SR22T-G3: how appropriate for new pilot?

I trained in a SR20 and was a partner in a SR22 G2 as a first plane and think the concept is fine if you take training seriously and do not count on any of the aircraft's features other than stick and rudder to bail you out of any situation. Don't train with the autopilot (although I'd be surprised if an instructor would let you use it much other than to get competent on using it)

You will find many, many SR22 accidents out there and I recommend you read some of them. Most are that guy who did not pre-flight, ran low on fuel, flew into icing conditions (and I personally don't trust the so-call FIKI on the Cirrus), or ran into IMC with low hours or not being current.

I really don't think the plane is dangerous, it just attracts low-time pilots and use of the A/P and avionics instead of basic airman's skills. Be a good airman and I think the SR22 is a fine aircraft.

Note I am still a low-time pilot and don't have my SR22 any longer; I am now training again in a Super Decathlon to try to learn aerobatics and wish I'd done that earlier.

 

^^ agree.

How often are you going to fly after you get your license?
If you see yourself flying every week or every other week, then you'll stay current in whatever plane you buy.

I trained in a Cessna 172 so it was a natural transition for me to buy a Cessna 182 as my first plane.
It's a very easy plane to fly and the G1000 panel with synthetic vision and GFC700 autopilot is amazing technology.
No parachute, of course, and my cruise speed is slower at 140 kts or so.

I recommend you rent a Cirrus for a while before buying one and see how much you're using it after you get your license.
.

 

Cirrus has their own Cirrus Standardized Instructor Pilots. I would call a few them directly and see what they say. You may be able to cut out the pilot school middle man.

 

The SR22 is a lot of aircraft for a new pilot.
If you train in one from the beginning you will be ahead of the curve of someone like me coming out of a 172 into something that climbs faster than I cruise.

Its a fast slippery plane, meaning it wants to go fast and does not want slow down in the pattern and landing etc.

If and when I buy/share my own plane the Cirrus is on the top of my list, but I want many more hours and experience in something a bit more docile.

Two of my pilot friends, one who owns an SR22 and the other who is a Cirrus standardized instructor and factory ferry pilot, talked me out of learning and using one as a first plane.

It can and has been done by many successful save pilots........but for my $0.02 worth just a little to much going on a little to fast in a busy pattern for my lack of experience to stay ahead of the plane..

 

My first airplane as a 60 hours IFR pilot was a G3 Cirrus. They're very easy to fly. I certainly wouldn't buy anything slower.

 

If you buy new yes. It's. Good deal

 

You have to prorate it for the amount of business/personal use, though, so you might not get the full amount.

 

Depends on your business. 100% of my flying is business.

 

Also realize that if you later sell that airplane, you may pay a lot in taxes.
My understanding is if you sell the plane for more than its depreciated cost basis, you owe ordinary income taxes (not capital gains taxes) on the "depreciation recapture" amount.

Also, I'm surprised how well my new-in-2009 Cessna 182 has retained its value.
It is worth more than 80% for what I paid for it new, mostly because every year since 2009, the new plane price increases have been more than $10k per year.

.

 

True.

You also don't have to depreciate it if you don't want to. New plane prices keep going up. I've really never lost money on an airplane except the Cirrus. Cirrus is not the plane to buy if you want to retain value. They build a ton of them, they're not designed to last forever like other brands but they do have all the bells and whistles. If I were in the market for a new piston airplane, the G5 Cirrus is what I would buy but only because Cirrus really pushes the envelope and I like than. The other brands are really, really lacking.

 

cherry-picking, but......not a great recipe for a used plane xx years down the road.....;-)

 

Sort of related: pilot friend wants to buy a Lancair with 150 hours TT. Pilot flies only about 10 hours a month, interstate, west coast. Likes the looks and the performance. Would be upgrading from a C 170.

A little reading (spurred by a fatal accident in OR last month) suggests that the Lancair has a record of 98 fatal events in 10 years, and </> 1,000 built. Is this an acceptable record, or one to look at much more closely? How does it compare to Cirrus?

NB: I don't think Lancair performance is right for this pilot (low monthly hours.....).
But I'm not a pilot, just an interested observer (who would likely end up in the pax seat sooner or later.....)

 

My opinion is to look at the cause of the crashes. Have him read about Thurman Munson.
And check out what it will cost to insure a low time pilot in a high performance aircraft.

 

Some interesting Cirrus safety data here:
Cirrus SR20/SR22 fatal accident history - Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association

For example:

"Since the introduction of the SR20 in mid-1999, there have been 101 fatal accidents in over 5,400 production Cirrus SR2x aircraft. In those accidents, 198 people have perished with 24 people seriously injured and 3 with minor injuries (including 2 injured on the ground)."

.

 

Planes don't crash themselves. It's the pilot. The cirrus is an extremely safe airplane as long as the guy flying it doesn't decide to do something stupid.

 

Yes, some planes are more forgiving than a Cirrus. But that doesn't mean the Cirrus is dangerous. That's like me saying "any plane without a parachute is dangerous".

As you know, there is no black and white in aviation. "It depends" is my favorite term when describing anything about aviation.

A noob will not understand. As you know it takes years and hundreds of hours to understand the concepts that you and I understand. One must earn a PPL and IFR before deciding which plane suits best.

 

Buy the plane that best suits your mission&#8230;.. Then go learn to fly it safely and professionally.

 

I agree that the Cirrus is not inherently a "dangerous" plane. Like Rob pointed out it may be more accurately described as being a little less "forgiving" of a plane that requires a little more skill in certain situations.

I think its safety record is a result of a number of situations including low time pilots in very fast planes. It's like a wealthy person who buys a Ferrari but has no idea how to really drive it at speed and ends up in the ditch. Alot of new pilots with the means to acquire a Cirrus but without the time and skill to safely handle the plane in all situations is probably a major contributing factor to the crashes.

I have been contemplating a switch to a Cessna 400 from my Diamond DA40 but I honestly don't feel like I'm prepared to do so yet. I've flown in a friend's Cessna 400 and he let me take the controls for a while and it was definitely a different ball of wax in the pattern and on approach.