Sorry it took so many varied responses to get you an answer.
On the Public Forum we always have a few souls who are self-appointed dissenters of ANYTHING we say.
My best advice: Don’t take our word for it. Go fly the Cirrus yourself and you will get both of your answers.
In reply to:
Spin resistant, not ‘officially’ tested for spin recovery, will recover,
I agree with Brian, don’t take our word for it. I suggest you read the NTSB report on the fatal spin that occurred in Parrish, NY.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020502X00613&key=1
You’re quite right, of course. It only feels colder. (Actually, I was wondering if someone was going to point that out.)
In reply to:
On the Public Forum we always have a few souls who are self-appointed dissenters of ANYTHING we say.
Just for the record, I did not dissent from any of the quite real benefits of a castering nose wheel pointed out by Cirrus fans. In fact, I agreed with them. Here’s my first post on this topic. (You tell me how it is offensive.)
In reply to:
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 [link deleted].) Some owners have also reported nosewheel shimmy problems.
I merely pointed out that there are drawbacks as well. I don’t consider that dissent, just additional information. That was followed by a series of dissents by the Cirrus faithful, who apparently couldn’t understand that a castering nose wheel can be as good as (or maybe even better than) nose wheel steering under normal circumstances, yet be less effective with a brake failure.
I will however challenge obviously false information, especially if I feel that it might be dangerous (e.g., that taxiing downwind has no effect on the rudder’s effectiveness). I guess it’s just the old instructor in me.
AMEN!!!
Oh, I have flown a SR20, and it is a delight (I’m currently a partner in an Archer). Like I said, I don’t have a problem/issue with the nosewheel, just wanted to get the “prevailing opinion” on the spin characteristics. Sometimes it just as important to understand the common (mis)conceptions as to know the truth. Actually, I think the potential partner (who is also a partner in the Archer) really just wanted to justify (to himself?) his purchase of a Bonanza.
Nice to know we are all so well protected by you and Art.
You’re quite welcome. Many here resent advice from non-Cirrus pilots. I’m glad you’re not one of them.
(BTW, I don’t speak for Art and he doesn’t speak for me.)
In reply to:
BTW, I don’t speak for Art and he doesn’t speak for me.
Joe,
That’s clear to me - I find your posts to be generally quite well-balanced and reasonable. And I still like your choice in SR20 paint schemes!
- Mike.
Dave:
You really are correct. I have an SR22 and this is what I do. As I start my takeoff roll, I advance the throttle SLOWLY. With rapid throttle advance there is a tenmdancy to pull the plane to the left before it is going fast enough forward to have rudder authority. With a good headwind, there is less tendancy to do this. As I advance the throttle with my right hand, in synchrony, I apply pressure with my right foot to the RUDDER, NOT THE BRAKE. With right hand and right foot working in unison, you can perform a very nice ground roll and takeoff without using the brake and staying on runway centerline. It takes a bit of practice because there is a lot of “P factor” with this 310 HP engine but it can be done.
In reply to:
houldn’t you get enough rudder authority from the propwash to keep it centered, without applying brakes?
In the SR20, yes. I never (well hardly ever) need to use brake when applying takeoff power in the SR20 - but I do use a bootful of right rudder. The SR22 though has a lot more power (and therefore torque) and needs more compensation. As others have discussed, the key is not to apply the power all at once in the case of the SR22. In the 20 I tend to open the throttle reasonably quickly, because I can.
I fly a Pitts S2C (Lycoming AEIO 540…basically same size engine as the SR22 I think). Anyway, it’s a boatload of torque for a plane that only weighs 1150 pounds dry. I don’t need any brakes if I ease in the power as you describe. Of course, a Pitts being what it is, has an extremely nimble rudder and cannot necessarily be compared to the SR22’s rudder (Interestingly, the Diamond’s rudder is almost useless compared to the Pitts, but you can still take off in a Diamond without brakes)
In reply to:
I fly a Pitts S2C (Lycoming AEIO 540…basically same size engine as the SR22 I think). Anyway, it’s a boatload of torque for a plane that only weighs 1150 pounds dry.
While I’ve never flown the S2C, I’ve got a bunch of time in the B model, and the acceleration in the '22 does remind me of the Pitts. Without splitting hairs, I’m sure the light weight of the S2C more than makes up for the 50 less HP in the Lyc. 540 installation you’ve got. It would be interesting to compare static thrust. You have the composite Hartzell, right? That’s a fat prop.
Jeff
Yup…the Hartzell composite prop literally makes the plane complete, in my opinion. I absolutely love flying it. I couldn’t imagine any other prop on that plane. I’ve never flown a B so I can’t compare…but I am told there’s a world of difference between the B and C (and the B ain’t nothing to sneeze at)
In reply to:
I say dump the nosewheel entirely and put an honest to goodness tailwheel…
That was PROBABLY meant to be sarcastic, but…
…I can honestly say that if a tailwheel SR22 had been available I likely would have bought one.
I don’t have time to play with “Photoshop” right now, but the below “Celerity” from the Aircraft Spruce catalog gives you some idea how “jaunty” a T/W Cirrus could be.
I wonder how much speed could be picked up without that nosewheel?
Texas taildraggers offered conversion kits for C150’s and others, and there are more than a few tailwheel Grummans running around.
http://dmaspeedmods.airweb.net/tdconversions.htm
Hmmm.
If you dont have time who does
Eddie,
As long as we’re thinking about landing gear, what about a float-equipped SRXX? The Japanese operated float-equipped Zero fighters during WW II, and the British experimented with Spitfires on floats (shown below).
Imagine water-taxiing your SR22F (for “floats”) up to one of Florida’s waterfront restaurants…
Cheers,
Roger
Increasingly off topic, I know, but
Have any of the kit people put a video camera in the bottom of the cowl and wired it to an aux button on an MFD?
It would seem that this would eliminate one of the two main drawbacks to tailwheels…that it is quite hard to see where you are going when you are taxiing. (caveat–never flown one so blind taxiing /s-turn taxiing may not be as daunting as it sounds…but to a 100% tricycle guy it does sound like a big deal).
Oh, and if you are going to have a video camera down there anyway…it wouldn’t be that much harder to rig infra-red so that you might reduce hard IFR pucker factor. 
Marty
replying to off-topic, re video cameras to overcome the forward sight problem of taildraggers. It would never work! 1) Taxiing is no big deal without forward vision, as long as you taxi correctly. Further, one should never substitute an image on a screen (which image could “freeze”) for the real image derived by S-turning 2) Landing is a bigger deal, but you must be focused 100% of the time on your peripheral vision , which is the real edge of the runway. Glancing at the screen would provide an unacceptable distraction from seeing the real picture from your peripheral vision. You’d be more likely to lose control of the plane by the distraction, than simply landing the traditional way.
In my 110 hours in a Pitts, I do not recall ever “seeing” my instrument panel at any time during takeoff or landing…I’m focused on the runway edge, or straight ahead after tail lift. Lift off speed is determined by sound of the engine, etc. I have no idea what my rotate or touch down speeds really are.
In reply to:
what about a float-equipped SRXX?
Don’t think it hadn’t occured to me.
Soon, with thousands of SRXX’s out there, I’d expect at least some shops to start vying for STC’s.
I’d be first in line for the tailwheel - the floats might cost a few knots in airpseed that I wouldn’t want to give up.