Insurance for Cirrus SR20 and SR22

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:g%q1e.436$ZV5.418@fed1read05...
Currently the Cirrus is having a higher accident rate per hours flown than
most other single engine aircraft... it's new.. and harder to fix for
minor dings than bent sheet metal..

Its not harder to fix, you have to have a different skill set. A minor flaw
in aluminum costs almost exactly the same to repair from my experience. The
only difference is that the metal plane likely has a harder to match color.

Also, I do not fly a Cirrus, but have seen that pilots used to C-182s or
Mooney's are not used to the speed and fast wing of the Cirrus... lots of
long hot landings on short runways...


Which Mooney are you speaking of? Any Mooney built in the last decade is
faster than a Cirrus. Of course, it also likely has speed brakes, and is
more respected by its pilot. Ask a few Cirrus pilot (or any others) which
plane requires more skill and attention, and they will undoubtedly say the
Mooney. 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.

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

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.

I am with you there, and from the rest of your comments, I think you are
more informed than most. You would likely be in the minority of our poll.

We agree totally.

Doodybutch wrote:
I was thinking about upgrading to a Cirrus if I could scrape the money
together. They're really nice, if you haven't checked one out.

An acquaintance of mine told me that the insurance on these aircraft is much
higher than comparably priced singles because of the ballistic parachutes.
Apparently, once it's deployed the airplane is totaled and there have been a
number of deployments.

I would appreciate it if someone knowledgeable would comment on this.

Thanks,

DB


The other issue is that the Cirrus is an unknown. There just isn't
enough of them out there to get good statical data. Of course, the
insurance industry will error on the negative side for you (positive for
them.)

The other issue is that the Cirrus is an unknown. There just isn't enough
of them out there to get good statical data. Of course, the insurance
industry will error on the negative side for you (positive for them.)

How many planes, and flight hours, do you propose is necessary before it is
statistically relevant?

The figures published in "AOPA Pilot" may be high, for various reasons I
won't go into. You might want to Call NationAir, an insurance broker which
carries a lot of Cirrus policies. Call the St. Louis office at (877) 475
5860. If you ask for Karen Caudle or J.T. Helms, they should be able to
give you some estimates, based on your experience level.

As to the unsolicited advice you've received on whether or not to buy a
Cirrus, I'd like to add one more piece: Don't believe everything people say
on Usenet (including my advice, which is why I'm giving you references to
verify it). My unscientific estimate is that at least 95% of Cirrus owners
are delighted with their airplanes. There seem to be some disgruntled
non-owners in this newsgroup, however. Go figure.

If you're not already a member of the Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association,
you can join for $50 a year. You can read the unvarnished truth about the
plane there -- warts and all. If it convinces you that you wouldn't be
happy with a Cirrus, it will have saved you way more than $50 in grief. At
any rate, you can get WAY more than $50 in good advice for aviation in
general (not limited to Cirrus) there. You don't have to be an owner to
join. You just have to pay the 50 bucks

http://www.cirruspilots.org

Best of luck in your endeavor, whichever type of plane you buy. There are
no bad types of general aviation airplanes -- just good and better.

-Mike

"Doodybutch" wrote in message
...
I was thinking about upgrading to a Cirrus if I could scrape the money
together. They're really nice, if you haven't checked one out.

An acquaintance of mine told me that the insurance on these aircraft is
much higher than comparably priced singles because of the ballistic
parachutes. Apparently, once it's deployed the airplane is totaled and
there have been a number of deployments.

I would appreciate it if someone knowledgeable would comment on this.

Thanks,

DB