M20F

Angle of bank with no loss in altitude. To maintain altitude you apply back pressure which increases the load factor on the wing and stall speed goes up. The chart really lists how G's effect stall speed because mathematically a level bank angle of X degrees is Y G's. As you have no way to measure G loads in most planes they are just giving you something to use as rough thumb to approximate your G load. An accelerated stall occurs at a speed higher than normal due to a higher load factor (g's), bank has nothing to do with it. This video will show accelerated stalls, if you watch starting at 2 minutes you will see an accelerated stall flying straight ahead. They don't stall because they dropped below Vs, they stall because they loaded up the wings so if they pulled 2G's the plane would have stalled at the same speed as @ 60 degree bank (without the bank). Accelerated stalls occur primarily base to final or the impossible turn (disorientation in IMC cruise would be another place where they occur but will ignore that situation), in both cases the goal is to lose altitude and land. In a normal landing somewhere usually abeam the numbers you reduce power and start descending, turn base, and turn final. If you keep the nose down (and the wings unloaded) it doesn't matter what bank angle you do your stall speed will not change from Vs/Vso. More bank angle is probably better than less because what often happens with a shallow bank is in a crosswind you overshoot final, dump in more bank to correct, and then pull back on the stick to tighten the turn. That increases the wing loading and the accelerated stall happens followed quickly by crashing. If it is the impossible turn then people bank aggressively and will start to rapidly descend, they pull back on the stick to control altitude, and bang you have an accelerated stall. If you have enough altitude to turn 180 with the nose falling a turn back on departure works, if not you are either crashing short or putting yourself into an accelerated stall. If you keep the nose down going around the pattern and you feel the need to pull back on the stick then best to roll out; add power; and go around. If you do that no need to memorize a bunch of stall speeds or worrying about stalling, rolling into a spin, etc. Pulling back on the stick prior to flare once you start down from downwind is what gets people in trouble. Mark or one of the other CFI's will come along and explain it a bit better than I probably did.

It changes with load factor. Put 2 G's on your wings in straight flight and your stall speed is going to be the same as a @60 degree bank. Put a plane in a 60 degree bank with no back pressure and your stall speed isn't going to change from straight and level. Bank angle doesn't get you in the pattern, loading the wings gets you. If people would just let the nose fall downwind, base, to final we would eliminate about 90% of all stall incidents.

Do you see this in a climb to high (teen's up) altitude? I on occasion see this and have just ascribed it to vapor lock'ish issues which the boost pump corrects (I don't see RPM fluctuations though) and it cleans itself up after the pump runs a bit or I level off.

Stall speed changes with weight and configuration, bank angle does not change stall speed.

The Cirrus checklists are the same or shorter than a Mooney (mainly because you don't have to deal with the gear). If you look at the other checklists they are verbose but none of the items are done in a critical portion of flight though certainly detailed especially the walk around which probably isn't a bad thing. I really don't see how you come up with 80% checklists / 20% flying the plane for doing pattern work (or normal flight for that matter). Normal Takeoff 1. Brakes........................................................................... Release 2. Power Lever .........................................................Full Forward 3. Engine Parameters.......................................................... Check 4. Elevator Control .....................................Rotate at 70-73 KIAS 5. At 80 KIAS................................................................. Flaps Up Climb 1. Climb Power.........................................................................Set 2. Flaps ......................................................................... Verify Up 3. Mixture ..........................................................Lean as Required 4. Engine Parameters.......................................................... Check 5. Fuel Pump ........................................................................... Off Cruise 1. Fuel Pump ........................................................................... Off 2. Cruise Power ........................................................................Set 3. Mixture..........................................................Lean as Required 4. Engine Parameters........................................................Monitor 5. Fuel Flow and Balance.................................................Monitor Descent 1. Altimeter ..............................................................................Set 2. Cabin Heat / Defrost .............................................As Required 3. Landing Light....................................................................... On 4. Fuel System.....................................................................Check 5. Mixture..................................................................As Required 6. Brake Pressure.................................................................Check Before Landing 1. Seat Belts and Harnesses................................................Secure 2. Fuel Pump ........................................................................Boost 3. Mixture..................................................................As Required 4. Flaps ......................................................................As Required 5. Autopilot ...............................................................As Required Normal Landing 1. Entry Power.................................................................. 15" MP 2. Entry Speed .............................................................. 120 KIAS 3. Abeam Power ............................................................... 11" MP 4. Abeam Flaps...................................................................... 50% 5. Abeam Speed............................................................ 100 KIAS 6. Base Speed ................................................................. 90 KIAS 7. Aproach Flaps ................................................................. 100% 8. Approach Speed ......................................................... 80 KIAS

If you fly a SR22 at the same speed as 172 it is going to stall, if you fly your E at the same speed as a 172 it is going to stall as well. Put any plane in a 60 degree bank close to Vs and yank on the stick and the result is going to be the same as the video KevinW linked. An Ovation has a VS0 of 59 knots and I really don't think people fly it differently than they do any other Mooney or most other GA planes, just faster.

I would agree but by the same token when people come here and ask is buying an Ovation good to get their PPL in the posts are overwhelmingly yes of course it is. A complex/high performance plane of any model doesn't make a good trainer in my book, it has nothing to do with a Cirrus specifically. I have about 200hrs of SR22 time and it is a certainly a lot easier to land. The high wing loading makes them a lot more responsive to control inputs than a Mooney (which drives like a dump truck) but it makes them real twitchy when trying to be precise hand flying an ILS where dump truck control is more preferred. Personally I don't get why people like Cirrus's so much but I also don't get the hate for them either.

I just looked you up on Flightaware and every single routing you have gotten has fixes in it, are you filing those or filing direct? I can see DC up to BOS to some extent but the routing out of KSAV and the others seems unusual. I fly in/out of KMMU and KHEF albeit East/West and aside from a SID/STAR or a gate fix have never seen anything like what you are seeing.

How so?

@150-169 knots TAS in level flight, the 195 knots is ground speed with the nose pointed down. His two posts were a little unclear but if you reread should make sense.

Between 2001 and May 2014 147 US-registered Cirrus SR22 aircraft crashed, resulting in 122 fatalities.[46] In 2011, the accident record of the SR20 and SR22 was the subject of a detailed examination by Aviation Consumer magazine. The review concluded that the series has an overall accident record that is better than average for light aircraft, exceeded only by the Diamond DA40 and DA42. However its fatal accident rate is much worse, at 1.6 per 100,000 flight hours—which places it higher than the United States general aviation rate of 1.2, and higher than the Diamond DA40 (0.35), Cessna 172 (0.45), Diamond DA42 (0.54), Cessna 182 (0.69), and the Cessna 400 (1.0), despite the SR22's full aircraft parachute system.[47] By 2014, the accident rate was dramatically reduced to a 2013 fatality rate of 1.01 per 100,000 flight hours. This was attributed to better training, particularly in when to deploy the ballistic parachute system.[48] By 2015 the accident rate continued to decrease, with a 2014 fatal rate of .42 per 100,000 flight hours, making it one of the best safety records in the industry. This marked the fewest fatalities in a single year for Cirrus since 2001, and the first year where the number of CAPS deployments (12) exceeded the number of fatal accidents (3).[49][50][4] Source I think (and this is just a feeling, not a fact) that a lot of people with more money than brains bought Cirrus's just like a lot of doctors in the day bought Bonanza's. You take a poor pilot and put them in any airplane they are going to crash a lot. Don't stall an airplane and it won't crash. Cirrus's are nothing special in this regard.

Fair enough but either way that one was ending poorly. There is a Youtube video off a GoPro out there which I am sure somebody will link of some airplane in Switzerland who had almost the exact same situation (a mid-air) and pulled the chute and lived (non-chute guys died, I think the glider guys bailed out and lived. Memory is fuzzy). I don't think it was a Cirrus.

Spins aren't the issue, accelerated stalls are the issue which come from overshooting base to final or trying to make the impossible turn in almost everyone of these instances. A spin is just the result of the stall occurring in the first place and no plane is going to recover from a spin at 400' AGL. In the Cirrus if you immediately popped the chute you might live so certainly better odds then doing it in a Mooney. The point being, do not stall close to the ground.

They elected not to do spins in the certification process thus the chute. Emotions aside in the discussion there has yet I believe to be a fatality from a proper chute pull on a Cirrus. I personally wouldn't spend the bucks on a chute but really no denying they are about the best thing for saving your life when used correctly (not so much for your plane/insurance company).

No matter how you slice it though my understanding is you need a 3 blade for the STC because a 2 blade isn't going to convert 310HP to thrust.

It is always going to flow back to this. We can all point to the Colgan incident and dozen's of other 121 incidents with all kinds of technology where accidents happen that we scratch our head at. When you feel G's in the pattern, in VMC, let go of the stick; add power; and go around. It is really that simple and if you can't correlate that chain of events into action, then having bitching Betty screaming in your ear probably isn't going to make much of a difference. AOA to me is something exceptionally useful to have when in IMC where you can't trust your eyes and the G's. For VMC though getting into this kind of problem is really related to something else that technology doesn't help. My opinion, and just in the context of AOA's/Technology not the crash in question.

I fly in/out of ORD Class B which is usually a multi fix clearance. I have yet to not have the routing listed on Flightaware match what I get from either C&D or Departure if I pick up in the air, anywhere in the US. Thus file, look at Flightaware, write down. My last long routing was RV OREOS OBENE CARET ROEZZ KMKC which is standard for a trip I have been taking lately. Take off RV 270, 15-20NM's later, cleared direct, I can't remember the last time I have actually even made it to the first fix when given 10+ fixes in a clearance (thus I never bother twisting them all in). Where is everyone getting consistently 10+ fixes in the US with an enroute GPS filed direct? We usually get 1-2 gate fixes on the way back depending upon direction of flight which I certainly love putting in using Avidyne keyboard but not enough to spend a lot of AMU's to save a couple twists on the Mooney. I have a lot of hours behind a 530W and about 200 hours behind an Avidyne 9. To be honest I really don't use any of the screens that much in comparison to the iPad (we stopped with chart updates on the Avidyne because it got used to little). Don't get me wrong I have nothing against either and given a choice I would surely take a 530/740 over a 430 if it was free. In terms of what to do though I fail to see how going from a 430 to a 740 gets a bigger ROI in terms of dollars or functionality over an Aspen. Are you seriously telling me with your dual 430 set up you would prefer a 740 over a Aspen/Garmin 500/Other PFD install? No ADS-B out with just a FS110/210 either, if you have an out solution than both that solution and the Stratus 2 work. I really don't get what the FS110/210 gets you. ADS-B/Mode S/etc. isn't exactly reliable in any flavor yet and there have been a lot of threads to that effect. I don't discount having it as it has picked up a lot of planes I haven't seen, it has also missed a fair amount of planes I do see and it doesn't it. I guess there is something to be said for reliably unreliable.

A 750 isn't bigger than my iPad, I really don't see what the big fascination is with large screens on a GPS/MFD. For a PFD a larger screen with synthetic vision is nice but realistically for the GA world a Aspen screen seems plenty suffice to me. As a buyer I am big on capability and having a PFD like a Garmin 500/Aspen seems to be a lot more useful than a big giant GPS screen that a $500 iPad can beat in a million different ways. I completely do not get why people like the FS110/210 (somebody educate me here) versus a Stratus 2. I can't remember the last time I got an airway as a clearance and when I have gotten fixes you never even make it to the first one before being cleared direct. I like a keypad versus the twist knob but not enough to spend a lot of AMU's for it. The weather and other functionality means you need GDL84/88 which is additional cost and at the end of the day gives you nothing more than you can already get out of Stratus 2 (or the $200 build your own version). Just my opinion to yours (and probably others!) :-)

I have nothing against an AOA the more arrows in the quiver the better. At the end of the day though you feel G's and when you feel them your natural reaction has to be to unload the wings. In a typical GA plane if you are in the pattern push the nose down and go around and try again, it isn't rocket science. I am in no way speculating about the particular crash in question just making a general comment.

We often cross control for slips to bleed of excess speed/altitude and in cross winds. Many of us make 30+ degree turns base to final because we fly close and tight. Making a shallow turn and then pulling back on the stick to tighten the turn (coupled with a little crush of the rudder) because you are over shooting is how a lot of these unfortunate situations come about. Accelerated stalls and simple better understanding of them coupled with the knowledge that if you don't load up the wings you can bank 90 degrees, mash the rudder, etc. and not worry about stall/spins would help the piloting world quite a bit. Don't be afraid to bank big, just don't pull back on the stick when you do.

I have a Bose A20 with the bluetooth and the quality on the phone is great. When I was based at 06C I used to call Chicago approach directly and they would clear you at the threshold to go. I can personally neither confirm nor deny but have "heard" you can even call a taxi while coming into land at places with no issues.

Not so sure about that, stitching looks awfully straight. Might need to increase beverage intake.

Congrats, what's the TAS to go with that ground speed?

I think Clarence might take exception to that statement.

I agree with Scott here there are some nice tweaks on the newer Avidyne or Garmin boxes but nothing that makes me want to sink $6K+ to get one unless you are looking for WAAS. I would think getting an Aspen to pair to an existing 530W or 430W would be a lot more bang for the buck (especially if you lack an HSI today) in terms of both resale and features.