I agree it’s not easy and maybe not likely. I was thinking about mild pressurization, 8000 ft pressure cabin at 18000 feet, using the same manufacturing technology as the jet. ( the jet also has huge plastic Windows)
To be clear, in Garmin’s integrated flight deck model lineup post-G1000 higher numbers in the product name generally denote bigger aircraft rather than a more modern system. The G1000 is the first generation integrated flight deck but the next generations is:
G2000 - piston
G3000 - light turbine (turboprops, single pilot jets)
G5000 - crew flown large jets
If you look at these systems they are all very similar with similar displays and touch-screen controllers. I don’t think the G3000 is so much a newer G2000 as it is a G2000 scaled up to 3-screens and sold to turbine OEMs. So if Cirrus wants to have more avionics similarity to make the transition easier my bet is on a switch to the G2000.
A pressurized plane is a totally different animal…from special expanding seals on the doors…to reinforced bulkheads and cabin and possibly the cargo area if pressurized. The installation of an oxygen generating system is also required that compresses air from the outside and drives it into the cabin and out the outflow valve which is also required. Turbines and jets can get this done readily. In a gas engine it would definitely require a turbo-charged engine.
There are no certified gas-engine, propeller driven aircraft with pressurization that I know of on the market (Lancair made three experimental kits, two no longer made, and the Evolution which is a Pratt-Whitney turbine plane).
:
http://www.piper.com/aircraft/m-class/m350/
From the website:
“The Piper M350 is the only current production pressurized piston-engine aircraft available today. It leads the piston pack with an impressive 213 ktas cruising speed, as well as the ability to cruise up to 25,000 ft in pressurized comfort. With standard dual turbochargers, owners can also expect a consistent fuel burn at any altitude keeping operating costs down.”
Edit: a quick search of controllers shows used M350’s in the $1.3M range.
Assuming the cost to certify and pressurize the cirrus pushes it into the millions to buy, it would be competing in a different class all together. To me, the only negative of a M350 is there isn’t a chute. The cabin is much better suited for family travel (for me anyway). I’m not sure I’d buy a cirrus at that price point relative to the other options out there.
This is supposed to show in the above block “There are no certified gas-engine, propeller driven aircraft with pressurization that I know of on the market…”
Piper Mirage? Piper M350?
Edited to add: Adam (barely) beat me to it. Did the M350 replace the Mirage? Sorry, but these are not planes I pay a lot of attention to.
Beat me to the post. I believe the Piper M350/Mirage is the only pressurized, piston single currently in production in the world… Over $1 mm starting price, don’t know the exact amount.
Don’t feel bad - I got scooped as well!
I did log a bunch of hours in a P210 belonging to a student. For all its faults and foibles, the concept was great!
Minor detail: Many people, perhaps even most people who have used the G3000 don’t like it. It is even more modal than the already too-modal G1000. A lot of button/screen pushing to do simple things.
In addition to the others who described the Mirage, you are also incorrect in describing the need to install an oxygen generating system. The cabin is pressurized by air from the compressor of the turbocharger (all pressurized pistons need to be turbocharged to get the pressurization). This compressed air is pumped into the cabin. The amount of pressurization is, as you say, regulated by an outflow valve which is usually pilot adjustable along with a second, independent “pop off” valve that automatically opens when the pressurization limit is reached so as to avoid blowing up the cabin like a balloon.
Pressurization has nothing whatsoever to do with oxygen generation. All it does is increase the pressure in the cabin versus the outside so the partial pressure of the oxygen in the compressed air (about 20% of it) is high enough to obviate the need for supplemental oxygen.
Again, I am not saying pressurization is coming, it’s more a wish list item, I enjoyed pressurization in the Piper Mirage having no headache and nausea after flights. The Matrix the unpressurized version of the Mirage is app 150 lb lighter and based on the same airframe. If and only if the SR vessel will be build like the Jet vessel, pressurization is feasible and would make sense from a production technology and cost perspective.
I too have read this and my jet buddy just traded in his PL21 CJ3 for a G3000 CJ3 and says he doesn’t think it’s that user friendly. He also flies a G1000 piston Cessna and G1000H Bell helicopter so he to some degree is comparing apples to apples. However, the folks going from a 530 to a touch screen 750 seem to RAVE about how much better they are. I wonder where the difference(s) lie(s)?
G3000 is too big for this airplane. It just won’t fit. I think the G2000 could get squeezed in though based on the interior width and the TTx which does have it. Touch screen would be nice. I’m getting a new 2016. I hope they don’t put the G2000 in it… Ugh…
Cheers,
Ed
It is an interesting thought. Aside from feasibility, do you think Cirrus even wants to considering potential risk to future SF sales?
Put down the device holder and enjoy your trip better 
Read my posts on this…
Agreed, those are Garmin’s words not mine. I was just trying to point out that the G3000 “ain’t gonna happen.” I think Shyam has the best idea. In my mind Cirrus is more in danger of producing an SR22 that costs as much as a 6-seat, pressurized, radar equipped, Mirage than they are getting outsold by Cessna and their touchscreen cockpit.
Agreed. A fully loaded 2016 SR22T GTS plus a/c and long warranty is very Close to the new Piper Matrix base price of just under 900k.
I have no insight in Cirrus’s marketing decisions whatsoever. I feel, that the gap between the SR and Vision line is significant in terms of $$$, pilot proficiency requirements and number of passengers. Not everybody can and want to spend 2 M. plus and burn 60-70 gallons per hour. 200 KIAS at 18000 feet, pressurized, 4-6 pax, Diesel engine burning 15 gallons of Jet A per hour would be a great proposition for many of us including me.
I presume you meant 200 KTAS. 200 IAS would, depending on temperature be about 270 KTAS at FL180.
Given that the Never Exceed Speed for the SR-22 is 201 KIAS any similar plane would need a very beefed up structure to allow 200 KIAS as a normal cruise.
Of course, I meant 200 KTAS, my mistake ! Thank you for correcting.
Physics rule, and the last avenue for “free” speed without an exponential power increase is the landing gear. Cessna once addressed this pretty cleverly with the Cardinal RG, a design that eliminated gear doors and used a very simple, light mechanism.
If I could spec the next generation for cirrus, I’d put onboard radar at the top of the list. The Cirrus is an IMC travel machine with a WX almanac today. Modern engine controls would be a big improvement, too, and pretty likely given that CAIGA is investing and owns the IO550 platform for some reason, right? An IO550 with electronic ignition and electronic fuel injection would yield meaningfully better performance and reliability - a captive category killer for Cirrus. If the appetite is there to change the airframe incrementally, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a longer, higher performance wing now that FIKI is part of the specification and the draggy cuff doesn’t seem to be saving the day very often. I’d like to see “aeron chair” type seats that could be lighter, more comfortable (cooler) and less visually confining.
The avionics suite is already pretty wonderful, and I’d concentrate on customization for the Cirrus. Pre-populate frequency changes - the flight plan knows who’s next. Pre-populate the missed approach altitude. Bluetooth the MFD to PAX iPads so they can flip around and play.
Lastly, get really serious about weight reduction. Think materials and design. Pounds are made up of ounces. As Colin Chapman said at Lotus - “to go faster add lightness”. So, to go farther, add lightness.