Cirrus for a student pilot?!

jordane93 said:
The speed isn't a challenge. The avionics are. Cirrus avionics are complex and when I do transition training with students we'll often spend at least 3 lessons on the ground with the plane plugged in and moving buttons. If you don't know the avionics and you're cruising at 180 knots then it can be a problem especially if you're ifr and trying to fiddle with the screens
Click to expand...

How is the G1000 in a Cirrus more complicated than the G1000 in a DA40 (a dedicated trainer) or a 172 (a dedicated trainer) or a SR20 ?
 
weilke said:
How is the G1000 in a Cirrus more complicated than the G1000 in a DA40 (a dedicated trainer) or a 172 (a dedicated trainer) or a SR20 ?
Click to expand...
Isn't the Cirrus vision platform a touch different than stock G1000?
 
weilke said:
How is the G1000 in a Cirrus more complicated than the G1000 in a DA40 (a dedicated trainer) or a 172 (a dedicated trainer) or a SR20 ?
Click to expand...
It's tougher because you're doing 180-200 instead of 100-120. You have a lot less time to react.
 
jordane93 said:
It's tougher because you're doing 180-200 instead of 100-120. You have a lot less time to react.
Click to expand...

The speed was the biggest factor when transitioning to the Cirrus.
It is not just going faster but switching frequencies faster, locating waypoints quicker, less time to stare at the ground looking for the freaking airport as you fly over it, traffic 3 miles opposite direction faster, trying to get under a cloud while watching the needle flirt with Vne, and trying to slow it down.

I have a six pack so the avionics were not a huge issue.
The speed was eye opening.
 
jordane93 said:
It's tougher because you're doing 180-200 instead of 100-120. You have a lot less time to react.
Click to expand...

Why would you go 180 in the pattern ? Just like a Bonanza, you CAN fly faster but you dont have to. Flaps down stall speed in the SR22 is 60kts, it's a part 23 aircraft, not an obscure warbird.
 
mkosmo said:
Isn't the Cirrus vision platform a touch different than stock G1000?
Click to expand...

Yeah, you have a keyboard and less need to monkey around with the garmin knobology.
 
perspective_03.png
 
weilke said:
Why would you go 180 in the pattern ? Just like a Bonanza, you CAN fly faster but you dont have to. Flaps down stall speed in the SR22 is 60kts, it's a part 23 aircraft, not an obscure warbird.
Click to expand...
Do you only fly in the pattern? So you're going to chop the power, dump the flaps and slow down every time you have an issue with the avionics? That is exactly why it makes it difficult.
 
Last edited:
jordane93 said:
Do you only fly in the pattern? So you're going to chop the power, dump the flaps and slow down every time you have an issue with the avionics? That is exactly why it makes it difficult.
Click to expand...

We are still talking about a student pilot. Is there a law that requires any instructional flight to be flown at max performance ? I transitioned to a comanche while a student pilot. Flew pattern and maneuvers 10kts faster than the archer. Entirely manageable.
 
weilke said:
We are still talking about a student pilot. Is there a law that requires any instructional flight to be flown at max performance ? I transitioned to a comanche while a student pilot. Flew pattern and maneuvers 10kts faster than the archer. Entirely manageable.
Click to expand...
True. But slowing the plane down because you are trying to manage the avionics shows me you're not in control of the aircraft and the plane is ahead of you. Which is why when I do transition training and primary students, I want them to the master the avionics. I don't want them fumbling between switches. I want them to have the easiest and most enjoyable flight and not worry about pushing the wrong key on the screen.
 
jordane93 said:
It's tougher because you're doing 180-200 instead of 100-120. You have a lot less time to react.
Click to expand...

An SR22 can easily fly SR20 speeds though, just pull back on the throttle. I can do 140 KTAS on about 10 GPH very comfortably.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
The retarded abcdef one.:mad2::mad2::mad2:
Click to expand...

That is an annoyance on Garmin Perspective. I feel like my grandmother hunting and pecking for the next letter on my FMS. Still much quicker to program than the G430s in my previous plane (especially due to airway decoding) but I really wish it were QWERTY
 
weilke said:
I believe that's how most flight management systems are laid out. qwerty is only useful if you can type two-handed.
Click to expand...

No, qwerty is what everyone with a smart phone, tablet, or computer is used to going to to type something, and they are used to reaching a certain place for a certain letter regardless if they two hand touch type or on thumb text. QWERTY is what is in our mind/muscle memory.

The old FMSs are that way because they were developed before pilots used qwerty keyboards on phones and in daily life. That condition had changed long before Garmin made this system.
 
Last edited:
RudyP said:
That is an annoyance on Garmin Perspective. I feel like my grandmother hunting and pecking for the next letter on my FMS. Still much quicker to program than the G430s in my previous plane (especially due to airway decoding) but I really wish it were QWERTY
Click to expand...

I have a love hate relationship with Garmin going all the way back. I take it back, the first Garmin product I had was 100% awesome and failed to **** me off in any way, it was the DGPS-53. It was an antenna bulb about the size of my fist with a long cable, Cannon Plug one side, Serial the other. Just clamp it out on deck somewhere, plug it into my laptop an boom, LAAS corrected GPS signal to survey accuracy in the days of dithering still. I loved that unit.

Every unit since has had some major feature that never failed to just **** me off at the stupidity of the feature/design failure. It's always interface issues as well, as the human interface, or ability to interface with industry standard NMEA protocols.

But in the end, they always give me high quality equipment that does the job I need done, even if it does cause me unnecessary hassles.
 
Last edited:
Rebel Lord said:
I just have a weird feeling about cirrus. I like my control yoke right in front of me and I also dont like the "Preppy" reputaion cirrus has. I really dont want people to think Im flying around on daddys dime. (Even though I am:redface:)

Also I told him a saratoga would fit our needs much more for much less.
Click to expand...

Go fly a few hours in a Cirrus. Report back. You've picked up some kind of prejudice from somewhere and the best solution is to go fly with a Cirrus instructor.

The Cirrus requires a certain mindset. So does a non-BRS plane. Don't mix the two.

CAPS has, indeed, saved lives. That doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't also lead to greater risk acceptance. But you can point objectively to lives saved while it's problematic to tease "increased risk acceptance" out of the stats without doing half a PhD dissertation. But such unintended consequences have been studied in other things like mandatory seat belt laws and SRS airbags. And after all that, the thing can still have a net positive impact on safety.

Anyhoo. If you haven't already, go train in a Cirrus before you render final judgement.
 
I think it's kind of moot. His dad isn't buying a Cirrus in that price range.
 
People sometimes do their primary training in the Cirrus. It takes quite a bit longer since you are combining many elements that normally happen after the private check ride, but it can be done with the right attitude and plenty of money.
 
petrolero said:
People sometimes do their primary training in the Cirrus. It takes quite a bit longer since you are combining many elements that normally happen after the private check ride, but it can be done with the right attitude and plenty of money.
Click to expand...

Yes. And If the plane they plan on owning after completing training is a Cirrus then I think training in the Cirrus from the beginning is a good thing. Like above posters have said, the Cirrus isn't some rocket that a new pilot couldn't possibly fly. It's a very capable single engine piston and that can make it a little more challenging for students or new pilots but by no means impossible. Even the 22. The whole selling a new SR22 to buy an SR20 for training to then buy an SR22 again still seems foolish but other than that we seem to have reached a consensus that the Cirrus (20 or 22) can be a good trainer provided the student know the plusses and minuses of training in one vs a 152/172/Cherokee.
 
oregonboy109 said:
The whole selling a new SR22 to buy an SR20 for training to then buy an SR22 again still seems foolish
Click to expand...

I skipped over that bit. Agree, that makes no sense. Just train in the 22 if that will be what you fly after training.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top