Blip16
Well-Known Member
the ones UND used to have weren't in very good shape after 12-1400 hours, but i blamed that on the training environment because most the parts that were falling apart were on the student side and not the instructor side
Minn. jury awards $16M+ in crash of Cirrus plane
- Thread starter Malko
- Start date
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
The metal heel plate under the rudder pedals is fastened to the floor board by four velcro strips. Need I say more?
Sounds sensible to me. The plate really only needs to handle light shear loads, perfect for Velcro and easy to deal with for maintenance. No need for wing attach bolts or something crazy there.
Shoot, in the early non-WAAS airplanes the number two GPS antenna is just velcroed up under the dash. Works just fine.
I just don't get it. A Cirrus is just another airplane. Some stuff is clever, some stuff isn't. Ditto for every Cessna, Piper, Boeing, Airbus, Maule, etc... ever built.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
The only problem is that when you fly it away from the frigid climes at the factory in Duluth, you encounter a weather phenomenon called heat. Put a strip of velcro on a metal inspection plate in the Florida summer heat, pull on it a few times, and see how long the glue on the back side lasts.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
Yet another in the long list of reasons to stay the heck out of Florida.
or
...another in the long list of reasons to use 4 sheet metal screws.
Okie_Pilot
Pitts Builder
Let's blame Cirrus for not proper training... Great, now when I eventually by a plane it'll come with 2 weeks of mandatory training.
Too bad he only received training in VFR conditions. We all know planes handle completely opposite when flown in IMC conditions.
Too bad he only received training in VFR conditions. We all know planes handle completely opposite when flown in IMC conditions.
Cal Varnson
Well-Known Member
Of the dozens of airports I've been to over the past few years, it seems that most of them have had at least one Cirrus based at them. And it seems like most of them are owned by guys that might go out a couple of times per month and putz around the pattern a few times. So that is why I was never a big fan of the Cirrus, not because it's not a good airplane, but because of the type of pilots that tend to fly them; weekend warriors with more money than experience. Thick in the wallet, thin in the logbook as the cliche goes.
Fast forward a couple of years, and I got hired flying one. The owners son picked it out for him, and he is exactly the demographic Cirrus is marketing to: Upper middle class aviation enthusiast. He has racked up a whopping 700 hours since the mid 80's and I don't think he even considered another airplane.
Alot of these guys see the avionics and of course the parachute and think that it gives them a big margin of safety. I get into trouble, so what? I can just pull the chute and everything will be ok. I live in a thinly populated part the the country and I can think of 3 accidents off the top of my head near where I live, one of them fatal, involving the Cirrus. Every one of them was totally preventable and involved very stupid mistakes by the pilot. Some of them have their instrument ratings, but so what? How current are they? They sometimes forget how demanding instrument flight, and just flying an airplane, for that matter, can be.
We are trying to sell our Cirrus and upgrade into something bigger. A guy I talked to thought he knew someone who would be interested in buying it. I asked how many hours he had; he said 200. I told him to get at least a couple hundred more hours in a 172 before buying one of these. It's not like the Cirrus is a jet, but in my opinion it is too much airplane for someone with only a few hundred hours.
There is nothing wrong with the Cirrus. I have 700 hours in one and think it is a fine product overall. It's just the demographic they are marketing to that gives it somewhat of a bad rap.
Fast forward a couple of years, and I got hired flying one. The owners son picked it out for him, and he is exactly the demographic Cirrus is marketing to: Upper middle class aviation enthusiast. He has racked up a whopping 700 hours since the mid 80's and I don't think he even considered another airplane.
Alot of these guys see the avionics and of course the parachute and think that it gives them a big margin of safety. I get into trouble, so what? I can just pull the chute and everything will be ok. I live in a thinly populated part the the country and I can think of 3 accidents off the top of my head near where I live, one of them fatal, involving the Cirrus. Every one of them was totally preventable and involved very stupid mistakes by the pilot. Some of them have their instrument ratings, but so what? How current are they? They sometimes forget how demanding instrument flight, and just flying an airplane, for that matter, can be.
We are trying to sell our Cirrus and upgrade into something bigger. A guy I talked to thought he knew someone who would be interested in buying it. I asked how many hours he had; he said 200. I told him to get at least a couple hundred more hours in a 172 before buying one of these. It's not like the Cirrus is a jet, but in my opinion it is too much airplane for someone with only a few hundred hours.
There is nothing wrong with the Cirrus. I have 700 hours in one and think it is a fine product overall. It's just the demographic they are marketing to that gives it somewhat of a bad rap.
Number1atNumber2
Tries to keep it fun.
I can understand that to a degree, but if these people didn't buy a Cirrus, it would just be something else, be it a Diamond, Piper, Cessna, Mooney. We will always have idiots up there.
Killtron2000
Well-Known Member
This kind of thing shut down GA aircraft production once before in this country.