Dude wrote:
Which Mooney are you speaking of? Any Mooney built in the last
decade is
faster than a Cirrus.

Any Mooney built in the last decade is an R-model or later, and there
weren't many of those built. I have some time in an F model and also
in an R model, ant they're only vaguely similar.

Of course, it also likely has speed brakes,

And in any case has retractable landing gear. I have some time in a
Cirrus as well, and mostly I've noticed that it requires more thought
given to descent planning than anything else I've flown - BE-55, C-310,
PA-30, M20R, and the 33/35/36 Beeches included. The full flap speed is
low, the first notch won't do much, and the gear is fixed yet the plane
is still clean and slippery. I didn't find it to be a challenge, but
then I had close to 1000 hours in those sorts of planes when I flew it.
I doubt it's the guys with that experience level who are having the
accidents.

and is more respected by its pilot.

And there's the main issue. I have a feeling that once insurance
companies get used to treating the Cirrus they way they treat expensive
new big-engine Bonanzas and Mooneys, the accident picture will smooth
out.

Ask a few Cirrus pilot (or any others) which
plane requires more skill and attention, and they will undoubtedly
say the
Mooney.

I wouldn't say that. Having flown both the modern Mooney and the
Cirrus, I think it's really a wash. The older Mooney is easier -
things happen slower, it's easier to slow down, etc. The Bonanzas are
definitely easier - to slow down/get down and to land. The Cirrus is
not a simple airplane, to be compared to a C-182. It's a fast,
slippery airplane comparable to an A36/V35 or M20R/S, and more
demanding in some respects. It's missing a couple of levers, but
that's not where the complexity comes in.

I think that is why the Cirrus accidents reduced when they started
more training. The Mooney guys were mostly getting that kind of
training
already.

I think you're right on the money there.

Michael