Cirrus Bashing Counterpoint
- Thread starter spiderweb
- Start date
VWGhiaBob
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 884
- Display Name
- VWGhiaBob
As one who flies just about everything, there's nothing that beats Cirrus redundancy, comfort, fuel economy, and great look. Other downsides prospective buyers should consider:
* Complexity - All of that avionics comes at a very hefty price...and get ready for a close relationship with your mechanic / avionics shop
* Overall costs - Expect about 50% premium over 172 / 182
* Insurance - Double (based on a quote this week)
* Resale - Per VREF, Cessnas are easy to sell; used "Cirri" don't move as fast
After much consideration, I'm probably going to buy a really nice 182 (plus my artistic spouse loves the high wing...better view...which is the REAL reason).
* Complexity - All of that avionics comes at a very hefty price...and get ready for a close relationship with your mechanic / avionics shop
* Overall costs - Expect about 50% premium over 172 / 182
* Insurance - Double (based on a quote this week)
* Resale - Per VREF, Cessnas are easy to sell; used "Cirri" don't move as fast
After much consideration, I'm probably going to buy a really nice 182 (plus my artistic spouse loves the high wing...better view...which is the REAL reason).
Last edited:
Lets face it. Cessna's are beasts in the air. And those who fly them do it for two reasons, 1. they are cheap 2. they are easy to fly and b. these same guys prolly drive cheap cars too
Cirrus is state of the art. Why be jealous of people who can afford them? Why pretend they are any less pilot than you are in your antiquated, lumbering, fuel wasting, school bus in the air?
Why? Because when one is standing outside the fence staring at these beauties and can't get into one, there are two reactions possible. 1. dream, win the lottery and maybe get one, one day. or 2. bash those who can get them and pretend you are better than them just because you can't own one.
Cirrus is state of the art. Why be jealous of people who can afford them? Why pretend they are any less pilot than you are in your antiquated, lumbering, fuel wasting, school bus in the air?
Why? Because when one is standing outside the fence staring at these beauties and can't get into one, there are two reactions possible. 1. dream, win the lottery and maybe get one, one day. or 2. bash those who can get them and pretend you are better than them just because you can't own one.
VWGhiaBob
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 884
- Display Name
- VWGhiaBob
CLSI - Bashing the Cessna guys and gals is no different from bashing the Cirrus guys and gals. So you do nothing to elevate the discussion. How's about we step up and say that both platforms have their valid place in this world?
Oh...and your assertion that Cessna pilots "prolly" (whatever that means) drive cheap cars? I pilot Cirrus, am quite successful, and proudly drive a Ford Pinto. Yes, really:
CLSI - Bashing the Cessna guys and gals is no different from bashing the Cirrus guys and gals. So you do nothing to elevate the discussion. How's about we step up and say that both platforms have their valid place in this world?
Oh...and your assertion that Cessna pilots "prolly" (whatever that means) drive cheap cars? I pilot Cirrus, am quite successful, and proudly drive a Ford Pinto. Yes, really:
That's my point. Bashing is a two way street. And it's senseless. Cirrus pilots have the SAME certification as Cessna pilots. But you have to admit, Cessna/Piper guys seem to get defensive alot (and brag about $40k used planes). Kind of a club as it were...
Jaybird180
Final Approach
How are you able to maintain that is such good condition?
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 1, 2014
- Messages
- 2,399
- Location
- Denver, CO
- Display Name
- petrolero
- Home Airfield
- Centennial (KAPA)
Yeah but Cessna singles sure do get the ladies.
I won't fly a Cirrus because they are addictive and I don't want to end up turning tricks on Colfax Ave. in order to afford one.
Yeah but Cessna singles sure do get the ladies.
I won't fly a Cirrus because they are addictive and I don't want to end up turning tricks on Colfax Ave. in order to afford one.
One must ask what one's priorities are, what do I want more?
1. a house
2. a good woman
3. medical care
4. a cirrus
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Lotsa bondo.....
VWGhiaBob
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 884
- Display Name
- VWGhiaBob
I bought it that way 5 years ago and take good care if it. With 80hp,auto, and A\C, 0 - 25mph: 30 sec. 0 - 60: Downhill only!
She is also a star here in HOllywood, having been featured in 48 hours Mystery (CBS).
Back to Cirrus...this weekend KVNY to KAVX....easy in a 172, not so much in a Cirrus!
She is also a star here in HOllywood, having been featured in 48 hours Mystery (CBS).
Back to Cirrus...this weekend KVNY to KAVX....easy in a 172, not so much in a Cirrus!
Mason
En-Route
Well, you can't go wrong with a 182. I love that airplane.
Easy to fly, carries a decent load, no surprises, plenty of room. Not very fast but so what.
FastEddieB
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2013
- Messages
- 11,865
- Location
- Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
- Display Name
- Fast Eddie B
- Home Airfield
- Big T Airport (80TN)
denverpilot
Tied Down
SCCutler
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2005
- Messages
- 17,409
- Display Name
- Spike Cutler
- Home Airfield
- T82
A Pinto- Suh-Weet! 
How about it costs more than a tank of car gas just to taxi to the hold short line...
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
The brakes suck.
More docile than a Cirrus? What mythical creature is this of which you speak?
Dr. O
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 2,410
- Location
- Hemlock, MI
- Display Name
- denny
- Home Airfield
- KHYX and X36
Hmmm, been lots of juvenile posturing in this thread.
If you are flying the Cirrus over mountains/LA-basin at night because it has a parachute your judgement is suspect.
If you are flying any single engine over mountains/LA-basin at night you have no judgement to suspect.
I fly a really old clapped out twin because:
1. it is a twin and the Great Lakes in the gales of November and the mountains at night are utterly unforgiving
2. I'm cheap
I spoze with the 'cheap' label I should be flying a clapped out Skyhawk and driving a 12 year old car?
Oh wait, I drive a 13 year old car. And no Rolex or Serengeti sunglasses or Countach, either.
I could have those things if I did not persist in blowing my money on farm land
Actually I wanted to blow it on wine, women, and song . . . . . but my significant other said NO
All righty, that was fun but to the topic at hand:
The Cirrus is the new 'fork tailed doctor killer' and for all the same old reasons.
(NB - it is a really nice fork tailed doctor killer)
The statement - I can fly anything I can afford - about says it all. It was true then and it is true now; it is your mid forties professional who has 20 years of deferred gratification getting where he/she is and now feels they deserve the very best. They really should spend a few years with an Archer (or such) then move up to an older but well maintained retract, and after 5 to 7 years their skill level and their judgment level is ready for a crotch rocket. But these folks are time driven, used to taking calculated risks, and used to being the very best and able to think their way out of any problem.
(those of us who have been around a while know that Mother Nature doesn't give a rip about who you think you are)
Now, this is not an indictment of every pilot who happens to fly a Cirrus. There are some normal folks flying a Cirrus.
As far as the hoo-haa over the parachute - aww come on - grow up
It is there. It is approved. It has helped some folks stay alive. How can you sneer at it? If you don't like it, shut up and fly what you do like.
The gee-whiz electronics bother me the most. The pilot spends 99 and 44/100th's percent of the time playing video games with the panel and when they have to finally uncouple the AP and hand fly the plane they are behind the power curve and every thing else (not reserved just to a Cirrus)
Finally, I won't buy a Cirrus because it is a single and I am cheap. The parachute simply is not a factor in my world, either way.
If you are flying the Cirrus over mountains/LA-basin at night because it has a parachute your judgement is suspect.
If you are flying any single engine over mountains/LA-basin at night you have no judgement to suspect.
I fly a really old clapped out twin because:
1. it is a twin and the Great Lakes in the gales of November and the mountains at night are utterly unforgiving
2. I'm cheap
I spoze with the 'cheap' label I should be flying a clapped out Skyhawk and driving a 12 year old car?
Oh wait, I drive a 13 year old car. And no Rolex or Serengeti sunglasses or Countach, either.
I could have those things if I did not persist in blowing my money on farm land
Actually I wanted to blow it on wine, women, and song . . . . . but my significant other said NO
All righty, that was fun but to the topic at hand:
The Cirrus is the new 'fork tailed doctor killer' and for all the same old reasons.
(NB - it is a really nice fork tailed doctor killer)
The statement - I can fly anything I can afford - about says it all. It was true then and it is true now; it is your mid forties professional who has 20 years of deferred gratification getting where he/she is and now feels they deserve the very best. They really should spend a few years with an Archer (or such) then move up to an older but well maintained retract, and after 5 to 7 years their skill level and their judgment level is ready for a crotch rocket. But these folks are time driven, used to taking calculated risks, and used to being the very best and able to think their way out of any problem.
(those of us who have been around a while know that Mother Nature doesn't give a rip about who you think you are)
Now, this is not an indictment of every pilot who happens to fly a Cirrus. There are some normal folks flying a Cirrus.
As far as the hoo-haa over the parachute - aww come on - grow up
It is there. It is approved. It has helped some folks stay alive. How can you sneer at it? If you don't like it, shut up and fly what you do like.
The gee-whiz electronics bother me the most. The pilot spends 99 and 44/100th's percent of the time playing video games with the panel and when they have to finally uncouple the AP and hand fly the plane they are behind the power curve and every thing else (not reserved just to a Cirrus)
Finally, I won't buy a Cirrus because it is a single and I am cheap. The parachute simply is not a factor in my world, either way.
I have an all glass cockpit in my little CTLSi. I have flown with steam gauges. By comparison? The steam gauges are Model A. The glass panel modern instruments in a high end automobile.
Sure the Model A ford could be driven cross country, but compared to driving an S-Class Mercedes you would be hating life.
The Garmin 796 (and its big brother the Garmin 750) have no equal.
Sure the Model A ford could be driven cross country, but compared to driving an S-Class Mercedes you would be hating life.
The Garmin 796 (and its big brother the Garmin 750) have no equal.
LoneAspen
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2013
- Messages
- 846
- Location
- Evergreen, CO (KAPA)
- Display Name
- LoneAspen
- Home Airfield
- KAPA
When I start my training (hopefully this coming spring, after I've moved back to Colorado) I've already made up my mind I want to train with a glass cockpit, preferably the G1000.
I've read a lot of the pros and cons about steam gauges vs glass. But to me, it comes down to...I'd prefer to learn in something that's similar to what I would buy, and if/when I buy, it will be a glass cockpit.
One of the cons I've read about is how the glass is too distracting to a lot of students because of the "gee whiz" or "overwhelming" factor.
I don't think either of those will apply to me. I've been in the IT world for almost 30 years staring at computers all day long and dealing with complex systems. A computer display is no more "gee whiz" to me than a toaster. It's there to perform a function and convey information, nothing more. It's not a magic screen that's going to hypnotize me.
As far as glass being "overwhelming", as long as my instructor can logically introduce me to its various functions as training proceeds and I need to know those functions, I'm sure I'll have no problems with it.
I'm sure it's possible to get sucked down a rathole dealing with all the possible automation and features glass provides, just like with some of the computer systems I deal with. But I've gotten pretty good over the years of learning to pay attention to only those things needed to get the job done at the time, and ignoring any distractions. No doubt comes from debugging thousands (millions?) of lines of code over my career where if you get sucked down a rathole, you'll never fix the problem.
I can appreciate the level of simplicity and "back to basics" that steam provides, just like I can appreciate the level of simplicity in the first car I learned to drive - no power anything, no gadgets, etc. Did it get the job done and allow me to learn to drive? Yes. But if I were learning to drive today, would I still choose to learn in it compared to a more modern car with modern technology? No way.
Perezhr
Pre-takeoff checklist
Have not flown an airplane yet I didn't find something to like about. That includes most of the C's and P's, a couple of Bo's, Diamonds, Mooney. They all do something particularly well while lacking in other areas. They are all a compromise and it's up to you to figure out what is truly important to you for the way you use the airplane. Kind of silly when I start reading post where folks are trying to discredit a particular brand, or pilots who fly them. Cirrus is a beautiful airplane. Come to think of it, it's one of the few I have not flown so I need to put it on my list.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
FastEddieB
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2013
- Messages
- 11,865
- Location
- Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
- Display Name
- Fast Eddie B
- Home Airfield
- Big T Airport (80TN)
What he said.
The Cirrus is not without some warts (no plane is), but is definitely a nice ride.
The gee whiz factor lasts for about 10 minutes on the ground. Once in the air you are more interested in quickly establishing your scan, and your focus points.
As a tech guy, you will be far more at home with glass than steam.
There is a lot of information, but as you know dealing with tech manuals and tech gear, you never try to take it all in at once. And over time, you will be reading these screens like the back of your hand.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'm amazed as I watch some of the videos being posted, at the amount of time pilots focus on these screens versus looking outside for other aircraft. I was taught that you should spend most of your time looking for traffic, from one side to the other continually with short interruptions of that scan for looking inside while vfr. The videos I've seen are just the opposite and most of the scan seems to be directly in front of the airplane.
I have ADS-B integrated into my glass. I also have the XPNDR and GPS integrated in them. I see traffic on my screen BEFORE I can see them out the window.
It's not an either/or with glass versus steam. Unless you are flying IFR. If flying IFR, you MUST be looking at and reacting to your instruments. Learning to use them effectively is always the way to go.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Wrong answer as far as I am concerned, are all potential impact objects flying with transponders?
I specifically said VFR, but even if IFR in VFR conditions, aren't you primarily responsible for collision avoidance?
Not knowing what you are flying with, and not knowing what videos you have been watching I wont try to make assumptions about your perspective.
I have been flying with all glass for over a year now. I have flown with steam gauges in the past also. So I can compare readily.
They are the same but different. It's difficult to explain in text how they are the same yet different. Going up one time a small demonstration would clear it up for you right away.
Nothing about glass makes a pilot any less situationally aware than using steam and making the 80/20 split between the panel and outside. That is a discipline the pilot uses regardless of whats on the panel.
The glass has a TON of information steam can never provide. But that doesnt mean you have to suck it all in all the time. As I indicated before, the new guy will find quickly what specific data he/she likes, where to find it on the panel, and ignore the rest unless needed at some point during the flight.
My glass provides an AOA meter, G-meter, wind direction and intensity meter, DA/GS/TAS calcs, ADS-B traffic, synthetic view of the ground, color coded terrain guidance, rolling tape for IAS and Altitude, VSI, Attitude indicator, HSI, pitch, ball, roll and autopilot all on one screen. It provides engine monitoring, fuel computing, trim indicators, and warning indicators on the other screen shared with a moving map with weather overlay. In the middle I have another touchscreen chunk of glass for GPS, flight planning, EFB, and tons of other toys too numerous to mention.
I also have audible warnings for traffic and other anomalous behavior.
Do I play video games while flying, no. Do I need all that infor to get from point A to point B. no. Do I appreciate the various pieces of information when I need them and can refer to them. yes.
The analogy is more like using Google on the internet. You can find billions of pieces of information with a single line query, but you usually only get that information one piece at a time.
Its like that with glass. (did I mention I can also display a virtual steam gauge panel on the Garmin 796 if I wanted to reminisce?)
Last edited:
VWGhiaBob
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 884
- Display Name
- VWGhiaBob
See and Avoid as a policy has to be. However, as pilots, we all know that it doesn't work much of the time. If two planes are approaching each other at 250mph (125 + 125), it's not realistic to think See and Avoid will always work. Best option is TIS or ADSB AND human eyes.
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2008
- Messages
- 11,571
- Location
- Ingleside, TX
- Display Name
- Jay Honeck
- Home Airfield
- KTFP - Ingleside, TX
I flew steam gauges for 19 years. I've flown glass for six months.
Some observations:
1. Buttonology is the main reason you see guys with their heads down too much. Once you get that figured out, there's no more head down time than before.
2. The head down time to learn the buttonology is worth it. The amount of info we have on board is light years ahead of steam gauges, or steam gauges with a tablet.
3. Glass is easier to interpret than steam gauges. We now have a ten-inch artificial horizon, overlaid on synthetic vision, as opposed to a 3 1/2" vacuum-driven steam gauge.
I would not want to go back to vacuum driven round gauges.
That said, we still poke gentle fun at Cirrus drivers, not because of their glass cockpits, but because of their predominant behavior. They tend to taxi too fast, at high RPM, and rarely wave back. They also seem to land extremely hot and long -- I don't think I've ever seen one make the first turn off here. Oh, and they love to cycle that prop! Like three, four, maybe five times.
I wouldn't have minded owning one, ten years ago, but my mission has changed, and I no longer need to haul kids around the country. Nowadays, I am having more fun flying upside down...
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'm not advocating steam over glass, not at all, I'm a technofile I like the technology. I'll be clear up front, I haven't flown in years, but I would think certain truths are consistent. I also think traffic avoidance equipment in the cockpit is great, but........
My observation has been on some of the videos posted is that the scan for traffic is almost non existent except for a look straight ahead when looking outside the cockpit. I was going to find the specific video that I just saw within the past few days, but thought better of it as I don't want to pile on any individuals. When I was flying that outside scan saved my bacon a few times, I had only steam gauges, a few times the threat came from the 8 or 9 oclock position, tough to see if you are staring straight ahead.
I think a well developed outside scan, along with glances as necessary to instruments and screens make a much safer VFR pilot. Technology is great, but it is far from foolproof. YMMV.
My observation has been on some of the videos posted is that the scan for traffic is almost non existent except for a look straight ahead when looking outside the cockpit. I was going to find the specific video that I just saw within the past few days, but thought better of it as I don't want to pile on any individuals. When I was flying that outside scan saved my bacon a few times, I had only steam gauges, a few times the threat came from the 8 or 9 oclock position, tough to see if you are staring straight ahead.
I think a well developed outside scan, along with glances as necessary to instruments and screens make a much safer VFR pilot. Technology is great, but it is far from foolproof. YMMV.
Jaybird180
Final Approach
How does one cycle the prop with a single lever Cirrus, which is the stock configuration?
JHW
En-Route
Here is the extent of my avionics, except for a midland CB radio on the other side for coms.
How are you going to see me on your television? It's a good thing I'll be watching for you as you go by like a pilotless drone.
Attachments
Last edited:
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2008
- Messages
- 11,571
- Location
- Ingleside, TX
- Display Name
- Jay Honeck
- Home Airfield
- KTFP - Ingleside, TX
That is an excellent question, and one I had not thought through.
They must have this mod? http://cirrus.tamarackaero.com/control-quadrant-upgrade/
colojo
Line Up and Wait
Precious... a $3,500 mod to replace the fancy single power lever with old school throttle and prop controls.
I wonder if they have a mod to delete the chute as well?
JHW
En-Route
By your own account, you are the drone for all practical purposes. If you are just looking at your tv screen in he panel for all information, there might as well be no one on board. For my part though, I'm going to avoid the other aicraft by looking outside and watching where I'm going.
NoHeat
Final Approach
The POH specifies taxiing at less than 1000 RPM, and that's what I do. And I wave first.
Harley riders, they say, often won't wave at a Beemer rider, but I have found that's not true, either.
I land at stall speed or close to it. The stall speed is 60 knots with flaps, and that is quite a bit higher than for a Skyhawk, for example, so it is necessary to land it faster than a Skyhawk. I suppose you think the stall speed has something to do with the pilot?
Total BS. A Cirrus has no prop knob. Just a throttle knob.
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2008
- Messages
- 11,571
- Location
- Ingleside, TX
- Display Name
- Jay Honeck
- Home Airfield
- KTFP - Ingleside, TX
Ouch! Touched a nerve?
I said it was good-natured kidding. Of course, not EVERY Cirrus driver flies like that. Of course not EVERY Cirrus driver has the mod to give them a real prop control.
We love Cirrus pilots. There...all better?
DavidWhite
Final Approach
I fly a Cessna because if they used Cirri in the Alaskan Bush they would fall apart after about 2 landings.