Hypothetical: Time to fly Cirrus Vision Jet

J

jallen0

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
May 18, 2017
Messages
335
Display Name
Display name:
Jallen0
This is purely a hypothetical. Let's say you are not a pilot and you win the lotto. And you want to buy a Cirrus Vision Jet. Money is no object. Would you:

1) Buy and learn to fly and then get your hours in a Cirrus SR22T then get a Vision Jet? If so how many hours would you need in order to qualify for the Vision Jet type rating? (The thinking here is that you start off in the Cirrus and learn to control that vs progressing to it)

2) Learn to fly in a 172/182, then transition to the SR22T?

3) Why learn to fly at all...hire a pilot!

Again, just a hypothetical. I was just wondering if this could be done and what timeframe it would take.
 
jallen0 said:
.....2) Learn to fly in a 172/182, then transition to the SR22T?......
Click to expand...

This, but not for the reason you’re thinking. If you’re going to (rightfully) say “low wing is better” you should at least have the facts to back that statement up.
 
eman1200 said:
This, but not for the reason you’re thinking. If you’re going to (rightfully) say “low wing is better” you should at least have the facts to back that statement up.
Click to expand...


Nope, not my thinking at all. My thinking was if you have no frame of reference as to how fast things happen in a SR22 vs a 172/182 then learning as a blank slate in a SR22 should be the exact same as learning as a blank slate in a 172/182. You learn to adapt and train in what you have.

However, IF it is essential that you learn in a slower plane that allows more forgiveness then that is my thinking. The issue of high wing vs low wing did not enter into my thoughts.
 
jallen0 said:
Nope, not my thinking at all. My thinking was if you have no frame of reference as to how fast things happen in a SR22 vs a 172/182 then learning as a blank slate in a SR22 should be the exact same as learning as a blank slate in a 172/182. You learn to adapt and train in what you have.

However, IF it is essential that you learn in a slower plane that allows more forgiveness then that is my thinking. The issue of high wing vs low wing did not enter into my thoughts.
Click to expand...

I know, Jerry. I was being ironical.
 
eman1200 said:
If you’re going to (rightfully) say “low wing is better”
Click to expand...

What you talkin’ about Eman?

AmDfgC.gif
 
Buy a jet and hire pilot to fly it for me, and would be big enough where I can separate myself from the pilot.
 
If I won the lottery, and money was no object, I'd continue my current plan, which is: SR20 -> SR22T and then MAYBE add on "-> Vision Jet" last, after many hours getting proficient in the SR22.

I got to see the inside of the SF50 recently, and of course it's a very cool plane. But I'm single with no kids, and don't do a lot of hauling people around, and I think it would be almost too much plane for me. Just too much wasted space and room I'd never use. If anything, I'd want it more for the increased capabilities, pressurization, etc, than for any increased people-hauling ability. Part of me also thinks I'd prefer to slow down a bit and enjoy the trip. I could easily see if I spent lottery money to get a new fully loaded SR22T, being perfectly happy in that (jeez, who wouldn't be???) with no desire to upgrade to the jet.

But I'll never win the lottery, so I don't have to burden myself with such decisions :)
 
Cherokee, Comanche, Aztec, Aerostar, Aerostar jet with hired safety pilot. And a hangar home big enough to keep all of them happy, lol
 
Something like this seems more sensible...

Warrior -> Arrow -> Mooney -> Cessna 310 -> Phenom


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SkyHog said:
Why not learn to fly in the jet?
Click to expand...

Because it’s probably a really lousy trainer...

And who would want to beat up on a multi million dollar jet?

And can you get a type rating simultaneous to a private?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lots of good answers but not one of the important ones. How many hours from zero time to Vision Jet time?
 
I would suggest learning how to fly in the jet. Start out in the sim and learn to fly the jet the way it was designed to be flown. Get the PPL IR and buy a safety pilot so insurance will give the hill coverage. (You'll need insurance to protect your millions from from the havenots.). Then, really learn how to fly by buying a taildragger and another CFI pilot type. This way you'll get some street cred from the plebes.
 
jallen0 said:
This is purely a hypothetical. Let's say you are not a pilot and you win the lotto. And you want to buy a Cirrus Vision Jet. Money is no object. Would you:

1) Buy and learn to fly and then get your hours in a Cirrus SR22T then get a Vision Jet? If so how many hours would you need in order to qualify for the Vision Jet type rating? (The thinking here is that you start off in the Cirrus and learn to control that vs progressing to it)

2) Learn to fly in a 172/182, then transition to the SR22T?

3) Why learn to fly at all...hire a pilot!

Again, just a hypothetical. I was just wondering if this could be done and what timeframe it would take.
Click to expand...

I would probably go zero to hero in the jet. Who wants a plane with the wheels hanging out in the breeze all the time? That's just embarrassing. :rofl:

But seriously... One of the things Cirrus used to take a lot of flak for was that they were selling SR-22s to non-pilots... And those same kinds of people wanted their investment to pay off right away without having to wait for all that pesky training to be over.

Cirrus' answer to it was Cirrus Access. At the highest level, which I think cost something like $60K (which included your insurance), you got a full-time CSIP instructor dedicated to you for a year. The idea was that that the instructor could double as your corporate pilot and you could use it for business travel right off the bat. Solo would not even be allowed until the student had at least 50 hours to remove the pressure that many new pilots feel. At the end of the year, you would have 250 hours, private and instrument, and lots of good real-world experience.

Something similar to that would work with the Vision jet as well, though it might take even more time.

gsengle said:
Because it’s probably a really lousy trainer...

And who would want to beat up on a multi million dollar jet?
Click to expand...

Meh, it's only a Cirrus jet. ;)

And can you get a type rating simultaneous to a private?
Click to expand...

Yep. It's rare, for obvious reasons, but it can be done. I think Thurman Munson did it, before the infamous crash...

GRG55 said:
If money is no object why on earth would you want to buy a Cirrus jet? :confused:o_O

When you could have one of these instead...:cool:

View attachment 71927
Click to expand...

Who would want a jet where you are required to get someone else to go flying with you rather than going yourself on a whim?

Seriously, if money was no object, I would get a Pilatus PC24. Single pilot, and the largest cabin on a single-pilot jet, giant cargo door, can operate off a 3000-foot grass strip, has the pseudo-APU functionality... It's really a new level in aircraft design IMO.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
...Who would want a jet where you are required to get someone else to go flying with you rather than going yourself on a whim?

Seriously, if money was no object, I would get a Pilatus PC24. Single pilot, and the largest cabin on a single-pilot jet, giant cargo door, can operate off a 3000-foot grass strip, has the pseudo-APU functionality... It's really a new level in aircraft design IMO.
Click to expand...

Me. That's who.

Money no object, I'd have a G650 in the hangar as fast as I could buy one and have it fitted out. From where I live it can get me to Europe or Asia non-stop. And frankly, sitting right seat in a Gulfstream I owned wouldn't seem like a hardship posting. :D
 
GRG55 said:
Me. That's who.

Money no object, I'd have a G650 in the hangar as fast as I could buy one and have it fitted out. From where I live it can get me to Europe or Asia non-stop. And frankly, sitting right seat in a Gulfstream I owned wouldn't seem like a hardship posting. :D
Click to expand...

Meh... I got to fly a Hawker once (right seat, of course). It was a very educational experience, but one of the things that really stuck out to me was that we flew for an hour to get to an airport that was an hour's drive from the destination due to the need for a 5000-foot runway, when there was a perfectly good airport with a 3500-foot runway right at the destination. That really changed my perspective on the value of the bigger jets. A King Air would have been faster.

Yeah, my little dream PC24 isn't going nonstop from my house to Europe, but it's going to get me into a lot more places than a G650... AND I don't have to have some other guy up front with me. :D
 
flyingcheesehead said:
...Yeah, my little dream PC24 isn't going nonstop from my house to Europe, but it's going to get me into a lot more places than a G650... AND I don't have to have some other guy up front with me. :D
Click to expand...

I was thinking a female pilot. Maybe Swiss, or French? :D

My Chairman of the Board of a company I co-founded in the Middle East had a personal G-550. I got to ride in it a few times between the Persian Gulf and Europe, as well as a few trips within Europe. Spoiled? Yes! :cool:

As for getting into places, I'll match your PC24, and raise you one Husky. :p
 
jallen0 said:
Learn to fly in a 172/182, then transition to the SR22T?
Click to expand...
Nah.. skip the whole 172 scene.. details below

Stingray Don said:
172 -> SR22 -> Vision Jet
Click to expand...
A Cirrus flies so much differently than a SkyHawk that there is really no value added in learning in a Cessna first.. you are just going to have to unlearn a bunch of things when you go to Cirrus.. might as well just start with Cirrus. It stalls different, flies much faster, and has completely different flying qualities overall
 
Tantalum said:
Nah.. skip the whole 172 scene.. details below


A Cirrus flies so much differently than a SkyHawk that there is really no value added in learning in a Cessna first.. you are just going to have to unlearn a bunch of things when you go to Cirrus.. might as well just start with Cirrus. It stalls different, flies much faster, and has completely different flying qualities overall
Click to expand...

That’s exactly why you should fly a traditional trainer first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Meh... I got to fly a Hawker once (right seat, of course). It was a very educational experience, but one of the things that really stuck out to me was that we flew for an hour to get to an airport that was an hour's drive from the destination due to the need for a 5000-foot runway, when there was a perfectly good airport with a 3500-foot runway right at the destination. That really changed my perspective on the value of the bigger jets. A King Air would have been faster.
Click to expand...
keep in mind that 5000 feet is generally an insurance requirement. I've done less than 4000 feet in Hawkers several times...the conditions do have to be a lot more right than they do for a King Air, however. ;)
 
A Cirrus sales rep was telling me how they got a 250hr pilot into the vision jet with a safety pilot. Full type rating too! Don't know about you but at 200ish hours I'm still learning too much to ever want to fly a jet.

Money no object? Buy a classic, classic, beautiful, sexy plane that will always have an appeal...

1. Electric Jr. in a hangar
2. SR22, TB-20 or wait for that DA52 in the same place
 
1RTK1 said:
If I won the big lottery I would want at least one plane that would fly faster than stink.
Click to expand...
I would only want that if there's someplace I really wanna be. And if I won big, I'd live in that place I really wanna be.
 
jallen0 said:
This is purely a hypothetical. Let's say you are not a pilot and you win the lotto. And you want to buy a Cirrus Vision Jet. Money is no object. Would you:

1) Buy and learn to fly and then get your hours in a Cirrus SR22T then get a Vision Jet? If so how many hours would you need in order to qualify for the Vision Jet type rating? (The thinking here is that you start off in the Cirrus and learn to control that vs progressing to it)

2) Learn to fly in a 172/182, then transition to the SR22T?

3) Why learn to fly at all...hire a pilot!

Again, just a hypothetical. I was just wondering if this could be done and what timeframe it would take.
Click to expand...

Ask Cirrus. If you are ready to order a SF50 G2 today, they would probably throw in a SR22 demo and a wholly owned CSIP for free. By the time you have a couple of hours and the required ratings, they would find a production slot to deliver the plane when you want it.


Oh, and you would be front and center in their sales literature for a couple of weeks.
 
gsengle said:
That’s exactly why you should fly a traditional trainer first
Click to expand...
Why though? Isn't that like saying you need to learn the piano first before playing violin?

The flying qualities are so different you'll need to unlearn 40-60 hours worth of flying you picked up.. and then relearn new things. A Skyhawk is too forgiving and easy in the stall, and is simply too slow in the pattern comparatively. If you attempt to do a base to final turn in a Cirrus at 70 knots you're in for a potential disaster.. nevermind flying short final at 60-65 knots.. or doing the same lazy stalls. A Skyhawk in general is a terrible trainer since it lets the pilot get away with far too much.. it's not a good reflection of what a real plane (whether that's a Lance, Saratoga, Bonanza, 210, etc.) actually flies like

There are schools that instruct on SR20 aircraft for basic PPL.. it's not that crazy and you'll save money just learning on the type of aircraft your going to be flying

But strokes for folks I guess
 
Tantalum said:
Why though? Isn't that like saying you need to learn the piano first before playing violin?

The flying qualities are so different you'll need to unlearn 40-60 hours worth of flying you picked up.. and then relearn new things. A Skyhawk is too forgiving and easy in the stall, and is simply too slow in the pattern comparatively. If you attempt to do a base to final turn in a Cirrus at 70 knots you're in for a potential disaster.. nevermind flying short final at 60-65 knots.. or doing the same lazy stalls. A Skyhawk in general is a terrible trainer since it lets the pilot get away with far too much.. it's not a good reflection of what a real plane (whether that's a Lance, Saratoga, Bonanza, 210, etc.) actually flies like

There are schools that instruct on SR20 aircraft for basic PPL.. it's not that crazy and you'll save money just learning on the type of aircraft your going to be flying

But strokes for folks I guess
Click to expand...

That’s partially a bad analogy - and partially a good one.

Many musicians learn piano because being able to think polyphonically (many notes/lines at same time) is a building block to musicianship. So in a way a good analogy, yes you could and should learn piano. Same reason I learned Latin in school.

Bad analogy, in that you want a trainer that strips flying to its three axis seat of the pants basics, the jet won’t be a good teacher for that - stabilized approaches and glass cockpits and all that her stuff comes way later. Or should imho.

But we agree the 172 isn’t a great trainer. I’m a Cherokee fan in that regard. But I also believe the SR20/22 is an even worse trainer... for teaching the basics.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Plenty of people have gone SR22 to Vision Jet. Cirrus markets a semi seamless transition from prop to jet
 
Just because a company markets it and some people manage to do it...

There was a year or two back it seems like year long saga of a guy on another group, went by the handle of samurai husky or similar, who did his primary training in Cirrus. For a host of reasons it became clear to most there and I believe the OP that a Cirrus isn’t a great primary trainer....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
That’s partially a bad analogy - and partially a good one.

Many musicians learn piano because being able to think polyphonically (many notes/lines at same time) is a building block to musicianship. So in a way a good analogy, yes you could and should learn piano. Same reason I learned Latin in school.

Bad analogy, in that you want a trainer that strips flying to its three axis seat of the pants basics, the jet won’t be a good teacher for that - stabilized approaches and glass cockpits and all that her stuff comes way later. Or should imho.

But we agree the 172 isn’t a great trainer. I’m a Cherokee fan in that regard. But I also believe the SR20/22 is an even worse trainer... for teaching the basics.
Click to expand...
Good points.. I was going to say that we don't have to learn to ski first before going to the snowboard, or vice versa.. but learning manual on an old Toyota Corrolla is probably better than learning manual on an M3 or Porsche.. and there are people who implore you to learn Latin before other languages (I am not one of those people though)

Philosophically I guess there are pros and cons to both and that will come down to the individual.

I still think the Skyhawk is too easy of a trainer.. at least a PA28 flies more like a real plane. When I transitioned to the Cirrus I was surprised at how little from the C172 actually carried over. Basic concepts were there, as you mentioned, but Cirrus (much like a Grumman Tiger in my opinion) requires more discipline from the operator. The Skyhawk is basically fool proof.. you have to actively work to upset that airplane (which again, some say make it a good trainer.. but I say it instills a false sense of infallibility in the user)
 
After lots of 400 series Cessna twin and high performance Mooney time, I had to drop off the Mooney a hundred miles or so away at an avionics shop, and got a ride back in my old instructors 172. He let me fly it back - hasn’t flown one in 15 years or so. You’re right I was amazed at how easy it was. That said didn’t seem easy the day I soloed! :-o


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
that a Cirrus isn’t a great primary trainer
Click to expand...
What about learning on a Grumman..? The Grumman is much lighter, but I find the flying qualities to be generally similar. It also depends on what your mission is. If your mission is to buy X and fly it as your main mode of transport for the next 5-15 years, then just learn on X. But if your mission is to build hours, and do this for a career, then I'd agree, a Cirrus makes no sense

To that point though, my friend recently purchased a Mooney and I encouraged him to hold off on his IFR training and to do it in the Mooney after he purchased it..
 
Tantalum said:
What about learning on a Grumman..? The Grumman is much lighter, but I find the flying qualities to be generally similar. It also depends on what your mission is. If your mission is to buy X and fly it as your main mode of transport for the next 5-15 years, then just learn on X. But if your mission is to build hours, and do this for a career, then I'd agree, a Cirrus makes no sense

To that point though, my friend recently purchased a Mooney and I encouraged him to hold off on his IFR training and to do it in the Mooney after he purchased it..
Click to expand...

Yeah instrument training is another matter. And if you buy an airplane it makes a ton of sense to learn in it, as that’s the equipment you’ll start out using. IFR is IFR for the most part...

Never got to fly the Grumman!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
That said didn’t seem easy the day I soloed!
Click to expand...
Nope! But your solo day has a whole host of romance elements to it too, and the thrill of being in the sky alone. I remember reading the checklist a hundred times for the 172.. which, in hindsight, didn't even have a fuel pump and was basically lights on, mixture rich, transponder on.
 
Tantalum said:
Nope! But your solo day has a whole host of romance elements to it too, and the thrill of being in the sky alone. I remember reading the checklist a hundred times for the 172.. which, in hindsight, didn't even have a fuel pump and was basically lights on, mixture rich, transponder on.
Click to expand...

I suppose a lot of my thought process is to ratchet up the difficulty incrementally so you aren’t overwhelmed and don’t miss the basics...


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