I’m seriously considering an SR22 but I’d rather wait to see a turbocharged or at least turbonormalized model. I’m on the West Coast and we have rocks and ice that beg for altitude capability. Does anyone know of any plans for a turbocharged SR22/24/2x?
I’ve also been looking at the Lancair 400, which just flat out screams, but Lancair has sold a handful of aircraft and I am concerned about long-term viability of the company, support, and insurance in that context.
I’m not in any great hurry. 2003 would be fine. I’d rather not go to an aftermarket solution in a new airplane.
Gordon
I’m seriously considering an SR22 but I’d rather wait to see a turbocharged or at least turbonormalized model. I’m on the West Coast and we have rocks and ice that beg for altitude capability. Does anyone know of any plans for a turbocharged SR22/24/2x?
I’ve also been looking at the Lancair 400, which just flat out screams, but Lancair has sold a handful of aircraft and I am concerned about long-term viability of the company, support, and insurance in that context.
I’m not in any great hurry. 2003 would be fine. I’d rather not go to an aftermarket solution in a new airplane.
Gordon
Gordon… I’m a Mooney TLS pilot (Turbo/270hp Lyc540) and I also fly on the moutainous West Coast. From experience I can tell you that turbos are just too expensive for what you get. Yes I love the speed and the ability to go to 25,000feet but I rarely go there and our bird has had 3 top overhauls and 3 turbochargers in 10 years. And the 4 pilots that fly it just baby that engine. The engine sucks gas(we have the 125 gallon tank mod) and has a high workload. Also, before you go to the Lancair400 fly it IFR and check for stability. I think you can get in trouble very quickly with that airframe/engine combo unless your are a very good pilot. I myself can’t wait for my SR22 and the simplicity and saftey it will bring. By the way, still looking for a partner in the L.A. area.
Dave F.
If Cirrus is smart — and they are — they’ll forget the Lancair hot-rod market and pursue volume. The market for turbocharged retractable 4-place low-wing planes is tiny. It’s basically Mooney and Bonanza . . . I’ll bet this category sells 75 new planes a year at most. The liability
problems are immense. Most owner pilots are underqualified to fly them. Weird stuff happens at the flight levels. Also, TCs rarely make it to TBO. They have a funny way of turning props into chin-up bars at 14,000 feet.
The market Cirrus ought to pursue in the next 5 years is for the cabin-class 6-placer powered by a single small Williams turbine. Even though such a plane would cost more than a 4-place TC retractable, the market would be larger and proven . . . i.e., it’s the flown corporate aircraft.
Margins for this plane — call it the “poor man’s King Air” — would be good. Which means Cirrus could keep charging low prices for the SR20.
>I'm seriously considering an SR22
but I'd rather wait to see a
turbocharged or at least
turbonormalized model. I'm on the
West Coast and we have rocks and
ice that beg for altitude capability.
Does anyone know of any plans for
a turbocharged SR22/24/2x?
>
>I've also been looking at the
Lancair 400, which just flat out
screams, but Lancair has sold a
handful of aircraft and I am
concerned about long-term viability
of the company, support, and
insurance in that context.
>
>I'm not in any great hurry. 2003
would be fine. I'd rather not go to an
aftermarket solution in a new
airplane.
>
>Gordon
[main page]
I’m seriously considering an SR22 but I’d rather wait to see a turbocharged or at least turbonormalized model. I’m on the West Coast and we have rocks and ice that beg for altitude capability. Does anyone know of any plans for a turbocharged SR22/24/2x?
I’ve also been looking at the Lancair 400, which just flat out screams, but Lancair has sold a handful of aircraft and I am concerned about long-term viability of the company, support, and insurance in that context.
I’m not in any great hurry. 2003 would be fine. I’d rather not go to an aftermarket solution in a new airplane.
Gordon
I’m seriously considering an SR22 but I’d rather wait to see a turbocharged or at least turbonormalized model. I’m on the West Coast and we have rocks and ice that beg for altitude capability. Does anyone know of any plans for a turbocharged SR22/24/2x?
I live in CA and fly a lot out here in all seasons. I think you will find the SR22’s peformance perfectly satisfactory in virtually any conditions you’re likely to encounter (save perhaps wanting to do an obstacle-clearing departure from a 2500 foot strip at 5000 feet in 90 degree weather). I fly a 260se/stol, its book climb rate and service ceiling are nearly identical to the sr22, and summer conditions just are not any problem, even if you want to get up to and cruise in the low-mid teens.
On the other hand, unless your load is routinely just yourself or yourself + a lightweight right-seat passenger, the SR20 may not satisfy you during the summer at higher DA’s.
IMHO, save yourself some maintenance grief and $$, don’t buy a turbo! In addition, will a turbo be able to find adequate fuel when something else has to replace 100LL in a few years?
Kevin et al:
Your points are well taken. Yes, I realize the maintenance issues with a turbo are significant. Dave, your letter certainly gives one pause when considering just how significant in terms of $. Do you limit boost when itÂ’s not needed or do you generally use book max performance MPs in climb/cruise?
If the diesels ever get certified they will be a lot better, typically providing 70% power instead of 40% power in the high teens. Williams turbine? Sure, but I want to get into something within the next 2 years or so, and IÂ’d guess it would be many years before that is a reality, especially since IÂ’d rather have airplane #100 than #1.
I have a 1968 Bonanza 36 now (partnership) and there are definitely times I’d like to climb, as opposed to crawl, up to the mid-teens. I don’t know how the SR22 performs up there. Typically I am lightly loaded pax-wise, with just myself and wife = 280 lbs. In the 36, full fuel (74 gal), I’m about 650 lbs below MGW and I can get about 150 kts at about 11,000, with its IO-520 285HP. What kind of ROC/TAS would I likely get in the SR22 in the low to mid teens w/ full fuel + 280 lbs? I couldnÂ’t DL the SR22 specs – something weird with that link on the Cirrus site. Also, IÂ’m assuming that a 2003 SR22/24 would have FADEC.
Re qualification / insurance, IÂ’m a high-time ATP/CFI, so that helps, but it just makes it more embarrassing when you do something dumb.
Gordon
I think it will be real interesting to see what the performance increase will be at the higher altitudes for the SR20/22 when FADEC is finially available. I doubt if it will allow one to get into the flight levels, but with precise EFI, precise leaning, and precise timing, I’m sure the engines will be putting out more HP at a higher altitude than the 30’s style clunkers we’re using today.
I have flown the Columbia 300 and found it to be very stable. (Although my flight was only 40 minutes). I currently fly a C172/180hp and hope to purchase a Columbia 300, or the SR22 in the next two years. I have not flown any of the Cirrus planes. I am wondering why you think the Lancair will be a diffucult IFR platform? Are you speaking for just the Columbia 400 or do your thoughts also include the columbia 300? Do you think the SR20/22 is a better IFR platform? Why?
Thanks you for your thoughts.