Hamid:
First of all, you do not use an oxygen “mask” unless you are above 18,000 feet. I have not had my plane above that level yet but it can go to 25,000 feet. There you must wear the mask.
Between 12,500 and 18,000 feet you use a small nasal cannula that, with the new configuration, does not even touch your nose. It is barely noticeable and, yes, passengers wear it too. There is a port in the ceiling where up to 4 O2 hoses can be connected.
The comfort level above 12000 feet is much better. In the summer it is cooler. The visibility is often close to 75 miles or greater. There is never or hardly ever any turbulence. You are above all but the convective cumulus clouds and it is just more pleasant than my many years of flying below 10,000 feet.
I hate to be the one to say but, I flew my NA SR22 up to 16000 feet last week and it performed very well, some how everyone has started to talk like the NA planes are limited to 12,500 feet. I believe there are very few Turbo Cirrus pilots flying above 18000 feet wearing oxygen mask. My NA Cirrus was cruising at 173 knots burning 14 gallons an hour, yes a Turbo should be cruising around 195 knots at this altitude burning 17 gallons more or less, but you can still clear the same weather up to 17500 feet in your NA Cirrus and keep your extra 100 pounds of payload. I fly over 200 hours a year mostly on the East Coast and I am in smooth air 99.9% of the time below 12000 feet without having to wear oxygen. So personally, I still prefer the extra 100 pounds of payload.
In reply to:
…but you can still clear the same weather up to 17500 feet in your NA Cirrus and keep your extra 100 pounds of payload.
It’s a different story on the Left Coast. There have been many times I’ve been crusing at 15-17 Kft, wishing I could climb out of the clouds by going up to 19-24 Kft.
Walt
In reply to:
It’s a different story on the Left Coast. There have been many times I’ve been crusing at 15-17 Kft, wishing I could climb out of the clouds by going up to 19-24 Kft.
Walt,
In reading your post, I wondered what structural changes are made to the TN22 that are not on the NA bird? Anyone have any idea? This inquiring mind would like to know. As a follow up, maybe this thread should be in the members’ section.
In reply to:
Walt,
In reading your post, I wondered what structural changes are made to the TN22 that are not on the NA bird? Anyone have any idea? This inquiring mind would like to know. As a follow up, maybe this thread should be in the members’ section.
There are no structural differences in the planes. In fact many of the Turbo planes were built as NA G2’s and then they did the engine and prop mods.
In fact technically the turbo mod is an STC to the NA type cert and the planes could easily be converted back to NA planes. I guess the only reason to do that would be availability of fuel for it should 100LL become extinct.
In reply to:
No one has said anything about the take off and climb performance of the NA22 vs the TN22. Does anyone have comparison numbers for let’s say a 10,000ft Density Altitude take off and climb let’s say out of Truckee or South Lake Tahoe?
Thanks
Rik
No, I don’t. But its easy. For all practical purposes, the Turbo flies like its at sea level up to FL250. So, look at your NA numbers at say 10,000 feet and then look at SL and you see the difference. While that’s not precise, its close enough to answer your question.
When I flew it from Monterey, at first it climbed like mine. But it just kept doing that, past 10,000 and then at 12,000, etc…
In reply to:
There are no structural differences in the planes. In fact many of the Turbo planes were built as NA G2’s and then they did the engine and prop mods.
In fact technically the turbo mod is an STC to the NA type cert and the planes could easily be converted back to NA planes.
Roger:
So then to address an earlier post, there is NO reason why a SR22NA cannot climb to 24k other than available power? What determines the absolute ceiling for a FAA certified aircraft?
If testing has been done on the TN22 up to and including 24k,as been suggested by the TN22 developers, then that certification, other than power requirements should be
applicable to the NA22.
Eric,
Excellent point.
I can only think of a few times when climbing above 17,500’ would have helped in my NA SR22. Still, more options are always nice.
It would be nice if Cirrus could raise the “maximum operating altitude” of the NA SR22, even if it required installed O2 (which my SR22 had).
Eric:
I think it is a well known secret that a NA SR22 can go above 17,500. It is not certified for that so that limits you legally but it can be done. BUT, there is a big difference in being able to go up higher and having performance to make it worthwhile to go higher. There are issues with magnetos and fuel flow up high that make a NA airplane, without mods, subject to power interruption. In addition you just will not have performance. So you really would not want to climb higher without the turbo. You would not really gain anything and probably could not out climb the weather anyway.
Brian,
The Mooney Ovation 3 with the same engine goes to 20,000’, so I think there’s enough “performance” to get the job done a bit higher, especially when it’s cool.
Do the Cirrus Turbos get different mags with the conversion?
Yes, the mags are pressurized.
In reply to:
Do the Cirrus Turbos get different mags with the conversion?
Yes, and in addition the fuel pump is modified so that it can provide continuous higher boost if needed for high altitude vapor suppression.
You do remember how much you enjoyed your last escapade with vapor lock? 