Originally Posted by
Adlerdriver
Isn't that pretty much what I said?
Yes and no, I am just saying that tower really didn't have time to determine that she was having difficulty flying the plane before it crashed. So they didn't get to do what you describe -- he had no forewarning nor indication until too late. He was just being helpful to what he assumed was a skilled and competent pilot.
I believe it is not Tower's duty to determine "who to send packing" and again he didn't have evidence yet to determine (in)competence.
Originally Posted by
Adlerdriver
The only thing Tower could have done differently would have been to send her packing much sooner to one of the many smaller airports in the Houston metro area.
On another topic - I'm completely ignorant of the Cirrus and it's operation/flying characteristics. So, what is so different about the SR20 airfoil that you would consider deviating from your stance against AOA gauges?[/QUOTE]
Sigh. I don't have a "stance against AOA gauges". My argument are against the unresearched and overenthusiastic claims that they would 1) increase safety for most GA pilots, 2) should be retrofitted for the GA fleet, 3) idiotic retorts that if you argue otherwise you "don't understand" how AOA works. All three are just false statements. As I said if a pilot feels he needs AOA indications to fly safely, go ahead and install one. Me, I agree with Chuck Yeager's quote. Most GA planes should be safely flyable with minimum of instrumentation by a qualified pilot.
If you get the opportunity go up in an SR20 or SR22 with a familiar CFI and spend a great deal of time poking around with the plane, particularly in the slow flight realm. I'll probably get some hate from the usual ignorant posters.
The major issues:
- On the "backside" of the power curve there is not a lot of lift reserve before airflow separates. When you are in a 172 and get slow, there is a LOT of realm before stall where you can have very high power setting and wallow around without any sinking, and before you stall, you KNOW you are about to stall. The SR20 will, in slow flight stall quite suddenly and do so asymetrically, particularly with power on stalls with moderate increases in AOA. There is a "split" airfoil that allows the wing roots to stall first, and the salesman will demonstrate roll control throughout the stall and in slow flight regime using the sidestick. Interesting, and not how traditional control through the stall is taught.
Wing loading is significantly higher for the SR20 - look at the size (and aspect ratio) of the wing when you see it in person. You can see it is very high performance.
The flight controls are sensitive and "spring loaded" to neutral position. I really did not like this and must say I never got used to it, but I could imagine that I could. The major issue was that the airplane does not mush like traditional planes. Over controlling with the sidestick at low speeds using the "joystick", particularly by a pilot that does not truly understand mechanics of flight (such as adverse yaw etc), is a real possibility and continues to happen. You don't (can't) get a "feel" for what you are doing, because there is very little feedback.
In a sense, this is similar to the Airbus design philosophy (and issues) in the transport airliner realm with their FBW controls.