Cirrus Killer? Cessna just doesn't get it...

"Dave Stadt" wrote

I don't even try but if I had to guess I would say small penis.

I don't have a SUV, but I think that characterization is off target.

It really isn't that hard to figure out. Lots of room to haul people, kids
and their stuff, kids friends, and other general stuff. Four wheel drive,
so you can still go when it snows, or you park in the wet grass, and get
stuck. A feeling of security, when you are driving by a 53 foot long
semi-truck trailer being pulled by a 28 foot tractor, or when pitted against
a little import in a crash situation. Showing, for all to see, that you are
successful enough to be able to afford how ever much gas it burns, no matter
what the cost. The ability to pull trailers with ease, filled with whatever
toys you have, like boats, camping trailers, lawn mower trailers, covered
trailers for moving your kids into school, or what ever other trailer you
might want to pull.

Try doing all of that with your Toyota Corolla.
--
Jim in NC

Matt Whiting wrote:

Yes, many people do, but pilots aren't normal people. :-)

Pilots are generally thinking people by nature and I suspect much less
likely to buy based on emotion or perception.

And that's why they absolutely refuse to buy a new design but prefer to
deliberately stick with 50s technology... :-P

Stefan

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote: "To my way of thinking, there isn't a
finer aircraft built than the C-210. Twin
speed and carrying capacity at 13 gallons per hour."

Yeah but the back row of seats . . . ugh . . . I wouldnt wish riding
there on any adult. Just my opinion . . . but I did not like sitting
back there the one time I did it.

Blue skies

JP

In a previous article, "Morgans" said:
and their stuff, kids friends, and other general stuff. Four wheel drive,
so you can still go when it snows, or you park in the wet grass, and get
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Too bad they don't give you the ability to stop when it snows.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Here in the US, we are so schizoid and deeply opposed to government
censorship that we insist on having unaccountable private parties
to do it instead. -- Bill Cole

Sylvain wrote:
Dave Stadt wrote:

Those that buy based on perception deserve what they get. I know far
more
people that buy based on mission than perception.


then how do you explain SUVs?

Have you ever owned one?

Matt

Ken Reed wrote:

Many pilots wives are much less nervous about flying with a BRS
installed.


That was a very significant factor for me buying a Cirrus.

And folks that don't understand probability very will also buy lottery
tickets.

Matt

ET wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote in news:wcn%e.1166$lb.94797
@news1.epix.net:


Oh, just the last time that I looked at an F-14, F-15, F-111 or F-18.
Ok, the -18 is maybe a little closer to a mid-wing like the F-16, but I
believe the wing is still above the CG of the airplane and that is what
defines a high wing to me.



OK, change "high wing" to "wing over your head" and my point is still
valid.... I believe all of the above have the wing out of the pilots
vision....

Well, few, if any (I can't think of one), of the modern jet fighters has
the wing anywhere near the pilot's head. It is usually 10 or more feet
behind the pilot's head.

Yes, all of the above have the wing out of the pilot's line of vision
unless they are looking pretty much backwards. And almost all light
airplanes have the wing in the pilot's line of vision, be they low or
high wing. I could see downward and navigate and make select emergency
landing sites MUCH easier in my Skylane than I can in the club Arrow I
now fly. Yes, the Arrow makes it easier to see the runway during the
approach to landing, but I spend 95% of my time enroute, unless I'm
doing touch and goes in the pattern. I'd much rather be able to see
well 95% of the time than less than 5% of the time. And even in the
pattern, you can see the runway better all but a small fraction of the
time when you are turning. And when you roll level on base, you can
easily see the runway again to time your turn to final. I'm always
amazed at pilots who can't seem to handle this without seeing a constant
view of the runway.

Matt

Dave Stadt wrote:
"Sylvain" wrote in message
...

Dave Stadt wrote:


Those that buy based on perception deserve what they get. I know far

more

people that buy based on mission than perception.

then how do you explain SUVs?

--Sylvain


I don't even try but if I had to guess I would say small penis.

Because that is your problem? I don't own an SUV, but I do own a
full-size pickup. It would be very hard to mount my snowplow and haul
firewood with a car.

Matt

Stefan wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

Yes, many people do, but pilots aren't normal people. :-)

Pilots are generally thinking people by nature and I suspect much less
likely to buy based on emotion or perception.


And that's why they absolutely refuse to buy a new design but prefer to
deliberately stick with 50s technology... :-P

The Cirrus design is also 50s, actually even earlier. Low-wing,
conventional tail airplane design is rather old. They used a newer
material, but even composites have been around now for probably 50 years.

Don't confuse new with better. I'm glad Cirrus exists as I think it
will possibly spur Cessna to build a new airplane that will have the
advantages of a Cessna with improved performance. That will benefit us
all, well at least us high-wing fans who like an airplane that can be
repaired almost anywhere in this country and most of the world.


Matt

Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Morgans" said:

and their stuff, kids friends, and other general stuff. Four wheel drive,
so you can still go when it snows, or you park in the wet grass, and get

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Too bad they don't give you the ability to stop when it snows.

They stop as well as most other vehicles.


Matt