Training in a SR20

Sprint100

Sprint100

Well-Known Member
I know that planes differ in how they feel, etc. but a big consideration I hear about is that a plane may be too complex to learn in. In my case, I will be finishing my private. There is a flight school that uses nothing but the Cirrus SR20. My question is, is this plane way too complex, powerful, for somebody with 33 hours? The only thing I have going for me is that I am technologically advanced so the displays are a delight to see.
 
the SR20 is not a trainer. training for the PPL in a plane like that will inevitably get you in bad habits of looking inside too much. i'm doing CFII training in an SR20 and it's a handful at some times. you can get the same private pilot certificate in a roasted 152 with 15,000 hours that you can in an SR20 and you'll probably be a better pilot for it.

http://www.bestaviation.net/articles1.asp?articleID=12
 
The SR20 would be a handful for you. It will take a lot of money to get you up to speed in that aircraft.
 
You can learn to fly in any aircraft you want. Cessna 150 or a Cessna Caravan, it's just a question of money.

I knew a guy who had inhereted a Bonanza. Since that was what he would be flying, that's what he learned in. It took him a few more hours, but he did just fine.

I personally recomend learning in the cheapest, simplist airplane you can find. However, there is no reason you can't learn in something more complex.
 
The Cirrus is a great plane, but I wouldn't want my students doing primary training in it. There are too many 'cool gadgets' that overshadow what you should be learning at this stage of the game.

For instance:

- Rudders and ailerons are linked. In normal flight, no compensation for adverse yaw is required.
- Throttle and prop control levers are combined. No direct constant speed prop control is required.
- The avionics and instrument panels are quite complex compared to other primary trainers. Technojunkie or not, that adds a significantly large amount of systems knowledge to your training.
- The big, powerful, exciting engine will burn twice the AvGas of most trainers and the other bells and whistles will cost twice as much in rental. It's much more realistically economical to learn in a C172 or PA28 (among the other dozen excellent traininers out there).

I'd happily buy one and fly it as a personal (or even advanced instrument training) aircraft. But it wouldn't be my choice for primary students.

*Disclaimer: All of my Cirrus time is in an SR22. But I don't think the 20 and 22 are THAT different. It's mostly a few bits of leather and a bigger engine, isn't it?
 
I have about 150 hours in a SR-20, most of it as dual given. Training in an SR20 is “do-able” but the transition will cost you some time. If you are close to finishing I would probably not switch planes, simply because you will have to relearn the appropriate configurations for each maneuver and it could take 5 to 10 hours to get there. (Though your mileage may vary.) The 20 has 200 hp and a constant speed prop, however the prop is linked to the throttle and requires no adjustment from you. The plane is much more responsive than any Warrior, Archer or 172. It is also easier to over control. The airframe is clean and it can build up a fair amount of speed if you are descending with no flaps. Cruise speeds are around 145 to 150 knots and the landing speed is 80 to 75 knots. The landing profile is different than most other planes I have flown. The flare feels much “flatter” and if you flare it like a 172 in a soft field landing, you will strike the bottom of the rudder on the pavement.

With that said, I know several pilots on field who own SR22’s, who did their private in that airplane, which I might add is more to handle than a SR-20.
 
I can't speak about a cirrus having never flown one but I did date a girl who got her private in a C152 and switched right over to a V-Tail Bonanza for the rest of her training and had very little problems transitioning. In fact, at 200 hours she knew so much more about high speed flying and descent planning then my 1000+ hours in 172s/Seminoles. I learned this the hard way trying to impress her with my incredible skills going into Las Vegas.
smirk.gif
Of course she was flying Lears at 300hours so go figure. There's something to be said about training in High Performance Complex aircraft.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Rudders and ailerons are linked. In normal flight, no compensation for adverse yaw is required.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't that a little weird in crosswind landings or does it 'de-couple' then?
 
Thanks for all the great input!!!!!!! I am going to rent the plane and an instructor this Sat. just to see what I would be getting into if I opted to take that route. The rate would be $125 for the Cirrus, which is $15 more than the 172's I trained in earlier so that isn't too bad. My mind isn't even close to being made up so I do appreciate any input on things to pay close attention to this Saturday. I am getting alot of pros and cons, so I will use Sat. to see if the pros are pros for me and if the cons are cons for me too. Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
The ailerons and rudder do not "decouple" during landings. Crosswind landings are a little unique in that plane. You sort of have to fight that link.
 
The pilot can override the 'automatic' rudder, or whatever Cirrus calls it. It just takes a little extra pressure. I don't know the specifics, but it must be somekind of bungee system.

I can find out the details if you really want to know . . . but it'll cost ya!
wink.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
My question is, is this plane way too complex, powerful, for somebody with 33 hours? The only thing I have going for me is that I am technologically advanced so the displays are a delight to see.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every airplane has a learning curve, if the only plane you've flown is an SR20 then by the time you finally get signed off for your private you will probably be very comfortable flying an SR20. Otherwise your instructor won't sign you off...

I've not flown any of the Cirrus aircraft but I imagine that you'll be flying a lot faster than in a 152/172/Warrior. So you'll have more learning to do to fly the aircraft safely. Since your private certificate is primarily how to fly and how to navigate, be sure you know the basics while learning the capability and limitations of all the fancy gadgets you have in the airplane and how to use them as a tool to maintain your situational awareness. The airplane has a lot of capability to get you into trouble. You'll need to learn how to stay of trouble, and if you do get into trouble, how to get out of it. In other words if all the fancy gadgets went tits-up can you still fly safely and get back on the ground...

The good thing about civilian aviation though, is that if you have a learning plateau, you can always throw more money and time at it until your learning curve starts curving back up.

Navy pilots start off learning to fly in a T-34, that's a 200+kts, 500hp turboprop aircraft... Zero time pilots are learning to fly that... The only drawback to that is if they run into a learning plateau that lasts too long, they don't have the luxury of throwing money and time at it, they get a pink slip...
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rudders and ailerons are linked. In normal flight, no compensation for adverse yaw is required.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't that a little weird in crosswind landings or does it 'de-couple' then?

[/ QUOTE ]

Got the scoop. The side yoke is connected to the rudder through two spring cartridges. In normal flight, the springs actuate the rudders in proportion to the lateral movement of the yoke, thus maintaining coordination. In flight at high angles of attack (steep turns, high load factors, climbs, etc.), the amount of compensation isn't enough, so further input is required. Similarly, as Doug pointed out, during crosswind landings the system must be over powered by the pilot in order to maintain wing-low drift correction and alignment with the landing surface. Due to the relatively low spring tension, that is pretty easy to accomplish once you're used to the odd feeling of the rudder system's spring tension.

Having flown it, I promise that it's not hard to get used to. However, only having logged a dozen hours in it, I didn't know the complete answer to your question . . . until now!
grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rudders and ailerons are linked. In normal flight, no compensation for adverse yaw is required.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't that a little weird in crosswind landings or does it 'de-couple' then?

[/ QUOTE ]

Got the scoop. The side yoke is connected to the rudder through two spring cartridges. In normal flight, the springs actuate the rudders in proportion to the lateral movement of the yoke, thus maintaining coordination. In flight at high angles of attack (steep turns, high load factors, climbs, etc.), the amount of compensation isn't enough, so further input is required. Similarly, as Doug pointed out, during crosswind landings the system must be over powered by the pilot in order to maintain wing-low drift correction and alignment with the landing surface. Due to the relatively low spring tension, that is pretty easy to accomplish once you're used to the odd feeling of the rudder system's spring tension.

Having flown it, I promise that it's not hard to get used to. However, only having logged a dozen hours in it, I didn't know the complete answer to your question . . . until now!
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for answering that. That is one of the things I was wondering about since Doug brought it up.
 
I finally got to fly the SR20. It was very cool since we landed at a neighboring aiport about 35 miles away and I got an extra 45 minutes out of it all
grin.gif
I didn't get the impression of the plane being too much for me at all. It was wierd to be cruising at 110 then to look back at your IAS and see 150+.
We did a standard preflight and I was glad, pesonally, not to see rivets(I can't stand those rivets in the side). Before we taxied the seats were extremely comfortable and the panel seemed a little lower. During taxi I found I still need work managing the brake-assisted steering. I'm still trying to accept the fact that 50% of flaps are recommended for takeoff. After takeoff, I wasn't fascinated by the eye-candy called the MFD and PFD, it wasn't until we got to cruise when we started cycling through the MFD that I was amazed at the information available at your fingerprints. Climbing out and finally being at cruise showed me how smooth this airplane is. It seemed like all had to do was think about turning and the plane did it by itself. Landing was very smooth and uncomplicated. It just required you to fly it down to the ground, the thing wants to stay airborne.
All in all, the plane was excellent.....stable and easy to fly. If you understand the seriousness in flying, your head will always be where it should be (at least that's what I think, but I am sort of biased LOL). Sorry, I forgot to ask about the runaway trim condidtions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top