Should I upgrade from Skylane to Cirrus SR20? (not mxmaniac infested)

I would also agree that going from a C182 to am SR20 would be a
downgrade. The SR20 is much more comparable to a C172 with the
exception of speed. As far as utility goes, the C182 is unbeatable in
that class. Look at weight, weight & balance issues, short field take
off and landing distances, winter operation, rough airfield operation,
etc. etc.
Be very careful about your view of the parachute. Cirrus airplanes do
not have a better safety record than other airplanes. Two main
reasons, a) parachute equipped airplane pilots tend to assume greater
risk ("all I have to do is to pull the handle") and b) it is a very
difficult decision to actually pull the handle and many pilots so far
in Cirrus airplanes have not pulled it when they should have.

Gerd
ATP, based in CZBA

"gwengler" wrote in message
oups.com...

As far as utility goes, the C182 is unbeatable in
that class. Look at weight, weight & balance issues, short field take
off and landing distances, winter operation, rough airfield operation,
etc. etc.

Two friends of mine got stranded by weather on their way back from Oshkosh a
couple years back. They rented an Expedition to drive home, but couldn't fit
everything in the plane into the SUV.

Get an A36 better than both in every way. My A36 has a useful load of 1345
lbs and cruises @ 168 kts.
"El Maximo" wrote in message
...
"gwengler" wrote in message
oups.com...

As far as utility goes, the C182 is unbeatable in
that class. Look at weight, weight & balance issues, short field take
off and landing distances, winter operation, rough airfield operation,
etc. etc.

Two friends of mine got stranded by weather on their way back from Oshkosh
a couple years back. They rented an Expedition to drive home, but couldn't
fit everything in the plane into the SUV.

On 6/13/2007 11:00:31 AM, "El Maximo" wrote:

They rented an Expedition to drive home, but couldn't fit
everything in the plane into the SUV.

Are you sure it was an Expedition? I could see that with a Ford Explorer, but
an Expedition? Having a tough time accepting this one.

--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
On 6/13/2007 11:00:31 AM, "El Maximo" wrote:

They rented an Expedition to drive home, but couldn't fit
everything in the plane into the SUV.

Are you sure it was an Expedition? I could see that with a Ford Explorer,
but
an Expedition? Having a tough time accepting this one.


Maybe it was an Explorer. I wasn't there.

Gwengler,

a) parachute equipped airplane pilots tend to assume greater
risk ("all I have to do is to pull the handle")


Any kind of factual support for that statement? Even a hint would
surprise me.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

El Maximo wrote:
"gwengler" wrote in message
oups.com...

As far as utility goes, the C182 is unbeatable in
that class. Look at weight, weight & balance issues, short field take
off and landing distances, winter operation, rough airfield operation,
etc. etc.

Two friends of mine got stranded by weather on their way back from Oshkosh a
couple years back. They rented an Expedition to drive home, but couldn't fit
everything in the plane into the SUV.

I can tell you from personal experience that a C182 baggage area will
hold more than the trunk of a Nissan Altima.

On Jun 13, 11:26 am, Thomas Borchert
wrote:
a) parachute equipped airplane pilots tend to assume greater
risk ("all I have to do is to pull the handle")

Any kind of factual support for that statement? Even a hint would
surprise me.

No surpises, on hints, no support for this "theory" whatsoever. My
statement is only based on my belief, which in turn is based on
accident reports I have read. For example, the guy who got into ice
at 16,000 ft. with a Cirrus, lost control, and either didn't pull or
pulled at a speed too high (chute ripped to pieces) - I forgot.
Perhaps the Lidle crash in NYC formed my belief, as did two or three
accident discussions from the Flying magazine.
The OP of the infested thread kinda went the same way - as if mountain
flying was somehow safer with a ballistic parachute. This will not
prevent one box canyon accident, for example. I have a hard time
believing that a pilot will pull the chute if he gets in a serious
downdraft in the mountains.

Gerd

A 182 is an established and mature design. Foundair is building what
they call The Expedition. Not yet certified, but is a tricycle version
of the Bushhawk, with some improvements. I think I heard it was 8 inches
wider.

http://64.34.128.140/home.aspx

I only mention it to inform. I rather like it myself, but it is not for me.

John



gwengler wrote:

I would also agree that going from a C182 to am SR20 would be a
downgrade. The SR20 is much more comparable to a C172 with the
exception of speed. As far as utility goes, the C182 is unbeatable in
that class. Look at weight, weight & balance issues, short field take
off and landing distances, winter operation, rough airfield operation,
etc. etc.
Be very careful about your view of the parachute. Cirrus airplanes do
not have a better safety record than other airplanes. Two main
reasons, a) parachute equipped airplane pilots tend to assume greater
risk ("all I have to do is to pull the handle") and b) it is a very
difficult decision to actually pull the handle and many pilots so far
in Cirrus airplanes have not pulled it when they should have.

Gerd
ATP, based in CZBA

Found Aircraft

http://www.foundair.com/






The Visitor wrote:

A 182 is an established and mature design. Foundair is building what
they call The Expedition. Not yet certified, but is a tricycle version
of the Bushhawk, with some improvements. I think I heard it was 8 inches
wider.

http://64.34.128.140/home.aspx

I only mention it to inform. I rather like it myself, but it is not for me.

John