Marketing and the Cirrus Sales Pitch

yes the g36. but I am talking used.
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
news
Aluckyguess writes:

I think its a great plane, but at this point if I was considering a new
plane I would go A36.

Is the A36 still in production? I thought it had been replaced
recently by a very similar but somewhat updated model.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Did you compair with a Lancair / Columbia? I can't understand why
anyone would pick a Cirrus over a Columbia except fpr the chute.
The chute was actually designed into the airframe to circumvent
difficulties with spin recovery requirements was it not?



On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:26:30 -0700, "Aluckyguess" wrote:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
.. .
Aluckyguess writes:

I think the BRS is more for the non-pilot. The wife, friends wife thats
afraid to fly and so on. Just my thoughts.

If they looked at the numbers they might change their minds, but often
rationality has nothing to do with it (especially if they are
excessively worried in the first place).

I had many friends say I should of bought the Cirrus because of the chute. I
actually looked at a used one and was going to buy it until I got the
insurance quote. 10K a year. I was actually a litttle intimitated by the
plane at first.
I think its a great plane, but at this point if I was considering a new
plane I would go A36.


--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Robert Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Did you compair with a Lancair / Columbia? I can't understand why
anyone would pick a Cirrus over a Columbia except fpr the chute.
The chute was actually designed into the airframe to circumvent
difficulties with spin recovery requirements was it not?

Not necessary spin problems, but as a suitable alternative to spin testing, and
because the aircraft designers believed in the parachute as an increase to
safety.

With the chute, they did not have to FAA spin test it for certification.
--
Jim in NC

Robert Dorsey wrote:
Did you compair with a Lancair / Columbia? I can't understand why
anyone would pick a Cirrus over a Columbia except fpr the chute.
The chute was actually designed into the airframe to circumvent
difficulties with spin recovery requirements was it not?

The Wikipedia entry makes that claim:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_Design
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_...rachute_System

BUT - Cirrus co-founder Dale Klapmeier says that a chute was planned from
the beginning and its use as alternative to spin recovery came about later:

http://www.cirrusdesign.com/chutehappens/qa/index.html

I think the Wikipedia entry needs updating.

Robert Dorsey wrote:
Did you compair with a Lancair / Columbia? I can't understand why
anyone would pick a Cirrus over a Columbia except fpr the chute.
The chute was actually designed into the airframe to circumvent
difficulties with spin recovery requirements was it not?


I demo'd both planes (SR22 and C400) and found them to be very similar.
Naturally the turbo'd 400 has the speed advantage, but you have to
climb to FL250 to see its advertised top speed. I didn't care for the
single lever power control in the Cirrus - I know why they went that
route (simplified power management?) but I just prefer a separate prop
control. Besides that, the Columbia is available with either the G1000
or Avidyne panels which I found interesting. I don't know either system
that well, but assume the capabilities are pretty close. (Which is to
say they are amazing)

My impression is that the majority of Cirrus accidents involve lower
time pilots that may not have a high enough comfort level with the
plane. The BRS system is a good safety feature, although I think some
pilots might rely on it a little too much to get them out of a jam.
Can't really back that up, it's just a gut feeling. The Columbia is
close enough in performance and capability to the SR22, but I don't
think there have been many accidents involving them - probably due to
the fact that the Cirrus fleet is so much larger. I think it comes down
to training. Seeing as insuring a Cirrus is so expensive, I'm wondering
if type training might be a requirement soon. I don't think the
accident rate is any higher (ref Collins' article) than other types,
but we sure do hear about it any time there's an incident/accident
involving one.

Robert,

I can't understand why
anyone would pick a Cirrus over a Columbia except fpr the chute.

Price.

The chute was actually designed into the airframe to circumvent
difficulties with spin recovery requirements was it not?


It was not. Google the group.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)