Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

How to avoid maintenance surprises?

Yes.
Let me add that I think that the Turbo 22 is a GREAT plane, but when started to become honest to myself i figured out that i do not need it.
Do i need to fly in WX that is not flyable with the NA? No.
Do i want the family to fly with oxygen a lot or more than necessary? no.
Do i think that i want even higher maintenance and fuel costsa? no. And believe me the NA is expensive enough?
Can i afford to cancel a flight because of weather? absolutely. I AM the director of flight operations and i fly when i want and decide

If my funds were UNLIMITED I’d buy a G5 turbo. With the money i can spend for flying the 2006 G2 was the best deal i can imagine. 215.000 Euros incl. the DFC90, a glass cockpit overhaul, air condition, traffic, stormscope, EGPWS, airbags, leather interior, 800h TT, tug, canopy, semi portable oxygen system, 4 bose headsets, new life vests, new annual and 100 h inspection ….

One big difference between the turbo or TN and the non turbo is the useful load. Do a W&B on the TN before you buy. I found it difficult to carry a third person in the TN even with a low fuel load. With full fuel, just the pilot as the 2008 TN I flew could only handle 339 pounds for both pilot, copilot and baggage. If the flight was during the winter and full de-ice was carried, that was lowered to 307 pounds for crew and baggage. The TN airplane is IMHO extremely nose heavy and has very little tolerance in the flare before you run out of pitch control, so you have to nail the final approach speed and flare at precisely the correct point or you may experience a pilot induced oscillation that has caused many a landing accident in this type. It flies much better with ballast in the back of the airplane. BTW, the 2009 that is certified for known ice has a greater deice fluid capacity and is even stingier on useful load during the winter.

KUZA

If my funds were unlimited I’d buy a G5 too.

Of course I mean the one made by Gulfstream

Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)

haha. Nah, that’s not a plane for FLYERS.
I think if money wasn’t an issue i’d still be flying a propeller plane, maybe a TBM850. Or, if I went for a jet, one of those cute Cessna Mustang Jets. My daughter would like that :-)
But it will not happen

Last Edited by at 20 Dec 17:33

Yes, it’s true that the turbo is much more heavy in the nose, but I would not call it “extreme”.
About the payload: Well, the SR22 will always carry 4 people and full fuel, any of them – and easily. A 100 kg overload is (technically) no problem at all. But (before I have to read 100 replies here that tell me what I already know), NO, I do not recommend illegal activties! Just sayin’!

Wow! What a wealth of knowledge available. Yes, I am grateful for every bit of information I can receive. My email address is [email protected] Maybe it is even possible to compile that information in something like an information page here on the site. Wouldn’t that be nice to have?

Frequent travels around Europe

I can’t think of a single flight in six years of ownership that I could have done in a turbo but couldn’t have done in my NA

Me too – in the TB20.

What one finds is that NA and turbo pilots split up into two camps, and each one thinks theirs is the best choice That is the case in most forms of aviation…

I could afford a TB21GT anytime. I choose to not buy one because I do not know a single turbocharged-engine pilot whose engine has made TBO without at least cylinders being changed. There probably is one out there but I have never met him.

I also think that a turbo doesn’t make all that much sense unless you have full TKS, and then you are looking at a ~100kg payload loss, which is probably significant as it converts most 4-seaters (which are really 3-seaters for any distance) into 2-seaters (for any distance). A NA plane will do 1000-1500fpm at low levels, which takes care of rapid low level cloud penetration in icing conditions, but if you are going to be doing thicker stuff (and using the turbo to penetrate mid level cloud at say FL100-150) then you need proper deice gear.

Otherwise, there is no contest – a turbo with full TKS will cut down the cancellations by a factor of 5x-10x compared to NA with no TKS, so the despatch rate (IFR assumed) rises from say 75% to say 95+%. That is true “equipment for equipment” so a TB21 with full TKS will have the same technical despatch rate as an SR22T with full TKS.

Another thing to consider is passengers. You may not want to be doing wild stuff with “delicate” passengers which is why I am happy with what I have. I fly mostly in reasonable wx, and frankly what is the point in ending up on some Croatian or Greek island when the wx is crap… But if I was flying on business, the situation changes, and if I was visiting customers (real customers, not distributors) it changes dramatically.

Also, to operate in bad wx you need to be doing it between suitably equipped airports – 2xILS is the best option in Europe. But usually this cannot be achieved.

So the “mission profile” needs to be fully defined.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Stephan

I see you are based at Egelsbach. If I’m not mistaken there is at least one highly experienced Cirrus instructor / owner there: do you know him?

EGSC

That’s Arnim Stief, who has 8000 hours on Cirrus airplanes and is also a Cirrus ferry pilot. I plan to do a little flying with him as soon as the weather gets a little better.

Isn’t Timm Preusser there as well?

EGSC
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top