting such a large lump in an SR2x would have quite a lot of repercussions! CofG and vibration are two that come to mind.

A lot of work would be needed. Compare the PA-46-500TP with the -310 and -350! the 500 has a very long nose!

Perhaps one day!

Regards,

9

Actually, a lot of turboprop conversions add a long nose because the engine is lighter and they stick it out in front to help CG placement. I doubt the engine would be rougher.It would need big tanks! The link

http://www.onaircraft.com/new_page_1.htm

will show a modified Cessna P210.

Paul