BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Aug 2014, 19:25

The newer Cirrus are just great planes. If I had the need for 4 seats and did not mind going slower I might consider one. I wish my Glasair had a parachute. It needs one more than the Cirrus.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Aug 2014, 20:07

Username Protected wrote:

Retrac = more weight, more maintenance, more planes with damage history....

Oh but it looks sooooo much better.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 08:46

Username Protected wrote:

The newer Cirrus are just great planes. If I had the need for 4 seats and did not mind going slower I might consider one. I wish my Glasair had a parachute. It needs one more than the Cirrus.

I agree -- the new SR22's are awesome. The only thing better would be a Glasair III with a chute!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 16:47

Comfort and safety does come very nicely in the G5.
Flying that plane with the perspective package has cost me a lot of money. :bugeye:

The Bo goes into the shop Monday to get her glass panel and traffic.
Why did I ever start flying that other plane? I felt like I was cheating on my girl and now I'm trying to dress her up like the other one. Oh boy!
They are all great planes!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 17:11

Username Protected wrote:

. Well, that ain't going to happen in a piston twin if you want to stay alive when an engine checks out. Training, training, and more training are required to fill truly like a competent pilot.

Which is exactly why Cirrus is doing so well.

If all these piston planes do 185 knots or so and have comparable safety records then the only reason not to do the Cirrus is because you need the barn doors. That's it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 17:49

Username Protected wrote:

Why did I ever start flying that other plane? I felt like I was cheating on my girl and now I'm trying to dress her up like the other one.

That's a great analogy. :lol:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 19:12

Username Protected wrote:

. Well, that ain't going to happen in a piston twin if you want to stay alive when an engine checks out. Training, training, and more training are required to fill truly like a competent pilot.

Which is exactly why Cirrus is doing so well.

If all these piston planes do 185 knots or so and have comparable safety records then the only reason not to do the Cirrus is because you need the barn doors. That's it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 19:31

New cirrus at osh really stepping up the interior. Its gone from rental taurus to european luxury car.

I get why the cirrus sells, i am just not buying one for 750k!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 19:56

While Beechcraft, Piper and Cessna (Cessna did buy Columbia to help themselves out) continue to repackage their old offerings the new guys on the block (Diamond and Cirrus) came up with whole new concepts and execution and did a great job at it.

I really wish the old time manufacturers would break out of their boxes and make a really great new offering. They can do it if their management would let them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 19:58

Username Protected wrote:

Everybody seems to forget that China saved Cirrus's butt while Wall Street was gutting Beech.

Ah big deal.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 19:58

I really wish the old time manufacturers would break out of their boxes and make a really great new offering. They can do it if their management would let them.[/quote]

Fixing it for you: if their shareholders would look past their puny little 13 week horizons.
Developing a plane takes time and money.
Shareholders have neither.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 19:59

Username Protected wrote:

I really wish the old time manufacturers would break out of their boxes and make a really great new offering. They can do it if their management would let them.

I'm afraid those guys are gonna sail off into the sunset.

Everyone had high hopes for Osh 2014 but I think the hopes are gone. Fly'em while you got 'em.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 20:25

Username Protected wrote:

While Beechcraft, Piper and Cessna (Cessna did buy Columbia to help themselves out) continue to repackage their old offerings the new guys on the block (Diamond and Cirrus) came up with whole new concepts and execution and did a great job at it.

I really wish the old time manufacturers would break out of their boxes and make a really great new offering. They can do it if their management would let them.

Only two roadblocks to this: the gov(FAA) and, right in the same breath, the LAW (read tort). It's seems so ridiculous to me, all this certification crap for a simple radiio for example.If you have a redundant system, who gives a rats behind.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 21:01

Username Protected wrote:

I really wish the old time manufacturers would break out of their boxes and make a really great new offering. They can do it if their management would let them.

I'm afraid those guys are gonna sail off into the sunset.

Everyone had high hopes for Osh 2014 but I think the hopes are gone. Fly'em while you got 'em.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Sep 2014, 21:14

Username Protected wrote:

While Beechcraft, Piper and Cessna (Cessna did buy Columbia to help themselves out) continue to repackage their old offerings the new guys on the block (Diamond and Cirrus) came up with whole new concepts and execution and did a great job at it.

I really wish the old time manufacturers would break out of their boxes and make a really great new offering. They can do it if their management would let them.

Only two roadblocks to this: the gov(FAA) and, right in the same breath, the LAW (read tort). It's seems so ridiculous to me, all this certification crap for a simple radiio for example.If you have a redundant system, who gives a rats behind.

Pirep: My Demo Flight of the 2014 SR22