Here’s something to think about:
"When the first few SR20’s rolled off the line they were described as top quality. Then a few squawks started to appear that were dismissed as normal. Recently there have been a steady stream of serious quality problems identified, ranging from a
broken bellcrank to fuel leaks, brakes, warped dashboards, alternators, flaps and multiple system failures. One owner has reported replacing 5 vacuum pumps and another has gone through several HSIs. Many have reported transponder problems that look like a design fault.Hmmm… Is this is a normal fault rate for a new design, or has an unacceptable quality threshold now been crossed? "
I realize the plane is overall great, I do. But I went back and "flipped" through the archives on this site and...well... At what point does one stop letting these teething problems go? I have dozens of personal e-mails from pilots, all of whom worship the SR-2Xs' rightfully, but then list a LOT of issues that needed to be fixed. At one level this is a tribute to just how great a plane this must be, but I gotta be honest, after reading through the archives I think at another level there are a lot of very forgiving pilots. I'm not a COPA member, so maybe this is something you are already discussing. But I'm not sure this is acceptable.
Yes? No?
Dean,
Quality is a relative term. I have yet meet an A&P that has spent significant time with the SR20 who is not impressed with the planes overall quality. They often state that compared to brand X, the Cirrus is nearly perfect. They then usually go on to list all the squaks found on brand X when brand new that are not only an inconvenience but make the plane unairworthy for its first few weeks of life.
The bigger problem seems to be one of component manufacturers common to all of GA.
Stuart N@)*CD
Here’s something to think about:
"When the first few SR20’s rolled off the line they were described as top quality. Then a few squawks started to appear that were dismissed as normal. Recently there have been a steady stream of serious quality problems identified, ranging from a
broken bellcrank to fuel leaks, brakes, warped dashboards, alternators, flaps and multiple system failures. One owner has reported replacing 5 vacuum pumps and another has gone through several HSIs. Many have reported transponder problems that look like a design fault.Hmmm… Is this is a normal fault rate for a new design, or has an unacceptable quality threshold now been crossed? "
I realize the plane is overall great, I do. But I went back and “flipped” through the archives on this site and…well… At what point does one stop letting these teething problems go? I have dozens of personal e-mails from pilots, all of whom worship the SR-2Xs’ rightfully, but then list a LOT of issues that needed to be fixed. At one level this is a tribute to just how great a plane this must be, but I gotta be honest, after reading through the archives I think at another level there are a lot of very forgiving pilots. I’m not a COPA member, so maybe this is something you are already discussing. But I’m not sure this is acceptable.
Yes? No?
I gotta be honest, after reading through the archives I think at another level there are a lot of very forgiving pilots. I’m not a COPA member, so maybe this is something you are already discussing. But I’m not sure this is acceptable.
Yes? No?
I tend to agree with you. Once they have committed a quarter of a million dollars on a plane people are no longer objective. They don’t want to admit that they may have made a very expensive mistake. While I don’t think the SR20 is a total loss, I do think that between the obvious design problems, the apparent poor quality control, and the delivery delays to designed to increase profits put Cirrus in the same catagory as any other small manufacturer with a good basic design but without the capital or expertise to produce the product or modify the design as conditions require. Many people can’t see beyond the parachute. With our plane scheduled for December I certainly don’t intend to get out now, but I don’t have very high expectations of it actually being delivered or its reliability when it does show up.
Hey Dean, slow down.
I had SR20 #37 delivered in May of 2000. I sold it a short time ago with almost 300 hours on it to go to a SR22. The 20 was a wonderful plane with the only minor squwaks being from the OEM components. At all times Cirrus was on the front line for immediate help. It was a wonderful plane that I hated to part with. We are so lucky to have an organaization like Cirrus in the GA scene.
Here’s something to think about:
"When the first few SR20’s rolled off the line they were described as top quality. Then a few squawks started to appear that were dismissed as normal. Recently there have been a steady stream of serious quality problems identified, ranging from a
broken bellcrank to fuel leaks, brakes, warped dashboards, alternators, flaps and multiple system failures. One owner has reported replacing 5 vacuum pumps and another has gone through several HSIs. Many have reported transponder problems that look like a design fault.Hmmm… Is this is a normal fault rate for a new design, or has an unacceptable quality threshold now been crossed? "
I realize the plane is overall great, I do. But I went back and “flipped” through the archives on this site and…well… At what point does one stop letting these teething problems go? I have dozens of personal e-mails from pilots, all of whom worship the SR-2Xs’ rightfully, but then list a LOT of issues that needed to be fixed. At one level this is a tribute to just how great a plane this must be, but I gotta be honest, after reading through the archives I think at another level there are a lot of very forgiving pilots. I’m not a COPA member, so maybe this is something you are already discussing. But I’m not sure this is acceptable.
Yes? No?
I think one thing to keep in mind is that the problems experienced by forum participants get duly noted here, which tends to put the “spotlight” on these problems. I, personally, do not monitor on-line forums where buyers of other brand new aircraft discuss issues of common interest, therefore, I can’t compare. But I think the feedback noted by Stuart, below, by A&Ps who do see new aircraft, is of considerable interest.
The gist of the comments so far is that the Cirrus than other GA aircraft manufacturers in terms of quality. But the real question is: Is that good enough?
Fortunately, there are objective standards for quality manufacturing. I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
Joe
Here’s something to think about:
"When the first few SR20’s rolled off the line they were described as top quality. Then a few squawks started to appear that were dismissed as normal. Recently there have been a steady stream of serious quality problems identified, ranging from a
broken bellcrank to fuel leaks, brakes, warped dashboards, alternators, flaps and multiple system failures. One owner has reported replacing 5 vacuum pumps and another has gone through several HSIs. Many have reported transponder problems that look like a design fault.Hmmm… Is this is a normal fault rate for a new design, or has an unacceptable quality threshold now been crossed? "
I realize the plane is overall great, I do. But I went back and “flipped” through the archives on this site and…well… At what point does one stop letting these teething problems go? I have dozens of personal e-mails from pilots, all of whom worship the SR-2Xs’ rightfully, but then list a LOT of issues that needed to be fixed. At one level this is a tribute to just how great a plane this must be, but I gotta be honest, after reading through the archives I think at another level there are a lot of very forgiving pilots. I’m not a COPA member, so maybe this is something you are already discussing. But I’m not sure this is acceptable.
Yes? No?
Cirrus does seem to have some quality issues, particulary as they begin to crank up production. However, I am not sure if their issues are any greater than any other GA manufacturer.
The company that I work for had many more problems than I did with their two brand new Cessna Citation Excels. My father has a Citation Encore which had multiple problems within the first 30 hours including failure of the autopilot (which is no small issue when you are single pilot) and the loss of pressuriation (failed a second time after spending one week in Witchita)
I do not mean to knock Cessna (great company, great service, and great planes), but to point out with my limited exposure to the issue that Cirrus is not alone.
Quality should be in every manufactory #1 priority. They have to spend much less time with customers if the quality is top notch. All this counts as time. When you have a problem and you have to call someone, that someone is no longer doing something productive because he or she is spending time that if quality had been #1 time would not have been waisted.
I suggest everyone that picks up their airplane to not be happy or submit the check until it is perfect, just like anywhere else sometimes they have to learn the hard way. We all have waited a long time, we have donated our deposits to a wonderfull cause. Cirrus and it’s people have done a fabulous job and we are very proud of our machines and we like to thank everyone to include the floor sweeper. But please, I will take and I am sure everyone else will gladdly take an extra week delay for something that has been gone over with a picky QA person, not just on looks but on test flights. There is no reason for the needle to be a little off to one side, let’s work together and get it right in the center. Cirrus will save money by doing it right the first time, we will take the penalty of a little longer wait and less time at the shop once we bring it home. Have a great Cirrus flying day.
Be happy 
Woor
Cirrus does seem to have some quality issues, particulary as they begin to crank up production. However, I am not sure if their issues are any greater than any other GA manufacturer.
The company that I work for had many more problems than I did with their two brand new Cessna Citation Excels. My father has a Citation Encore which had multiple problems within the first 30 hours including failure of the autopilot (which is no small issue when you are single pilot) and the loss of pressuriation (failed a second time after spending one week in Witchita)
I do not mean to knock Cessna (great company, great service, and great planes), but to point out with my limited exposure to the issue that Cirrus is not alone.
Quality should be in every manufactory #1 priority.
To put things in perspective, Cessna has been making the 172/182 for almost 50 years. Look up the number of service bulletins and AD’s for the new 172/182. Cirrus has a long way to fall to meet that standard
John
I tend to agree with you. Once they have committed a quarter of a million dollars on a plane people are no longer objective.
I think you’ve captured the point perfectly Art. While Cirrus and Lancair have worked near-miracles by bringing these planes to production it is still not acceptable to deliver planes with serious quality problems.
There’s no use comparing the quality to other low-quality models, or to affix some near-religious status to the manufacturer.
The big challenge here for the manufacturers, possibly their biggest challenge of all, is to keep the quality up when the production is efficient enough to make a profit. Both Lancair and Cirrus have proven that they can make great planes in the pre-profit high cost mode. The question is, can they make great planes and make a profit too.
This has yet to be seen. Position holders and owners do themselves justice by keeping their standards high. Planes that don’t start in the cold, can’t climb in the heat, whose transponders don’t always work are not OK. Cirrus is doing a fabulous job of after sales support. Now let’s look for the delivery quality to improve along with improving efficiency.
Steve
I think one thing to keep in mind is that the problems experienced by forum participants get duly noted here, which tends to put the “spotlight” on these problems. I, personally, do not monitor on-line forums where buyers of other brand new aircraft discuss issues of common interest, therefore, I can’t compare. But I think the feedback noted by Stuart, below, by A&Ps who do see new aircraft, is of considerable interest.
I would suspect that almost any A&P who has done anything other than a ramp evalation would be on Cirrus’ payroll in one form or another as all manufactured to date should be under warranty. This would hardly qualify as an unbiased evaluation. Also composite aircraft are not as common in general aviation as spam cans.
Could be these A&P’s are doing a bit of stroking.
M. Myers
[Corrected Post]
The gist of the comments so far is that Cirrus is better than other GA aircraft manufacturers in terms of quality. But the real question is: Is that good enough?
Fortunately, there are objective standards for quality manufacturing. I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
Joe
I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
I think there is very little correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality manufacturing; the certification is neither necessary nor sufficient.
After purchasing many poorly-designed, poor quality products from companies that proudly advertise their ISO 9000 certification, I can only think what a waste of money it was for them to thoroughly document their ill-conceived and executed processes.
Of course, ISO 9000 consultants may have a different opinion
-Mike
Okay, how about a Malcolm Baldridge award?
Joe
I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
I think there is very little correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality manufacturing; the certification is neither necessary nor sufficient.
After purchasing many poorly-designed, poor quality products from companies that proudly advertise their ISO 9000 certification, I can only think what a waste of money it was for them to thoroughly document their ill-conceived and executed processes.
Of course, ISO 9000 consultants may have a different opinion
-Mike
I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
I think there is very little correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality manufacturing; the certification is neither necessary nor sufficient.
After purchasing many poorly-designed, poor quality products from companies that proudly advertise their ISO 9000 certification, I can only think what a waste of money it was for them to thoroughly document their ill-conceived and executed process>
Of course, ISO 9000 consultants may have a different opinion
-Mike
I agree about ISO 9000. It’s a big joke. I’m in manufacturing and the worst of our suppliers are ISO certified. They are shameless when it comes to shipping defective materials. Sometimes, we return 65% of the shipment.
Dan
I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
I think there is very little correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality manufacturing; the certification is neither necessary nor sufficient.
I also agree on the lack of correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality/support. I had one ISO 9000 certified vendor in particular that often delivered the wrong components, late, and, when we finally got the right components (eternity) they didn’t work.
Gordon
Okay, how about a Malcolm Baldridge award?
OK, now that would be something. However, anyone that knows anything about that award would also know that receiving it at Cirrus’ stage of developement would be pretty far fetched.
Mike hit the nail on the head with his comments and saved me the trouble of banging out the same thoughts on my keyboard.
I know your comment was laden with sarcasm to make a point, but let’s not get carried away. Using the facts that CD doesn’t have ISO9000 certification and has never received the Baldridge award in order to substantiate a claim that they have poor quality is not appropriate or fair.
IMHO,
Greg
Joe
I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
I think there is very little correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality manufacturing; the certification is neither necessary nor sufficient.
After purchasing many poorly-designed, poor quality products from companies that proudly advertise their ISO 9000 certification, I can only think what a waste of money it was for them to thoroughly document their ill-conceived and executed processes.
Of course, ISO 9000 consultants may have a different opinion
-Mike
Okay, how about a Malcolm Baldridge award?
OK, now that would be something. However, anyone that knows anything about that award would also know that receiving it at Cirrus’ stage of developement would be pretty far fetched.
Mike hit the nail on the head with his comments and saved me the trouble of banging out the same thoughts on my keyboard.
I know your comment was laden with sarcasm to make a point, but let’s not get carried away. Using the facts that CD doesn’t have ISO9000 certification and has never received the Baldridge award in order to substantiate a claim that they have poor quality is not appropriate or fair.
IMHO,
Greg
Joe
I wonder if CirrusÂ’ methods would earn them ISO 9000 certification, for example?
I think there is very little correlation between ISO 9000 certification and quality manufacturing; the certification is neither necessary nor sufficient.
After purchasing many poorly-designed, poor quality products from companies that proudly advertise their ISO 9000 certification, I can only think what a waste of money it was for them to thoroughly document their ill-conceived and executed processes.
Of course, ISO 9000 consultants may have a different opinion
O.K. For those of us who have no idea what in the world you’re talking about, what is an ISO 9000 certification? Is that some kind of porno site rating or even better some sort of rating from a can’t miss stock picking bulletin board.
-Mike
I know your comment was laden with sarcasm to make a point, but let’s not get carried away. Using the facts that CD doesn’t have ISO9000 certification and has never received the Baldridge award in order to substantiate a claim that they have poor quality is not appropriate or fair.
Quite the contrary! My point is this: Since there is controversy about Cirrus’ quality, why not test that hypothesis against an objective standard? ISO 9000, if you believe in that, or the Baldridge Award process, or whatever.
Then we’d have a more realistic idea of how good Cirrus’ processes and QA are – without having to rely on anecdotal comments, comparisons with other manufacturers (who themselves may be bad), or inside scoop from “Jeff.”
Joe