i was watching the promo video and they said thta they have a special propeller because at 25000feet with favorable winds it can break the sound barrier breaking it apart....crazy!!!
I LOVE the Corvallis 400TT (Cessna400) and I can hardly wait until I get a chance to fly one. Sat in one this weekend at the local airport. Very nice airplane. My grandson (12) really thought it was 'sweet'.
TKS doesn't seem to work well on fixed gear. I've used it on the Mooney for known ice and it works great. I've never heard of problems but the Cirrus has had crashes. I think the big ice collectors under the wings make it not good for known-ice.
Any crashes involved with icing is probably a dumb thing, because its generally advised not to fly into known icing areas. and most fixed gear planes can't really climb into icing unless you live in that kind of area. and in jersey, its not really a problem. idk...maybe you live in the arctic. lol just messing. all depends on where you live.
Oh and wait. the Columbia is certified utility category. Not bad.
Oh and one more thing. If you get a Columbia in a spin, you recover with rudder. In a Cirrus, you recover with parachute then explain why you wrote your $500,000 airplane off to your insurance guy while the Columbia pilot gains even more confidence in his airplane and his skills.
Ah yes....But what if, oh, your engine fails? what do you do in a columbia? Dead stick and pray you can land somewhere. How about a cirrus? pull the CAPS handle, land wherever you want. instead of trashing your plane.
oh and, wasn't the columbia a lancair plane? yeah.....thats right.
and how about turbochargers? i'm not aware that a columbia comes with one.
"dead stick and pray you can land somewhere"? you bet. i was trained to fly airplanes, not parachutes, and in a manner that ALWAYS allows me a way out. it's called a forced approach, and it's a required skill, way better than being at the mercy of the wind.
a CAPS deployment usually results in a write-off, just so you know. between the rocket deployment and the weird landing attitude, it wrecks airframes.
the columbia 400 is a TSIO550-powered airplane. the "T" is for turbo. look it up.
@kimiles1 There is one major advantage to the CAPS and that is your chances are better for walking away from a deadstick landing at night with the CAPS as opposed to a forced landing.
The (proudly) Lancair/Columbia 400 is a TSIO550-powered airplane. "T" for turbo. You really should look things up before committing.
And I'll deadstick the airplane in a forced approach any day over pulling the holy s*&t handle, because I'm a pilot, and that's what pilots do when things go wrong. We FLY the airplane.
And a CAPS or other BRS deployment will most often write off the airframe, between the rocket going off and the unusual landing attitude of the airplane. This is well-documented.
Easy there son. Maybe you ought to chill a little bit. First off its youtube. Its a video on TKS!!! Does it matter? sorry for injuring your pride here, bud.
pballa92: everytime you open your mouth you demonstrate your ignorance of the subject. The only thing that's laughable here is the fact that you had all these wrong ideas in that tiny brain of yours while walking around the Columbia area with a Cirrus shirt on.
cool it buster. i'm gonna tell you what i told your little amigo kimiles1. its a YOUTUBE video about TKS! does it matter? and cirruses arent dumpy, they're majestic. so chill out a little. they're airplanes. so unless you build every columbia yourself, maybe you should just let it go.
you're right. sorry about the repeat post; it didn't seem to take the first time, so i did it again, then both posts appeared, so i didn't mean for it to come up twice and seem real aggravated. my apologies.
i don't think cirrus makes poor airplanes; they're gorgeous. i'm just kinda partial to the columbias. i'd happily take either!
with tks. which is really the point.
just curious as to how i became "little" kimiles1... that's funny
its all good. I frankly didn't even remember the first post, so i was like....woah. Everybody's got to have their loyalties though. they're pretty much the same, but i will say that columbias have more cargo space, which would be nice when going on trips.
The columbia was designed by Lance, who started the Lancair kit plane company... Who sold the kit plane company, when he wanted to design and Certify a "NEW" plane under the name Lancair Certified Aircraft, and received prototype cert. August of 97 for the 300. The 350 came around 2004 which was the "air-conditioned ready" version of the 300. The 400 was certified in 2005. Lance was bought out of the company later that year by the 49% owner, government of Malaysia, who changed the name to CAM.
@pballa92 If you pull the CAPS handle, you will total the airplane in the process. Also the CAPS parachute is not steerable. You land wherever the wind and you position of deployment take you. And there are no guarantees. Even the CAPS activation handle itself is marked with a warning 'PULLING THIS HANDLE MAY RESULT IN INJURY OR DEATH'.
@cff121 Alright, I'll give you that the CAPS handle isn't steerable, but its a lot better than dead sticking. That said, it doesn't destroy the airplane in the process. I was at the Cirrus factory and they showed us a plane that had just recently deployed its CAPS system and was back in the factory to be repaired. The parachute is mounted on reinforced points on the airframe and the straps are covered when the skin is put on. When the parachute deploys, a recessed cover on the top of the tail is
ejected and a rocket pulls the parachute out. The parachute straps are pulled from under the skin and, unless you land in a tree or on a mountain or something, the airplane isn't "destroyed". Some structural damage? Yes, but (in many cases) the plane remains generally intact. Want proof? Check out some videos of CAPS deployments. The plane isn't "destroyed."
i was watching the promo video and they said thta they have a special propeller because at 25000feet with favorable winds it can break the sound barrier breaking it apart....crazy!!!
chris5812341234 1 year ago
I LOVE the Corvallis 400TT (Cessna400) and I can hardly wait until I get a chance to fly one. Sat in one this weekend at the local airport. Very nice airplane. My grandson (12) really thought it was 'sweet'.
ljackso 2 years ago
hmm... ok, I'll buy that :-)
Blaine748 2 years ago
TKS doesn't seem to work well on fixed gear. I've used it on the Mooney for known ice and it works great. I've never heard of problems but the Cirrus has had crashes. I think the big ice collectors under the wings make it not good for known-ice.
RobertGary1 4 years ago
Any crashes involved with icing is probably a dumb thing, because its generally advised not to fly into known icing areas. and most fixed gear planes can't really climb into icing unless you live in that kind of area. and in jersey, its not really a problem. idk...maybe you live in the arctic. lol just messing. all depends on where you live.
pballa92 4 years ago
Nothing wrontg with flying through known ice when you have TKS installed and an FAA certificate for "Flight into Known Icing Conditions" on your AFM.
RobertGary1 3 years ago
"columbias....hahahah....so ancient compared to the cirrus. i had a good time wearing a cirrus shirt in the columbia area. "-pballa92
...which makes cirrus appear all the worse for having planes which are so much slower and dumpier looking.
haha
Ardrex 4 years ago
HAHAHAHAH cirrus is nothing compared to columbia.
ballsmclongschlong 4 years ago
columbias....hahahah....so ancient compared to the cirrus. i had a good time wearing a cirrus shirt in the columbia area.
pballa92 4 years ago
Columbia 400: 310hp, 230KTAS at FL180
Cirrus SR22 T: 310hp, 219KTAS at FL250
Oh and wait. the Columbia is certified utility category. Not bad.
Oh and one more thing. If you get a Columbia in a spin, you recover with rudder. In a Cirrus, you recover with parachute then explain why you wrote your $500,000 airplane off to your insurance guy while the Columbia pilot gains even more confidence in his airplane and his skills.
"Ancient"? I don't think so.
Compared to Cirrus? Absolutely not.
kimiles1 4 years ago
Ah yes....But what if, oh, your engine fails? what do you do in a columbia? Dead stick and pray you can land somewhere. How about a cirrus? pull the CAPS handle, land wherever you want. instead of trashing your plane.
oh and, wasn't the columbia a lancair plane? yeah.....thats right.
and how about turbochargers? i'm not aware that a columbia comes with one.
pballa92 4 years ago
"dead stick and pray you can land somewhere"? you bet. i was trained to fly airplanes, not parachutes, and in a manner that ALWAYS allows me a way out. it's called a forced approach, and it's a required skill, way better than being at the mercy of the wind.
a CAPS deployment usually results in a write-off, just so you know. between the rocket deployment and the weird landing attitude, it wrecks airframes.
the columbia 400 is a TSIO550-powered airplane. the "T" is for turbo. look it up.
kimiles1 4 years ago
@kimiles1 There is one major advantage to the CAPS and that is your chances are better for walking away from a deadstick landing at night with the CAPS as opposed to a forced landing.
cff121 1 year ago
The (proudly) Lancair/Columbia 400 is a TSIO550-powered airplane. "T" for turbo. You really should look things up before committing.
And I'll deadstick the airplane in a forced approach any day over pulling the holy s*&t handle, because I'm a pilot, and that's what pilots do when things go wrong. We FLY the airplane.
And a CAPS or other BRS deployment will most often write off the airframe, between the rocket going off and the unusual landing attitude of the airplane. This is well-documented.
kimiles1 4 years ago
Easy there son. Maybe you ought to chill a little bit. First off its youtube. Its a video on TKS!!! Does it matter? sorry for injuring your pride here, bud.
pballa92 4 years ago
pballa92: everytime you open your mouth you demonstrate your ignorance of the subject. The only thing that's laughable here is the fact that you had all these wrong ideas in that tiny brain of yours while walking around the Columbia area with a Cirrus shirt on.
Ardrex 4 years ago
cool it buster. i'm gonna tell you what i told your little amigo kimiles1. its a YOUTUBE video about TKS! does it matter? and cirruses arent dumpy, they're majestic. so chill out a little. they're airplanes. so unless you build every columbia yourself, maybe you should just let it go.
pballa92 4 years ago
you're right. sorry about the repeat post; it didn't seem to take the first time, so i did it again, then both posts appeared, so i didn't mean for it to come up twice and seem real aggravated. my apologies.
i don't think cirrus makes poor airplanes; they're gorgeous. i'm just kinda partial to the columbias. i'd happily take either!
with tks. which is really the point.
just curious as to how i became "little" kimiles1... that's funny
kimiles1 4 years ago
its all good. I frankly didn't even remember the first post, so i was like....woah. Everybody's got to have their loyalties though. they're pretty much the same, but i will say that columbias have more cargo space, which would be nice when going on trips.
pballa92 4 years ago
The columbia was designed by Lance, who started the Lancair kit plane company... Who sold the kit plane company, when he wanted to design and Certify a "NEW" plane under the name Lancair Certified Aircraft, and received prototype cert. August of 97 for the 300. The 350 came around 2004 which was the "air-conditioned ready" version of the 300. The 400 was certified in 2005. Lance was bought out of the company later that year by the 49% owner, government of Malaysia, who changed the name to CAM.
Blaine748 2 years ago
...and the change from 350 to the 400 was the TURBOCHARGE! oh yeah.. and the huge Garmin redesigned Instrument Panel that your Cirrus very much lacks.
I worked at Columbia/Lancair Certified from 2002-2007
Blaine748 2 years ago
@pballa92 If you pull the CAPS handle, you will total the airplane in the process. Also the CAPS parachute is not steerable. You land wherever the wind and you position of deployment take you. And there are no guarantees. Even the CAPS activation handle itself is marked with a warning 'PULLING THIS HANDLE MAY RESULT IN INJURY OR DEATH'.
cff121 1 year ago
@cff121 Alright, I'll give you that the CAPS handle isn't steerable, but its a lot better than dead sticking. That said, it doesn't destroy the airplane in the process. I was at the Cirrus factory and they showed us a plane that had just recently deployed its CAPS system and was back in the factory to be repaired. The parachute is mounted on reinforced points on the airframe and the straps are covered when the skin is put on. When the parachute deploys, a recessed cover on the top of the tail is
pballa92 1 year ago
ejected and a rocket pulls the parachute out. The parachute straps are pulled from under the skin and, unless you land in a tree or on a mountain or something, the airplane isn't "destroyed". Some structural damage? Yes, but (in many cases) the plane remains generally intact. Want proof? Check out some videos of CAPS deployments. The plane isn't "destroyed."
pballa92 1 year ago
cool
Xxflyboy10xX 4 years ago