Chief Brody

Having been a CSIP over the years, I can attest that am not a huge fan of the Cirrus community. I think they are a bunch of too - cool for school, type A DBs to be quite honest. However we cannot argue that the CAPS record speaks for itself. Do some research. Those that have pulled it tell a story that I am sold on. When the chute is pulled within it's operating envelope it saves lives. The impact is the equivalent of dropping from 3 stories up. Firm but very survivable. No one is saying use it as a crutch to fly outside your limits.

JohnBurke

He record does speak for itself. Over half of the deployments in circumstances where the pilot should never have been, and unending accounts by private pilots (et al) who wouldnt have attempted the trip save for the parachute. It becomes their defacto portable alternate airport. Given that most of the deployments have involved perfectly good airplanes taken beyond the pilot's own capabilities, one can argue that while CAPS does save lives on occasion, it does far more to promote endangerment.

When Cirrus considers every deployment a "save," the statistics are badly skewed. After all, they say, pull, and pull often. We'll make more.

Even though the flight manual clearly states that deployment of CAPS will result in destruction of the airframe and quite possibly death. Whether it's the Cirrus loaded past gross with four people and fuel over the Rockies at night in a thunderstorm, in which the pilot deployed because he lost control (round parachute canopy in tstorms in the mountains...not good), or the gentleman that deployed and floated gently under canopy to the ground in Colorado, while burning to death...to call every one a "save" is at best a misnomer.

That Cirrus used the parachute to compensate for the inability to show spin recovery for certification, but never tested it to a landing, speaks volumes.

dustrpilot

I have a friend that's a retired professional pilot, who is trading in a G36 Bonanza for a Cirrus. He knows his limits and sets hard boundaries for IFR flight. He's doing it because of his age and the ability to have his wife trained to deploy the chute in case of his incapacitation. I think his reasoning is sound for his situation.
I've never flown a Cirrus, but I've only spoken to one pilot that's flown them that likes them.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DoUEvenLoopBro

You guys are awesome!

After everyone's advice and through some more detailed analysis of both our needs, wants, and budget constraints I think we've narrowed it down to the Cessna 310 or Cessna 340 as far as twins go. And the Cherokee 6/300 or A36 Bonanza for singles.....thoughts???

Can anyone speak to the pros and cons of Turbos?

FlewNavy

Simple - turbo increases performance and cost. The relationship between the two is not linear.

Skyone

Rent, rent, rent. Rent the same twin over and over and you'll feel like you almost own it. Plus you can a better performing, well taken airplane. Buy the big single for the hamburgers and the runs to Fl.

Swedish Blender

There is a big difference in your 310/340. Pressurization can get expensive. Thought about 421s but the geared motors can cause people issues.

I would look more at a 310 vs 402 comparison OR 340 vs 414.
I have no recommendations for either as my youth was spent in Pipers. Chieftains are great.

As far as singles, a T210 would be my choice for load/performance/WB.

Tester130

Many have said the rent mantra over and over here...and I would tend to agree. You already have said that you are running spread sheets to do some cost analyses. You should also be looking at what it would cost to rent a plane to do what you are hoping to do and the compare the costs to see which way is the best choice. A friend of mine says he needs to average flying his plane 5 hours a month to justify owning it versus renting.

Now let me throw one more idea into your head. Because renting does have its limitations. Planes could be beat up or not available. Weekend rental rates could be prohibitive. You could go down to your local airport and find someone that owns a plane that serves what you need and offer to become a joint owner. You would need to come up with some form of agreement as to how you split the costs (50/50 on annual, % of flight time for wear and tear repairs) so that you each feel you are getting a fair deal. It will cut the costs of owning way down and allow you to fly a plane you know the maintenance history on and will more than likely be in better shape than any rental.

A friend of mine was looking for a Cherokee 6. Ran into another friend that was about to sell his because it was too expensive to own by himself and fly as much as he wanted. They partnered on the plane. Later on they took on two more partners. Now the four of them have one of the nicest planes at the airport. It is much easier to decide to upgrade those radios/nav/interior/etc when you are only paying 1/4 of the cost. They have a shared calendar where they sign up to use the plane. Each guy has a certain number of days per year where once he is signed up, those are his days. Beyond those, he can sign up, but be bumped by someone that has guaranteed days left. They split split all costs evenly as they figure they are all flying it about the same amount of time (or have the option to fly it the same amount).

Odds are there is someone at your airport of choice that isn't able to put gas in their plane because all their spare money is getting put into maintenance. Find that guy and you get access to a nice plane at half the cost and they cut their costs in half and are able to fly more. As with all partnerships, get it in writing as to who pays what, how scheduling the plane will work, how to leave the partnership when that time comes, and other specifics. If you don't get it all on the first draft, then you can always draft up amendments when you make a new partnership decision.

This is the route I would be going if I was to "buy" a plane right now, but fortunately I have a father-in-law with a nice enough Arrow that I can tool around in. He is getting up there in age and is just happy someone is getting the plane in the air now and then.

ugleeual

I've heard that buying a plane sucks, renting a plane sucks, and buy/lease back to an FBO sucks real bad. Best advice I've heard is that buying a plane works well if you don't like sharing your stuff... and of course have the bank roll to do it. Renting in block hours from an FBO is probably the most cost effective method from what i've heard but you don't have ultimate control of the schedules for a specific plane and don't have control of the mx.

Treesixzero

It can do everything you want. Without going to cabin class
If you go cabin class 340&414 useful load with fuel on board is almost nothing. You can fill all 4 tanks of the Aztruck all 6 seats and some bags "usually" without maxing out if it's got a few of the good mods you can expect 170-200kts