Minimum Hours for SR20

First off I would like to say hi guys as this is my first post. This is a great site with lots of information presented.

I’m going to take a different stand on what aircraft you should fly next. Just because the landing gear is always down on a cirrus does not make it an easy plane to fly. I think you would really benefit from the 172RG and 182RG. THese planes will teach you to get ahead of the airplane and make you a much better pilot. It’s just me but I would feel safer with a cirrus pilot that called out gear down or set to land on final just because I feel he/she is far enough ahead of the airplane to be thinking about things like that.

Not everyone is ready for a SR22 after just getting their pilots licence. If you did all your training in a 172 it might be helpful to spend some time in a 182 before moving into the RG aircraft. On top of that I think if you buy a SR20 or SR22 you might find your insurance is very steep because of your lack of PIC time. Overall I would say take small steps and be safe.

In reply to:


Â…[with no-PFD] you will fly a GPS T-type approach, with the autopilot if possibleÂ…


I suppose you could shoot a VOR or ILS approach just as easily, since they look pretty much the same on the 430Â’s as GPS approaches do.

The autopilot will still work without good PFD attitude info because of a “hidden” TC, right?

Joe

In reply to:


On what do you base your opinion? Accident stats or performance envelope?


Both. The fatal accident rate for the SR20 is running about double that of the SR22 based on aircraft-months.

In reply to:


Personally, I think they are equally safe assuming you know how to fly the machine within its performance envelope.


Yes, but the SR20 demands a higher level of skill to remain in that envelope due to its less forgiving nature.

Am I making myself popular or what!

In reply to:


I suppose you could shoot a VOR or ILS approach just as easily…


There is no glideslope information available without the PFD, but one could do a LOC instead of an ILS, as long as there’s a GPS overlay.

In reply to:


There is no glideslope information available without the PFD, but one could do a LOC instead of an ILS, as long as there’s a GPS overlay.


Good catch re the glideslope, but why would you need a GPS overlay when the 430Â’s have VOR and localizer capability?

This is one of the weak points of the PFD. If the screen goes out, there is no secondary VOR head in the airplane. Thus, your very capable VOR/GPS box (Garmin 430), loses its ability to have its VOR function workable.
My non PFD SR22 has dual VOR heads (Sandel HSI and a secondary VOR/GPS CDI).

There is a “CDI” indicator on Nav page 1 of the 430, but it is not “legal” to use it in place of a conventional VOR/LOC indicator. I’m pretty sure that this “electronic CDI” is driven only by GPS signals, not by VOR/LOC, even when your 430 is in “VLOC” mode. On the other hand if you delcare an emergency–not unreasonable with a failed PFD in IMC–you may exercise your own authority (at your own risk of course).

In reply to:


There is a “CDI” indicator on Nav page 1 of the 430, but it is not “legal” to use it in place of a conventional VOR/LOC indicator.


Nor is it legal for GPS navigation! You still need a CDI to be legal, VOR or GPS.

In reply to:


I’m pretty sure that this “electronic CDI” is driven only by GPS signals, not by VOR/LOC, even when your 430 is in “VLOC” mode.


If thatÂ’s true you would be limited to a GPS (or overlay) approach.

In reply to:


On the other hand if you delcare an emergency–not unreasonable with a failed PFD in IMC–you may exercise your own authority (at your own risk of course).


Agreed!