Something "big" at Cirrus

[VMC-on-top]

Big announcement due from Cirrus on 18th .... any clues anyone? pressurised? Turbine? Diesel?

Cirrus Aircraft (http://cirrusaircraft.com/)

[achimha]

I bet the marketing budget is still bigger than the R&D budget.

Maybe new hull color schemes? :)

[jxk]

New paint scheme?

[Cows getting bigger]

Price reduction?

[1800ed]

They're beginning to look the the Apple of GA :}

[znww5]

Maybe they are going to fit a booster stage to the ballistic recovery system?

[peterh337]

On an American forum somebody thinks Cirrus are going to announce a turboprop, and it will be the ex Farnborough Aircraft project which ended up split off into a) the Epic Dynasty (http://www.epicaircraft.com/Dynasty.html) (which appears to have gone bust) and b) the Kestrel (http://www.kestrel.aero/), and Klapmeier got involved with the latter, and if he returned to Cirrus then................ it would be a bit like Apple, with Jobs coming back to rescue it from dwindling sales :)

[Rory Dixon]

I guess, they are 'redefining' privat aviation with the approval of their little jet.
I think, the Klapmeiers should start wearing jeans and black turtlenecks.

[Sir George Cayley]

If one uses other a/c manufacturers (I do wish Flight Mag would stop calling them airframers:yuk:) there is a common product progression.

You know where this is going already - singles then twins. Tecnam, Diamond
DynAero and I' sure others have all followed this route with varying success.

Has Cirrus spotted the fact that some customers leave their orbit to step up to a twin and that to hold onto them they need the right equipment? After all it's easier to retain repeat business than to spend money attracting new buyers.

Single engined turbines are OK but the market is smaller than for twins engined a/c. Doesn't the PiperJet failure support that?

SGC

[silverknapper]

Garmin 2000?

[peterh337]

Any bets?

I know of one chap heavily involved in the Socata TBM scene who is getting very upset...

:)

[172driver]

I'm not a betting man, but if I was I would put some money on a turbine. Its the logical next step for them.

[funfly]

It's a jet. they are "Reinventing the Jet Age" :D

Cirrus Aircraft (http://cirrusaircraft.com/)

[peterh337]

That's very old news.

You can buy a TBM (etc) for the money which will go further, carry more, burn less juice, cost less... the market is full of jets, with the only advantage here is that you don't need an ME PPL :)

[VMC-on-top]

Thats quite an anticlimax!

Difficult to see who's going to buy this? Those flying SR22's are unlikely to unless the price is a (relatively) small step up from a top of the range SR22, which it won't be. And its not going to appeal to those want to trade down from a twin, so who is going to buy it?

I know they took a few hundred deposits for it a few years back before they scaled right back on production in 2008 and with new Chinese investment, they will no doubt, create new jobs and can start turning it out within a couple of years or so, so perhaps they've done their homework and think that they can clear up the (almost completely) vacated VLJ scene?

What a shame, a turbine, pressurised, 4 seat Cirrus would have been great!

[Pitts2112]

It seems to me I saw a mockup of this at Osh Kosh back in '07.

[172driver]

It's a jet

Confirms my choice not to be a betting man ;)

Seriously - this is oooooold news indeed. They already had this one in the pipeline at some stage, didn't they?

What a shame, a turbine, pressurised, 4 seat Cirrus would have been great!

Couldn't agree more

[Hodja]

with the only advantage here is that you don't need an ME PPLUnfortunately you need a type rating instead. And those aren't trivial in terms of training commitment & costs.

Personally I don't see much future for the SF50. Maybe 5-10 years ago, when conspicuous consumption was rampant, and the planned VLJ cost delta wasn't this big.

In the meantime VLJ acquisition costs doubled, and no longer fits the natural progression of an SR22 upgrader. A tiny market of people are able to put USD2-2.5m cash on the table, and those that could probably already bought a TBM, Mustang or Phenom.

Seriously, does anyone really "need" VLJ's?

[peterh337]

Unfortunately you need a type rating instead. And those aren't trivial in terms of training commitment & costs.

Indeed. Especially in EASA-land.

Not that I believe this would translate into concrete action but there is a lot of fear stacked up among the regulators and associated gravy train riders, of VLJs. I've been to both Eurocontrol and UK ATC (West Drayton and Swanwick) presentations where this was voiced, along the lines of "thousands of VLJs clogging up the skies" etc. And this was years after the "VLJ dream" was dead and buried. One speaker claimed the Germans would demand an ATPL for any SE jet (which is kinda hard... how will you get the 500hrs in a multi pilot airplane :E ) and another one claimed they would ban SP jets from their airspace.... then one old boy in the audience sat up and asked what will happen to all the Citation 1s :E

But in the current climate (vis the N-reg debacle) it may be better to not push this... especially if the said jet is 1999kg ;) And if it isn't, it's going to cost a packet more to fly in Europe.

I've never believed there was a latent market for privately flown VLJs. All people I personally know who fly a SE TP are very smart pilots who know all the figures exactly and they would not ditch their present capability (short runways, load, etc).

If it was going to work anywhere it would work in the USA but even there it failed totally.

The money is still there and always has been, but a VLJ offers little over a TP.

And you can buy an Eclipse now; apparently quite well sorted too.

[silverknapper]

Peter

I'd be surprised if this was more expensive than a TBM. I would personally choose the TBM any day over this, but would imagine it will be cheaper. Sadly I think Socata are way off the mark price wise.

[peterh337]

I agree; a TBM850 (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/tbm850/index.html) is about $3.2M plus extras which is a lot, but it is a quality piece of hardware.

But you can buy a used good condition TBM700 with a fresh engine for say $1.5M, and you get everything in between.

My guess is the Cirrus jet will be $2M. The Mustang is $2.7M or so. $2M will get you a nice TBM. If you want to go "downmarket" then a brand new Jetprop will be $1.5M.

It's an interesting question how many piston twin owners would move to a SE of any kind. They appear happy to pay a hefty premium for the 2nd engine; presumably for strong reasons of their own. But all those I know don't appear to have $2M or anything remotely like that, to play with.

I think the market for a SE jet would be SE TP owners, mainly.

But there are so many variables it seems. The other day I was talking to a chap who sells and maintains this stuff and he said a King Air 90 will cost less to run than a TBM850, total operating cost (excluding fuel and Eurocontrol charges) for the first 10 years. This really suprised me. A KA90 has 2 motors which has a lot of value to certain parts of the market.

In Europe (which admittedly is not going to a major Cirrus priority) a ME TP or any jet will have a problem under EASA OPS in that it will need a dual (FAA A&P/IA or 145-RS plus EASA Part M) maintenance signoff, which is sure to inflate costs a bit. Whereas an SE TP doesn't need that - I am sure Socata and Pilatus "sorted this out" under the table at EASA to clobber their US competition :E

[AdamFrisch]

The twin vs single debate is endless.

But in all honesty, the real divider is (as usual) economics. I can go out tomorrow and get a King Air, Turbo Commander or an MU-2 for about $400.000. They will fly almost as fast as TBM and go further, probably land and takeoff shorter and just burn about 20-gal/hr more. You can buy a lot of fuel for $1 million in price difference...

Peter, I know you have an aversion against twins, but I also know you want to upgrade to a turbine eventually. You could go get a twin rating in a week and be in a turbine in no time for a lot less money than any TBM or Jetprop. There's plenty of choice out there.

[Sir George Cayley]

Yeah, but I'd still have one:ok:

Imagine telling ATC you're a Jet Cirrus;) Yes, I am a show off.

With GPS approaches set to burgeon there will be plenty of airfields it will be able to access.

SGC

[stickandrudderman]

Perhaps the emerging Chinese buyers are what Cirrus have in mind?

[FullWings]

Nice interior but the performance is nothing earth shattering. Plenty of other airframes out there, especially 2nd hand.

What's the point of a jet that can only do 300kts TAS flat out at altitude? Some piston-engined aircraft are faster than that. My normal steed would be very nose high at that speed, probably nearly stalled!

[peterh337]

I know you have an aversion against twins

I don't actually.

What I tend to say is that a SE TP is safer than a piston twin, and such.

[silverknapper]

The other day I was talking to a chap who sells and maintains this stuff and he said a King Air 90 will cost less to run than a TBM850, total operating cost

I can believe it. I haven't seen a comparative analysis between a 90 and 850. However I have seen one between the PC-12 and 200. And it was surprising. There was nothing in the hourly costs, including fuel. And for utilisation of 200 hrs per year the maintenance on the 200 was much less. Fuel only was about a third more on the twin.
It's not a single vs twin debate so I'm not going to get into that. And for it's now native far eastern market perhaps the Cirrus jet is just the thing, look at the amount of Rollers sold in China, not to mention the ugly brute of an SUV Bentley have developed specifically for that market. However my personal order of preference would be:

1. 90 : Twin safety, lovely cabin, proven machine.
2. TBM: Lovely airplane, good range.
3. Cirrus Jet.

Cirrus did a great job of convincing wealthy Ferrari drivers they needed an airplane. Despite it flying like a dog. Perhaps this is the same target audience in the Far East they are aiming at, albeit with more disposable cash.

[007helicopter]

Anti Climax for sure, I have seen the SF50 Jet in flight in Duluth and no doubt a beautiful sight. When originally launched absolutely it could have been a winner, 500 Cirrus owners thought so with $100K deposits and the anticipated price was around $1M and designed and built by Alan Klapmeir.

Many faithful Cirrus owners would naturally have progressed to the Jet.

Now with a price tag circa $2M it puts it in a whole different market and the damage done to the Cirrus fraternity I think it will be a tough battle for them to make money.

[Contacttower]

Cirrus did a great job of convincing wealthy Ferrari drivers they needed an airplane. Despite it flying like a dog. Perhaps this is the same target audience in the Far East they are aiming at, albeit with more disposable cash.

You think it handles like a dog? I think it handles significantly better than most spamcans, which is what is fair to compare it to...

I agree about the jet though, 300kts TAS is disappointing and significantly slower than the TBM. Would probably be quieter and a smoother ride than a turboprop though.

[Cows getting bigger]

So, the BIG announcement was...........










....... "We've got ourselves a bank loan"!

Nonsense. Complete nonsense.

[Fuji Abound]

Cirrus did a great job of convincing wealthy Ferrari drivers they needed an airplane. Despite it flying like a dog. Perhaps this is the same target audience in the Far East they are aiming at, albeit with more disposable cash.

Have you flown one?

You are entitled to your opinion but are amoung a very small minority.

Cirrus have their faults but by any stretch handling is not one of them for the mission profile of the aircraft.

[abgd]

The economic argument for vljs was based largely around 'air-taxis' more than owner-pilots. My understanding was that single jets couldn't be used for public transportation, but with a stall speed in the low 60s and CAPS I wonder whether that's still the case?

[Fostex]

I for one welcome this new high speed composite flying coffin.

...and if you ever get a tricky approach or fly into cloud, just pull the BRS and float gently to the ground/your death.

[mmgreve]

Rolling out an old prototype from the back of the factory is not big news.

The news I'm most excited about right now is this:
Pipistrel Panthera Unveiled - YouTube

Looks like it could be in the air pretty soon as well, so hopefully we'll get confirmation (or not) of the anticipated performance numbers.

If anyone are in Friedrichshafen, please have a look and tell us what you think.

(not quite sure what went wrong in the Youtube wrap...)

[soay]

I see ANN still haven't forgiven Cirrus for not paying them for their advertising contract:

Vision Impaired: Cirrus Re-Announces The Previously Announced SF50 Jet... Again (http://www.aero-news.net/bannertransfer.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=761eec86-5ebb-41f8-ae8b-8521218c7306)

[Cobalt]

1. 90 : Twin safety, lovely cabin, proven machine.
2. TBM: Lovely airplane, good range.
3. Cirrus Jet.

Now add Cirrus SR22 / Columbia 400 at the bottom, and you see the gap they are trying to fill.

It is a BIG step from a 4-seater SEP to the TBM, the 90, a Mustang, or an Eclipse 500 - just put them on the ramp next to each other, let alone the requirement in pilot capability! There is currently no 300kt certified aircraft with a small cabin (the Eclipse / Embraer 100 / Mustang "VLJs" come closest, but are more in the TBM size class)

Simply said, the aircraft building tradition is that more power goes into more payload and larger cabins, not into higher speed.

What the high-end, cash-rich (what you call "Ferrari driving") private pilots want is speed, and a six-seater at most. That is what Cirrus is aiming for. Some kit planes fit that segment - Lancair IVPs with turbines, Epic, etc.

Doing it with a Jet? Bold and risky, I wish them luck, I agree with you and it would not be my choice to buy.

If Cessna got their act together, made the Corvalis pressurized, added a TP and made the gear retractable [it IS the certified version of a Lancair IV, so the basic airframe is suitable] it would be a MUCH better contender for the "Ferrari" segment [although to compete with Cirrus, it would probably also need a parachute]

[421C]

Ooh. No-one could accuse the PPRUNE forum of being overly cup-half full on this. Any more flaws we can come up with? The list so far is flying coffin bird ingestor death trap for ferrari driving morons who'll pull the BRS if near a wisp of cloud and too slow hah my 30000lb jet would stall Id buy a used TBM.....etc

It'll probably be the best selling new turbine airplane. Outside the utility (Caravan) segment, there is precisely one new aircraft between the $1m Baron and the >$3m TBM and Mustang - the Piper Meridian. It's hardly an overcrowded market.

[Cobalt]

I agree it is a gap. I am not sure this is the best way to fill it, but if it is the ONLY aicraft filling it, it is very likely to sell well. Piper should be quaking in their boots about the Meridian... and I know a few owner-pilots (ok, two) in the TBM bracket that would definitely give it a good look!

Also, Cirrus has proven in the past that they can sell their aircraft into new segments, the SR22 outsold the competition considerably, and the SR22TN in particular has left the direct competition (Corvalis, Mooney Bravo / Acclaim) dead in the water.

I still believe a TP is a better TECHNOLOGY choice than a jet in that segment (just look at the figures - a TBM850 achives 0.72NM per lb fuel at 6,300lbs weight and 320kt, Cirrus claim 0.72NM per lb of fuel at 5,400lbs and 300kt) but the difference is not significant enough to be a problem - after all, who compares a Ferrari and a Lamborghini based on their fuel consumption?

[peterh337]

Outside the utility (Caravan) segment, there is precisely one new aircraft between the $1m Baron and the >$3m TBM and Mustang - the Piper Meridian. It's hardly an overcrowded market. Not being overcrowded doesn't mean there is a huge pent up demand.

A new Jetprop is $1.5M, so add that one. It's better in most respects than the Meridian, too.

And anybody who wants one can have one.

Also, what are the current Baron sales? According to this (http://www.gama.aero/files/2011ShipmentReport_-_revised.pdf) they sold 30 last year.

I would not doubt that Cirrus could outsell the TBM (38) but I don't see a market for hundreds. Where would the money be coming from?

You also can't just jump into a jet like you can jump into a Ferrari. The journey to the whole PPL/IR with a type rating is very nontrivial. (ATPL exams in Europe). I recall talking to some people close to the now dead Javelin jet and their view was that they realised too late that most of the people with the money would not have time to collect the paperwork to fly it.

That's why nearly all bizjets are flown by a crew and not the owner and this includes nearly all of the SP certified ones. The principal bet Cirrus will be making is not that they can bring a SE jet to the market at the $2M+ area but that they can somehow create a whole new bunch of private pilots who are going to commit to the paperwork collection journey.

I think most of "the market" is already flying a turboprop, and you can count them :)

I am not sure this is the best way to fill it, but if it is the ONLY aicraft filling it, it is very likely to sell well.I don't think that follows, because the gap doesn't exist once you look at used aircraft.

Anybody who can buy a $1M Baron could stretch a little and buy a good used TBM700 which will outclass a Baron in every department except not having two engines (and the value of two piston engines compared to one PT6 is dubious).

A $2M Cirrus jet will be competing with a lot of good turboprop hardware.

[421C]

Peter, Cobalt
I agree with your points. I was disagreeing with the overwhelmingly negative sentiment in the thread.

Peter - all the arguments you make about the trade-offs in the $2m market, you could make in the $700k market Cirrus sell the SR22 in. I tend to share some of your preferences. But there are always trade-offs. You say the Baron guy could buy a used TBM for $1.5m. But he could equally buy a 90s CJ 'classic' for the same money. The CJ outclasses the TBM massively - so why does anyone buy a used TBM etc etc.

Some people want brand new, latest glass cockpit and single-owner/pilot simple. That's why they buy $2m Medidians instead of one of the huge range of used jets/TPs available for that much. That's why they buy $700k Cirrus SR22s instead of one of the vast range of used piston aircraft that are more capable, comfortable and cheaper.

The light jet segment (Mustang and up) is mainly crewed, but there are hundreds of owner-pilots of everything from C500s upwards in the USA. There are also those for whom the step even to a Mustang (nice used ones at $2m) is daunting. I would imagine the flying challenge for a Cirrus Jet would be markedly simpler. Your Jetprop/TBM uses archaic non-FADEC PT6 technology, for example, requiring a lot more pilot management on start and operation. In Europe, yes, the training & paperwork is onerous. For a properous non-pilot to say "I fancy one of those" is unrealistic for training time/effort reasons. In the US, there must be thousands of Cirrus owners who've accumulated hundreds of hours IFR experience. The damn factory course for the Cirrus SRxx is almost as long as some light Jet TRs, so an experienced FAA PPL/IR on the Cirrus SRxx would probably be a 10 day type rating course and some mentored hours away from flying a new class of jet. Peope will.

Whether they sell dozens/yr or a really impressive >100/yr will depend on how well they execute. Sadly, this class of aircraft rarely seems to emerge from certification and with options fitted with appealing range/payload. We'll have to see. From the new SR22T I flew last summer (FF payload ~300lb) I hope they keep weight under control....

[S-Works]

The journey to the whole PPL/IR with a type rating is very nontrivial. (ATPL exams in Europe).

Incorrect. To gain the type rating as a PPL you would need the IR with the exams and then High Performance Aircraft exams which are a couple of days including the ground school and taken at the training FTO. A pass in the ATPL exams just saves you the HPA.

[172driver]

I think a lot of you here see this way too much from the European perspective. I don't know, but my guess is that Cirrus see European sales as an extra bonus - the real money is elsewhere. In the US there are plenty of pilots with both the money and the experience to fly one of these things. And paved runways aren't really a problem either.

Another thing: let's face it, a jet is A LOT more sexy than any piston. If you had the money and lived in the US what would you buy - a TBM or a Jet? Most likely, no contest. I can definitely see a market for this one in the US for owner/pilots who use their machine for business and pleasure, two-up max and medium range. IOW below the various light jets. Then there is China....

[Hodja]

Then there is China....No, not at the moment.

Non-scheduled civilian flying is currently not allowed in mainland China airspace. This will eventually change, but it'll be a very far cry from the aviation freedoms some people take for granted in the West.

Also the usual magazine nonsense often reported about the booming crowd of Chinese millionaires on a buying spree is a red herring. We're talking small numbers, and nowhere close to the kind of wealthy individuals and corporate Lears/Gulfstreams/Falcon/GEX found in the US.

[AdamFrisch]

Pipistrel is the most interesting company around at the moment. Not only did they manage to get 55mpg out of the new Virus, but the damn little LSA cruises at 147kts!

They also won the NASA green challenge with their super efficient electric aircraft. Try finding a car, any car, that can drive 100mph for 250miles whilst burning a single gallon of gas. Shows what a great future might lie ahead for electric. Pipistrel is at the very forefront here and they don't think old fashioned like all the rest. The Panthera looks great and I'm sure will be a huge seller. But what I'm most excited about is the electric version and the hybrid Panthera versions - they will be truly modern.

My prediction is this - by the time turbine manufacturers get their heads out of their a**es and come around to finally offer viable options for small GA aircraft - the game will already be over. Electric will already be the prime mover.

[peterh337]

I agree with 172driver but I would still be suprised to see Cirrus selling numbers which way exceed say the TBM or Jetprop etc sales.

But they will need to do so to make it worth their while.

A while ago I met a chap at a conference who was very closely involved with the Eclipse project from Day 1, at a high level. He totally rubbished all of the marketing numbers the company came out with at various times, especially the "air taxi" stuff. I don't suppose he was Vern Rayburn's greatest fan but then neither were the huge numbers of deposit holders who got totally conned in what I think can be described as a a legit version of a Ponzi scam :)

But Eclipse spent countless millions on marketing, and at a time when there was more money about. They did attract a lot of position holders but only at a ludicrously low delivery price. Sure you could sell positions all day for a twin jet with a $800k delivery price :E

I just don't think the market is there for hundreds a year. Sure a jet is much more sexy than a TP but twin engine jets are two a penny, and even if you throw half a million at one to refurb the cockpit with the latest glass you will still not be above the $2M (possibly nearer to 3M) which the Cirrus jet will go for by the time it is out.

People who buy this stuff are not stupid. They know what they can get for how much and they know the performance tradeoffs. If there was a magical hidden market there, what the hell are all those people flying?

They are flying "something" pretty good already. They are not doing their PPLs.

They are not flying pistons. Most piston owners who fly old pistons are relatively broke (which is why they fly old planes; they didn't have the capital) and couldn't even pay for the jet engine overhaul :) Those that fly new stuff don't have millions and probably bought at the top of what they could afford.

They are already flying turboprops, I reckon, and that gives you a measure of the market. The problem is that the Cirrus jet is not going to deliver anything over a decent TP - apart from sex appeal. But I think sex appeal appeals mainly to the proverbial banker / hedge fund manager / etc and there aren't enough of those about. The turboprop scene is doing well for the existing players but I don't think there is any factor-of-10 upside there to be unearthed.

[achimha]

Most piston owners who fly old pistons are relatively broke (which is why they fly old planes; they didn't have the capital) and couldn't even pay for the jet engine overhaul Those that fly new stuff don't have millions and probably bought at the top of what they could afford.

The best way to become a wealthy individual is to make wise financial decisions. I know several pilots that could easily afford just about anything that can be legally operated with a single pilot but they choose something smaller.

I am totally in love with the Extra 500 but even if I could afford it at € 1.3m + VAT, I would probably not do it. A reasonable Silver Eagle (Cessna P210 Turbine) sells for about €600k. It's an old design, the pressurized cabin isn't that great at all and you need blankets on the back seat but the price difference is huge.

PS: Just got back from the AERO show in Friedrichshafen. Very much worth a visit this year, general attitude among exhibitors and visitors is a lot more positive. I was totally shocked when I saw that the UK CAA had a booth there! Their goal was to inform about the London 2012 airspace restrictions. The highlight of the show was the Diamond DA52 IMO.

[007helicopter]

I would not doubt that Cirrus could outsell the TBM (38) but I don't see a market for hundreds. Where would the money be coming from?

Before the Jet project was put on hold / stalled due to the credit crunch Cirrus had taken around 500 x $100K deposits from mainly the existing Cirrus community, so the theory was fine then, The originator Alan Klapmeir had a vision for many more sales than this and at the time who could have doubted him.

The world and Cirrus loyalty has changed now so it will be a much bigger challenge to get the volume.

[peterh337]

To be fair, anybody can come up with $100k to buy a position, knowing they can sell it on easily enough if they want to back out. In almost any such project there is a cost escalation and the position buys you a fixed price (usually) which is where the investment value lies. Consequently there is a huge speculative element in this kind of thing.

I don't think the world has changed. What has mainly changed is that people are not so stupid as they were when Rayburn was taking deposits :) Most of those who took positions didn't have a clue about aviation or aircraft; if they did they would have realised the project was infeasible at the original price levels.

Maybe in 20 years' time one will be able to do another large scale con...

[Hodja]

The best way to become a wealthy individual is to make wise financial decisions. :ok:

I am totally in love with the Extra 500 but even if I could afford it at €1.3m + VAT, I would probably not do it.Precisely. There's just a certain limit to frivolous spending & diminishing returns on satisfaction. C'mon, the most enjoyable trips I've ever taken certainly weren't done in the fastest or most expensive aircraft. Enjoyment doesn't scale well w/cost or speed.

Not to mention that you really need the *time* to fly these USD1m+ aircraft. The TP & jet owners I know are all either (semi-) retired and/or use their aircraft actively for business. If I had a USD3m+ TBM850 sitting idle on the ramp 95% of the time, I'd be friggin' miserable on a daily basis.

[421C]

I just don't think the market is there for hundreds a year
No-one is saying there is. I don't think any light turbine aircraft has ever consistantly sold hundreds a year. There is a rather big difference between hundreds a year and the dismal negativity in the start of this thread. I was reacting to the "why would anyone buy one when they could get a used XYZ instead". When did selling hundreds a year become the discussion? Is the Cirrus jet a bad decision and a bad airplane because it won't miraculously become the best selling GA turbine airplane of all time?
They know what they can get for how much and they know the performance tradeoffs. If there was a magical hidden market there, what the hell are all those people flying?
Lucky the Cirrus guys didn't consult PPRUNE when they launched the SRxx 10 years ago. They's have been told there was already a solution for every need the SRxx met within the existing new and used plane market. Forgive me, but I suspect you'd have mentioned the TB20 in this respect. Nevertheless the SRxx sold 5000 airframes in the next 10 years whilst the legacy competitors sold a tiny trickle and stopped manufacturing (Socata TBs, Mooney). I believe there is a market for the "Cirrus Proposition", self-evidently in the $700k piston world and I suspect there will be in $2m turbine world. It's not evident in PPRUNE or FLYER forums because we tend to represent an oddball mix of plane preferences. Cirrus buyers I imagine don't post here much because of the generally hostile reaction to Cirrus aircraft and owners and marketing and whatever. Nevertheless, Cirrus sold more airplanes in the 2000s than, I suspect, the world total of piston products from Piper, Beech, Socata, Cessna, Mooney etc etc in the previous decade.

As I said, as much as I respect the company and the aircraft, a new SR22 is about the last way I'd spend $700k on aircraft. But that reflects my relatively oddball preferences compared to the mainstream new airplane market. I think forum opinion has a way of thinking it is the latter when it is the former.


ps. can anyone actually point to a mythical victim-of-cirrus-marketing ferrari driving hedge fund bloke who bought a Cirrus? Every owner I have met is a sensible, successful, knowledgeable pilot in their 40s-60s, usually active or retired professional or entrepreneur. I rather respect someone capable of buying a new $700k airplane, and have never come across the fool-deluded-by-marketing-flies-with-his-hand-on-the-CAPS-handle type a certain sort of poster here seems to assume is representative.