@mooneydriver
I had 3 neighbours with SR22s in my hangar. One owner gave up, so now it‘s 2.
The owners are really proud of the performance they have available and what the airplane can do – IF it flies.
All 3 planes have in common that all of a sudden they would disappear for months (up to 6 actually) for some unexpected maintenance problems (corrosion is only one of them).
Ok, one owner was a bit unfortunate when the maintenance provider danged a wingtip against the hangar door while moving the plane.
But what would be a minor and quick repair for a Cessna developed into a nightmare for the Cirrus owner since the main spar got seriously cracked in the area of the wing spar tunnel.
Surely it is like the Jetprop case i.e. a G1000 can be removed and whatever (G500 etc) installed under the usual STC, but it is regarded as uneconomical to do that. I don’t think anybody ever answered that one for the Jetprop case.
Or are the G1000 airframes specifically excluded on the Garmin G500 STCs, by S/N range, to ensure the aircraft becomes worthless for any other kind of “Garmin glass”? Obviously you could always remove a G1000 and install separate avionics; these don’t need an STC.
To add: a new 172 was quoted in 2002 by the UK dealer (CSE) at GBP 140k + VAT (to a flying school I hung around in back then, as a 3-off purchase) so in the hypothetical case of a mint-condition one, plus inflation, what do you get for 2018?
This is unlikely to happen in a C172SP. (foto)
Also the airframe life limit of 12.000 hrs will bring down the prices of used SR22s sooner or later.
Can a new thread be started, if required, on these SR22 airframe issues? I don’t think a C172 is competing with an SR22 for a flying school application.
Regarding KAP140 we have been flying ours 1000h in 10 years and had only two problems. Fixed a loose connection in the harness and changed one roll servo.
Performance was greatly enhanced when the altitude encoder was changed as a part of an avionics upgrade.
I would assume that as a rate based system it is more sluggish and not the same experience as a GFC700 – but have not tried that.
I agree with PetitCessnaVoyageur and Mooney_Driver. I have lots of time in a 2006 glass 172S and I have yet to find any issues with the KAP140.
Certainly there are lots of functionality that it doesn’t provide but the GFC700 does, but what it does provide, it does well.
Bosco is right that the non-SBAS G1000 is (for practical purposes) a dead end, but the only important thing it doesn’t provide is LPV. It does provide both RNAV 1 (P-RNAV) and roll steering with the KAP140.
An Archer with a rather new engine asking 125k€ VAT free !!
People are getting crazy.
https://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=51454
