What does this have to do with anything?

In the first place it was a Chinese company not China that bought Cirrus. So what? If you're against products just because foreign companies own their manufacturer, or make them directly, you must not own many products manufactured in the last 30 years of any kind.

I'd prefer that Cirrus and Continental were still owned directly by Americans or American companies too but I am glad that visionary business people were willing to invest their capital to keep both companies not only alive but innovating and saving American manufacturing jobs from being further displaced overseas.

I'm sorry that Beech has failed to innovate for a number of years. That is too bad for all of us. It has more to do with a lack of visionary entrepreneurial leadership than probably anything else.

I know we talk about sticking with our Beech planes because they are "1/10" the price of a new Cirrus. I'm not exactly sure that's a fair comparison. That would be comparing a 50 year old Beech to a new Cirrus. If Cirrus had been around for 50 years would they not be on the same level field of play and picking them up for roughly the same price?
What we should be comparing that to is buying a new G36 to the new G5. That's more fair. Oh but wait…that's a 6 seater G36 to the 4/5 seater of the G5. Where is the 4 seater to 4 seater comparison to even keep it apples to apples? If Beech did make a modern V35B or F33A would we still saying the same things?

To quote my favorite Robin Williams character "OH, you're going straight to hell for that one!"

What does this have to do with anything?

In the first place it was a Chinese company not China that bought Cirrus. So what? If you're against products just because foreign companies own their manufacturer, or make them directly, you must not own many products manufactured in the last 30 years of any kind.

I'd prefer that Cirrus and Continental were still owned directly by Americans or American companies too but I am glad that visionary business people were willing to invest their capital to keep both companies not only alive but innovating and saving American manufacturing jobs from being further displaced overseas.

I'm sorry that Beech has failed to innovate for a number of years. That is too bad for all of us. It has more to do with a lack of visionary entrepreneurial leadership than probably anything else.

The point of Chinese ownership is very valid. It wasn't like Cirrus was making tons of money with their "superior" product. They(like Beech, Piper, and Cessna to a degree with their piston sales) were losing money and nonviable financially. China buys them, Continental, Enstrom, Superior, Brantly, and Hiller just to name a few. Several of those purchases have been fatal to the company purchased-the promised factories and expansion never happened and never will. Cirrus might be different but anyone that thinks Chinese ownership of american companies is good has very flawed thinking in my viewpoint. Their ultimate goal is always to build factories and produce the product in China. When and if that goal is reached they won't think twice on shutting down whatever manufacturing base they have here unless it's necessary to keep a production certificate.

I am sort if going the other way. I took my Cirrus transition training in a SR20. That sucker is so popular, I cannot get to rent it when I want.
And then B2 OSH happened.
Now I am looking forward to acquiring a Bo.
I do want a g500 glass. But it will never compare to the perspective system.
I have flown in older Cirrus with Avidyne. It does not even come close.
The intuitive nature of the the avionics is wonderful.
But as they say, make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.

All this Cirrus love is making me ill. I sat in one at OSH and I don't fit. I'm 6'5/235#. I also think you will never see a 50 year old Cirrus flying. I'm glad they are making planes but I will never buy one.

Russell,

Do you think your Debonair cabin is larger than the new Cirrus? I've owned both, and thought they were similar in roominess. And, the pilot-side door on the Cirrus makes it easier to get in..

1. These concerns really don't matter anymore..

2. Your Deb is bigger?

6'5"/235 in the Pilatus would be tough.

I know my deb has more head room. I can fit in it. I like the Cirrus but I can't close the door. I need to recline the seat too far to make the plane work for me. I am tight in many aircraft but just can't hack it in the Cirrus. I have never been in a Pilatus. Was yours the plane they painted at Spalding Regional?

I'm not sure this is an accurate statement. I think Cirrus was making money and plowing it all into the development of their jet and got caught in the economic downturn with slowing sales and cash flow problems. I could be wrong but my understanding is that it wasn't the piston sales per se that got them into cash flow difficulty. Also, I seem to have read somewhere that the development of the jet was requiring more money than they could produce - a common problem with growing companies or companies with a large R&D project to finance.

Cirrus is actual selling fewer airplanes today than they were pre 2008 in part because they have brought back production to support used prices and the price of the new airplane (margin creation). A strategy similar to Socata and Pilatus. But despite the lower production they appear to be making money.

My position isn't that Chinese ownership of American companies is "good". My position is that its good that an otherwise viable aviation company, providing a needed product, made with American workers is good. Perhaps Continental and Cirrrus will move production to China, as Cessna attempted, or to Mexico as Beech attempted. But they haven't done so yet so it's a bit early, and unfair, to criticize them for it.

The fact is that we live in a global economy, with a global market for products like airplanes. Companies are going to be owned by the people who see the opportunity to make money. There is nothing wrong with that. If we don't want Chinese people, or their government to own companies created in America then there are two answers: the first is that Americans should put their money where their mouth is and the 2nd is that the American people, through their government, should constrain their endless buy now pay later mentality so that the Chinese aren't required to prop up our economy.

I am sorry you feel ill. There is an ignore thread button which is just like those little magic wrist bands. Use it and you will feel better. In the meantime there is no violation of the Terms of Service here, its still a free country, and I think everyone should continue to express their pro and con Cirrus thoughts (including yours).

They don't make planes for people who are 6'5". You're in the minority.

I've been in a lot of larger jets too and none seem they'd accommodate a guy who is 6'5" so this issue is not something you'll be able to blame squarely on Cirrus.

My Pilatus has the original paint so no, it wasn't at Spalding..

Russell,

The Cirrus has an angled seat rail which raises the seat position as it is moved forward and lowers it as it moves back. Some taller pilots have found using the seat in more rearward position helps. In some cases though legs aren't long enough to comfortably fit the rudder pedals. An AI named Jim Barker, the Cirrus equivalent of PMC, has a rudder extension kit to solve that problem.

I can imagine that many airplanes are uncomfortable for you. I'm 6 1 and found that in my two Bonanza's I just barely cleared my headset in my preferred seating position. I found going to the Lightspeed Mach 1 or Halo made it much more comfortable, particularly in turbulence.

The Pilatus cockpit is quite comfortable and also easy to get in and out of. Much more so that a KA and certainly more than a TBM. But it's a whole different breed of cat too.

I guess I'll chime in - I'm the "handsome" guy in the back seat during Tom's test flight - at 6'4" 215 lbs I was quite surprised at how comfortable I was in the back seat (even with Tom D flying ). Entering the rear seats is a breeze - with the door open, you simply step into the rear compartment and sit - I think even easier than getting into the front seats.
As mentioned, I believe Gary Black is even taller than me - I sat behind him and had ample room between my knees and the back of Gary's seat - As Tom mentioned, it was a hot and humid day and the air-conditioner was started as soon as the engine was started - It produced excellent cooling and I don't believe there is any restriction on its use - According to Gary, it uses 2HP in operation.

I fly an F33 - In the pilot's seat of the SR22 there is more shoulder room and there was definitely more headroom than my aircraft - I was wearing a Bose headset in the SR22 and had approximately 3" of headroom. I use Halo in my F33 as I am unable to comfortably wear a traditional headset due to limited headroom.

Several years ago I test flew a SR22-G3-Turbo and I thought it flew great - I decided against it because 1) with full fuel I was severely limited on passenger/payload 2) it was a lot more $$ than my Bonanza. With the 200# UL increase, the SR22-G5 has extremely good utility.

I love my bonanza but for my mission, if I was spending $600 AMUs on a piston single...I would own a Cirrus SR22 (that was actually a bit painful to say )