BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Oct 2011, 23:09

Username Protected wrote:

If I was rating an aviation "best buy" it'd have to be a late model Cirrus...you can get one 25 years newer than a Bo for equal money with perfect cosmetics, glass panel, 10-15kts more speed and a parachute...if I didn't need 6 seats I'd give'm a good look...

Oh the heresy !

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Oct 2011, 23:36

I have flown the Cirrus twice and can't say I'm thrilled about it.

New Airplane prices are just out of control. Piston singles for 800K? i don't care if its a G36 or SR22. I could put PT6's on my duke for that kind of $$..

.. & buy a recent TN Bo with the money left-over from not spending 1.5M on a non-TC, non-Pressurized Baron.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Oct 2011, 23:46

Many flight schools were letting them go back to the bank, going at auction for 150K plus?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Oct 2011, 23:54

Username Protected wrote:

Many flight schools were letting them go back to the bank, going at auction for 150K plus?

They are a victim of their own success. Just so darn many on the market from the '05-'08 timeframe.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 01:04

Cirrus is going down the same road that the Grumman line did.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 01:17

Username Protected wrote:

Cirrus is going down the same road that the Grumman line did.

Not aware of that historical parallel ?

What worries me about Cirrus is their lack of innovation. So far, they have done nothing really different from what Beech and Cessna have done over the same period. Bolt new boxes inside, tweak some things on the engine, fix some design flaws etc. Nothing really new or innovative. Bringing the jet to market or introducing a pressurized SR22 would be something new, with the new owners I dont see either of those things happening.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 04:00

Username Protected wrote:

.........it's actually a pretty nice plane (my second-favorite plane after my current one).......

That's the whole point.

The 2000 and something Cirrus is your favorite after the 44 year old Beech you are currently flying.
An airplane from the 60s that is still holding up against competitors in 2011, that’s what I call an excellent product.

Makes me wonder how the current Cirrus aircraft will be valued in the market in 2055.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 08:24

I liked the SR22 I used to have. But I like my Bo more.

My close friend at the airport has a turbo sr22 and he loves it. He thinks my Bonanza is an "old fogey" airplane.

I have to say I do like the cockpit layout of the Cirrus. Is is nice.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 08:38

$800K for an airplane that uses only differential braking for directional control taxiing... and didn't they have brake fires as a result with xwinds during prolonged taxi.
Am I right about this? May have been addressed but I'm curious.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 08:38

Username Protected wrote:

Cirrus is going down the same road that the Grumman line did.

Not aware of that historical parallel ?

What worries me about Cirrus is their lack of innovation. So far, they have done nothing really different from what Beech and Cessna have done over the same period. Bolt new boxes inside, tweak some things on the engine, fix some design flaws etc. Nothing really new or innovative. Bringing the jet to market or introducing a pressurized SR22 would be something new, with the new owners I dont see either of those things happening.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 08:48

Username Protected wrote:

I dunno. I thought the G1 -> G2 -> G3 were all pretty big design improvements. I think those days are over for Cirrus though.

Also, they've added a lot of gismo stuff the past couple years:

GFC700 Autopilot, the Hypoxia Check/Automated Descent Mode, Overspeed Protection, 'The Blue Level Button', the Autopilot Stall Protection, Dual AHRS, and Autopilot Coupled Go-Around....

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 08:50

Username Protected wrote:

$800K for an airplane that uses only differential braking for directional control taxiing... and didn't they have brake fires as a result with xwinds during prolonged taxi.
Am I right about this? May have been addressed but I'm curious.

The differential braking takes about 5 minutes to master; it's NBD.

Yes, there were some brake fires several years back, and they changed some things to prevent that. (It was never a problem on my plane or the others on my field, so I don't know how common it was.)

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 08:56

Thanks, Arlen.

John

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 09:31

Username Protected wrote:

I dunno. I thought the G1 -> G2 -> G3 were all pretty big design improvements. I think those days are over for Cirrus though.

What have they done since the carbon spar in 2007 that wasn't provided to them by either Garmin or CAV ?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Oct 2011, 09:33

Username Protected wrote:

GFC700 Autopilot, the Hypoxia Check/Automated Descent Mode, Overspeed Protection, 'The Blue Level Button', the Autopilot Stall Protection, Dual AHRS, and Autopilot Coupled Go-Around....

Again, which of these things were Cirrus developments ? They may have secured exclusive agreements and branding rights for some of them, but all of those features were developed by Garmin.

Pirep 2011 Cirrus 22T