Personal Minimums.

TwoTwoLeft said:
I believe most of the "anti Cirrus" propaganda was put out there by Cessna. Unfortunately, Cirrus shot themselves in the foot with their own target market... Wealthy professionals who are new or low time pilots. As fast as a Bonanza, yet just simple enough to jump into without a stepping stone. Throw in that type A personality ..............................
Click to expand...

This would be laughable were it not that you actually believe this...............
 
The only thing that's missing from this thread is a little math to back up or refute having personal mins!
 
Polar742 said:
I don't have an issue with a dude that flies his BE55 50 hours a year setting an arbitrary limit. Not a thing wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Late to the party, but this. A competent professional (in the limited sense of "gets paid to push buttons") pilot had better be able to fly to whatever the legal minimums are w/r/t his opspecs, etc. A private pilot, well, it's really none of my business. Personally, I wouldn't fly IMC in an aircraft that I didn't feel comfortable flying an ILS at 1800RVR...if that scares me, I shouldn't be flying it at all. But it's a big world full of people with different opinions on stuff. What's good for me might not be good for someone else. Being a mature judge of your own abilities is worth more than either arbitrary minimums or being personally offended by what someone chooses to do or not do with their airplane/family/etc. That sounds harsher and more didactic than I meant for it to. I guess I just mean that for my part, I like to mind my own business...I've got more than enough Opinions already...ask anyone on JC. ;)
 
TopGunn said:
:yup:

Same thing goes for Bonanza and Mooney guys.
Click to expand...

Meh. Bonanzas seem to have some weird ego attached in some cases. I've never seen Mooney pilots to be much outside the norm one way or the other. But then, neither of those manufacturers seem to consider blinding strobe lights to be acceptable "anti-collision beacons" in the interest of saving half a knot and $300. I still can't believe the FAA signed off on that.
 
dasleben said:
turntablehelicopter.jpg
Click to expand...

Insta-classic.
 
Boris Badenov said:
I had to park next to a Cirrus tonight. He was programming his pseudo-FMS with the engine running at high RPMs and the strobes all a-flashing. *hate*
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with me thinking I'm talking to morons?

I could care less what airplane the client owns. To me its a paycheck. So after I'm done carving their arbitrary personal limitations in stone for them:sarcasm:, my goal is keep them from being "that Cirrus guy".

Hell, I'd rather be flying/teaching in fabric over plastic any day. Just have to go where the money is for the moment.




believe most of the "anti Cirrus" propaganda was put out there by Cessna.
Click to expand...

I had several clients around 2006 looking to buy a new airplane. They were talking with factory reps from Diamond, Cirrus, Colombia & Cessna. I kid you not, every time we spoke with a Cessna rep and informed them that a Cirrus was also a consideration, it was the same response... Accident rate, not spin certified, parachute is a gimmick. It was like the same rehearsed story from deferent reps. They made more of an effort to downplay the Cirrus than to up sell their product to the client's flying needs. Don't get me wrong, Cessna makes great quality aircraft. How many SR22s do you think will hit 50 years old??? I'm not all about Cirrus. Personally, I really don't like them. Lucky for me, some people do so I can work and get paid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top