Just had my first vacuum pump failure at 40 hrs. Good news is, the vacuum warning light and vac. auxillary lights worked fine, so backup was automatic. We happened to be VFR, and elected to terminate the trip, as IMC was a distinct possibility later in the day. Mechanics tell me they have had lots of problems with the Airborne vacuum pumps, and are using different makes now. Cirrus was helpful and supportive, but it can sure ruin an otherwise good trip. By the way, this is a “B” model, and I believe it is a good balance of features and price, especially for someone that doesn’t need or rely upon the vertical nav. of an autopilot. Approaches are stable and easy in the Cirrus, and you can simply trim for correct vert. speed and use GPS or VOR tracking with the autopilot. Of course, an all electric would have avoided the vac. failure, but then I haven’t flown into a lightning strike, yet.
Just had my first vacuum pump failure at 40 hrs.
This is disconcerting news, especially on the heels of so many other failures (at least, it seems so to me). It’s possible that a real fix was identified on Walt’s SR20(N415WM) earlier this month, and that there simply wasn’t enough time for the fix to be incorporated into #71, which was delivered only a few days later. I hope that’s the case.
It would be great to be able to read about this type of event - problems and remedies - directly on cirrusdesign.com; that would save us from speculation and rumor, allow us to understand the good efforts I’m sure are being made, and would (IMHO) be a good thing for all. I can understand why the company wouldn’t want to have this sort of discussion in a COMPLETELY public forum, but why not have an “Placeholders and Owners” button, accessible only to authorized users? Just a suggestion.
If this is still an ongoing saga by the time I get #156 (N84MR), I would want to get away from needing vacuum altogether. Am I right in saying that in a “C” config, the only vacuum driven instrument is the AI? Does anyone know of an STC’d electric AI we could use instead? Would it then be legal for us to remove the ENTIRE vacuum system entirely? I’d love to add some negative numbers to the W&B up front 
Mike.
Just had my first vacuum pump failure at 40 hrs.
This is disconcerting news, especially on the heels of so many other failures (at least, it seems so to me). It’s possible that a real fix was identified on Walt’s SR20(N415WM) earlier this month, and that there simply wasn’t enough time for the fix to be incorporated into #71, which was delivered only a few days later. I hope that’s the case.
It would be great to be able to read about this type of event - problems and remedies - directly on cirrusdesign.com; that would save us from speculation and rumor, allow us to understand the good efforts I’m sure are being made, and would (IMHO) be a good thing for all. I can understand why the company wouldn’t want to have this sort of discussion in a COMPLETELY public forum, but why not have an “Placeholders and Owners” button, accessible only to authorized users? Just a suggestion.
If this is still an ongoing saga by the time I get #156 (N84MR), I would want to get away from needing vacuum altogether. Am I right in saying that in a “C” config, the only vacuum driven instrument is the AI? Does anyone know of an STC’d electric AI we could use instead? Would it then be legal for us to remove the ENTIRE vacuum system entirely? I’d love to add some negative numbers to the W&B up front
Mike.
The vacuum pump failure is not symptomatic of anything Cirrus is doing. It is a problem with the Airborne pump, and perhaps the fix for Cirrus is to specify a different one. The aircraft manufacturer should have some leverage and be able to choose component sources. Mike Busch at Cirrus was great and handled this under warranty on the spot. Also, Jay’s aircraft at SNA repaired it within two hours after delivery of the plane. If this new Airborne pump fails soon, I will be the first to refuse another of the same brand and insist on a different make. I am not aware of Walt’s “fix” for the vac. pump failures.
The vacuum pump failure is not symptomatic of anything Cirrus is doing. It is a problem with the Airborne pump…
I just found that out. I spoke with Bruce at length, and I’m convinced that Cirrus is very much on top of things.
We also discussed my suggestion of an “Owners and Placeholders Only” button on their website; they’d love to do it, but their chief priority right now is meeting production commitments and other issues which relate directly to their core business.
I give the company very high marks for their “focus on focus” - I’ve known many companies that floundered because they tried too hard to do too much too soon - kind of like jumping on your horse and galloping off in all directions.
I also got great news: #156 will be delivered in February! Apparently LOTS of -20 positions upgraded to -22s; I’m delighted.
All of this made me decide to buy another position - I’m placing my order with Bruce today. It will be for another SR20, which will be ready about September 2002. I may replace the one I’m about to get, sell the new one, or just start a fleet. Don’t know.
Mike Busch at Cirrus was great and handled this under warranty on the spot.
All part of the reason I’m buying two!
I am not aware of Walt’s “fix” for the vac. pump failures.
See Walt’s posts on October 4th. It has to do with replacing the Starter Drive Assembly. However, after speaking with Bruce, I realize that there’s a strong possibility that this particular issue may have been an aberration, not found on other SR20’s.
- Mike.