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.