Yup at 45s the AI seems to be lagging after going through the vertical in pitch or past 180 in roll…
Antonio wrote:
Yup at 45s the AI seems to be lagging after going through the vertical in pitch or past 180 in roll…
That is normal? how do you cage an AHRS before it topples 
When I used to do G1000 demos in DA40, I do make sure people can see those red chevrons, but I rarely saw it doing an in-flight reset or get stuck !
boscomantico wrote:
Experience shows that the bulk of the market never goes for the very fastest aircraft in its class, IF it comes with too many compromises on other sides.
That compromise being the shute or no shute in the last 20 years.
Columbia/Cessna as well as Mooney lost the market because of this and to Cirrus’ unique marketing concept. They both did not heed the advice that was even then a huge thing, that the shute would change the market, both are out of business. It’s that easy really. No shute, no sale.
Clearly Cirrus also won because they have a phantastic marketing concept and 2nd to none customer relations. That is worth a lot.
I have a hunch that Cessna never really wanted to sell the Columbia anyhow but was forced by Textron, therefore simply neglecting it.
Mooney had awful customer relations in the last years, which turned a lot of people away. Apart, the current model range has absymal payload, they totally missed the bus on this matter, something the new ownership appears to be set out to correct now.
Fast has always had appeal and here Pipistrel might just about get a chance here, because they have the shute as well. So if someone looks at buying a SR22 or a Panthera, the “wife effect” will not immediately exclude the Panthera as it did with Columbia and Mooney. Add to it, that the Panthera is cheaper to buy and more efficient to operate with about 3 GPH less at identical speeds which translates into about €25 less per hour in fuel only. It may be more expensive to maintain due to the retracable gear, but depending how that has been constructed, that may be overrated. 14 kts for identical fuel flow is a huge difference, I agree. Taking a 500 NM trip this will mean roughly 15 minutes difference but 3 USG fuel used too. That is not exactly nothing.
However, I think the Panthera has one massive problem, which is endurance. 55 USG is not enough for this engine, not by far. With reserves, that is about 3 hours of endurance, maximum. At 183 kt that is roughly 550 NM IFR range. That, for me, would be a total show stopper, seeing the range of similar models. The SR22 has over 90 USG available and 1000 NM range, the Ovation features ranges up to 2500 NM with long range tanks.
Let’s first wait and see the first customer reception in the US.
And then let’s see if it ever gets certified, including known ice.
As long as it is uncertified, it has huge competition from the RV10, which has a big following and very good manufacturer support already.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
So if someone looks at buying a SR22 or a Panthera, the “wife effect” will not immediately exclude the Panthera as it did with Columbia and Mooney. Add to it, that the Panthera is cheaper to buy and more efficient to operate with about 3 GPH less at identical speeds which translates into about €25 less per hour in fuel only. It may be more expensive to maintain due to the retracable gear, but depending how that has been constructed, that may be overrated. 14 kts for identical fuel flow is a huge difference, I agree. Taking a 500 NM trip this will mean roughly 15 minutes difference but 3 USG fuel used too. That is not exactly nothing.
The only difference I believe is SR22 has got TKS and Panthera doesn’t, otherwise, at least in my eyes, Panthera wins. And I assume I shouldbe able to install G500 TXi?
it has huge competition from the RV10
Not sure… Yes, if I ever permanently lost my medical I would buy an RV10 immediately and fly it on the medical self declaration, UK day VFR but how many people want to build a kit? Most would get divorced long before they finish.
I reckon that if this is successful under the US Exp regime, they could make enough $$$ there without having to certify it. Low hanging fruit, etc…
SR22 has got TKS and Panthera doesn’t
TKS is quite easy to add, and if you do the wing leading edges with a recess then there is zero aerodynamic cost.
The RV10 has 60USG in its tanks. Nobody complains about its range, and everyone praise its useful load and economy.
Yes it has a good fan base, and is available for about 250,000$ used with low hours.
If the Panthera is experimental, would it be amateur-built ? Would you have to buy all parts from Pipistrel ? For “Only” 100k$ less than a Cirrus ?
Tough job
I guess US pilots need less range because stopping anywhere is easier :
Edit : there is a mod to add 15 (not sure) gallons to the RV10, but it’s not very common.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
the “wife effect” will not immediately exclude the Panthera as it did with Columbia and Mooney
For some reason that “wife effect” is not applicable to PC12s & TBMs
Ibra wrote:
PC12s & TBM
True. Whether the reliability of turbines has made it to this level I don’t know but they are a quite different league of airplanes and are not usually purchased by a first time purchaser. The wife effect is predominantly present with first time purchasers / low time pilots where the spouses are not used to flying yet. Anyone progressing to a SET will be in a different situation there.
Looking at losses of SET’s, particularly Malibu derivates and also some PC12’s this may not be quite rational of course, yet Sthe SF50 may well change that in the future. If it can have a CAPS, then so can the TBM.
I think the “wife acceptance” of SETs is heavily influenced by the luxury interior you get on a $4M+ cabin class plane I mean, it just isn’t possible for the engine to fail, is it? And if the pilot has just the right amount of grey hair, and a reassuring voice… This is real feedback I hear; I am not making it up. The more luxurious the interior looks, the safer the plane must be.
