Puerto Rico
- Aircraft Year
- 1975
- Aircraft Type
- 112/A
- Reg Number
- N1278J
- Serial Number
- 278
-
Welcome to the new Commander Owners Group Forums. Please bear with us as the kinks are worked out and things are tweaked. If you have any questions or issues with the new platform, please post them here.
Unusual cross-shopping
- Thread starter Second Officer Alex
- Start date
Craig
New member
New Cumberland, PA
- Aircraft Year
- 1976
- Aircraft Type
- 112TC
- Reg Number
- N4591W
- Serial Number
- 13081
Re: Unusual cross-shopping
Alex,
I owned a 2003 SR20. Maintenance on that aircraft (aka $6000 annuals) finally made me sell it. The plane was in the shop a lot, mostly for electrical and avionics issues. I had the all-glass Avidyne stack. Don't even get me started on the annual support for the PDF or MFD. It may have changed since my ownership, but I was paying well over $1500/year JUST for support maintenance on them, which I think was a joke. And another annoyance - the alternators had a nasty habit of failing - A LOT. You know, at times I really believed I may have had a lemon Cirrus.
I also wasn't a fan of the spring-loaded side stick. You could never really "feel" the aircraft with it, which made me botch more landings than I care to mention. In fact, they say that the plane was really never meant to be hand flown. I could just never get the hang of it after training in 172s for years prior.
Enter my current 112TC - N4591W...
I LOVE THIS PLANE! I was fortunate that the previous owner took incredible care of her. He also upgraded the interior and the panel to rival (if not surpass) the Avidyne panel in my SR20, so I may be a bit spoiled. But even with that, I just feel like this plane is more solid and it treats me very well. My last annual was a fraction of the cost of the SR20, and any repairs required so far haven't been too costly. Parts may be a little slow to get, but it's not like you can't find them.
Given the choice, I feel like the 112TC is the better plane.
Good luck with your decision!
Craig...
Alex,
I owned a 2003 SR20. Maintenance on that aircraft (aka $6000 annuals) finally made me sell it. The plane was in the shop a lot, mostly for electrical and avionics issues. I had the all-glass Avidyne stack. Don't even get me started on the annual support for the PDF or MFD. It may have changed since my ownership, but I was paying well over $1500/year JUST for support maintenance on them, which I think was a joke. And another annoyance - the alternators had a nasty habit of failing - A LOT. You know, at times I really believed I may have had a lemon Cirrus.
I also wasn't a fan of the spring-loaded side stick. You could never really "feel" the aircraft with it, which made me botch more landings than I care to mention. In fact, they say that the plane was really never meant to be hand flown. I could just never get the hang of it after training in 172s for years prior.
Enter my current 112TC - N4591W...
I LOVE THIS PLANE! I was fortunate that the previous owner took incredible care of her. He also upgraded the interior and the panel to rival (if not surpass) the Avidyne panel in my SR20, so I may be a bit spoiled. But even with that, I just feel like this plane is more solid and it treats me very well. My last annual was a fraction of the cost of the SR20, and any repairs required so far haven't been too costly. Parts may be a little slow to get, but it's not like you can't find them.
Given the choice, I feel like the 112TC is the better plane.
Good luck with your decision!
Craig...
Puerto Rico
- Aircraft Year
- 1975
- Aircraft Type
- 112/A
- Reg Number
- N1278J
- Serial Number
- 278
Re: Unusual cross-shopping
Thank you, this is definitely good information. I decided that although they look good, Cirrus are not the planes for me.
Isn't that something!
New York, NY
- Aircraft Year
- 1976
- Aircraft Type
- 112TC
- Reg Number
- N976MA
- Serial Number
- 13043
Re: Unusual cross-shopping
This item I wouldn't hold against Cirrus. A component loss can happen to any of us at any time. That would reflect no the design of the commander
If we're going to call Cirrus out - we should use the valid issues :
- spring sidestick
- inability to test for flaws in composites
- inability to repair the composites in a consistent fashion.
- expensive to maintain
- using the BRS to state that the airplane doesn't need spin certification.
alternator loss - nah.
This item I wouldn't hold against Cirrus. A component loss can happen to any of us at any time. That would reflect no the design of the commander
If we're going to call Cirrus out - we should use the valid issues :
- spring sidestick
- inability to test for flaws in composites
- inability to repair the composites in a consistent fashion.
- expensive to maintain
- using the BRS to state that the airplane doesn't need spin certification.
alternator loss - nah.
Toronto, Ontario
- Aircraft Year
- 1998
- Aircraft Type
- 114B/115
- Reg Number
- C-GODZ
- Serial Number
- 14659
Re: Unusual cross-shopping
Well ... the 114B's have a dual alternator option (standard with the Air Conditioning or TKS options). So, an alternator failure becomes a non event. Also, dual vacuum pumps.
Well ... the 114B's have a dual alternator option (standard with the Air Conditioning or TKS options). So, an alternator failure becomes a non event. Also, dual vacuum pumps.
New York, NY
- Aircraft Year
- 1976
- Aircraft Type
- 112TC
- Reg Number
- N976MA
- Serial Number
- 13043
Re: Unusual cross-shopping
Hmm. Didn't know that was an option. Fair enough.
How do we retrofit that to pre-114Bs or simply not doable ?
My main worries in IFR flight for electric are :
- Master Contactor - single point of failure in the airplane for all electric. My Aspens would survive this - going on battery - but this would prompt an immediate landing - using handheld radios.
- losing the alternator - which would force a load shed - prompting an expedited landing.
Hmm. Didn't know that was an option. Fair enough.
How do we retrofit that to pre-114Bs or simply not doable ?
My main worries in IFR flight for electric are :
- Master Contactor - single point of failure in the airplane for all electric. My Aspens would survive this - going on battery - but this would prompt an immediate landing - using handheld radios.
- losing the alternator - which would force a load shed - prompting an expedited landing.