Not for you, who likes to fly at FL 200 in NA machines (the SR 22 is only certified for 17.500 ft), or would you go so far to choose a Turbo this time?
Yeah, a good Q. My views on turbos have not changed. So I don’t know. In fact I know exactly what I would do if I lost my plane: I would buy another TB20GT immediately, and spend a few months having it refitted just like my present one. If I wanted an SR22T, or a used TBM700, I could buy one tomorrow… I don’t because the TB20 fits the mission profile.
BTW I am sure the SR22 would do FL200. It’s just that nobody will write about doing it in a forum.
Also I don’t “like” to fly at FL200. I use the capability only when needed to remain VMC on top. On nice days I fly at FL100.
My Lancair Columbia 300 out performs the SR22 in EVERY PERFORMANCE category: Speed, Climb, Efficiency, Range, Useful Load.
An interesting Q why that is. The SR22 must lose payload due to the chute (50-70kg). But both planes have fixed gear, which must be worth 10kt+ at the max cruise.
In the market of 4-seat certified touring airplanes the Cirrus has clearly been a success. It does not make (much) sense to compare it with helicopters, LSA or kitplanes … those are different markets.
What wasn’t mentioned yet: Cirrus really develop their products and improve them all the time. Although the basic airplane from 2000 is just as fast as a 2015 G5 model (sometimes faster because they had no TKS), almost every detail was improved form generation to generation. From generation 2 to 3 there were more than 1000 changes, some minor but many substantial like the introduction or the carbon spar (90 lbs lighter), 11 gallons more fuel, a higher landing gear and so on. … not cosmetics but real improvements.
And with the G5 model Cirrus proved again that they will not stop improving the plane. 200 lbs more payload and the fifth seat are a clear message.
No other manufacturer did that. Many other “competitors” took a 30 year old design, put in a G1000, created a new paint scheme and advertised the result as a sensation. But (most) people who intend to spend three quarters of a million Euros will have a closer look. Cirrus did not even use the basic G1000 system but made Garmin develop the special “Perspective” version, which really has many advantages.
@LeSving The way forward for certified market might be expanding limits of VLA. It would be nice to see this happen.
As for Panthera, as I already wrote, IIRC they don’t plan to offer anti-icing/ deicing for now. That limits the IFR capability. And, for me, it’d probably be a deal-breaker. Clean airframes don’t like ice in general and it’s far too easy to pick up. I would have thought this would be an issue up north.
BTW I am sure the SR22 would do FL200. It’s just that nobody will write about doing it in a forum.
Of course it will. But I won’t. If i can’t get the flight done with FL 160, I’m staying home. That was the main reason I didn’t want a SR22T, because I find it crazy to fly in FL250 without a pressurized cabin. I can easily accept that more adventurous people than me like to do that, but that’s where i drew the line.
If i ever feel the need to fly that high I’ll buy a JetPROP or Meridian.
If i can’t get the flight done with FL 160, I’m staying home
That’s not how IFR works, however. There is no present way to get the tops to a better accuracy than say 5000ft. That’s the best you get out of satellite IR images. So you get airborne, tops FL150, all OK so far, and they rise a bit ahead. Will you stop the climb and do a 180 and go back home once you reach FL175, when it’s obvious that FL200 would do it?
My Lancair Columbia 300 out performs the SR22 in EVERY PERFORMANCE category: Speed, Climb, Efficiency, Range, Useful Load.
Repeating it constantly doesn’t make it more convincing. The advantage the Columbia/TTx has over the Cirrus is mostly not relevant in daily life. Yes, it is a bit faster . but you can calculate yourself how much the time difference on a typical flight will be. My estimate for Munich-Berlin: Less than 10 minutes. The higher passenger comfort, the additional safety and the better visibility will make a much bigger difference.
The upside of a Turbo is btw. also the higher speed/fuel economy/favourable winds up high and IFR probably also to have the option to stay above the weather.
That’s not how IFR works, however.
It does work for me. If it’s not clear that I will on top in FL160, the I’ll simply stay home. And I can fly in IMC for a while at that altitude if it’s not through convective stuff, or fly around.
What do you do if the clouds in front of you reach up to FL250? I do the same, just a bit lower :-)
Peter wrote:
By “not exceptional” I meant not exceptional in handling – as I explained ref part 23.
Well, the XtremeAir XA41/ 42 are also CS-23 certified but I would say they are pretty exceptional. 
Peter wrote:
Regarding the * asterisk, yes that is used to start bulleted lists, in the same way as # is used to start numbered lists (see Posting Tips). One has to use a different character, say + or ++ or one of the symbols.
I know what it’s used for I just wanted to know how to do it if I actually want an asterisk at the beginning of a line. I can’t, thank you. I was however surprised that even (*) at the beginning was interpreted as a list item, not just *. I should have tried brackets instead of parentheses.
What do you do if the clouds in front of you reach up to FL250?
I would make a decision based on the general situation.
If I can descend to > 0C and there are no airspace or terrain issues and I am sure there is no convective wx ahead and the alternate situation is generous and in good wx, then I will descend and carry on.
In some scenarios (OAT below say -25C) I will continue, subject to this being just a localised thing. I would not do this in -15C, based on the data here
Plan C is to turn back but I have not yet had to do that.
I know what it’s used for I just wanted to know how to do it if I actually want an asterisk at the beginning of a line. I can’t, thank you
There may be a way (I will ask David) but I don’t know it.
