Sorry Clyde, but I find you’re remark a bit off!
I’m not quite sure what that’s meant to mean!
That was just to say I didn’t agree.off as in off mark. No worries
the official brochure from Cirrus’s website it states 950lbs. That’s it.
Well, that’s not it, right now 850 lbs is about it. But Cirrus have told me that by the end of this year, the SR20s coming off the assembly line will have a max gross of 3100lbs. Existing planes will get a POH change to add at least 150lbs to the max gross and probably 200 with a change in seat cushions. But the 150 is (I quote) “a done deal”. The certification work for this is being done as part of the SR22 work, which is probably the cause of the delay.
I sure hope you are right. Of course, with an increased MTOW, this will mean that the TKOF and climb performance will suffer correspondingly. I don’t think that’s much gained. You’ll pay more for landing fees etc. It’s just equivalent to having an increase in DOC… The only way forward is to reduce weight, but that’s much harder to do, as I pointed out in the last posting.
Besides this, it’s a fact that the SR20 is very heavy, especially given that it’s essentially made of composites.
That doesn’t have to be the case at all. It just depends on techniques used. Now, I am not too familiar what exactly is used, but carbon composite constructions are very light.
Composite planes are heavy - ask Beech - the Starship came out a lot heavier than planned. But there is another factor; compare the SR20 with e.g the PA28 series - these have much lower empty weights, in part because they are certified to CAR3, not FAR23, and the SR20 is thus a much stronger plane.
Using Carbon Composites, you can build light planes. Just check out planes like the DA-40 from Diamond.
I can’t comment on the certification, I am not very familiar with all of that. However, I am sure that you are quite right regarding the robustness of the SR20. On the other hand, I personally think that a Cessna is about as robust as anyone requires so I don’t agree that extra robustness is an argument for increasing the weight. Just out of interest, what are the new (sic) Cessna’s certified under?
Also add the 80lbs or so for the 'chute, and what you get for your extra weight is better performance (thanks to the smooth composite airframe) and much higher safety levels (stronger plane with a parachute).
better performance is not true per se. Of course you get a better cruise, due to MUCH better aerodynamics (compared to the PA28 series). That’s not however always true for climb, tkof perfomances, range and loading as well as stall speed (which is a safety factor too, you would agree). If you take speed, the 200HP moneys are going faster too (but then again they cost a sum they aren’t worth).
See, I am not by any means trying to put down the SR20, far from it. I just regret that it has become more conventional that what I, and surely many others, had hoped for. It’s still the best plane out there, but mainly due to it’s excellent value for money ratio. But it’s not that superior in performance levels though.
If you compare the SR20 with other FAR23 planes, e.g the Trinidad and Commander 114, you will find that although they are lighter (aluminium) and retractable, they offer no better range/payload combinations.
well, that’s a tricky comparison since both the trinidad and the commander are higher powered, 250 and 300HP respectively, I think. Maybe it would be better to compare a Mooney, that’s 200 HP too.
In any case, the statement is not right. With a trinidad you have 1190 lbs max useful load, cruise of 163kt, range of 1100nm.
In the future, we can hope to see the cost of carbon fiber drop (it’s currently wayyyy expensive) and this will enable composite structures to be much lighter with no reduction in strength. But for now, the benefits of composites come at a cost, in weight.
My key issues when I ordered the plane were Speed, usefull load (I really wanted over 700 lbs w/full fuel), simplicity and safety.
The increase in gross weight that has been promised (promised might be too strong, but I have been verbally assured by Cirrus that it is going to happen) should give most planes a useful load of 1050lbs. With 336 lbs of fuel (56 gals), you will be able to haul 714lbs of people and bags nearly 700nm in 4 1/2 hours or so (with 45min reserve). That, to me, is a pretty damn useful travelling machine, and it meets your requirement of over 700lbs payload. Your other requirements are already met.