Cirrus Aircraft Launches the 2020 SR Series Powered by an All-New Mobile App
How do they power an aircraft from an app? 
notwithstanding the hassle of parts procurement for a French design
Currently, I am not encountering any problems, and never really have since I bought my TB20 in 2002. There are various stories, many posted here over the years. One visitor to Tarbes was told that Socata stopped making custom (airframe) parts i.e. they keep selling stuff made for them by other firms, and there are enough TBs being parted out to provide a supply of airframe parts. This may have been true at one point but I doubt it still is because you can still buy a new elevator for example. What is quite possible is that e.g. the GT composite roof is no longer made, but if you need a new one you must have rolled the aircraft
I have heard many much worse stories about Commanders but again I am sure there is a lot more detail.
In general, a well looked after plane needs few if any airframe parts, and the rest (engine, avionics, most electrics if you can identify it) is 3rd party anyway.
@Peter re parts there is almost always a solution, with the ultimate solution being owner produced parts. I think the most difficult items are small, complex type specific items that come from vendors now out of business, sometimes originally designed for cars or industrial applications that may not be widely known outside the country of manufacture. French cars have not been as widely exported as those of some other countries
Silvaire wrote:
Of the three I would personally choose something with a Lycoming versus a Continental, and with individually serviceable avionics. The 114 is too massive for my taste so of the three it’d be the TB 20, notwithstanding the hassle of parts procurement for a French design. I fly a plane with even more challenging airframe parts issues.Otherwise at risk of being noted as ‘that guy’, the one who answers an unasked question, my choice for this job would be a carefully vetted early 70s Piper Comanche 260C:
And you would be absolutely right, never had any engine trouble over the Atlantic with mine ;-)
On a serious note, the only thing the Comanche is missing is Turbo and de icing which living in the Alps I do find quite limiting in winter which would push me to say the Cirrus is the better plane. (G3 turbo) or later
The absolutely key requirement is
Assuming same purchase price
That means one of the following
And (at least in theory) you can install TKS for de-icing on TB-20/21 and some Commander models. Peter can elaborate on TB20 install. :)
LFHNflightstudent wrote:
the only thing the Comanche is missing is Turbo and de icing which living in the Alps I do find quite limiting in winter which would push me to say the Cirrus is the better plane. (G3 turbo) or later
They did build some turbo-normalized Comanche 260Cs… 
The original Pug Piper initiative to build a Comanche for the flight levels (i.e. 18K feet or higher) was the Comanche 400, the eight cylinder hot rod that in combination with the efficient Comanche wing could fly high on swept volume, not inlet pressure. When turbo Lycomings came into existence, the 400 went away.
I’d like a 400
marioair wrote:
Yes same purchase price is the key.
Say I have 150-200k. That would get a “bottom of the range” g1/g2 and presumably a very tidy TB20
Ok, yes. I had a post ready to send yesterday night but somehow it got lost. Anyway, I remember most of my research figures.
150-200k will get you a very nice TB20 or an early Cirrus. Half that will give you a nice TB20 and some Rockwell Commanders.
You mention payload. I checked out the payload figures of all 3 of them yesterday and the Commander wins hands down.
The Commander has the largest payload with full fuel with over 350 kg with 70 USG full fuel.
The TB20 will carry about 270 kg with full fuel of 86 USG
The SR22 G1/G2 will carry about 170 kg with full fuel of 81 USG.
However, with 70 USG on board, the TB20 will also carry 313 kg and the SR22 about 200 kg.
Speed wise, the TB20 and Commander are both 150 kt airplanes, the Cirrus is a 170 kt airplane.
Range wise, the Commander will fly about 550 NM before it needs fuel. That, for travelling, is on the short side.
The TB20 will fly up to 1000 NM with reserves, which is the best of the lot.
The SR22 will run about 700 NM with reserves.
So now the question is, what priorities you are setting. In my opinion, of the 3 airplanes, the TB20 offers by far the best over all package. It has a very good range, decent cabin, good payload and decent speed. The Commander is a good load hauler but that is about it. The SR22 however has that all important shute…
In your budget, you can find a top TB20 or TB21 even. The Commanders are likely to be massively below budget, the Cirri above and are still old models with mostly Avidyne Cockpits. Personally, given the choice in terms of usability and versatility, the TB20 would be my choice.
If the shute comes into the equation once you talk to your wife about which plane she wants this discussion will be quickly forgotten. However, the Cirrus imho has the massive restriction to payload which make it a 2 seater most of the time.
If tks and ifr glass avionics (on top of the chute) are a requirement, a very early sr22 could be hard to beat when compared to tks-upgraded and avionics-upgraded TBs or Commander.
I’ve been made aware that the empty weight of the SR22 in my DB may be off. As I am told, usual payload of the SR22 G2 is around 235 kg with AC and 270 kg without.
This changes the above figures which unfortunately I can not edit anymore… so with 70 USG on board it would then be able of 280 kg or 313 kg (depending on with or without AC). That would put it on even footage with the TB20.
Maybe some SR22 operators can report their figures. I wonder where the discrepancy comes from, possibly from a G1…
I also got the cruise figure of 170 kts @ 13.5 GPH, which would, looking at the above calc, mean an endurance of 5 hours (plus 1 reserve) which puts the range up to 800 NM.
Taken these for granted, the SR22 comes a lot closer to the TB20 than originally thought, it is also 20 kts faster.
So as I can’t update the previous post, here the vitals again updated:
The Commander has the largest payload with full fuel with over 350 kg with 70 USG full fuel.
The TB20 will carry about 270 kg with full fuel of 86 USG
The SR22 G1/G2 will carry between 235 and 270 kg with full fuel of 81 USG. (With or without AC)
However, with 70 USG on board, the TB20 will also carry 313 kg and the SR22 between 280 and 310 kg, almost similar.
Speed wise, the TB20 and Commander are both 150 kt airplanes, the Cirrus is a 170 kt airplane.
Range wise, the Commander will fly about 550 NM before it needs fuel. That, for travelling, is on the short side.
The TB20 will fly up to 1000 NM with reserves, which is the best of the lot.
The SR22 will run about 800 NM with reserves.
This does put the SR22 and TB20 on par more or less figure wise, with the SR22 a bit less on range but 20 kts faster. This does not change the fact that with your budget, you will have to compromise a lot on any SR22 but can possibly get a top line TB20 or buy a Commander for half the money, but with a lot less range.
