Mr JGG
YOU ARE THE BT gift that just keeps giving. Eating a homemade pizza and thinking, hmm I need a Cirrus. Go get it brother, produce a thread on it, then finish the 195 thread,,,,,and the runway!
A little jealous, the Cirrus has long legs compared to my rig.
Mark

John,
I realize you can load a new one up to a million but you don't have to. The stock SR22 is a very nice plane and it begins at $655,000

Price out a new one here. https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/u ... celist.pdf

If you add FIKI for 60k, Air conditioning for 30k and built in oxygen for 10k you would be well under $800k plus you can pick the paint color, interior etc. May be a fun project for you and the Mrs.

Make the trip once in your cub
Suddenly the 180 will seem incredibly fast and capable.
It's like someone just wrote you a check for $800k

Unless you need an 800k business expense or just have that much cash on hand, a 10 year old cirrus can do everything you need.

I was Cirrus shopping earlier this year. I made a few offers but none came to fruition.

I think you should be looking at a G3 or newer. There is a big difference between the de-iced sr22 and a fiki sr22. With a bonanza there isn't a huge difference and the inadvertent system has the same surface area as the fiki system. In an sr22 they added another panel on the vertical tail feathers in addition to more fluid capacity and other redundant systems. I won't go as far as saying the inadvertent system is not effective, but If you can afford the more expensive plane with fiki, I think it is worthwhile.

I think you could find what you are looking in the 400k range. For me I went with a Duke with a much lower capital cost but an increased operating cost, I needed more seats and baggage space.

John,

I'm a Columbia owner and I'm not going to try and sell you that. But I can share some insight from the community because they are similar.

Given your list, I'd look for something in 5yr or less age category, where you can get some depreciation off the bottom line (unless you have a tax scenario in mind).

First, scratch the non-turbo. Travel in a turbocharged piston plane is great. You have the choice of winds and altitudes and in the upper teens and lower 20's, you have the airspace pretty much to yourself. Best thing about my Columbia 400.

You want AC: Note the weight penalty.
You want de-ice: Note the weight penalty.

On the deice subject, once you know you want deice for some kind of reason, then what you're really saying is, "I need FIKI". Inadvertent deice is for closing airplane deals when someone is feeling fudgy about it, not sure why they want it. If you're sure you want it, then the reason is "I'm probably going to encounter ice when I fly" and FIKI is the only choice for that.

Otherwise, make the conscious decision and buy clean-wing. That's what I did. I owned FIKI twin for a decade and the decision tree comes down to, "FIKI" or "clean wing". There's no in-between.

So let's not think about money budget, think about weight budget. That's really the key here.

AC = heavy.
FIKI = heavy.

This points you squarely into the late model SR22T, which got a gross-weight increase.

If you take the empty weight, add a full tank of TKS, and enough fuel to fly where you want to go + reserves, what's left for the seats and bags? Is your typical load within the W&B graph?

(I don't know if the late SR22T has ZFW or landing weight limits in addition to gross weight, but LOOK first).

The Avidyne era craft fly just as well as the G1000 era. This is true in the Columbia aircraft too. There's no aerodynamic difference between an Avidyne, G1000 or G2000 Columbia 400. THis is a little less true on the SR22 as some airframe changes happened, but not that many.

Cirrus has been better than Cessna at keeping the aging fleet up to date, and you'll get more support due to the number of Cirrus with Avidyne. Somewhat perversely, it is easier to update an old Avidyne to WAAS than it is an older G1000. On the downside, I find the Avidyne kind of a mish-mash of loosely integrated systems. The G1000, much nicer to live with. The GFC700 autopilot is very nice.

On the "I don't want to overhaul it". I hear ya.

In all the dozens of used airplanes I've looked at buying over the years, the logbooks tell the story. Every single airplane has a lot of teething pains in the first 200 hours of life. They just do. There's sort of a prime spot between 300-800 hours where they just seem to need oil changes and that's about it.

I bought a 10 year old 2007 Columbia, with 800hrs TT on it. The engine had just been topped and the cam and lifters replaced by a very reputable shop less than 50hrs before I bought it. (TSIO550)

I had hoped it would be less expensive venture. But it wasn't. I came up on some 10-year items (mandatory) and although the engine has been running wonderfully, that hasn't equated to less total expenditure. Lesson learned. Now the rub is, I have G1000, but non-waas. The upgrade was available when I bought it ($45k or so), but has since gone EOL and I'm stuck with no means to acquire parts.

So - buy one with the panel you want.

All in all, money not withstanding, that all points to a very late model SR22T, with A/C and FIKI and you'll need to run the W&B to see how that works out.

By this point in life, you know the mission weight with people and bags and where you want to go.

One thing to consider about NA vs TN or TC is that if you're considering flight in ice (with FIKI model) the ability to climb in moderate ice can be seriously compromised without boosted engines. Plus turbo'd power can usually keep you out of the ice most of the way.

There is a very handy model year history available here (as well as other downloadable info):

https://www.steelaviation.com/free-media-downloads/

https://www.steelaviation.com/wp-conten ... istory.pdf

Here is a comparison of the two turbo options for the SR22:

https://taturbo.com/sr22/tenreasons.php

I agree as well Lance. If my mission required the ability to fly in icing (which it does), I would not consider owning a piston without turbo. Just when you need the most climb performance when climbing through the top of a layer, is when you dramatically lose the ability to climb in and NA. The tops of the clouds generally have the most ice and you could easily get trapped with no ability to climb on top in an NA.

The Turbo provides an additional ‘out’ and as you pointed out, many times gives you the altitude flexibility to climb above the ice. With the added altitude flexibility, added performance, better climb rate and addition icing ‘out’ the turbo option is a no brainer for me and I’m based in flat land OH.

In the used Cirrus market (more than several years old), there isn’t a huge price penalty between NA and turbos. As to talk about the turbos being expensive to maintain, I simply don’t see the reality of it. I’ve got over 1,000 hrs time in my G5T and previous G3T and have yet to spend a nickel on exhaust or turbo work.

James,
Just realized you and I both have an Aerostar and a Cirrus

Ginny prefers the Cirrus
Except for longer trips where weather is knasty in mid teens.

JGG,
G5 Perspective avionics is awesome. I am a bit slow to learn so I had to commit to learning this system and put in a bit of time. In hindsight Perspective is easier than I though it would be.

If I could drop 200k and get Perspective in Aerostar I would tomorrow.
My NA FIKI bird is about 10 knots slower than Columbia was so I understand wanting a turbo model.

Take Karen to fly in a Cirrus before you buy one. Not nearly as easy to get in/out of as an Aerostar but ok if you can take a rather large step up/down getting on/off wing.

Despite it shortcomings like interconnected prop/throttle and side yoke vs side stick on Columbia I like the Cirrus much more than I thought I would. Once you learn it flying is just plain stress free.

For someone who has owned a couple of airplanes I promise you will not be disappointed if entry/exit if doable for both of you.

You know the Aerostar works for your needs, get an Aerostar. I imagine for 800K you can get one ready to fiy needing nothing that is fully updated.

Thanks to all of you for responding. What I really love about BT guys is that when pressed for real answers, the fact to BS ratio is amazing. Lots of info here and much to consider. If consummated, this will be my "30 something" aircraft purchase, but airplanes are a fluid product in a fluid market and what I don't know is "a lot".

I appreciate suggestions as to other aircraft, but you must understand, the #1 consideration is my wife's safety and the #1 risk, as small as it may be, is pilot incapacitation. Perhaps we are a little paranoid, but remember, this family has been through the kind of trauma that you never get over. We have to deal with that everyday in our own ways, but we are individually and as a family unit, risk adverse. "No chute" for this next airplane is not an option.

I will be following much of the advice given hereon and proceeding to fully indoctrinate myself to the Cirrus market and options therein. As for the airplane, I have given a friend BFR's in his for the last ten years so i have some familiarity.

I'm not through asking questions and many will be proffered here. Any and all discussion is appreciated by me, and apparently, by others.

Jg

One time my parents were flying in their Piper, and shortly after takeoff my Dad leaned over and reached down to adjust the seat. He was trying to figure out exactly which slot in the seat track was the perfect spot for cruise flight.

My mom saw him slumped over and mumbling and thought he’d been suddenly incapacitated.

It was funny later but apparently not at the time.

Pilot incapacitation is a real risk and pilots’ wives are rightly concerned.

Probably not in the budget, but what you really need for that is a Cirrus Jet with Autoland (and a chute).

The reality is...that the older any of us get, the higher our risk for sudden incapacitation.


Short of a hired second pilot, the chute gives an option *for that situation* that is superior for a non-pilot spouse.


My observation is that John makes his #1 priority in life pretty clear. Keep his wife happy.


Having been privileged to spend a few hours in his house, and in *their* presence, I would say that I have rarely seen the deep and abiding love between two humans that I have seen there. She deeply loves and respects him. He deeply loves her, and wants her to feel secure and happy.


In that context, a Cirrus (desired by her) is a bargain.

Those are some very beautiful words, Stan. We should all be so fortunate to have another see our marriage this way. Congrats JGG and let me know if I can be of any service to you on your journey here.