Chuck, I think we’re on the same page. I will elaborate to be sure.

I carefully plan my flights, especially when icing is involved. My launch criteria for flights where I expect icing is that I always want an ‘out’ or two. Generally that means the ability to climb above icing or descend below icing conditions. The turbo affords many more options for escape as many more altitudes are available vs an N/A. If I do not have one or two outs , I will cancel a flight. I do not launch when I expect long periods of time in icing with no outs. Although I seldom cancel due to icing, one time I did, I recall icing being forecast from ground up to 18k ft and enroute conditions were IFR all the way. I could’ve climbed above 18k ft but I also limit my altitude to no more than 18k ft or short excursions to 20-21k ft. This flight offered no ‘outs’ if forecast ice was heavier than expected or if any system issues arose. I cancelled.

When airline pireps indicate moderate icing, I review the weather very carefully ahead of time, mostly looking for outs and ways to avoid the heaviest icing. The weather tools have come a very long way in the last 5 years and the icing prediction tools in ForeFlight and the on board icing tool in XM weather work exceptionally well. I use them both to choose altitudes and routes to minimize icing exposure and to avoid the heaviest ice. I will not go anywhere near SLD or severe icing. If SLD is prevalent and cannot be avoided, I’ll cancel. Moderate icing is approached very carefully with thorough planning to minimize time in ice and avoidance of the heaviest ice conditions.

I operate in the #1 or #2 heaviest icing environments in the country here in the Great Lakes. While icing deserves great respect, a FIKI Turbo SR22 and very careful flight planning with the best weather tools allows one a very high dispatch rate. In ‘normal’ years, I’m flying 300+ hrs per year and flying all year long. At the most, I’ve cancelled 2 flights in a year due to icing.

My icing flight planning in an SETP wouldn’t be much different than it is now except that I would have even more higher altitudes to choose from for icing avoidance.

I absolutely would not either...

Chuck, I think we’re on the same page. I will elaborate to be sure.

I carefully plan my flights, especially when icing is involved. My launch criteria for flights where I expect icing is that I always want an ‘out’ or two. Generally that means the ability to climb above icing or descend below icing conditions. The turbo affords many more options for escape as many more altitudes are available vs an N/A. If I do not have one or two outs , I will cancel a flight. I do not launch when I expect long periods of time in icing with no outs. Although I seldom cancel due to icing, one time I did, I recall icing being forecast from ground up to 18k ft and enroute conditions were IFR all the way. I could’ve climbed above 18k ft but I also limit my altitude to no more than 18k ft or short excursions to 20-21k ft. This flight offered no ‘outs’ if forecast ice was heavier than expected or if any system issues arose. I cancelled.

When airline pireps indicate moderate icing, I review the weather very carefully ahead of time, mostly looking for outs and ways to avoid the heaviest icing. The weather tools have come a very long way in the last 5 years and the icing prediction tools in ForeFlight and the on board icing tool in XM weather work exceptionally well. I use them both to choose altitudes and routes to minimize icing exposure and to avoid the heaviest ice. I will not go anywhere near SLD or severe icing. If SLD is prevalent and cannot be avoided, I’ll cancel. Moderate icing is approached very carefully with thorough planning to minimize time in ice and avoidance of the heaviest ice conditions.

I operate in the #1 or #2 heaviest icing environments in the country here in the Great Lakes. While icing deserves great respect, a FIKI Turbo SR22 and very careful flight planning with the best weather tools allows one a very high dispatch rate. In ‘normal’ years, I’m flying 300+ hrs per year and flying all year long. At the most, I’ve cancelled 2 flights in a year due to icing.

My icing flight planning in an SETP wouldn’t be much different than it is now except that I would have even more higher altitudes to choose from for icing avoidance.

Brad, if you hadn’t already, you now officially qualify for BT Elite status.

He's actually at Platinum Elite Status






Brad, if you hadn’t already, you now officially qualify for BT Elite status.

Yes, and if he “earns” one twin turbofan in the next 12 months he’ll make Diamond!

Thank you but no on turbofans.

Stigma associated would not go over well with my customer base.

Me,
I am just trading one twin propeller airplane for another

Nothing in the Elite requirements says that you can't have both. In fact it's encouraged.

The clientele need never know

I have some hours in an SR22 G3 with TN and 4 blade prop - my first and only Cirrus. I love the systems and most handling characteristics. The 4 blade prop is insanely quiet and smooth. Also it fit my family (2 kids) perfectly - though I had to leave some fuel behind because I was delivering kegs to extended family.

But I’ll never forgive them for taking away my little blue lever. Why did they do that? I always felt that it was more difficult to achieve the power I wanted. Also the thing ate oil like a twin!

My brother's Cirrus did the same. I always figured it was engine wear from running hard all the time.

Some Cirri have the blue knob. It is a STC developed by Tamarack.
Some 22s burn a lot of oil; I don’t think that is commom to most per the COPA forum postings

I was able to do the demo flight this summer with my brother in law who has since placed an order for a new G6. Compared to my ‘99 A36 with A/C I would say the biggest factor just seemed to be less fatigue. We flew for over almost 2 hours and it was 100 deg and it was just smoother , quieter, and at full gross weight took the bumps well. I think a big factor was better A/C design and solar windows but I was impressed.

I don't understand the blue lever comment at all. What could be more simple than setting power with a big % power gauge on the MFD? It runs at 2500RPM all the time and you put the big lever to the % power you want. What's so confusing about that?

Don't understand the oil usage comment either. I've owned a G3 SR22T and a G5 SR22T over the past 5-6 years. On both airplanes, I use (1) quart between oil changes. It's a big block Conti, same as the A36. There's nothing dramatically different about the engine. Like any big block Conti, especially one that's turbo-normalized, the cylinders rarely make it to O/H. I would expect that in any SR22T that you're going to replace 3-6 of the cylinders sometime in the 800-1,200 hour mark. Budget it and simply do it when they come up. They're roughly $2K / jug installed.

That's quite an endorsement Jeremy. I've never flown in an A36 with A/C and just assumed it would be a similar experience. What are the differences that you feel make the A/C system better in the 22 vs. the A36? Cabin size? Windows? A/C unit itself? Airflow?

The Cirrus is a remarkable airplane and I understand why people buy them. For me personally, I just don't think I'd ever buy one... for me, it's a "seen one, seen them all" plane... flown one, flown them all... I walk right past on the ramp and don't think twice about it. Doesn't tug my heart strings in the slightest.. I don't have a practical use for one and for a go-to-work plane it's probably a good choice. My friend just bought a brand new one, and I'm scratching my head because he could have got a darned nice used turboprop for that much scratch.