SR22 operating costs

JasonC wrote:

You could be right Martin. I guess panel space would be too small for the dual PFD setup.

Even if there was enough space, I don’t see any indication Cirrus is interested in a dual PFD configuration. Even the jet has only one IIRC, the only G3000 installation with just one PFD AFAIK.

PS: That brings about an interesting question of how would multi-pilot operations work on that jet. Typically you can get TR restricted to co-pilot only with the minimum hours (70 PIC, 200 total) while you need substantially more to be PIC.

stevelup wrote:

I don’t know what field you’re a tech expert in, but it isn’t embedded control systems from the past two decades!

Embedded systems DO NOT have general purpose CPUs or rotating/solid state disk. AHRS/ADHRS are not general purpose computer systems – no pilot/owner/FBO can reprogram them…

The PFD/MFD panels are general purpose computers and can readily be reprogrammed by loading code on their internal solid state disks with a USB or SD solid state disk (or eventually a wireless update via bluetooth). They also have a changeable database that contains the sectionals and plates etc.

The thread drift is not productive….the original point was some stated a threat from buggy software in glass panel systems…that is simply a non-problem. And no one has yet brought a documented example of a glass panel CRASHING from a software bug.

USFlyer wrote:

Embedded systems DO NOT have general purpose CPUs or rotating/solid state disk. AHRS/ADHRS are not general purpose computer systems – no pilot/owner/FBO can reprogram them…

No one except you have been talking about “General purpose” or “disks”. I and other have said that AHRS systems include computers and software which is true. It is also true that said software can be updated. No one has claimed that the pilot or owner can do it, but an avionics shop can.

PS: That brings about an interesting question of how would multi-pilot operations work on that jet. Typically you can get TR restricted to co-pilot only with the minimum hours (70 PIC, 200 total) while you need substantially more to be PIC.

As you say presumably no way to get an SIC rating for low hours pilots to fly with a mentor for say 50 hours and then revalidating as PIC.

Airborne_Again wrote:

I and other have said that AHRS systems include computers

Embedded purpose-specific chips containing a risk-cpu and hard-coded (as distinct from software) instruction in on-chip ROM cache and are PRECISELY the distinction that needs to be made.

The original issue was do glass panels get software crashes. The answer is no. AHRS are not software changeable by pilots. Panels are general purpose and can be reloaded with code change but none have a history of software crashes in the field.

USFlyer wrote:

AHRS are not software changeable by pilots.

No one said it was. What has been said repeatedly is that it can be updated at an avionics shop.

purpose-specific chips

risk-cpu

ROM cache

This is getting silly. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

I have to mention the “ROM cache” in particular to my research colleagues working with computer architecture.

A few members of our club would like to add a SR22 to our fleet. Can anyone here shed light on realistic operating costs, both for the NA and the Turbo models? Given the potential budget, it would most likely have to be an earlier model.

Thanks.

You would need reports from your side of the pond. As we often see, costs are not the same here

@Jujupilote, I know but it’s still interesting to see what the real life costs are.