As AVGas prices begin their inexorable climb I am musing on the value of a Cirrus relative to her brethren. Intuitively, twins should probably see an increased depreciation rate. Will the chute make the Cirrus more attractive for the must have a twin for safety group? Will our half the fuel flow with speed equal or better than many twins make our value rise? Or is the price of gas such a small cost of the total ownership bill that the question is really mute?
Skip
Small factor.
The LARGE factor will be the cost of maintanence, post warranty.
By the way, I just got fuel about 2 hrs ago at SLG @ $2.25/gal.
I assume you know about http://www.airnav.com/fuel/
In the UK we are paying nearly $10 a gallon(imperial)
How about that!
Trevor Pickering SR22G2
No doubt in my mind. M 310 burns about 28 gallons per hour, and unless I put Gami’s in it will not run LOP. I only fly it now to keep it maintained while still trying to sell it (of course, it will hall 4 adults and several hundred pounds of baggage and 180 gals of gas - I do miss that… W & B is almost never a factor in flight planning. If anyone know so someone interested - I am becoming very flexible (it has a new panel with Garmin 530, colemill conversion, vortex generators, new interior, etc, etc.) But, for cost of operation - the Cirrus is clearly cheaper to operate and that was a large part of my reason to change. So was the chute because most of my flying is mountain flying.
By the way, I just got fuel about 2 hrs ago at SLG @ $2.25/gal.
[/quote]
self serve at KISP (Long Island) today was $3.80. Cheapest around here I think is KWST Rhode Island at $2.70
Agreed, it’s a small factor, perhaps 1/4 or so of the overall cost of ownership.
Of course, energy costs affect EVERYTHING else in the economy. Therefore as they rise, there will be inflationary pressure on everything else in aviation: labor, parts, parking/hangar etc. This can only be countered by increased efficiencies, willingness of businesses to accept lower margins, or both. I expect the cost of everything to rise with the cost of oil, perhaps not in lockstep, but not lagging by much either.
I think we’re just at the beginning of a transition away from a fossil fuel-driven economy. Oil production will peak within a decade or less, but energy demand will keep climbing worldwide. Once the transition is complete I think the world will be a better place, but it will certainly be a stressful, even tumultuous several decades getting there!
I was at Orlando Executive this weekend and paid $4.12 a gallon, Ouch!!! I purchased 11 gallons to have the $20 landing fee waived…Luckily I had topped off in St Augustine earlier the same day. (2.75 per gallon full service)
Kevin,
I’ve always thought the 260/se was an excellent airplane. I’ld love to hear your oppinions of the airplane, and why you decided to sell it.
– Thanks.
As the DA 42 hits the US market who with their senses about them would buy an AVGAS gulping twin or single. The DA 42 appears to be the most exciting offering availabe, and if it demonstrates a safety record similiar to the DA 40 it will revolutionize GA.
Russell
Sorry, didn’t see your post until today. I have made a lot of comments about the plane on the COPA forums before; a search on “260se” will find all of them!
The short version is that I loved the plane and would happily buy another. I sold because I changed jobs and only had time to fly 60-70 hr/year, vs. 200+ hr earlier. For me at least, aircraft ownership made no sense under the new circumstances.
You can find a lot of information about the 260se/230se/wren on the 260se owners’ group website; feel free to contact me by personal message here or through the 260se owners’ group forum if you’d like to discuss more.
As a Cirrus owner and also a fairly frequent flyer in the diesel Diamond DA40 I can tell you there is NO comparison between the two.
The Cirrus wins hands down on all counts!
Trevor Pickering SR22G2
As the DA 42 hits the US market who with their senses about them would buy an AVGAS gulping twin or single.<<
The answer is a person who never buys the first generation of any new aviation technology. I’m a big fan Diamond’s products, philosophy and quality…but I’ll stick to my IO-320’s a few more years until I see how these new engines fare in real life.
In reply to:
As the DA 42 hits the US market who with their senses about them would buy an AVGAS gulping twin or single. The DA 42 appears to be the most exciting offering availabe, and if it demonstrates a safety record similiar to the DA 40 it will revolutionize GA.
How much will the DA 42 cost? How much will the insurance cost?
My prediction is that the DA 42 will be a flop, but time will tell and I’ve been wrong before.
Jerry
Hazardeous for your health is a good one isn’t Cirrus the outfit pushing up GA insurance rates? Anyway, some like sports cars some like boxes. However, I agree if I were 6’2" I would most likely have to go to the box versus the DA 40.
But a gas gulping box with a conglomeration of screens compared to a slick, head turning DA 42, will have to say I would learn to slouch a little.
Why do you think it will flop? This plane has a 1400 NM range to dry tanks, on only 73 gallons! 181 knot cruise at 80% power. It outperforms and burns less total fuel/hr than any decent performing single out there. If the expected life/maintenance of the deisels is accurate, this could be a phenomenal value. Originally (few years ago), the plane was advertised at $360,000…but that was before glass panels, and the usual price bumbs on the way to certification. And out of 640+ registered Diamonds in the U.S., there have been only two fatal accidents in ten years. Personally, I have some gripes about Diamonds…too little interior room, not enough shading from the sun for long trips…but if I were in the market for a new twin, I’d be looking hard at this one.
Just curious, what do you perceive as the negatives??
Jerry:
Be prepared to be wrong again [;)] I predict the DA42 to be a good commercial success. Solid performance, great looking, Jet A, economical to operate, FADEC, excellent company backing it and an awesome design!! The marketplace for a twin is obviously smaller than singles, but there is surely a nice niche it will fill. Just my humble opinion. [:)]
<<<Just curious, what do you perceive as the negatives??>>
For one, at OSH I couldn’t close the canopy without hitting my head, which means no headset, and a bloody head if in turbulence. Per the salesman at OSH, the seats do not recline or otherwise adjust.
I’m only 6’2" and pretty disappointed as it seems to otherwise an outstanding plane
John
N468JP SR20 #1261
In reply to:
Why do you think it will flop? This plane has a 1400 NM range to dry tanks, on only 73 gallons! 181 knot cruise at 80% power. It outperforms and burns less total fuel/hr than any decent performing single out there. If the expected life/maintenance of the deisels is accurate, this could be a phenomenal value. Originally (few years ago), the plane was advertised at $360,000…but that was before glass panels, and the usual price bumbs on the way to certification. And out of 640+ registered Diamonds in the U.S., there have been only two fatal accidents in ten years. Personally, I have some gripes about Diamonds…too little interior room, not enough shading from the sun for long trips…but if I were in the market for a new twin, I’d be looking hard at this one.
Just curious, what do you perceive as the negatives??
Lots of “ifs”. I remember George Braly explaining the problems with deisels at the APS seminar, I don’t think they have all the bugs worked out yet.
Plus, I sense ‘a disturbance in the force’. Time will tell.
In reply to:
Jerry:
Be prepared to be wrong again I predict the DA42 to be a good commercial success. Solid performance, great looking, Jet A, economical to operate, FADEC, excellent company backing it and an awesome design!! The marketplace for a twin is obviously smaller than singles, but there is surely a nice niche it will fill. Just my humble opinion.
I’ll betcha a pizza.
John–You need to shrink—at 6’2"–your just to tall!! [;)]