Growing Disturbed by Blogs and Articles about Cirrus Technique

spiderweb

spiderweb

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
9,488
Display Name
Display name:
Ben
I have read a lot recently about landing technique in the Cirrus. I am seeing that many people say that it is essentially a one-part process: after power-off, round off to just above level and wait.

The better advice has been that it is the same for all other airplanes; it is just that the landing attitude is a bit flatter (and also looks that way).

I have many hours in high-performance aircraft and advanced cockpits (the SR20 technically is not hi-perf), but have only 4 hours in the Cirrus.

Your thoughts? Videos?
 
Friends don't let friends fly plastic airplanes, ha ha. Just kidding.
 
A DPE friend bought an SR-22 that was built prior to the change in landing gear configuration currently being sold.

His subsequent research of the Cirrus accident/incident rate revealed an indordinate number of prop and/or tail strikes during landing. They were attributed to gear geometry that demanded a very precise attitude during flare and landing. He sold the plane after a few months and confided that he wished he had done the research before rather than after buying it. I'm told by the good folks at the Cirrus store that the gear mod has provided much more ground clearance during landing.
 
wabower said:
A DPE friend bought an SR-22 that was built prior to the change in landing gear configuration currently being sold.

His subsequent research of the Cirrus accident/incident rate revealed an indordinate number of prop and/or tail strikes during landing. They were attributed to gear geometry that demanded a very precise attitude during flare and landing. He sold the plane after a few months and confided that he wished he had done the research before rather than after buying it. I'm told by the good folks at the Cirrus store that the gear mod has provided much more ground clearance during landing.
Click to expand...

It has. The old config was ridiculous.
 
What Wayne said is consistent with my experience in both the long and short legged versions.
 
wabower said:
A DPE friend bought an SR-22 that was built prior to the change in landing gear configuration currently being sold.

His subsequent research of the Cirrus accident/incident rate revealed an indordinate number of prop and/or tail strikes during landing. They were attributed to gear geometry that demanded a very precise attitude during flare and landing. He sold the plane after a few months and confided that he wished he had done the research before rather than after buying it. I'm told by the good folks at the Cirrus store that the gear mod has provided much more ground clearance during landing.
Click to expand...

Do you remember what the pitch angle was for a tail strike?

Only going off what the others have said... the Q400 still sounds like the highest risk plane for a tail strick. They tell me the max pitch angle is 6 degrees for landing and a tail strike at 7 degrees. I know the Saab is very forgiving... 13 degrees before the carpet dance.

I never flew the Cirrus, but I did go on a demo flight when Cessna reps brought the Corvallis to Little Rock while I was instructing there. It seemed like an easy plane to land -- given all the right numbers were followed :)
 
SR22t lands fast and somewhat flat. No biggie.

It is not a cessna as in pull the power over the fence, hold it pitched up, and wait until it touches. Cirri, you fly it with power almost until touch down. at least this works fine for me.
 
I like to flare, like birds.

Not keep going upstream to spawn, like a salmon.

;)
 
Cirri landings at Lakeway are fun--sometimes exciting--to watch.

cirrusmx said:
SR22t lands fast and somewhat flat. No biggie.

It is not a cessna as in pull the power over the fence, hold it pitched up, and wait until it touches. Cirri, you fly it with power almost until touch down. at least this works fine for me.
Click to expand...
 
I only flew an SR22 Turbo once. My landing was a greaser, and I came away thinking "WTF is everyone complaining about with these things being hard to land?"

Clearly, though, people do have problems. I like tall landing gear as a rule - works better on gravel/unimproved strips, and looks cooler.
 
I've flown the long legged version. Super easy aircraft to land. I would think any frequent user would be greasing them on almost every time. Count me in the "I don't understand the controversy" camp.
 
jason said:
According to wikipedia it was 2007 for the SR20
Click to expand...

This flight was made in 2010 in an SR22 Turbo. Not sure what year the plane was, but obviously no newer than 2010. :)
 
nevermind.

anyways, not bad airplanes at all. the only thing i dislike about cirrus is the limited payload. maybe 200 or 300 extra pounds of useful load would make it the perfect 4 seater.
 
cirrusmx said:
anyways, not bad airplanes at all. the only thing i dislike about cirrus is the limited payload. maybe 200 or 300 extra pounds of useful load would make it the perfect 4 seater.
Click to expand...
Which weighty features would you like to see traded for that extra useful load? Or would you be willing to pay the price for a turboprop engine to get the extra power needed to increase useful load that much (I'm not seeing an IO-720 as a real good option)?
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Which weighty features would you like to see traded for that extra useful load? Or would you be willing to pay the price for a turboprop engine to get the extra power needed to increase useful load that much (I'm not seeing an IO-720 as a real good option)?
Click to expand...

A turboprop engine would be rather silly to add to the plane, being non-pressurized, etc. I'm thinking GTSIO-520 or (T)IO-720. Think of it like the Comanche 400.
 
Kelvin said:
OOC, what year was the gear changed?
Click to expand...

The G3 in 2007 increased prop clearance. The SR22T added a shock to the nose strut.

If you weight a Cirrus so the tail is touching the ground such as when working on the nose wheel, you will see the angle is fairly high for a tail strike. They occur mostly when practicing zero flap landings.

Prop clearance on G1 and G2 aircraft is 7". For the G3 (2007) it is 9". It isn't just low prop clearance. Springy gear means that a nose wheel strike can easily result in PIO leading to a prop strike. Starting with the introduction of the SR22T, extra damping was added to the nose gear.

Since the sight picture out of a Cirrus is very different from a 172, most prop and tail strikes occur when low time in type.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I only flew an SR22 Turbo once. My landing was a greaser, and I came away thinking "WTF is everyone complaining about with these things being hard to land?"

Clearly, though, people do have problems. I like tall landing gear as a rule - works better on gravel/unimproved strips, and looks cooler.
Click to expand...

The sight picture is very different from a Cessna. It is causing me to fear the ground, and flare to quickly, causing me to float, causing me to have to add power.

Poor technique.
 
Adapting to a new sight picture is a common problem. Pilots transitioning to jets often think they are too flat, 421 pilots initially struggle with the long nose, Silver Eagle pilots must learn about the humped cowl. Newb Bonanza pilots feel like they are flying down-hill when in level flight.

Somehow they all seem to figure it out, so I assume you will be successful as well.

spiderweb said:
The sight picture is very different from a Cessna. It is causing me to fear the ground, and flare to quickly, causing me to float, causing me to have to add power.

Poor technique.
Click to expand...
 
spiderweb said:
The sight picture is very different from a Cessna. It is causing me to fear the ground, and flare to quickly, causing me to float, causing me to have to add power.
Click to expand...
If you flare too high just make it gradual and let yourself sink slowly. You will get to the ground eventually. Someone here has seen me do that, recently, because I'm used to flaring much higher... :redface:
 
wabower said:
Adapting to a new sight picture is a common problem. Pilots transitioning to jets often think they are too flat, 421 pilots initially struggle with the long nose, Silver Eagle pilots must learn about the humped cowl. Newb Bonanza pilots feel like they are flying down-hill when in level flight.

Somehow they all seem to figure it out, so I assume you will be successful as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I usually do. It usually doesn't take me 5 hours, though!
 
Everskyward said:
If you flare too high just make it gradual and let yourself sink slowly. You will get to the ground eventually. Someone here has seen me do that, recently, because I'm used to flaring much higher... :redface:
Click to expand...

I think that's what it is I need to do.
 
Ben, some twin time would do you some good. You fly it on, in a landing pitch attitude. It looks seriously different than that of the 182 or the PA32.
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Ben, some twin time would do you some good. You fly it on, in a landing pitch attitude. It looks seriously different than that of the 182 or the PA32.
Click to expand...

I am craving twin time! I just wish all the twin time near me didn't cost so much!

(Though I do understand why it does cost so much.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top