Cirrus for a student pilot?!

Rebel Lord said:
And I'm not at all. My dad is very serious about buying a plane which I would be the sole pilot. I'm trying to push him towards a Saratoga because of the seating capacity and cargo room. I don't mind getting a high performance/complex plane but in trying to be realistic in our price range which is about 50-100k plus has the perk of having roughly the same layout as a Cherokee if I'm not mistaken so I would be familiar
Click to expand...

How do you guys plan to use it?
 
WhiskeyPapa said:
How do you guys plan to use it?
Click to expand...

We are probably going to use it to commute from Houston to Dallas and go on vacations as well as just taking people flying around for fun while I also get more hours, training, and ratings. I don't plan on making landings in short fields but possibly some soft fields if it's a well maintained grass field.
 
OP should consider if his dislike of the Cirrus is because he subconsciously thinks flying one is an admission he is less than a Completely Skilled Pilot. Being 19 means you're bulletproof.

The OP mentions he thinks he can mitigate the risk of not flying with a CAPS, but the best pilot in the world can't perform a successful off airport emergency landing in hilly terrain at night. Note I said "hilly", it doesn't have to be "mountainous" to be dangerous.

He has also missed the fact that flying a Cirrus means having a glass cockpit with inherent pilot aids and a gateway to modern avionics (unless it's a first generation Cirrus).

The alternative Saratoga/PA-32 will likely have a mashup of avionics, some old and some new. Starting off with the advantage of a glass integrated avionics system is a huge advantage and carries its own measure of safety.
 
3393RP said:
OP should consider if his dislike of the Cirrus is because he subconsciously thinks flying one is an admission he is less than a Completely Skilled Pilot. Being 19 means you're bulletproof.

The OP mentions he thinks he can mitigate the risk of not flying with a CAPS, but the best pilot in the world can't perform a successful off airport emergency landing in hilly terrain at night. Note I said "hilly", it doesn't have to be "mountainous" to be dangerous.

He has also missed the fact that flying a Cirrus means having a glass cockpit with inherent pilot aids and a gateway to modern avionics (unless it's a first generation Cirrus).

The alternative Saratoga/PA-32 will likely have a mashup of avionics, some old and some new. Starting off with the advantage of a glass integrated avionics system is a huge advantage and carries its own measure of safety.
Click to expand...

If I was going to get a brand new airplane or a used one made in the last few years I would get a Piper archer. One of my main things is as stupid as it sounds I don't like the look of them, I think Piper pattern aircraft look better and since I'm doing all my training in one I'd rather get somthing that's atleast familiar to me.
 
I like the Archer too. I'm biased though:)

In all seriousness, if your stated price range is 50-100K, you might not get much Cirrus or Saratoga for that.

You could get a pretty nice Archer in that price range. As another poster mentioned, check out the Dakota. Archer with more ponies and speed.

I know it's not your money and your dad is buying, so in the end you might have no say at all. But I wouldn't let anyone tell you want you want.

That said, if dad won't buy anything but Cirrus, I sure wouldn't say no lol.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
I like the Archer too. I'm biased though:)

In all seriousness, if your stated price range is 50-100K, you might not get much Cirrus or Saratoga for that.

You could get a pretty nice Archer in that price range. As another poster mentioned, check out the Dakota. Archer with more ponies and speed.

I know it's not your money and your dad is buying, so in the end you might have no say at all. But I wouldn't let anyone tell you want you want.

That said, if dad won't buy anything but Cirrus, I sure wouldn't say no lol.
Click to expand...


I agree it is his money and he is very generous to pay for my college and flight training and I would be thankful for what ever he gets... But i still don't want a cirrus. :D


I'll look into the Dakota.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
And a headwind that would make that possible happens daily, all over the country:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Often enough for me to make the warrior useless as a travel plane. Big difference between 110kts and 175kts.
 
Oh so now we have gone from "worthless for anything but training" to "useless as a travel plane". Got it.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
* Complexity - The avionics are vastly more complex than a vanilla 172. This complicates the learning process. I know an able guy who bought a Cirrus for learning purposes. He now has 200 hours of instruction, and his instructor told me he's not ready still. The instructor (who specializes in Cirrus training) also said that Cirrus is not the best platform for new pilots - especially the SR22.
Click to expand...

Avionics are no more complex than a current model 172 or DA40.
 
50-100k is not going to buy a cirrus. Go ahead, buy a warrior. You'll be happy.
 
I don't think my Cirrus is boring looking. They're not all white with stickers.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    9.5 MB · Views: 18
Last edited:
Can't attach two pictures to one post for some reason
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    603.4 KB · Views: 19
I have nothing against cirrus, I'm sure it's a fine plane but even if I could afford it, it's just not my cup of tea
 
Rebel Lord said:
I have nothing against cirrus, I'm sure it's a fine plane but even if I could afford it, it's just not my cup of tea
Click to expand...

One thing I would recommend is figure out what your mission is, and find a list of planes that fit that mission and then go fly those planes.

Cirrus isn't your cup of tea but have you flown one?

If the only thing you have flown is a warrior, I wouldn't go buy a warrior. I was sort of hoping we would end up w/ a TB-21 when we sold the TB-9 but Dad went the Cirrus route. I HATED it for the first hour.

Now I love it. It doesn't really fit my primary mission as a pilot though so I am vetting other planes right now. I am leaning toward a Grumman but having never sat in one, that may change

Point is, I would go hitch a few rides in some different planes. In the meantime, if Dad buy's a Cirrus, Enjoy the heck out of it. Even if it doesn't fit your mission, they are a total blast to fly.


P.S. Someone take me for a ride in their Grumman :yes:
 
Rebel Lord said:
We are probably going to use it to commute from Houston to Dallas and go on vacations as well as just taking people flying around for fun while I also get more hours, training, and ratings. I don't plan on making landings in short fields but possibly some soft fields if it's a well maintained grass field.
Click to expand...

The Warrior will be fine for flying around for fun and for very short xc trips but if you plan on longer trips for vacation or something your probably going to want something faster/more comfortable. I've done some short/medium (1.5-3 hrs) trips in the 172 and it was great but, IMO, the 172 is a better XC plane than the warrior (better backseat for pax, downward vis, 2 doors and it isn't an oven in the summer.....). However, for traveling with the family on longer XCs I think the minimum is a 182/Dakota if you decide not to go with a Cirrus.

How many family members will you be taking on these vacations? 3 and you could get by with a 180hp 172 M or N but if you've got 4 or more you're into 182/Dakota/Cirrus or even Cherokee Six/Saratoga/210 territory.

Also I'm shocked no one has said Bonanza yet. This has to be a POA record :wink2:
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
One thing I would recommend is figure out what your mission is, and find a list of planes that fit that mission and then go fly those planes.

Cirrus isn't your cup of tea but have you flown one?

If the only thing you have flown is a warrior, I wouldn't go buy a warrior. I was sort of hoping we would end up w/ a TB-21 when we sold the TB-9 but Dad went the Cirrus route. I HATED it for the first hour.

Now I love it. It doesn't really fit my primary mission as a pilot though so I am vetting other planes right now. I am leaning toward a Grumman but having never sat in one, that may change

Point is, I would go hitch a few rides in some different planes. In the meantime, if Dad buy's a Cirrus, Enjoy the heck out of it. Even if it doesn't fit your mission, they are a total blast to fly.


P.S. Someone take me for a ride in their Grumman :yes:
Click to expand...

oregonboy109 said:
The Warrior will be fine for flying around for fun and for very short xc trips but if you plan on longer trips for vacation or something your probably going to want something faster/more comfortable. I've done some short/medium (1.5-3 hrs) trips in the 172 and it was great but, IMO, the 172 is a better XC plane than the warrior (better backseat for pax, downward vis, 2 doors and it isn't an oven in the summer.....). However, for traveling with the family on longer XCs I think the minimum is a 182/Dakota if you decide not to go with a Cirrus.

How many family members will you be taking on these vacations? 3 and you could get by with a 180hp 172 M or N but if you've got 4 or more you're into 182/Dakota/Cirrus or even Cherokee Six/Saratoga/210 territory.

Also I'm shocked no one has said Bonanza yet. This has to be a POA record :wink2:
Click to expand...


Like I said for what I really want is a useful load of over 1000lbs and atleast a 600-800nm range. I think a Saratoga fits that perfectly. I really like the club seating and the ability to take multiple friends with luggage on trips to see the country.
 
Rebel Lord said:
Like I said for what I really want is a useful load of over 1000lbs and atleast a 600-800nm range. I think a Saratoga fits that perfectly. I really like the club seating and the ability to take multiple friends with luggage on trips to see the country.
Click to expand...

I think club seating is cool.
Dream plane would be an A36. Those are sweet.
I would need an STC to add a pilot side door. :D


I don't know about the SR20 but our 22 has 1150 UL
 
DUDE CIRRUS ARE SO SEXY AND NICE ID RATHER HAVE THE NEWEST AN DBEST THAN OLD TECHNOLOGY.! TAKE THE PLANE
 
Rebel Lord said:
We are probably going to use it to commute from Houston to Dallas and go on vacations as well as just taking people flying around for fun while I also get more hours, training, and ratings. I don't plan on making landings in short fields but possibly some soft fields if it's a well maintained grass field.
Click to expand...
Are you based in Houston? If so, I believe there's a flight school at TME with a Cirrus fleet you could probably get a few hours of instruction in if you're curious.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
I think club seating is cool.
Dream plane would be an A36. Those are sweet.
I would need an STC to add a pilot side door. :D


I don't know about the SR20 but our 22 has 1150 UL
Click to expand...
The 20 has about 800lbs useful load. Hardly a travel plane. My student is training in a 2015 SR22 and he's only 15. His dad bought him the plane and we've discussed him training in a 20. He flies the 22 really well but I told him the 20 is a lot better training platform than the 22. I also told him he'd be giving up speed, useful load, and range. He just put his 22 up for sale and is now going to buy a 20. 20 for training and 22 for travel.
 
jordane93 said:
The 20 has about 800lbs useful load. Hardly a travel plane. My student is training in a 2015 SR22 and he's only 15. His dad bought him the plane and we've discussed him training in a 20. He flies the 22 really well but I told him the 20 is a lot better training platform than the 22. I also told him he'd be giving up speed, useful load, and range. He just put his 22 up for sale and is now going to buy a 20. 20 for training and 22 for travel.
Click to expand...
If he wants a training plane, I'll trade him my Skyhawk for the Cirrus ;-)
 
RudyP said:
I don't think my Cirrus is boring looking. They're not all white with stickers.
Click to expand...
Love the paint on this one! My favorite is the Kalahari orange. I've seen a turbo model with a similar paint job at my airport.
 
Rebel Lord said:
We are probably going to use it to commute from Houston to Dallas and go on vacations as well as just taking people flying around for fun while I also get more hours, training, and ratings. I don't plan on making landings in short fields but possibly some soft fields if it's a well maintained grass field.
Click to expand...

How much do the people weigh?

You could get an upgraded older C 182 in the 50-100K range & add a parachute (although that might put you under UL target). You could probably even get decent retractable at the upper end of your price range. Or a C210.
 
Last edited:
jordane93 said:
The 20 has about 800lbs useful load. Hardly a travel plane. My student is training in a 2015 SR22 and he's only 15. His dad bought him the plane and we've discussed him training in a 20. He flies the 22 really well but I told him the 20 is a lot better training platform than the 22. I also told him he'd be giving up speed, useful load, and range. He just put his 22 up for sale and is now going to buy a 20. 20 for training and 22 for travel.
Click to expand...

Why not continue teaching the kid to fly the SR22? Just insist that he train at least 3 times a week and he'll get it quickly enough. You said he already handles it well. I think it's silly to trade down to an SR20.

I think people have gotten over-used to the idea that you start out on a really basic plane and any other approach doesn't work. I don't believe that's true. It would make more sense for him to complete his PPL in the SR22 and then spend some time learning to fly gliders if you want him to have broader experience. I would kind of understand if you said "dump the SR22, we'll continue in a Cub," but "dump the SR22, we'll train in a 20" makes no sense at all!
 
Last edited:
WhiskeyPapa said:
Why not continue teaching the kid to fly the SR22? Just insist that he train at least 3 times a week and he'll get it quickly enough. You said he already handles it well. I think it's silly to trade down to an SR20.

I think people have gotten over-used to the idea that you start out on a really basic plane and any other approach doesn't work. I don't believe that's true. It would make more sense for him to complete his PPL in the SR22 and then spend some time learning to fly gliders if you want him to have broader experience. I would kind of understand if you said "dump the SR22, we'll continue in a Cub," but "dump the SR22, we'll train in a 20" makes no sense at all!
Click to expand...

I agree with your assessment.

WWll fighter pilots transitioned into a combat aircraft with less than 200 hours. The success of the training regimen was accomplished in large part because of intense mandatory ground school and study.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
Oh so now we have gone from "worthless for anything but training" to "useless as a travel plane". Got it.
Click to expand...

Depends. If "travelling" is going 50-100 miles for a burger, sure. If it is going 500 miles, then no the archer is useless as a travel plane for sure.
 
WhiskeyPapa said:
Why not continue teaching the kid to fly the SR22? Just insist that he train at least 3 times a week and he'll get it quickly enough. You said he already handles it well. I think it's silly to trade down to an SR20.

I think people have gotten over-used to the idea that you start out on a really basic plane and any other approach doesn't work. I don't believe that's true. It would make more sense for him to complete his PPL in the SR22 and then spend some time learning to fly gliders if you want him to have broader experience. I would kind of understand if you said "dump the SR22, we'll continue in a Cub," but "dump the SR22, we'll train in a 20" makes no sense at all!
Click to expand...

Agree with this. The notion of selling a new 22 to buy a 20 to train for 50-100 hours then sell that and get back into a 22 is ludicrous. If he didn't already have a plane, I could see steering him towards the 20, maybe but not when he already has the 22 and is going to take a massive depreciation hit twice!

Plenty of people have done ab initio training in SR22s perfectly fine.

Let's not forget the SR22 is still a piston engine single, it isn't like he's learning to fly in a TBM900 or Citation.
 
The only "downside" to training in a SR22 is it will probably take longer to get to your PPL than if you are in a slower plane. That is not such a bad thing.
 
bikert said:
Depends. If "travelling" is going 50-100 miles for a burger, sure. If it is going 500 miles, then no the archer is useless as a travel plane for sure.
Click to expand...

I've used a 150HP Cessna to fly Frankfurt-Rome on multiple occasions. Also, Riga-Frankfurt; Paris-Frankfurt; Bavaria-Umbria. All over Germany, France, the Baltic and Italy. Stop for fuel along the way at grass fields with a restaurant. it's a wonderful way to travel. An Archer is absolutely fine for 500MM trips.
 
bikert said:
The only "downside" to training in a SR22 is it will probably take longer to get to your PPL than if you are in a slower plane. That is not such a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I would like to see those '200hr' SR22 primary students. Either they:
- truly lack the skill to fly a plane
- dont have the time to commit to make progress
- have money and a cirrus instructor who has turned them into an annuity.

A number of airlines start(ed) their ab initio students in A36 and F33 bonanzas. A SR22 is simpler, no gear, no prop control. They are planes. You pull the yoke back, they go up, push to go down etc.
 
bikert said:
The only "downside" to training in a SR22 is it will probably take longer to get to your PPL than if you are in a slower plane. That is not such a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Well he's only 15 and he's got 170 hours so he will definitely have a lot of hours even before he solos in July.
 
weilke said:
I would like to see those '200hr' SR22 primary students. Either they:
- truly lack the skill to fly a plane
- dont have the time to commit to make progress
- have money and a cirrus instructor who has turned them into an annuity.

A number of airlines start(ed) their ab initio students in A36 and F33 bonanzas. A SR22 is simpler, no gear, no prop control. They are planes. You pull the yoke back, they go up, push to go down etc.
Click to expand...
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
 
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...

So if it is the avionics that you think are an issue, why are you pushing him into an SR20 with the same avionics??

For the depreciation hits that this little adventure is going to cost daddy, he could buy a used Archer, keep the 22, learn in the Archer then set it on fire upon completing his PPL and come out ahead financially. Unless we aren't getting the whole story, this isn't adding up for me.
 
RudyP said:
So if it is the avionics that you think are an issue, why are you pushing him into an SR20 with the same avionics??

For the depreciation hits that this little adventure is going to cost daddy, he could buy a used Archer, keep the 22, learn in the Archer then set it on fire upon completing his PPL and come out ahead financially. Unless we aren't getting the whole story, this isn't adding up for me.
Click to expand...
It's one less thing to worry about. Instead of doing 180 he has to worry about only going 140. And it's not an avionics issue. He's not a transition student. I said the transition students have a difficult time transitioning to the avionics
 
I'm 21 and just got my instrument rating and have 130 hours, so I'm not much ahead of you. I did my training in a warrior too. Trust me... You'll be ready to move on as soon as you fly something with more speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top