A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cirrus SR22 Purchase advice needed.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 25th 04, 09:29 AM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dennis,

this is usenet. What did you expect? Do you believe all you read here,
jts like that?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #12  
Old April 25th 04, 01:09 PM
Dennis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I have been reading this group for years, and when CJ Campbell speaks, I
listen..

I had researched the financials, even have enough people interested in
partnering, I already have a hanger and have 200+ Bonanza hours. The simple
fact of 4030 hours life on the airframe is a deal breaker. I'm not much
worried about the 5+ accidents in the last 12 months. I've read many of the
NTSB reports and it seems to me pilots ARE getting into situations they
should have not been in (although the one where they guy's aliron was
falling off made me read again). Having the BRS would make one feel a bit
more at ease taking risks, but I am not a risk taker, nor would I want to
find myself in a position to deploy the chute..

I also took a serious look at the Lancair 350, but after learning of it's
price got my out of the seat..

Dennis
N3868J
MyAirplane.com


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Dennis,

this is usenet. What did you expect? Do you believe all you read here,
jts like that?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)



  #13  
Old April 25th 04, 01:12 PM
Dennis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Great! You'll have to look me up while there! I'll be the one with
"MyAirplane.com" on his shirt.. (well, one of them anyway). We may get a
booth, its up in the air right now (and only 2 weeks untillt he show).

Will you be staying over the 2 days? Wondering what camping would be like
on that field... or if its even allowed.

Dennis
N3868J
MyAirplane.com



"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Dennis wrote:

I would like to get others ideas in regards to if I should do a

lease-back
at my local FBO, or take on 4 to 9 other partners.. I will be going to

the
Rochester fly in next month (http://www.rochesterwings.com) and hope to
solidify a deal with Cirrus..


Dennis, no comment on the Cirrus, but I want to mention that I am
planning on attending the Rochester Wings event, too (barring weather,
maintenance, or health issues). See you there.

--
Peter







  #14  
Old April 25th 04, 01:15 PM
Dennis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You hit the nail on that one.. I bought a 1981 Beechcraft 77 Skipper just
over 2 years ago and hardly get to fly it. Put 63 hours on it last year and
20 of those were friends using it.

Its inexpensive to own a Skipper, but I can see your point clearly..
Hanger, insurance, maintenence, etc.. Its a bit much when you don't fly it
enough.

Dennis
N3868J
MyAirplane.com

"Don Tuite" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 22:34:34 -0400, Peter R.
wrote:

Dennis wrote:

I would like to get others ideas in regards to if I should do a

lease-back
at my local FBO, or take on 4 to 9 other partners.. I will be going

to the
Rochester fly in next month (http://www.rochesterwings.com) and hope to
solidify a deal with Cirrus..


Dennis, no comment on the Cirrus, but I want to mention that I am
planning on attending the Rochester Wings event, too (barring weather,
maintenance, or health issues). See you there.


My $.02: First time: find an existing club/partnership. Rarely does
single ownership work -- the plane doesn't fly enough. Easier to find
an existing arrangement to buy into than to create one. You probably
won't get the exact kind of plane you think you want, but the
experience will be educational.

Don



  #15  
Old April 25th 04, 02:26 PM
Stu Gotts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dennis;
If you have that many hours in a Bonanza, you'll never be satisfied
with anything else.

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 12:09:05 GMT, "Dennis" wrote:

I have been reading this group for years, and when CJ Campbell speaks, I
listen..

I had researched the financials, even have enough people interested in
partnering, I already have a hanger and have 200+ Bonanza hours. The simple
fact of 4030 hours life on the airframe is a deal breaker. I'm not much
worried about the 5+ accidents in the last 12 months. I've read many of the
NTSB reports and it seems to me pilots ARE getting into situations they
should have not been in (although the one where they guy's aliron was
falling off made me read again). Having the BRS would make one feel a bit
more at ease taking risks, but I am not a risk taker, nor would I want to
find myself in a position to deploy the chute..

I also took a serious look at the Lancair 350, but after learning of it's
price got my out of the seat..

Dennis
N3868J
MyAirplane.com


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Dennis,

this is usenet. What did you expect? Do you believe all you read here,
jts like that?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)



  #16  
Old April 25th 04, 03:47 PM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

They find out why these planes are falling out of the sky with such
regularity


Well, I sure hope I never again see you complain here about
sensationalistic reporting on aviation accidents. Jeeze!


The fact is that the Cirrus currently owns one of the worst accident and
fatality rates of any small airplane.

Cirrus also now has a history of quality control problems, with some
aircraft being returned or sold for a pittance as lemons.


  #17  
Old April 25th 04, 03:53 PM
Doug Vetter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dennis wrote:
Holy crap! I guess I should have done some more research first...

I really, really, really like the performance spec's and looks of the
Currus.. My wife read your comment and now she's put off on the idea...
Gonna have to find something else now before she but the breaks on a new
plane purchase..

Dennis
N3868J
MyAirplane.com


Hi Dennis,

I'll agree with the previous poster that while the Cirrus is a nice
airplane, I also would suggest that you not buy the airplane until they
extend the life limit. They'll undoubtedly tell you that they have
"plans" to extend the limit "somewhat", but the proof is in the paper.
Amortized over a mere 4000 hours, I'd venture a guess that an SR22 costs
more per hour to run than a capable twin (the Cessna 400 series
presently notwithstanding).

The SR20's limit of 12000 hours is still too limiting, IMHO, but I can
appreciate the FAA's conservatism regarding any new (indeed
revolutionary) design. I would want that limit raised after a
sufficient field history is established and a half-dozen airplanes are
torn apart when they reach the life limit to determine if the
engineering models indeed reflect reality.

However, I must disagree with the comment about the airplanes "falling
out of the sky" -- we just touched on this in Jay's thread. This has
NOTHING to do with the airplane. It has EVERYTHING to do with pilots
with more money than skill flying them. Fundamentally, I believe the
Cirrus is a safe airplane. I think we all agree it flies differently
than a Cessna, but in the right hands, that's not a bad thing.

Personally, if I had $300K (or partners) I'd buy a used Seneca or Baron.
It never pays to buy new. A twin will be just as fast, have full
deice, and an extra engine for sanity in IMC, night, and overwater
operations. The statistics will never bear out how much safer twins
are, because when everyone arrives safely following an engine out, there
is no report, and the airplane will fly another day. While that extra
engine costs $$$, it gives you the OPTION of finishing the flight in a
"routine" fashion and helps keep insurance costs down (no claims =
better prices for everyone). Next time you want to take your wife in
challenging conditions, ask her how many engines she'd want...

BTW, awesome job on the website. Just do me (and every other
alternative-OS guy) a favor...dump the IE requirement. By requiring IE,
you're limiting access to your site to a single operating system. If
you have to require anything (and for a truly standards-compliant site,
you shouldn't), require Mozilla!

Safe flying,

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

  #18  
Old April 25th 04, 04:53 PM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Doug Vetter" wrote in message
et...

The SR20's limit of 12000 hours is still too limiting, IMHO, but I can
appreciate the FAA's conservatism regarding any new (indeed
revolutionary) design.


I was told by a Diamond rep that the Diamond aircraft do not have airframe
life limits. I would consider them to be just as revolutionary as the
Cirrus. However, I have not looked up the Diamond's type certificates to
verify the rep's claims.


However, I must disagree with the comment about the airplanes "falling
out of the sky" -- we just touched on this in Jay's thread. This has
NOTHING to do with the airplane. It has EVERYTHING to do with pilots
with more money than skill flying them.


Actually, it has EVERYTHING (sic) to do with the airplane, whether it is
some design flaw that causes them to disintegrate or whether it is a design
flaw that makes them too difficult to fly for the pilots that are buying
them.

In any event, I think the FAA will eventually order Cirrus to get to the
bottom of it, no matter what the cause. The FAA nearly grounded Cirrus with
the first rash of accidents. I doubt that their patience with Cirrus is
unlimited.

The pilot in Florida had 600 hours in type, was instrument rated, and was a
founder of the Cirrus Pilots Association. That does not fit the description
of "more money than skill."

The Cirrus cannot recover from a spin or even an incipient spin. Pilots are
supposed to deploy the chute if the Cirrus enters a spin. Fine, if you are
900' AGL or more. Probably more, if the chute takes longer to deploy when
the airplane is in a spin. So a departure stall or approach stall in this
airplane is going to be far more dangerous than in other aircraft.

And let us be clear he stalls were a factor in a large percentage of the
Cirrus accidents so far.

Given that the most common GA accident is low level maneuvering: the slick
design of the Cirrus, the inadequate flaps, the poor stall handling
abilities, pilot unfamiliarity with the new equipment (which also keeps
pilots' eyes inside the cockpit), poor maintenance and quality control, and
the inability of the parachute to deploy at low altitude all seem to me to
add up to a lot of trouble.


  #19  
Old April 25th 04, 05:18 PM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dennis,

The simple
fact of 4030 hours life on the airframe is a deal breaker.


I wouldn't worry about that. It's bound to change. Talk to Cirrus about
it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #20  
Old April 25th 04, 05:29 PM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stu,

If you have that many hours in a Bonanza, you'll never be satisfied
with anything else.


Well, the Cirrus has the chance to do that, from my perspective.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boeing Boondoggle Larry Dighera Military Aviation 77 September 15th 04 02:39 AM
New Cirrus SR22 Lead Time Lenny Sawyer Owning 4 March 6th 04 10:22 AM
Fractional Ownership - Cirrus SR22 Rich Raine Owning 3 December 24th 03 06:36 AM
New Cessna panel C J Campbell Owning 48 October 24th 03 04:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.