Comparing the Corvalis TTx, Corvalis TT (Columbia 400) and Cirrus SR22T G3

It is also important to note that the flap of the TTx also carries 8° more flaps when placed in the full position. This allows for shorter ground rolls and steeper approach. The cool thing is that even with all those flaps hanging out, the TTx will climb better than 500 feet per minute on a go around if the pilot forgets to raise the flaps. The TTx has aŵaziŶg flLJiŶg Ƌualities. TheLJ’ƌe ƌeallLJ seĐoŶd to Ŷo pistoŶ geŶeƌal aǀiatioŶ aiƌĐƌaft iŶ the Ŷoƌŵal aŶd utilitLJ ĐategoƌLJ. It’s iŶĐƌediďlLJ doĐile aŶd Ŷiŵďle all ǁhile ŵaiŶtaiŶiŶg a ǀeƌLJ high leǀel of staďilitLJ. That’s ǀeƌLJ rare. Usually when performance and nimble handling characteristics are increased, stability suffers. Not the case with the TTx. Flying the TTx is really flying! You want to hand fly the aiƌĐƌaft, ďut it’s alǁaLJs ŶiĐe to kŶoǁ that LJou have the amazing GFC 700 autopilot backing you up. Two common flight quality complaints about the Cirrus are the flight controls and trim system. It is simply not a comfortable airplane to haŶd flLJ fƌoŵ aŶ eƌgoŶoŵiĐ staŶdpoiŶt and it’s diffiĐult to applLJ fiŶe tƌiŵ ŵoǀeŵeŶts. In short, it laĐks a taĐtiĐal feel ǁheŶ flLJiŶg the aiƌĐƌaft. With the additioŶ of a ĐoŶtƌol ĐeŶteƌiŶg spƌiŶg, LJou doŶ’t get the tLJpiĐal aiƌspeed load feel that you do on other aircraft. I suspect this is another factor in the stall spin hazards facing the Cirrus. In fact, Cirrus sent out a safety alert in 2010 encouraging recurrent training every 6 months, with an emphasis on landing operations. The Cirrus has an interesting set up for selecting power settings. They have a special linkage between the throttle and prop governor that removes the prop control from the Cirrus. Contrary to many things that you hear, it is not a FADEC system. Cirrus simply has decided the RPM you should be running at a given manifold pressure. Cirrus boasts that it ŵakes eŶgiŶe ŵaŶageŵeŶt easLJ, aŶd theLJ’ƌe ƌight. Foƌ aŶ uŶeduĐated pilot, the Ciƌƌus eŶgiŶe is easier to manage. With this said, if we give a TTx pilot one settiŶg to flLJ, it’s just as easLJ to ŵaŶage the eŶgiŶe. Pilots that want to learn how to properly run their engine have much more flexibility in the TTx. Let’s talk ŵoƌe aďout safetLJ. EǀeƌLJthiŶg oŶ the TTx is designed to eliminate a single point of failure situations. The TTx has four very efficiently designed flap hinges per flap, three aileron hinges, dual wing spaƌs, dual hoƌizoŶtal staďilizeƌ suppoƌt tuďes, dual alteƌŶatoƌs, dual ďatteƌies… LJou get the piĐtuƌe. To top it off, the TTx has a built in roll cage made of carbon fiber maximizing structural integrity in a crash and protecting the occupants. The TTx electrical system is also unique to the piston world. The aircraft has no standby batteries, but rather two independent busses, each with an alternator and battery. Both busses have components specifically dedicated to them, however the essential and avionics bus receive power from both busses at all times. In the rare event that one alternator is lost, the aircraft receives an annunciation on the PFD were then the pilot simply selects the "CROSSTIE" switch to the "ON" position and the other alternator covers the entire electrical load. No load shedding necessary. In the unheard of event that both alternators quit working, the pilot has 30 minutes of electrical power to get on the ground. The Cirrus' paƌaĐhute. Let’s eŶd soŵe of the ŵLJths ƌegaƌdiŶg the paƌaĐhute ƌight Ŷoǁ. MaŶLJ dispute the Ŷuŵďeƌ of liǀes saǀed ďLJ the paƌaĐhute. Ciƌƌus is sŵaƌt to ŵadžiŵize the Ŷuŵďeƌs hoǁeǀeƌ, Ŷo oŶe ĐaŶ argue that the parachute has iŶ faĐt saǀed liǀes. It ǁoƌks. That’s also the ƌeasoŶ that ŵaŶLJ CessŶa ϭϳϮ aŶd 4 | P a g e 182 owners have elected to install the BRS on their aircraft. There are also rumors that the parachute allowed Cirrus to bypass the standard spin certification standards. The FAA requested that Cirrus test the SR22 parachute throughout the envelope. This included deployment at VNE and during a one turn spin. Normal spins and recovery were still tested and it will recover from a standard spin, just as the TTx will. But the POH does state that CAPS is the oŶlLJ aĐĐeptaďle ŵethod foƌ ƌeĐoǀeƌiŶg foƌ spiŶs. While the aircraft can recover from spins, the typical pilot buying the TTx and Cirrus would probably not be able to safely recover. The great thing about the TTx is that it is extremely difficult to even get close to a spin. While demonstrating the TTx into a stall, one can hold on the stop and rolling the wings from 30° to 30° in the opposite direction while in the stall! The TTx is ǀeƌLJ Đoŵfoƌtaďle to flLJ. “oŵe saLJ it’s a little ŵoƌe diffiĐult to get iŶto the fƌoŶt seats, aŶd that may be aĐĐuƌate, ďut oŶĐe LJou’ƌe iŶ its ǀeƌLJ Đoŵfoƌtaďle. The seats aƌe aŵaziŶg. EƌgoŶoŵiĐs of the stiĐk loĐatioŶ iŶ ĐoŵďiŶatioŶ ǁith the dooƌ aƌŵ ƌests ŵake foƌ ǀeƌLJ Đoŵfoƌtaďle ͞ fiŶgeƌtip͟ flLJiŶg of the TTx. There is a touch more shoulder room in the Ciƌƌus, ďut oŶlLJ ďLJ ϭ.ϭϯ iŶĐhes. It’s pƌettLJ Ŷegligiďle. Theƌe is also a little ŵoƌe headroom in the Cirrus, only by .7 of an inch. Effective headroom is better in the TTx because the seats sit lower. For those with long torsos, the TTx will be noticeably different. The real test is a 4 hour flight in each aircraft. You’ll ďe ŵuĐh ŵoƌe fatigued iŶ a Ciƌƌus thaŶ a Coƌǀalis. Selling points of the TTx: 1. Most think that the airplane is more aesthetically pleasing. 2. Airframe Strength & Integrity 3. Better low airspeed performance. 4. Much better handling characteristics and flying qualities. 5. More flexible in regards to speeds in the terminal environment. 6. Better fit & finish 7. While the Cirrus may have a few more avionics options than the Corvalis TT (but not the TTx), they Coƌǀalis pilot ĐaŶ get iŶto aŶLJ aiƌpoƌt that the Ciƌƌus ĐaŶ ;theLJ ĐaŶ’t flLJ aŶLJ appƌoaĐhes that ǁe ĐaŶ’tͿ. 8. The TTx seats are much more comfortable. 2 hours in Cirrus can be relatively painful. This is because the seats are built for a landing under parachute canopy. 9. More engine power settings resulting from a separate prop control, increasing utility, flexibility and range.