Cirrus SR22 demo flight

Paul,

1969 Arrow for 1/8 of that cost - at least the airframe sort of matches
the engine technology.


Have you flown the Cirrus? Let me tell you, a 1969 Arrow sucks rocks in
comparison. You'll forget the engine real soon.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Does it suck $350,000 worth of rocks?

I'm intrigued by the Cirrus, but I don't see myself buying one within
the depreciation window. It's my understanding that, on average,
planes stop heavy depreciation after about 7-8 years, but that's just
something I heard. It seems like new planes are for people with money
to throw away, but different folks get different things out of their
purchases. My wife and I buy cars that are between 1.5 and 2.5 years
old, just after the wildest depreciation has ended. We get essentially
new cars for a LOT less then the new price, plus any lemons have been
weeded out, initial recalls have been taken care of, and the little
stuff that inevitably goes bad with a brand new device has already been
cleaned up.

I'd definately apply the same logic to airplanes personally, but if I
were a corporation that could see a tax benefit out of having a clear
capital depreciation scale because I have millions I make elsewhere,
then sure, the Cirrus might be logical, but otherwise, as an individual
buyer, I'd wait a little longer.

This is completely aside to the nervousness I about the design of the
cirrus. Personally, I'm not sure I want a plane who's first recovery
technique for everything is 'pull the silks'. Parachute deployment
seems like it should be a last step, not a first. It looks like a very
nice plane, of course. Maybe in the next few years I'll 'grow out of'
those concerns. I'd love to try out that avionics package and the view
looks incredible, but not until they've come down a little in price.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

Ben,

Does it suck $350,000 worth of rocks?

I guess the market is answering that - with a resounding YES! Not for
everyone, of course - I can't afford one, either. But, together with
Lancair, it is on a pretty sure way to become the market leader and
dethrone Cessna real soon. Oh, and of course I'd love for it to have a
modern, economical Thielert engine.


Personally, I'm not sure I want a plane who's first recovery
technique for everything is 'pull the silks'.

That a, well, gross oversimplification of facts, to put it mildly - but
the issue has been debated to death here, so let's not go there again.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message ...
I guess the market is answering that - with a resounding YES! Not for
everyone, of course - I can't afford one, either. But, together with
Lancair, it is on a pretty sure way to become the market leader and
dethrone Cessna real soon. Oh, and of course I'd love for it to have a
modern, economical Thielert engine.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)



Cirrus outsold Cessna in ASEL aircraft, and I think they pretty much matched for total aircraft sold (includes Cessna
jets)...

("Ben Hallert" wrote)
purchases. My wife and I buy cars that are between 1.5 and 2.5 years
old, just after the wildest depreciation has ended. We get essentially
new cars for a LOT less then the new price, plus any lemons have been
weeded out, initial recalls have been taken care of, and the little
stuff that inevitably goes bad with a brand new device has already been
cleaned up.


How old are the older Cirri?

How much are those vs. buying a new Cirrus today?

Are they holding their value? Relative to other used/new planes? Curious?


Montblack

Montblack,

Are they holding their value? Relative to other used/new planes?


Actually, it seems they don't hold their value that well. The reason is
that the newer ones have much better avionics.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message

Does it suck $350,000 worth of rocks?

Yes. You flown one?

I'm intrigued by the Cirrus, but I don't see myself buying one within
the depreciation window. It's my understanding that, on average,
planes stop heavy depreciation after about 7-8 years, but that's just
something I heard. It seems like new planes are for people with money
to throw away, but different folks get different things out of their
purchases. My wife and I buy cars that are between 1.5 and 2.5 years
old, just after the wildest depreciation has ended.

Good for you. When you have money to throw away, have another look.

This is completely aside to the nervousness I about the design of the
cirrus. Personally, I'm not sure I want a plane who's first recovery
technique for everything is 'pull the silks'. Parachute deployment
seems like it should be a last step, not a first.

And, in the meantime, educate yourself on the subject.

moo

Happy Dog,

Are you a Cirrus owner? Some of your posts seem to suggest it, or that
you're a fan. Can you provide some more personal insight into the
plane that we should know? My main beef right now is just buying
inside the depreciation window, like I said. I certainly didn't mean
to set off your 'defend cirrus' circuit!

It's an awful pretty plane, and the cockpit looks nice. I'm very
interested in seeing how those and other similar composites fair going
forward. I'm also a fan of the Lancair Columbia. Maybe not the same
market, but both seem to have some real similarities and great
potential.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

"Ben Hallert" ben.hallert@gmail.

Are you a Cirrus owner? Some of your posts seem to suggest it, or that
you're a fan.

I'm a fan of empirical reality. Cirrus makes and markets a product that is
deeply attarctive to small plane owners. The evidence of this is their
sales figures.

Can you provide some more personal insight into the
plane that we should know? My main beef right now is just buying
inside the depreciation window, like I said. I certainly didn't mean
to set off your 'defend cirrus' circuit!

The "plane as investment" concept is for committed dreamers. I'm this way
whenever I encounter misinformed statement about a subject that interests
me. Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was either
a joke or slothfully misinformed.

It's an awful pretty plane, and the cockpit looks nice. I'm very
interested in seeing how those and other similar composites fair going
forward. I'm also a fan of the Lancair Columbia. Maybe not the same
market, but both seem to have some real similarities and great
potential.

The cost of flying your own plane is the impact on your available resources,
the amount you pay to look at it and the amount you pay to fly. Everyone
with a couple hundred grand in cash and the itch to fly tries to balance
these. That amount of cash can get you into a new Cirrus, or Cessna or a
few other planes. It can also get you into a used Cheyenne or a few other
turboprop planes. There are myriad issues to consider. Insurance and
maintenance are two areas where a new light single shines. Especially if
you have partners. Glass cockpits with approach, weather and traffic
information improve situational awareness, especially for infrequent flyers.
Whether any individual pilot is actually at less risk depends on how they
use these tools. Nothing new there. How much money you got? What kind of
flying do you want to do?

moo

Your speculation about Cirrus emergency procedures training was
either a joke or slothfully misinformed.

That's not... entirely correct. The POH for the SR-22 says that the
only method of spin recovery is to activate the CAPS (Cirrus Airframe
Parachute System).

Of course, like I said, other then that, it looks like a fine aircraft.