Cirrus's are KIP

I only ask the question because I'm under the (possibly ignorant) impression that the older a fleet gets, the more it costs to maintain/run it. Granted, Cirri (I can't make myself say Cirruses) have far more advanced avionics packages than what most of you freight dawgs fly, right? And I don't know if the acquisition costs outweigh the cost savings over time.

If it did become cheaper to operate a Cirrus than, say, an old Baron or a 210, would the freight companies look to something like that to lower costs?

And is 400-500lbs of payload adequate for a light freight operation? Or does that defeat the purpose?
 
killbilly said:
If it did become cheaper to operate a Cirrus than, say, an old Baron or a 210, would the freight companies look to something like that to lower costs?
Click to expand...
Revenue - Expense = Profit/Loss

Anything to drive the profit/loss into the black is good and will probably be done. If the Cirrus is more profitable than a baron/210, then I can't see why not.

And is 400-500lbs of payload adequate for a light freight operation? Or does that defeat the purpose?
Click to expand...
Depends. If you're burning lots of gas, it's a higher $/mile or $/hr price and less load means a higher $/pound of stuff.

-mini
 
It was not at all uncommon to get a 210 loaded with 1000-1200 (depending on model) when I was at FLX. I'd be surprised if the Cirrus would be worth it, especially when you factor in that the mechanics at FLX know the 210 and Baron like the back of their hands, but I doubt they have a single fiberglass expert in the entire company. On the other hand, the market could always change...and in fact will.
 
Boris Badenov said:
It was not at all uncommon to get a 210 loaded with 1000-1200 (depending on model) when I was at FLX. I'd be surprised if the Cirrus would be worth it, especially when you factor in that the mechanics at FLX know the 210 and Baron like the back of their hands, but I doubt they have a single fiberglass expert in the entire company. On the other hand, the market could always change...and in fact will.
Click to expand...

That's part of what I was wondering, and I'm assuming MX falls into the model of "cost-to-operate."

I don't know what a used 210 costs, but I imagine it's less than a Cirrus. And if a 210 can carry 2x the cargo, well, that is definitely a point in the 210's favor.

I was thinking of the speed and insurance benefits with a Cirrus, but those might not outweigh what you get in an old, proven 210.

I'm really interested in how the profit margins work out for a 135-freight op like FLX or Airnet.
 
killbilly said:
Okay - potentially dumb question from the peanut gallery here....

Places like Flight Express use 210s for doing freight hauling and the 210 is basically a high-performance single.

As airplanes like the Cirrus get older and thus cheaper, would we ever see the day where they might take the back seats out and make a freight variant?
Click to expand...

Will the Cirrus have a 1,600# or more useful load as 210s do.:yup:
 
P210pilot said:
Will the Cirrus have a 1,600# or more useful load as 210s do.:yup:
Click to expand...

I fly a 2008 Cirrus with all the options such as Air conditioner, turbo, Garmin, etc.
Useful Load with full fuel is 330 pounds with full fuel (92 gallons). Take off with half tanks (500 mile range) and you got a 600 pound useful load which does not even campare to the 210's
 
killbilly said:
Did you read the rest of the thread?
Click to expand...

Yes I did. A FIKI normally aspirated or turbo 210 will carry at least twice the useful load of a 22. It also has a lot more cubic volume in the cabin. So, no a 22 won't come close to replacing a 210 for freight hauling.
 
minitour said:
But does the rest of the thread have the performance of a 210? :panic:

-mini
Click to expand...

For any trip over an Hr., I go to the FLs and have a TAS of right around 200 Kts. and I don't need no stinkin O2. With all tanks (including TKS) full I have 7 Hrs. range and still can carry almost 700#s payload.:)

I have a P-210N. The P-210R is probably the best single engine piston plane ever built IMHO. Unfortunately there were only 40 built before GA tanked in the Mid 80s and Cessna ceased production.:(
 
Quote from Cirrus:

" With the two small nozzles positioned just below the windscreen, in addition to any fluid slung rearward by the propeller, the pilot is assured of an unobstructed forward view."

When I hit the spray bar for my windshield I get a blurry view. It is a lot better then an opaque view though.:)
 
P210pilot said:
For any trip over an Hr., I go to the FLs and have a TAS of right around 200 Kts. and I don't need no stinkin O2. With all tanks (including TKS) full I have 7 Hrs. range and still can carry almost 700#s payload.:)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. The 210s can do quite a bit...I was just busting your hoo-hah's. :)

-mini
 
You know I keep looking at the title of this thread and thinking it has something to do with this guy:
18696.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top