Question about what type of plane

[TRC1969]

I am starting training Feb 6th. My school has me set up to train in a G1000 172. My plan has always been to purchase a Cirrus SR20 after PPL is finished and start my IFR training. When my skills are ready move to the 22. I spoke with an another school today that focuses on Cirrus training. They are obviously more expensive. So my question here is…. Is it worth it to spend the extra money and have all my hours in the cockpit I will
Actually be flying in later, or does it make better sense to learn in the 172 and transition to the 20?
(172 wet with instructor 264/hr)
(SR20 410/hr with instructor+fuel).

 

[Skyrys62]

quick math if it takes 50 hours to PPL:

172 = $13,200
SR20 = $20,500 + $2400 fuel ($6 x 8gph x 50hrs)
This doesn't include taxes if they add that..

Difference of $9700
However.... the transition will cost a little, plus insurance may likely require it.

You could buy the SR20 and train in it through PPL. That might make the purchase pay off a little in the process.
I think especially with a Cirrus training center, you'd be fine starting out in your own SR20...IF they let you use your own plane.

Possibly start out in the 172, then transition after about 30-35 hours. Kill three birds.. save some money, get transitioned, and satisfy insurance for the upcoming purchase.

Plenty of reading here, as well as other threads:
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...a-cirrus-should-you-train-in-a-cirrus.126293/

 

[TRC1969]

Thanks for the info. I know this subject has been beaten to death. Usually on the mishaps board.

 

[frfly172]

The insurance companies like time in type.

 

[iamtheari]

Fly the 172 until you can buy the Cirrus, then do whatever is next in the Cirrus. If you buy it when you hit 20 hours, then finish your PPL in your own Cirrus. If you buy it after you get your PPL in the 172, then get enough transition training to be insurable and to feel comfortable in your own Cirrus. I wouldn’t spend extra money to learn the basics in a Cirrus just because I might buy one someday.

 

[asicer]

The insurance companies like time in type.

True, but it's not a linear progression. They don't like 100 hours in type 5x more than 20 hours in type.

 

[rhkennerly]

I’m always a little puzzled when a person without much experience decides on a plane before they get a license. You imagine your “ideal” mission profile, but with no evidence. A lot of guys dragging 5 extra seats around because they imagined flying frequent family hops. Turns out mom gets air sick & the kids get bored watching you have all the fun (not to mention your wife’s probable reluctance to commit your joint genetic experiment to being splattered on a hill). STOL flying might catch your eye, or sea planes.
Jus’ sayin’

 

[TRC1969]

I do understand being puzzled when someone says I want a certain plane even before they have their PPL. In my case it fits the mission. Two homes exactly 461NM apart. I’m a little larger of a fellow so the extra room is nice, and until last year it was an affordable used aircraft to buy. And it has a chute so the wife is sold on it. But I am still doing some recon on the idea. I will start in the 172 and more than likely transition to the Cirrus to finish up.

 

[dmspilot]

I am starting training Feb 6th. My school has me set up to train in a G1000 172. My plan has always been to purchase a Cirrus SR20 after PPL is finished and start my IFR training. When my skills are ready move to the 22. I spoke with an another school today that focuses on Cirrus training. They are obviously more expensive. So my question here is…. Is it worth it to spend the extra money and have all my hours in the cockpit I will
Actually be flying in later, or does it make better sense to learn in the 172 and transition to the 20?
(172 wet with instructor 264/hr)
(SR20 410/hr with instructor+fuel).

You will save money and can practice stall-spin entries in the 172 without fear of having to pull the chute and totaling a plane.

Years ago the FAA recommended the building block method of learning to fly. For some reason they have backtracked on that but have yet to come forth with any evidence that SBT is better. A Cessna is simpler and will teach you more about flying than a Cirrus.

 

[TRC1969]

Not the first time I have heard that advice. So many people seem to say start in the 172. I guess that’s what I will do. I’m already set up and have the plane reserved for the week anyway.

 

[rhkennerly]

I do understand being puzzled when someone says I want a certain plane even before they have their PPL. In my case it fits the mission. Two homes exactly 461NM apart. I’m a little larger of a fellow so the extra room is nice, and until last year it was an affordable used aircraft to buy. And it has a chute so the wife is sold on it. But I am still doing some recon on the idea. I will start in the 172 and more than likely transition to the Cirrus to finish up.

then you’ll appreciate the cirrus even more when you get to it. We had a saying in sailing: small boats teach you to sail, large boats teach you systems. I’d say the same idea applies to flying. I’ve often thought that pilots would benefit from starting off with the fewest number of gizmos allowed: fewer distractions, less mental energy devoted to extraneous instruments, & paying more attention to the feel of flying. It also helps to train in a plane that has pronounced warnings but forgiving tendencies.

I get starry-eyed when I peak into the ergonomic starship cockpit of a cirrus. But I’m glad I learned to fly in Cessnas.

 

[iamtheari]

I get starry-eyed when I peak into the ergonomic starship cockpit of a cirrus. But I’m glad I learned to fly in Cessnas.

I wouldn’t buy a new daily driver that doesn’t have ABS and a reverse camera. But I’m glad that I don’t melt down and cry when the ABS needs some help to stop on ice or the camera is covered in grime and I need to parallel park. I don’t think that learning on less sophisticated equipment guarantees you will be more skillful, but it certainly helps you not to take the better stuff for granted.

 

[rhkennerly]

I wouldn’t buy a new daily driver that doesn’t have ABS and a reverse camera. But I’m glad that I don’t melt down and cry when the ABS needs some help to stop on ice or the camera is covered in grime and I need to parallel park. I don’t think that learning on less sophisticated equipment guarantees you will be more skillful, but it certainly helps you not to take the better stuff for granted.

But I bet your dad insisted you not fool with the radio while you were learning to drive.

Anyway, not quite what I was saying. Dividing attention among all the gizmos can detract from the learning process & slow progress.

I was watching one of those “my journey to private pilot” vids just last night. Poor guy spent more time fiddling with the mixture on his first solo XC than he did looking out the window & checking off waypoints. I can’t imagine what his experience would have been like with a full glass panel, multiple views, a com/nav panel integrated into his EFIS, & a glass engine suite to worry over.

My point is that a sink hole on final is felt in the butt before it registers on the panel & then in your mind. Learning to “see” the ground track in a crosswind comes faster without the little airplane showing you skittering away from the magenta line. A robust shudder before stall is a good learning aid.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

It won't matter....unless money is unlimited....go the cheaper route and beat on the rentals. Once you get 50-60 hrs...then think about buying. Or, maybe you're ok with beating up your own?

 

[TRC1969]

I guess I called the Cirrus school just to see the cost difference and after about 30 minutes into the phone I was thinking maybe it’s the best route to start in the SR20. My thinking was when I’m done I should have a pretty good handle on the avionics and wouldn’t need the transition training. But even while
Speaking with them and hearing the line “if you can afford it why not”. I was thinking about is this a sales pitch that really has my best interest in mind? I’m sure they are a great school and I’m also sure I could do it, however there are plenty of other folks out there who can afford it that don’t! That has to make you think, why not. At the end of the day its just common sense to start small and work your way up. And hell I’m retired and plan on finishing up in three months anyway. I have nothing else to do.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

Why did you choose a Cirrus....without even flying one?

 

[TRC1969]

Well I looked at a lot of different planes. It has the range I’m looking for, it’s speedy enough to get me there quickly enough, and quite frankly I couldn’t see paying 6 figures for a plane that was built in the 80’s or 90’s. The cirrus will ultimately cost more money than let’s say a 95 172 but it will be a 2000 ish model. Keep in mind that was before prices went vertical. I have a friend that bought a plane May 2021 for 100K. It’s a twin engine Beech, but it’s a 69 model. My mind may change after I can speak more intelligently on the subject but a more modern plane with a chute currently has my vote.

 

[Pinecone]

If I were king, I would make everyone start with glider flying. Then a basic tailwheel airplane. Then a nose gear with only a VOR or two. A GPS would be installed, but with a sealed switch so if it is used, the student has to explain why they used it.

THEN TAA.

BTW, I would throw in some basic aerobatic work also.

 

[TRC1969]

Let’s just say I bet I’m not the only one who is glad you’re not king. As for me I don’t get the whole glider thing, that just scares the crap out of me. I mean you have to glide in a Cessna when the engine quits, why glide on purpose? I have little to no experience but I will be perfectly happy to stick with powered flight!

my apologies for being combative your Majesty..

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

You, young man, missed a step. To be a true the pilot's pilot you'd need to first have an A&P....so you know how to correctly maintain your aircraft.

Seriously....your king stuff is way outta line with what is needed.

If I were king, I would make everyone start with glider flying. Then a basic tailwheel airplane. Then a nose gear with only a VOR or two. A GPS would be installed, but with a sealed switch so if it is used, the student has to explain why they used it.

THEN TAA.

BTW, I would throw in some basic aerobatic work also.

 

[KJT]

If I were king, I would make everyone start with glider flying. Then a basic tailwheel airplane. Then a nose gear with only a VOR or two. A GPS would be installed, but with a sealed switch so if it is used, the student has to explain why they used it.THEN TAA. BTW, I would throw in some basic aerobatic work also.

Curious about your rationale. Military training programs all start with powered flight. Tailwheel training is not needed (especially in the military). Instrument training includes everything — why limit training to VORs?

Input from others with similar experience is welcome.

 

[dmspilot]

Curious about your rationale. Military training programs all start with powered flight.

I thought it started with an exhaustive selection process that chooses only the top few of the most highly qualified.

 

[Tantalum]

A Cessna is simpler and will teach you more about flying than a Cirrus

Why is a 172 simpler than an SR20 or teach more about flying. The SR20 has a handful of buttons, the same G1000, and a fuel selector. Fine, you have no "both" but neither does a Warrior. Is the wing less forgiving, sure. But if someone's goal is to fly in plane X why not learn in it? We're not talking anything exotic here like an Extra..

without fear of having to pull the chute and totaling a plane

When was the last Cirrus chute pull because of stall gone wrong or inadvertent spin? I agree with most of your posts, but this "Cirrus stall = spin / chute" thing has to die. The plane is spin recoverable as was proven for EASA certification with traditional recovery techniques. The chute was added for midairs, there's a personal and human reason the designers put it there. It wasn't to cheat FAA regs.

@TRC1969 train and fly the SR20 if you have the $$. You'll have less to unlearn and you'll be safer for having actually learnt in the plane your flying. A Cirrus will bite you if you try to approach at 65 knots. A 172 will just let out a pathetic whistle, maybe, and get a little mushy. Get used to that and the Cirrus will be a learning curve that could be very dangerous.

 

[Bill]

One benefit to learning in a 172 is they are everywhere. If you ever need to rent in a pinch, you’ll most likely be renting a 172.

 

[FoCoJayco]

OP, I’m in a scarily similar situation as your. I’m working on my PPL in two different Cessnas, 172S with a G1000 and a 172M with analog gauges and a GTN650. I’ve been forced to switch between them due to maintenance, but I’ve enjoyed flying both.

I plan to buy a Cirrus SR22[TN] eventually. The parachute is also the key for my wife and family.

The debate I was having was when to buy. I had decided I would finish my PPL with the Cessnas. But was considering whether to buy before or after getting IFR. Upon advice from Cirrus pilots in another forum, I’ve decided I’m going to wait to buy. I’m going to finish my PPL in the Cessnas and then take Cirrus transition training, mountain flying in a Cirrus (I live in CO), and rent a Cirrus for pleasure flights. After building hours and experience in the Cirrus for the rest of the year, I’ll look to buy next year and then do IFR training.

As others have pointed out, if the family doesn’t like flying or something else changes with our mission, we can adjust accordingly before making the investment. But I do think it’s good to have goals and I like to plan (and budget) in advance.

Good luck with your training and decision.

 

[KJT]

I thought it started with an exhaustive selection process that chooses only the top few of the most highly qualified.

I’ll stipulate to the selection process - to remove it from this discussion. But those who are selected start with powered flight. If glider training were beneficial/valuable, the military would start there. But they don’t.

 

[Tantalum]

If I were king, I would make everyone start with glider flying. Then a basic tailwheel airplane. Then a nose gear with only a VOR or two. A GPS would be installed, but with a sealed switch so if it is used, the student has to explain why they used it

Agree on the gliders, my first few flights were in a glider. In general just because one group of people learned a certain way doesn't mean future groups need to.. "it was hard for me so it has to be hard for you" is kind of an odd way to look at things. Fine if it makes someone safer. I'm not sure learning to fly a tailwheel necessarily would do much to mitigate the main causes of GA accidents

throw in some basic aerobatic work also

I agree with this. There should be much more focus on seeing how the plane behaves at the edge of the envelope, and in unusual attitudes..

 

[Tantalum]

TN

Turbos are a whole different beast. You should have your flying chops down pat before learning the turbo. Leaning technique, EGT, CHT, and overall engine management are a real concern. If you're buying your own plane that can make the difference in a very premature overhaul or engine work, vs making it to TBO

Before I got my multi I spent a few years flying Turbo Cirri. Awesome machines. Sure glad I waited till I had a few hundred hours and about 100 in Cirrus naturally aspirated before learning turbos

 

[texasclouds]

Bonanza

 

[dmspilot]

I agree with most of your posts, but this "Cirrus stall = spin / chute" thing has to die.

It's right in the POH.



Seems pretty clear: "CAPS must be deployed immediately."

When was the last Cirrus chute pull because of stall gone wrong or inadvertent spin?

I would hope it's rare, since people shouldn't be practicing spins or stall-spin entries in them.

Why is a 172 simpler than an SR20 or teach more about flying. The SR20 has a handful of buttons, the same G1000, and a fuel selector.

It teaches more about flying because, for starters, it can be spun. Thus the CFI can allow the student to practice stalls without guarding the controls or saving the student from themselves. The scenario is similar even for other maneuvers. An instructor is more likely to let a student try takeoffs and landings in a 30 knot crosswind in a beat up 172 than a million dollar Cirrus. Agree on the G1000, but there were only two choices to choose from.

 

[dmspilot]

I’ll stipulate to the selection process - to remove it from this discussion. But those who are selected start with powered flight. If glider training were beneficial/valuable, the military would start there. But they don’t.

I think the moral of the story was military and civilian training aren't comparable. Just like airline procedures and GA procedures aren't comparable. The trope is tired.

 

[KJT]

I think the moral of the story was military and civilian training aren't comparable. Just like airline procedures and GA procedures aren't comparable. The trope is tired.

Does that mean that glider training is/should be a mandatory prerequisite for civilian training? It’s not, and I’m only questioning why one would think it should be.

 

[iamtheari]

But I bet your dad insisted you not fool with the radio while you were learning to drive.

Anyway, not quite what I was saying. Dividing attention among all the gizmos can detract from the learning process & slow progress.

I agree with your point. Learn how to fly in a Cub, or as close to one as you can get, and you can focus on flying without any instruments to interfere.

 

[MountainDude]

Buy your last plane first. It will be a huge waste of money and time to buy a 172 now, keep putting money into it that you will not recoup at the time of sale. Buy your last plane now and make it perfect for yourself.

 

[Llk]

Between Mooney, Bonanza and a Cirrus pilots, opinions run the gamut do you *really* need a parachute?? Must you really pay for 6 seats worth of gas when you really fly with 2 people most of the time? Is a mooney really that much more narrow than a bonanza? What’s your beef with one door versus two?

If I had scoped out my mission when I started flying it would have been 100 percent a full blown L39 (says the man who just ferried a C150 from East Texas to California with mass headwinds )

Quit messing around with a Citrus and step up to an Aerostar


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FoCoJayco]

Turbos are a whole different beast. You should have your flying chops down pat before learning the turbo.

Yes, that was the reason for the brackets, I’ll start renting a SR20 and then move to the SR22T when the CSIP agrees it’s time (the rental company doesn’t have any SR22 NAs).

 

[Kenny Phillips]

... A Cirrus will bite you if you try to approach at 65 knots. A 172 will just let out a pathetic whistle, maybe, and get a little mushy.

Ha, I'd consider 65 kts in my Skyhawk to be a bit hot!

 

[texasclouds]

Rent the 172 through instrument, then get the Cirrus and get a thorough checkout in it. Make your mistakes in the 172, then polish your skills in the Cirrus. And if you get halfway through training only to find it isn’t for you, you can just walk away.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

I thought it started with an exhaustive selection process that chooses only the top few of the most highly qualified.

That will always depend on the need. I was certainly not among the most highly qualified, but during the Vietnam war, the military had a huge need for pilots. The "exhaustive selection process" required me to be healthy, have a college degree, and a strong desire to avoid being drafted into the Army. There were a couple of written tests, but nothing challenging for anyone with average intelligence.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

I am starting training Feb 6th. My school has me set up to train in a G1000 172. My plan has always been to purchase a Cirrus SR20 after PPL is finished and start my IFR training. When my skills are ready move to the 22. I spoke with an another school today that focuses on Cirrus training. They are obviously more expensive. So my question here is…. Is it worth it to spend the extra money and have all my hours in the cockpit I will
Actually be flying in later, or does it make better sense to learn in the 172 and transition to the 20?
(172 wet with instructor 264/hr)
(SR20 410/hr with instructor+fuel).

Our 172s have round gauges, but they rent wet with an instructor for $195.00. Come and fly with me... I could use a student who wants to get through the training in a few months. (By the way, the fastest one I have had did it in six weeks.)