Is Cirrus the new Bonanza?

[spiderweb]

It's a fairly lightweight piston single with fixed gear that's rather flimsy. Don't land it on rough strips. Don't get too close to thunderstorms. Realize you don't have true radar, only your NEXRAD (and perhaps a stormscope), and plan accordingly. Realize that icing in your dictionary should have as a definition "Something you stay the **** away from." Realize that 86% power is not a cruise point, and you should be easier on the engine if you want it to last.

You won't find these in any manual. They should be part of your personal minimums.

Seems like this is good advice for similar singles. I think what you're driving at is the marketing of the Cirrus. And I understand that.

 

[Ted]

Seems like this is good advice for similar singles. I think what you're driving at is the marketing of the Cirrus. And I understand that.

Correct. The marketing hype does not take into account the realities of how one should operate the airplane. Keep that in mind and operate it like it should be operated rather than how marketing wants you to operate it, and you'll be fine.

 

[wabower]

If the Bo hadn't been invented, would the other new retrac single of the same era (Navion) have become the doctor killer?

yeah they got the name doctor killer because of "stupid doctors", I can't think of another GA airplane with a nickname that has "killer" in it, at least one that is nearly as known

 

[dennyleeb]

If the Bo hadn't been invented, would the other new retrac single of the same era (Navion) have become the doctor killer?

If we had not gone to the moon do you think the Russians would have? Did the Navion break up in flight?

A little info I found interesting

The 10,000th Bonanza came off the production line in February 1977, but five years later, Beech discontinued production of the V-tail Bonanza to concentrate solely on the straight-tail Bonanza 36. Concerns over the safety of the V-tail design (and the resultant liability) undoubtedly played a major role in that decision. Independent studies found that the V-tail Bonanza had a fatal in-flight failure rate 24 times higher than the straight-tail version; a possible cause is the greater stress placed on the V-tail aircraft's tail and fuselage during pitch and yaw maneuvers than on the straight-tail version.

 

[Henning]

If we had not gone to the moon do you think the Russians would have? Did the Navion break up in flight?

A little info I found interesting

The 10,000th Bonanza came off the production line in February 1977, but five years later, Beech discontinued production of the V-tail Bonanza to concentrate solely on the straight-tail Bonanza 36. Concerns over the safety of the V-tail design (and the resultant liability) undoubtedly played a major role in that decision. Independent studies found that the V-tail Bonanza had a fatal in-flight failure rate 24 times higher than the straight-tail version; a possible cause is the greater stress placed on the V-tail aircraft's tail and fuselage during pitch and yaw maneuvers than on the straight-tail version.

Please explain that, also note that the entire piece is speculively written.

 

[dennyleeb]

Please explain that, also note that the entire piece is speculively written.

I am not a engineer. Are you?
Theb in flight break ups were speculative?

 

[peppy]

How about some real data from a time after the tail on the V-tail Bo was strengthened.

Percentage of fleet involved in a fatal accident since 2000.

V35 1.78%
A36 3.28%

My how data and perception often disagree.

 

[Henning]

I am not a engineer. Are you?
Theb in flight break ups were speculative?

No, the reason V tail production stopped.

You don't need to be an engineer to figure out that same work = same force required and that the V tail has no greater ability to take off the tail as the tri tail.

The issue as I have seen it is one of reduced drag and the ability to blow through Vne much more readily when you put down the nose of the V tail. Most of the failures were caused during high speed pullouts IIRC.

 

[wabower]

Did the Navion break up in flight?

.

Probably, if it had been subjected to the same stresses by the same group of under-trained and over-confident pilots who bit off more than they could chew.

 

[Henning]

Navion with a 285 conversion is a hell of an airplane! But IIRC the Navion empty weight is almost 400lbs more than the Bo of the time and is draggier. With that reasoned against the issue with Bo typically being a Vne+ pull out of an inadvertent dive, I question whether the Navion would have failed under the same abuses.

 

[peppy]

Navion with a 285 conversion is a hell of an airplane! But IIRC the Navion empty weight is almost 400lbs more than the Bo of the time and is draggier. With that reasoned against the issue with Bo typically being a Vne+ pull out of an inadvertent dive, I question whether the Navion would have failed under the same abuses.

That said, there was an AD that strengthened the tail. I believe that ended the issue.

 

[dennyleeb]

How about some real data from a time after the tail on the V-tail Bo was strengthened.

Percentage of fleet involved in a fatal accident since 2000.

V35 1.78%
A36 3.28%

My how data and perception often disagree.

Since 2000.

 

[wabower]

I spent many months at Beech during the mid-late 60's, heading the financial audit field work and installing BOM and inventory control computer systems. As a quasi-insider, I knew that they had been flying the C-33 prototype for some time, and had made the decision to convert future production (at some point) to straight tails, primarily because of marketing, performance and cost-weight issues vs engineering issues. The 36 was on the drawing boards, with the wing moved back for CG purposes and with the straight tail.

The doctor-killer tag had already been applied when I started flying V-tails in 1959. At the time, however, pilots and instructors were quick to point out that the "graveyard spiral" that led to many accidents was the fault of the pilots rather than the design of the airplane, and stressed the obvious fact that any airplane will break if the pilot pulls hard enough.

Also worth noting is that the Bo was introduced in the late 40's, and was the quickest, slickest, slipperiest GA plane ever produced. VFR was the culture of the day. Doctors were high earners and many were attracted to airplanes. Training was sketchy at at best, navaids and avionics were primitive and somewhat unreliable. With that combination, it's somewhat amazing that any of them survived. I still remember my first V-tail lesson, during which we practiced medium-bank turns during which the instructor demonstrated the plane's tendency to "wrap up steeper" rather than return to level flight, and the resulting nose-drop and speed increase that led to many funerals of prominent citizens around the country.

 

[peppy]

Since 2000.

Yes. Even here there are issues with the data. The V35 fleet was essentially fixed but decreasing and I suspect there are now lots of older pilots who don'r fly much but can't bear to part with their V-tail while the A36 has somewhat younger owners and probably flies more per month. Also, the A36 fleet size is increasing. The data only goes back to 1964 but if you look at it vs. present fleet size (major caveats apply) you get (since 1964):

DA40 0.84
SR22 1.86
M20 7.84
BE35 (all) 12.0
A36 8.4
V35 8.59
DA20 1.55
172 6.20
182 6.31
310 12.82
210 12.40

The Diamond and Cirrus numbers are meaningless due to low time of exposure i.e. lower lifetime fight hours per type. A little bit of this applies to the V-tail vs. the A36.

 

[SCCutler]

Do you have any reference information, NTSB stuff on the accident. I would be curious what the cause of the accident was.

+1.

I chose the Bonanza largely because of its robust construction and excellent engineering. While the problems with the later V-tails occurred when the planes were flown substantially outside their design envelope, they have nonetheless been addressed, and as modified, the V-tail has an excellent record.

 

[dennyleeb]

bottom line is I think the cirrus is a much better aircraft (but I chose not to buy one of those either because of their safety record) I have a hard time buying into the fact that it is just bad pilots

 

[Henning]

bottom line is I think the cirrus is a much better aircraft (but I chose not to buy one of those either because of their safety record) I have a hard time buying into the fact that it is just bad pilots in either of the above

Sorry, that's the facts Jack, pilots ARE the problem.

 

[peppy]

Sorry, that's the facts Jack, pilots ARE the problem.

Yep. If you compare an SR22 to a 172 then you see some differences in the accident profile. Once you start comparing to a Bonanza, C310, C210, M20, etc. the profiles begin to look very similar. For all the effort little seems to change. Eliminating spin training from the PPL did reduce spin accidents since training fatalities were an issue.

 

[dennyleeb]

Sorry, that's the facts Jack, pilots ARE the problem.

you are just so full of facts, amazing