Glass cockpit vs steam gauges for low time PPL (and getting into a fast aircraft early on)

Valentin wrote:

However, it should not be too speedy for a low time pilot.
As for the short field capability, I don’t know if I’ll need it. Most of the airfields on the islands have long enough runways, as far as I know.

You will miss out on the action. Some 3-4 years ago a guy here got a Lancair. It’s cool, it’s fast, but he misses out on a lot of what’s happening because most of what’s happening is happening in shorter grass/gravel fields. He is now considering getting a microlight (110-130 kts cruise) because it is much more versatile. We have lots of longer airfields, but nothing is happening there, that’s not where people gather. They gather to shorter grass and gravel fields. A 182 has no problem with these fields, just forget it with a Lancair. With a Cirrus, I’m not sure, but they seem to take forever to take off even on tarmac.

GA pilots like to be around other GA pilots. It’s a factor of the “mission profile” that shouldn’t be left out.

I don’t see any reason why you shouldn’t go straight to an SR22 straight after your PPL. But of course, it depends on your aptitude and ability – both for flying and for learning. There are fresh PPLs who are well on their way to being a really good pilot, and then there are fresh PPLs who scrape through a skills test test (quite possibly not their first one) and who, shall we say, you wouldn’t want your nearest and dearest getting into a plane with.

Fundamentally the SR22 is still just a fixed-gear SEP. Yes it’s heavier, more powerful and more slippery than the average training aircraft and you’ll take time to adjust to higher speeds and energy management that requires a bit more thought. Ultimately though it’s just different to a PA28 or C172, not inherently harder. You could even buy it before you finish your PPL and finish your training in it.

Whatever you do, buying one aeroplane as an intermediate and then changing it in the not-to-distant future is a sure fire way of spending more than you have to.

As a final note, based on your location and stated mission profile it looks like you’ll spend a lot of time over water. You may wish to consider a retractable gear rather than fixed since the ditching characteristics are generally better. Or even a twin, since it doesn’t sound like budget is much of an issue. Of course in the Cirrus you have CAPS for over water.

Valentin wrote:

I considered SR22 and decided it’s too much for an inexperienced pilot. I could be wrong.

I think you might well be. The SR22 is widely used like that and it has the distinct advantage of fixed gear, no prop lever, the parashute (which is particularly useful for inexperienced folks and considering where you are with large overwater legs) and again, considering where you are you have mostly large runways. And it is a G1000 plane anyhow, so there is not much difference in use of avionics to a Cessna, but the Cessna is a lot slower and has much less range.

And range is something else which I would put foremost if I lived in Cyprus! If you want to fly to Europe regularly, you can read up on Greece’s problems in abundance. In order to safely get around being dependent on fuel and customs in Greece, you need a range of well over 800 NM. Fuel and cost friendly airports like Skopje (687 NM) or Belgrad (854NM) as well as Croatia and Italy are reachable from Paphos in a SR22 but not in a fixed gear C182!

With an SR22 you can cover a good 900 – 1000 NM with approximately 170 kts in 12’000 ft or 175-180 kts and 1000NM range if you don’t mind oxygen at 17000 ft .

With a Cessna 182 fixed gear we are talking 700 NM and 140 kts. In other words, going anywhere in a C182 will mean to land in Greece and much longer overwater legs.

Obviously you can go for other decent range airplanes like the TB20 or a Mooney Ovation too. While the TB20 has the range, it has no G1000, whereas there are plenty of Ovations with G1000 (but make sure it’s got WAAS!). An Ovation will carry two people from Paphos to Zurich if it needs to with 180 kts.

Any of those planes are well suitable for where you are and to be flown after PPL, I would have to say the SR22 is probably the most suitable as it was made for new pilots, even though originally that caused some problems. But flying it is no more difficult than flying a G1000 182 provided you take sufficient training and fly it regularly thereafter. And particularly for the long overwater legs e.t.c. that parashute is really useful.

Or, thinking outside the box, you could opt for a Cessna 210, possibly even the pressurized version. They are all steam cockpits but they deliver good range and usually come with good avionics. They will likely be in the price range of a G1000 182 but deliver much more speed and range with similar payload. A C210 is definitly a plane you can fly after your PPL, can do your IR on e.t.c. while having very good usability, we have even had someone here who did that (non pressurized) and still owns that plane today.

Valentin wrote:

What exactly does it mean to be more slippery for an aircraft? Is it less stable? Is it more difficult to control in turbulence?

It means that it has low drag so it can be difficult to slow down, particularly when descending. So you must plan your approaches more carefully.

Valentin wrote:

What exactly does it mean to be more slippery for an aircraft? Is it less stable? Is it more difficult to control in turbulence?

No, just that it gets faster and stays fast more easily when descending. As an example, if you’re two miles from the field at 160kts and need to lose 3,000ft to get down to circuit height, you can’t just pull the power right back and shove the nose down – it’ll likely get too fast too quickly. One has to plan further ahead and shed the speed/height more gradually.

Apart from anything else, your cruise speed is much higher than the speed you want in the circuit – this is not the case in a PA28/C172 where one does pretty much everything (except climbing and final approach) at approx. 100kts. So even before you take the slipperiness of the airframe into account, you need to lose a fair chunk of speed somewhere between top-of-descent and arriving in the circuit (or on the ILS), plus because you have a higher performance aeroplane you probably cruised at a higher altitude so you’ve more height to lose too…..