Cobalt wrote:
Why do people continue to post this utter BS? The “controllability issues” does not even make sense since a parachute does not help here
You are correct, it’s well controllable down to VS with side stick but it has issues at slow speeds with high airframe drag
No need to spin it, it becomes apparent of you land it slowly on tarmac with full sideslip, 20deg nose up before you fire 310hp on your go-around on full falps 
What issues does it have?
I guess too much drag & too much power on the backside of the curve? its a known receipt for botched slow go-arounds on high nose and lack of rudder on type or minor tail scratches? probably it’s no different than any other +300hp high performance aircraft but surely it requires way more attention when it’s flying bellow it’s VS on full power, I doubt doing any of that on chute is healthy but I don’t have hundred of hours on type and I never been on chute to judge…
The aircraft is well controllable with stick at slow speeds down to VS+0.01kts
I am sorry – are you saying that the pilot flying the approach below Vs (?) and getting a tail strike is an airplane issue?
How does too much drag and too much power result in a tail strike?
What lack of rudder are you talking about? Demo x wind is 22 knots.
The Cirrus is very controllable even below Vs.
No the pilot (me RHS as pax who promised will do nothing this time), he flew a very slow approach > VS and lost lot of speed during his flare before he went for go-around after a heavy landing on full right rudder, the DB is here you can dig the list of landing and go-around accidents, many refer to loss of control on high power setting
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/type/SR22/4
T28 wrote:
The Cirrus is very controllable even below Vs.
Note sure what is in that video? but I think you are better off flying an SR22, go ahead have some full power stalls on it, drop the wing, sideslip it slowly to short grass on power…you will get a better opinion than a YT video on how it will fly on power while dragging it’s chute !
No the pilot (me RHS as pax who promised will do nothing this time), he flew a very slow approach > VS and lost lot of speed during his flare before he went for go-around after a heavy landing on full right rudder
And what exactly is the airframe specific control issue there?!
the DB is here you can dig the list of landing and go-around accidents, many refer to loss of control on high power setting
What I could not dig is the accident being caused by a lack of or deficiency of flight controls authority or otherwise unhealthy airfoil / airframe behavior through the certified airspeed range. Can you point it out?
Note sure what is in that video? but I think you are better off flying an SR22, go ahead have some full power stalls on it, drop the wing, sideslip it slowly to short grass on power…
I have 100+ hours on it, and I still struggle to make sense of any of the above. Or how any of that is relevant to Cirrus needing a chute. Or to how it relates to “flight” under a deployed canopy.
T28 wrote:
What I could not dig is the accident being caused by a lack of or deficiency of flight controls authority or otherwise unhealthy airfoil / airframe behavior through the certified airspeed range. Can you point it out?
Nothing fancy, just needs a lot of rudder when it’s getting dragged at slow speeds and high power, in case you never noticed? but apparently you are more expert on the type, it will be good if you could share some of your YT videos of SR22 power ON stalls
From here
That proposition will never get tested because Cirrus pilots are taught to pull the chute even if an off-airport landing appears assured
The Cirrus mantra “pull fast, pull often” or whatever it was, is the only right thing to do from a statistical point of view.
Yes you are right, statistically we would be all dead without airframe parachutes, I can’t count how many saves I made using it
I can see why Cirrus from a liability management perspective would adopt that policy. They may even have lower product liability costs (insurance and damage claims) as a consequence?
