Mooney or Cirrus?

[jetdriven]

56 minutes ago, Mooney217RN said:

Like this family?

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2066691/Plane-Crash-near-Chicagos-Crystal-Lake-kills-businessman-Ray-Harris-2-daughters.html

Again, mischaracterized. This plane came out of 400 overcast at high speed and 70 degrees nose down.  Iirc the parachute fired during the impact sequence. 

[Wayne Cease]

Like this family?
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2066691/Plane-Crash-near-Chicagos-Crystal-Lake-kills-businessman-Ray-Harris-2-daughters.html

Yes. It was well outside the parameters. Low overcast with mist and near freezing temps by a VFR pilot.

There are questions about whether the chute was fired off on impact or after he got below the clouds.

It was a very high energy impact. Radar showed a 2,500 fpm climb followed by a 3,600 fpm descent just before the crash.



Wayne

[MRussell]

1 hour ago, ArtVandelay said:

You were saying...

No offense but obscuring the facts and stats will not change them, and only serves to derail an otherwise excellent thread. 

[mike_elliott]

5 hours ago, Wayne Cease said:

Everyone that has pulled the chute inside the parameters has lived.  Everyone

Wayne, Dr. Bob Edisiss died. He was a hangar neighbor that bought his 2nd Cirrus and perished in it a couple days after he picked it up in MN after pulling the chute. His wife, son and son's fiancee lived, however.

 

EDIT: I see now where ultimately it was a stroke that claimed the life of Dr. Bob, not trauma from impact. All these years, I believed it was from them landing in a pond and not having the gear legs absorb the energy.

 

[PT20J]

Both airplanes are appropriately certificated though one design is decades newer than the other. I’ve got time in both. Neither is better or worse; they’re just different. Mooney owners seem happy with their purchase and Cirrus owners seem happy with theirs. Anyone unhappy is free to switch. Can’t we just leave it at that? 

Skip

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

Wayne, Dr. Bob Edisiss died. He was a hangar neighbor that bought his 2nd Cirrus and perished in it a couple days after he picked it up in MN after pulling the chute. His wife, son and son's fiancee lived, however.

 

EDIT: I see now where ultimately it was a stroke that claimed the life of Dr. Bob, not trauma from impact. All these years, I believed it was from them landing in a pond and not having the gear legs absorb the energy.

 

It’s quite understandable mike.  It is traumatic loosing a friend suddenly and not focusing on the details of what happened at the time is more than understandable in such an unusual incident.

Edited August 3, 2019 by aviatoreb

[M20F]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

Anyone unhappy is free to switch. Can’t we just leave it at that?

Absolutely my frustration as a Mooney owner comes from people saying Cirrus seats are great (they aren’t) and the continued FUD over chutes.  

[jetdriven]

There is no FUD. It’s a proven life saving technology that is not cheap 

[Hank]

14 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

There is no FUD. It’s a proven life saving technology that is not cheap 

And cannot be retrofitted onto our planes at any cost. So why keep harping on it???

[jetdriven]

I’m not harping. But it is a critical factor in the decision folks choose brand C. Along with Useful load.  This thread is Mooney vs cirrus. Old technology speedster vs modern technology traveling machine. People decide what they want and don’t. 

Just as the 220+kt cruise speed of an acclaim is a big deal to some, the 210kt speed and a CAPS parachute  is the other side of the decision matrix. Let’s not talk about how far 3 people can fly.   C outsells M ~50:1. And, what is it, 1/4 of the restart Mooney’s have crashed and burned? Not good for the brand. 

Edited August 4, 2019 by jetdriven

[Guest]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

There is no FUD. It’s a proven life saving technology that is not cheap 

$1500.00 per year for CAPS replacement, but is cheap relative to the $1M price of a modern high performance single.  I’d bet that the poor fellow in another thread here would be un injured if he was in a Cirrus. Speed and efficiency are great ideals, a steel cage did nothing for for him.

Clarence

[M20F]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

There is no FUD. It’s a proven life saving technology that is not cheap 

You can see a few posts in this thread challenging the fact that within limits nobody has died pulling the chute. 

As for not being cheap, unless you know a secret you can’t take it with you. 

[aviatoreb]

39 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

I’m And, what is it, 1/4 of the restart Mooney’s have crashed and burned? Not good for the brand. 

Oh wow is it that bad?!! That’s terrible.

[mike_elliott]

11 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

Oh wow is it that bad?!! That’s terrible.

Somebodys nose is growing, Erik

[jetdriven]

19 minutes ago, M20F said:

You can see a few posts in this thread challenging the fact that within limits nobody has died pulling the chute. 

As for not being cheap, unless you know a secret you can’t take it with you. 

Two, actually. One was a midair and subsequent inflight fire and the other was a loss of control and departure from the clouds at 70 degrees nose down. Wasn’t clear if he even pulled. 
Not a challenge at all to the proven record of the caps system. It doesn’t matter to mooney guys but it matters to the 300+ cirrus buyers a year. 

[Shadrach]

10 hours ago, MooneyMartian9 said:

Correct me if I am wrong. The chute was required because it failed to recover from spins and thus couldn’t get certification without a parachute.

 

I agree, It’s marketing and fleet age—Cirrus Never mentions the spin characteristics only safety from their CAPS system and as you said ppl can transition or primary students can easily train in a SR20 /22 with glass... harder to find Mooney schools, and if you do the panel is likely original and the gear isn’t welded in down position

You’re wrong. The chute enabled the aircraft to bypass FAA spin testing. That is not the same thing as not being able to pass. It passed European spin requirements.

[M20F]

2 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

Two, actually. One was a midair and subsequent inflight fire and the other was a loss of control and departure from the clouds at 70 degrees nose down. Wasn’t clear if he even pulled. 
Not a challenge at all to the proven record of the caps system. It doesn’t matter to mooney guys but it matters to the 300+ cirrus buyers a year. 

I think if you scroll up you can see another involving doctor and a clarification.  This thread is just one of many.  There is no instance of a person dying pulling the chute in a Cirrus within limits, yet we continue to see folks disputing that fact.  It is a weird twisted logic.   

I own a Mooney and as I have said countless times I love it, but I can be rationale enough to see why Cirrus outsells then today.  Clarence got it right in his post. 

[MIm20c]

I’m curious if we had a real secondary market (3-10 year old planes) if buyers would step up to the plate. The few used late model planes have been sitting on the market a long time. If buyers are not around with money to scoop up these planes it could be very expensive to own a new one.  

The Cirrus salesman I overheard were not concerned if the buyer could afford the plane or not, only if they could cover the first payment.  It could be the strong late model used prices might make for a relatively cheap monthly payment?

[jetdriven]

Yes the doctor who died of a stroke and the rest of the occupants survived under a parachute landing. 
87 CAPS events... there’s 87 airplanes full of occupants Who would likely be dead but for. 
 

It seems to be the only thing that matters around here. The gear comes up and it looks better and it’s a little bit faster. Never mind it’s only faster for one person but anyway.

Edited August 4, 2019 by jetdriven

[M20F]

10 hours ago, MooneyMartian9 said:

Cirrus Never mentions the spin characteristics 

Have you ever spun (or should I say rapidly gone to a spiral) a Mooney.  Even the mighty Don Kaye got his shorts a little brown in one (though only on the right side of his shorts).

 

[Mooney217RN]

4 hours ago, PT20J said:

Both airplanes are appropriately certificated though one design is decades newer than the other. I’ve got time in both. Neither is better or worse; they’re just different. Mooney owners seem happy with their purchase and Cirrus owners seem happy with theirs. Anyone unhappy is free to switch. Can’t we just leave it at that? 

My point exactly from the original post.  I was merely trying to elaborate why Cirrus outsells Mooney, which is clearly marketing, or a lack thereof.  

I will refrain from commentary in the future, I wasn't intending to start a thread of discourse.  

By the way, I like the Cirrus.  I just feel the Mooney is a better plane for me, and a far better value.

[M20F]

Just now, Mooney217RN said:

which is clearly marketing, or a lack thereof.  

Most people with a $5M+ net worth aren’t suckers for slick marketing.  I know the proletariat likes to think otherwise but it isn’t the case. 

Mooney doesn’t sell a commercially viable product and while the focus is always on Cirrus, PIper/Cessna/etc. outsell then as well. 

[HXG]

6 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

 

You were saying...

 

 

 

 

 

Tom

 

This one hits home. This happened shortly before I came on with Mile High Gliding as a glider CFI  who also gave glider rides in Boulder several years ago. This was a case of a heads down cirrus pilot who was involved in a midair collision with the tow plane towing a glider. Poor cirrus pilot and his brother were burned alive. Tow pilot killed. Glider pilot with ride passengers landed safely. 

Cirrus is a great airplane. A great passenger plane with parachute security for non pilots as well.   But, I get a little irritated when some of their pilots exaggerate their safety with frequent false claims,  particularly to non pilots (I’ve heard it many times). These planes will kill you and do burn chute or not. Cirrus is well represented in incidents and accidents in the NTSB reports as are Mooneys (even excluding the gear ups).

Both are great safe airplanes, but I agree that the easier transition, style appeal, passenger comfort, and parachute safety have made this a far more desirable plane to new prospective buyers.  I prefer Mooneys as a “pilot’s plane”. At $800,000, I don’t see new Mooneys ever competing with a new Cirrus. That cost is outrageous to me and not that far away from turboprops if you have that kind of money to spend. .  

[aviatoreb]

42 minutes ago, HXG said:

Cirrus is a great airplane. A great passenger plane with parachute security for non pilots as well.   But, I get a little irritated when some of their pilots exaggerate their safety with frequent false claims,  particularly to non pilots (I’ve heard it many times). These planes will kill you and do burn chute or not. Cirrus is well represented in incidents and accidents in the NTSB reports as are Mooneys (even excluding the gear ups).

Both are great safe airplanes, but I agree that the easier transition, style appeal, passenger comfort, and parachute safety have made this a far more desirable plane to new prospective buyers.  I prefer Mooneys as a “pilot’s plane”. At $800,000, I don’t see new Mooneys ever competing with a new Cirrus. That cost is outrageous to me and not that far away from turboprops if you have that kind of money to spend. .  

Your first paragraph conclusion.  I agree and interpreting my way (forgive me if it is not in perfect harmony - I don't mean to put words in your mouth - these are my words).  Both models have their incidents and NTSB reports.  The right way to judge is the over all statistics.  What is the crash rate and what is the fatality rate, per 100,000hrs of exposure.  Cirrus used to be worse but they have improved. Mooney has held steady I believe but is therefor now worse than Cirrus (since cirrus improves) but not by a ton, and it is inline with other high performance singles.  But there is no logic-ing this out about parachutes and I agree with what you said - the idea of them is attractive but perhaps exaggerated.  One can still get hurt in a cirrus.

Yoru second paragraph.  I have the same thought regarding a new Cirrus that is also close to million so I would be thinking turbo prop.  SO it is not fair to conclude that a new mooney is near the price of a turbo prop as differentiating cirrus.  Same for cirrus. And anyway, it is only close to the cost of a turbo prop if you go used turbo prop.  As the turbo prop I want is $4M - the tbm930.  For $1M I get a used TBM700.  Which I would get if I could. but I can't.  But now that we are comparing used aircraft, we should be comparing used Mooney's say a $200k used Mooney vs a $200k used Cirrus.  Anyway it is totally legit and there are good reasons to buy new aircraft. I wish I were in that income bracket.

Edited August 4, 2019 by aviatoreb

[NJMac]

My company should be ready to step up to the plate and get me a really nice bird in a few years. I asked for a cirrus rep to be in touch with me about getting in line for an 8000 edition and never heard back. They're good but I fell thru the cracks.

What's with the 5mm net worth comment? I figured it was generally understood you had to have means to fly a new (ish) plane.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk