A couple of other guys and I are seriously considering purchasing an SR20 as a partnership. One of the potential partners has stated a couple of ‘concerns’.
Free castering nosewheel: I think I can address this one with the partner, since I flew the “American” aircraft (Yankee, Trainer, Traveler) when they first came out and did not have a problem.
“The only way to recover form a spin is to use the parachute”. I seem to remember that Cirrus did not need to do the complete spin recovery series because of the CAPS, but that does not mean that it could not recover. Does anyone have any solid info/facts on this topic??
Thanks
Firstly, you guys should seriously consider joining COPA since there’s so much info on the member’s side that addresses the spin issue or any of your other concerns.
The free-castering nosewheel is a non issue and no reason for concern. The Cirrus handles very well on the ground.
Regarding spins, the Cirrus POHs suggest trying to recover using standard anti-spin techniques before resorting to the CAPs system. I suggest you do a search of the site to see what has been said during the spirited debate I’ve seen regarding spins.
The whole issue of spins has been seriously misinterpreted by many folks. Test pilots have spun the Crrus and it DOES recover. Flat or unsual prolonged spins may not. Why? Because the airplane is designed to be SPIN PROOF. Therefore it is much harder to get into a spin than in a conventional plane. As a result, it MAy be harfder to get out of a well established spin because of those sam protective characteristics. Cirrus found it easier to use the chute to act as the remedy rather than go through vigorous spin certification issues with the FAA.
No one should ever get into a spin in this plane in the first place as the plane is more stall proof as well. It is prohibited to INTENTIONALLY enter a spin. If you get into a spin from which you cannot recover (which could happen in any plane), it is comforting to know you HAVE the chute to save your day.
Thanks guys… I appreciate the info.
As I said, I’m comfortable with the castering nosewheel… I mainly wanted feedback on the spin recovery issue. You’ve confirmed what I thought. (Spin resistant, not ‘officially’ tested for spin recovery, will recover, but might take more recovery time/altiltude).
Thanks
Mike
If I had a potential partner that was worried about the spin recovery characteristics of an airplane, I would be more worried about the partner than the plane.
Has he been doing a lot of spins lately? If he’s doing them on purpose, he shouldn’t oughta do them in the Cirrus, since it’s contrary to the airplane’s placarded limitations. If he’s doing them accidentally, he might want to spend a little time with an instructor [:)].
I agree that a free-castering nose wheel is pretty much a non-issue when the brakes are working properly, but there has been at least one Cirrus accident due to loss of control on landing after a brake failure. (See http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20040129X00128&key=1)
Some owners have also reported nosewheel shimmy problems.
I would suspect that most, if not all, nose wheel shimmy problems on landing are due to:
Landing too fast.
Under-inflation of tire.
I was flying a C-172 SP prior to the Cirrus and had more nosewheel shimmy problems in the Cessna than the Cirrus. I don’t think the fully castering nosewheel is much of a factor.
I do agree that the lack of directional control if a brake goes out is less than ideal but Cirrus is far from alone in that.
I agree that a free-castering nose wheel is pretty much a non-issue when the brakes are working properly, but there has been at least one Cirrus accident due to loss of control on landing after a brake failure.
There is an item on the descent checklist to test the brake pressure. If a loss of brake fluid has occurred prior to descent then this will at least give you advance warning, and you can select an appropriately large airport and wide runway to avoid an incident.
I’ve never had even the slightest nosewheel shimmy, and my original brake pads were pronounced “fat” by my SC last week, with 330 hours on them. I rarely use them taxiing, and I’m kind to them when landing.
Some owners have also reported nosewheel shimmy problems.
Nosewheel shimmy is not confined to castering nosewheels. I’ve experienced violent shimmy in a PA-28, which has a rigid connection between the rudder pedals and the nosewheel. Very rigid! When that puppy shimmys, you have rudder pedals slamming into your feet, yet the only way to stop it is get on the brakes, which requires keeping your feet on the pedals. It eventually led to complete failure of the nosewheel steering, but that’s another story.
If you are impling that the free castering noswhell makes the plane more uncontrollable with a brake failure I tend to disagree. Above about 10 knots of ground speed the Cirrus has excellent directional control using the rudder alone. I usr very little braking on the ground except wih very tight turns.
I cannot recall the last time I used the brakes at all for directional control on the runway. You only have to use the brakes if you are landing on a very short field or you did not manage your speed well.
So is:
Retractable landing gear
Asymetrical Thrust
In flight engine failure
AD’s yet to come
Tire failure
In-flight collision
And more . . .
All of which have happened, will likely happen again and all should be considerations to the purchase of an aircraft
But perhaps it is safer to not fly at all.
Perhaps a drive down the highway in your SUV with Firestone tires would be risk free and therefore, not “a consideration”
Sorry if I am a bit . .
But if a castering nose wheel is the only thing holding you up, get on with it. It’s not a problem for Tigers or Cirrus
As with any aircraft, they all have different “styles”. Just do the proper training, and don’t sweat the small “style” differences
I cannot recall the last time I used the brakes at all for directional control on the runway
Agreed. Even at slower speeds on taxiways, rudder is effective. I recently flew with a friend who is an Airshares owner in his '22 and on takeoff, I could feel him hold and ride the right brake as he applied takeoff power, which I feel is almost unnecessary. Come to think of it, I don’t even remember what I do since I don’t even think about it, but I do know I don’t ride the right brake. The rudder is immediately effective.
And regarding shimmying, I’ve seen it once in the Cirrus, again riding with my AirShares owner friend. I don’t recall the reason but will say that I’ve encountered nosewheel shimmy MUCH more in the Cessnas.
Maybe Fasteddie has a comment since he used to own a Tiger.
The only planes I have ever flown have a free caster, diamond and cirrus, hell my wife taxied a Katana the first time she was in a small plane. It is NOT a problem.
Maybe Fasteddie has a comment since he used to own a Tiger.
And a Traveler a long ways back.
I’ve always thought of the free-castering nosewheel as a postive. Everything’s a trade-off to some extent, but in this case you’re trading slightly increased brake wear (and brakes are easy) for no oleo strut, shimmy dampener, rudder/nosewheel linkage, etc.
And it doesn’t take long to get used to the MUCH tighter turning radius.
My SR22 has never shimmied (with me in the plane, anyway). My Tiger would if the nosewheel fork bolt wasn’t properly torqued, and the same likely applies to the Cirrus.
Full-stall landings with the nosewheel way up in the air should be the goal - shimmying is a lot less likely if the nosewheel touches down at very low speeds.
I recently flew with a friend who is an Airshares owner in his '22 and on takeoff, I could feel him hold and ride the right brake as he applied takeoff power, which I feel is almost unnecessary. Come to think of it, I don’t even remember what I do since I don’t even think about it, but I do know I don’t ride the right brake. The rudder is immediately effective.
I have specifically tried take off in my SR22 without using the right brake. It does not work. I tried full rudder at the beginning of the takeoff roll but some brake was necessary to keep the plane on the centerline. I must not overuse the brakes since I just finished an annual and the brakes were o.k.
It does not need a lot of right brake, but there is some needed for me until there is enough speed so the rudder is effective.
…hell my wife taxied a Katana the first time she was in a small plane. It is NOT a problem…
No one said it was a problem if everything is working okay (in fact it may be an asset – tighter turning radius and all that), only that it can become a problem if a brake fails. Of course you can maintain directional control with the rudder with a brake failure – perhaps with as little as 10 knots ground speed as someone here pointed out (though I think he really meant airspeed, and when taxiing to the duty runway you’ll likely have a tailwind, so you can add that to the 10 knots ground speed you’ll need). But try to control the plane at that speed while attempting to stop it with one brake! (Even below 10 knots I’d rather not run into anything, thanks.) If you have a long enough runway and no one is in your way you could easily land and even turn off onto a taxiway with no brakes, then kill the engine and coast to a stop, probably in a pretty straight line if it was going straight when the rudder became ineffective. But the pilot at College Park had the misfortune of actually needing the brakes that Cirrus so thoughtfully installed and didn’t have the luxury of coasting to a gentle stop.
I’m not saying that the Cirrus is dangerous or even undesirable because of a castering nose wheel, only that nose wheel steering gives an extra margin of safety in the event of brake failure. (Just as I’m sure no Cirrus fan wouldn ever say other aircraft are unsafe or undesirable because they lack the extra margin of safety provided by the CAPS.)
I’ve always thought of the free-castering nosewheel as a postive. <<
Hey…I agree with you! Steerable nosewheels are cheating and a terrible compromise between the rudder in the wind and the rubber on the pavement. Kinda like linkages between the rudder and ailerons for coordinated turns. And if you really wanna make the Cirrus an HONEST airplane, I say dump the nosewheel entirely and put an honest to goodness tailwheel on it. I might buy one then!
I really do disagree again. And I DID MEAN groundspeed because, when you are on the ground with the whells contacting the pavement, there is NO DIFFERENCE between airspeed and groundspeed effectively.
BUT, I have had a brake failure in a Cessna 172 and I can assure that it was impossible to control the airplane with nosewheel steering. The combination of using opposite rudder and the good brake is the ONLY technique that will keep you on the runway; nosewheel type aside.
