We spend time training for them, but real-world emergencies are rare enough that it’s easy to get complacent. They don’t always happen to “other pilots,” though, and preparation can make a big difference when things don’t go as planned:
• What if you lose 500 rpm during takeoff, but the engine is running smoothly?
• What if the ammeter drops to zero during a flight in IMC?
• What if your left aileron develops a strong vibration in flight?
Our new seminar is full of expert tips on handling those “up here, but wishing you were down there” scenarios. We focus on how to keep abnormal situations from becoming full-blown emergencies, offer advice on keeping critical problems under control, and give our best advice on off-airport landings.
Find an AOPA Emergency Seminar near you!
Monday January 11, 2016-The Woodlands Waterway, 7pm-9pm
1601 Lake Robbins Drive, The Woodlands, TX 77380
Tuesday January 12, 2016-Wyndham Houston West, 7pm-9pm
14703 Park Row Blvd., Houston, TX 77079
Wednesday January 13, 2016, Holiday Inn San Antonio Airport, 7pm-9pm
77 NE Loop 410, San Antonio, TX 78216
Thursday January 14, 2016, Omni Austin Hotel at Southwark, 7pm-9pm
In the Pre-Takeoff Checklist for any Cirrus aircraft, it calls for pilots to perform a Cirrus Autopilot Check. It is prudent to check the autopilot before your flight to ensure that all aspects of the autopilot are working properly. The only problem is, the checklist doesn’t spell out how to perform the Cirrus Autopilot Check. You would have to go to the POH for the airplane, which is usually in the back seat or a bag somewhere and therefore hard to get to, in order to find the procedure.
The procedure for checking the autopilot is slightly different depending on what autopilot is in your airplane. The procedures for all three are below.
S-TEC 55x
Sync the heading bug to your current heading
Activate heading mode on the autopilot
Twist the heading bug left and right to ensure the ailerons move left and right
Sync the heading bug to your current heading
Activate vertical speed mode on the autopilot
Move the vertical speed bug (or the vertical speed on the altitude pre-selector if you have a steam gauge Cirrus) up and down to ensure the elevator moves accordingly
Ensure you can overpower the autopilot
Press the autopilot disconnect switch to ensure the autopilot shuts off
Avidyne DFC 90
Press the AP button to activate the autopilot
Ensure AP, ROLL, and PITCH Annunciations are depicted in green on the top of the PFD
Set the heading bug 90 degrees from the current heading
Press the HDG button on the autopilot
Ensure the ailerons are moving in the proper direction and HDG is annunciated on the top of the PFD
Ensure you can overpower the autopilot
Press the autopilot disconnect switch on the stick and ensure the autopilot has disconnected
Garmin GFC 700
Press the AP button to activate the autopilot
Ensure you can overpower the autopilot
Press the autopilot disconnect switch on the stick to ensure the autopilot has disconnected
In the Pre-Takeoff Checklist for any Cirrus aircraft, it calls for pilots to perform a Cirrus Autopilot Check. It is prudent to check the autopilot before your flight to ensure that all aspects of the autopilot are working properly. The only problem is, the checklist doesn’t spell out how to perform the Cirrus Autopilot Check….
When I was doing my instrument and multi-engine training, we did a lot of circle to land approaches. As a student, I could never figure out why these types of approaches would ever be practical when you could an approach straight in to another runway. But, as a good student, I never asked my instructors the purpose of them, I just did them to the best of my ability.
Now, having been flying in the IFR system for almost a decade, I’m finally beginning to fully understand the practical purpose of a circle to land approach. I have actually elected to do an approach where I had to circle to land on several occasions in actual IMC conditions.
One important note to remember on circle to land approaches is that the minimum descent altitude (MDA) is always higher than on a straight in approach. The reason for this is that you are basically joining the pattern for a different runway and you have to be able to visually keep yourself clear of towers and other obstacles. So, you need a higher visibility and a higher ceiling than if you were just lining up to come straight in.
Here are a couple of practical circumstances where it would make sense to do a circle to land approach.
Airports with only 1 straight in approach
This one is easy. There are a number of airports scattered around the US that have only 1 straight in instrument approach published for it. Around my part of Texas, the first one that pops into my mind is the RNAV 31 at T85 in Yoakum, TX. Most of the year, the prevailing wind is out of the south, so 13 is the favored runway at T85. During the winter is when most of the IMC weather happens in South Texas, so that is why the approach is for 31.
Of course, especially this year during the summer, there are some IMC days where an approach to T85 would be necessary. When there is a strong wind out of the south, landing on 31 is impractical, so a pilot would fly the approach to 31, then circle to land on 13.
Approaching from the opposite direction
Take a look at the RNAV 19 at KBMQ, Burnet, TX. The two initial approach fixes (IAF) are IXANY and JIBAJ. If a flight is approaching BMQ from the west or north, this is an easy approach to join. If a flight is coming from Austin (directly the the east and a little south) or San Antonio (almost directly south), it would be a bit of extra flying to get configured properly for the approach. Especially coming from Austin, because the degree of turn to join at JIBAJ wouldn’t make the approach practical.
Well, how about vectors? Unfortunately, Houston Center doesn’t have this approach depicted so vectors aren’t a possibility. Center can give you vectors north to make the angle a little easier to join at JIBAJ, but they can’t vector you onto the approach.
Direct DLORA to join is another option, but again, if you are approaching from the southeast, the angle is wrong.
Insert the RNAV 01 approach with a circle to land. AMUSE is right on V163, so it’s really easy to join the approach there coming from the south. Coming from Austin, joining the approach at SUBIE works out great. Fly down to the MDA, join the left downwind for 19, and everyone is happy.
VOR Circle to Land Approaches
Every instrument pilot has had an instructor “force” them to do a VOR A or VOR B approach and no one enjoys them. I personally think they are good practice. With the number of RNAV systems and RNAV approaches out there, though, VOR approaches are becoming a bit archaic.
They do have a place in this discussion, though. A VOR approach is given an A or B designation when the angle of the final approach course is greater than 30 degrees to the runway (VOR A KLZZ), or the final approach course is lined up with the runway, but the MDA is too high to practically descend and land (VOR A KGRK or the VOR/DME C KASE).
So, there are practical uses for a Circle to Land approach. The next time you do some IMC work with an instructor, ask him/her if you can include one.
When I was doing my instrument and multi-engine training, we did a lot of circle to land approaches. As a student, I could never figure out why these types of approaches would ever be practical when you could an approach straight in to another runway. But, as a good student, I never asked my instructors…
If you have been searching “Cirrus SR22T for sale” or reading up on the Cirrus Vision Jet, you are looking at genuinely excellent airplanes. Both have earned their reputations. This is not an article about why you should not buy one. It is about a third airplane that almost never shows up in a Cirrus search — and what the numbers look like when you set it next to the two you are already considering.
190 ktDA62 Cruise
762 lbFull-Fuel Payload
648 nmRange, 4 Adults + Bags
1 WeekTraining, No Travel
What the Cirrus SR22T Gets Right
Let us start where we should. The SR22T is one of the most successful piston singles ever built, and for good reason. Turbo-normalized power that holds performance up high. A Perspective+ flight deck that is about as good as glass gets in a single. Side-yoke handling most pilots fall for inside ten minutes. And CAPS — the whole-airframe parachute that changed how our whole industry talks about safety.
Add strong resale, a deep service network, and one of the best owner communities in aviation, and you have an airplane that is very hard to argue with. If you fly two people and light bags on 300 to 500 nautical mile legs, we would tell you to go buy one — and we would help you find the right one. We also teach Cirrus SR20, SR22 and SR22T training here in Texas, so this is not an outsider’s opinion of the airplane.
The conversation changes when the mission grows.
Cirrus SR22T vs. Diamond DA62: The Numbers Side by Side
The Diamond DA62 is a seven-seat, twin-engine, Jet-A-burning composite airplane that most Cirrus shoppers have never sat in — usually because it simply never came up in the search. Here is how the two line up on the numbers that matter.
Specification
Cirrus SR22T
Diamond DA62
Cruise speed
184 KTAS @ 85% power / 10,000 ft
190 KTAS @ 90% power / 10,000 ft
Fuel burn
18.3 GPH @ 85% (16.4 GPH @ 75%)
19 GPH total (9.5 GPH per engine)
Fuel type
100LL AvGas
Jet-A (~$1.75/gal cheaper)
Seats / rows
5 seats, 2 rows
7 seats, 3 rows
Useful load
~1,125 lb (3,600 lb MTOW)
1,341 lb (5,071 lb MTOW)
Full-fuel payload
~575 lb
762 lb
Range, 4 adults + 75 lb bags (835 lb)
~320–350 nm
~648 nm (45-min reserve)
Takeoff over 50-ft obstacle
2,080 ft
1,575 ft
Landing over 50-ft obstacle
2,535 ft
1,447 ft
Single-engine service ceiling
—
11,000 ft
Engine-out redundancy
CAPS parachute
Second engine
Recurring safety-system cost
~$20,000 CAPS repack / 10 yr
None
Rating required
High-performance endorsement
Multi-engine (~1 week, at home)
Cirrus SR22T figures are taken from the Cirrus SR22T G6 Pilot’s Operating Handbook (P/N 13772-007, Reissue A): cruise at ISA and 3,400 lb, takeoff and landing over a 50-ft obstacle at sea level, ISA and 3,600 lb max gross.
Read that speed line carefully, because it is closer than the marketing on either side suggests. At 10,000 feet the DA62 has about six knots on the SR22T — real, but hardly decisive. Climb higher and the advantage flips outright: the SR22T is turbo-normalized, so at 18,000 feet the POH shows 198 KTAS on the same 18.3 gallons an hour, comfortably faster than the DA62. If raw speed is what you are buying, the Cirrus has a genuine answer.
Where the DA62 separates itself is everything around the speed. It burns Jet-A, which runs roughly $1.75 a gallon under 100LL at most FBOs and is available at airports where AvGas gets harder to find every year. And the full-fuel payload gap is 187 pounds. Payload is where light-airplane trip plans quietly fall apart.
Four Adults, Bags, and the Range That Actually Matters
Spec sheets get written for two people. Real trips are not flown that way.
Load four adults and 75 pounds of luggage — call it 835 pounds — and the SR22T has to leave fuel on the ramp. On a typical G6 empty weight that leaves room for roughly 48 of its 92 usable gallons, and realistic range lands around 320 to 350 nautical miles with IFR reserves. Put that same 835 pounds into a DA62 and you are looking at roughly 648 nautical miles with a 45-minute reserve.
To be fair to the airplane: with full fuel and two people aboard, the SR22T is genuinely long-legged. The POH shows 763 nm at 10,000 feet and 791 nm at 18,000 feet on a 45-minute reserve. The range only collapses when you fill the seats — which is precisely the mission this comparison is about.
That is not a rounding error. That is one fuel stop versus none on a Texas-to-Colorado weekend. And the DA62 does it across three rows, with two seats still open behind you.
About the Cirrus Vision Jet G1
If your search has moved from the SR22T up to the Vision Jet, that airplane deserves real credit too. Cirrus did something nobody else managed: a single-pilot personal jet, with CAPS, delivered in volume, flown successfully by owner-operators. That is a genuine achievement in this industry, and we teach Cirrus Vision Jet training ourselves.
The G1 specifically, though, asks for a level of commitment that surprises a lot of first-time jet buyers.
Cirrus Vision Jet G1: What Ownership Actually Asks Of You
Acquisition: approximately $1.8 million.
Fuel burn: 60–70 GPH of Jet-A.
Full-fuel payload: only 300–400 lb — roughly two adults and a soft bag.
Range: about 800 nm on paper, but heavily payload-limited in practice.
Type rating: a full FAA type rating is required — roughly two weeks of initial training in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Insurance dual: 25+ hours of additional dual instruction beyond the type rating.
Recurrent: annual simulator recurrent training back in Knoxville, at $15,000–$25,000 per year, every year.
Runway: 3,192 ft takeoff / 3,011 ft landing over a 50-ft obstacle.
Climb: drops to 1,100–1,200 fpm at heavier weights, and loses thrust at high density altitude airports — exactly where you want margin.
Worth saying plainly: the G2 and G2+ are meaningfully more capable airplanes — better payload, better hot-and-high performance, updated flight deck. That is a different and more interesting conversation, and one we are glad to have. Everything above is specific to the G1, because the G1 is the airplane most often cross-shopped at DA62 money.
Compare that training path to the DA62. A multi-engine rating is all that is required — roughly one week, typically at your home airport, with no hotel and no travel. There is no annual sim requirement in another state, and no recurring five-figure training line item on the budget.
Runway Numbers Open Up the Map
Performance over a 50-foot obstacle is where your airport list gets long or short. The DA62 clears it in about 1,575 feet on takeoff and 1,447 feet on landing. The SR22T needs 2,080 and 2,535 feet. The Vision Jet G1 needs 3,192 and 3,011 feet.
That is roughly 500 feet less than the SR22T on departure and nearly 1,100 feet less on arrival — and against the G1 the gap is wider still. Practically, that difference is what gets you into the shorter ranch, lake and mountain-adjacent strips that a lot of the best flying runs on. That is not a spec. That is a different set of weekends.
The Parachute and the Second Engine
CAPS is a real safety system and we will not say otherwise. It has saved lives, and it deserves the respect it gets. It also carries a cost most buyers do not budget for: the rocket and canopy repack runs about $20,000 every ten years, and it is not optional.
The DA62 answers the same question a different way. Lose an engine and you still have one making power, turning counter-rotating props, managed by a FADEC that keeps it to a single lever per side. One number to know either way: the DA62 single-engine service ceiling is 11,000 feet, so on one engine it will hold altitude over most terrain but not over the high country. Neither answer is wrong — they are two philosophies about the same risk. The DA62 version just does not come with a recurring five-figure bill.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Diamond DA62 faster than a Cirrus SR22T?
Only down low, and only slightly. At 10,000 feet the Diamond DA62 cruises at 190 KTAS at 90% power on 19 GPH of Jet-A total, while the Cirrus SR22T G6 POH shows 184 KTAS at 85% power on 18.3 GPH of 100LL. Higher up the SR22T is the faster airplane — its turbo-normalized engine holds 198 KTAS at 18,000 feet on the same fuel flow. The DA62 advantage is fuel cost, payload and runway, not raw speed.
How much can a Diamond DA62 carry compared to a Cirrus SR22T?
The DA62 carries a 762 lb full-fuel payload across seven seats in three rows. The Cirrus SR22T has a useful load of about 1,125 lb and a full-fuel payload of roughly 575 lb. Loaded with four adults and 75 lb of bags — 835 lb total — the DA62 flies about 648 nm with a 45-minute reserve, while the SR22T is closer to 350 nm.
What training does a Cirrus Vision Jet G1 require compared to a Diamond DA62?
The Vision Jet G1 requires a full FAA type rating: about two weeks of initial training in Knoxville, Tennessee, plus 25+ hours of additional dual for insurance, plus annual simulator recurrent back in Knoxville that runs $15,000–$25,000 per year on an ongoing basis. The Diamond DA62 requires only a multi-engine rating — about one week, usually at your home airport, with no travel.
Can a Diamond DA62 use shorter runways than a Cirrus SR22T or Vision Jet?
Yes. Over a 50-foot obstacle the DA62 takes off in about 1,575 ft and lands in about 1,447 ft. The Cirrus SR22T needs about 2,080 ft and 2,535 ft, and the Cirrus Vision Jet G1 needs about 3,192 ft and 3,011 ft. The Vision Jet G1 also sees climb rate fall to 1,100–1,200 fpm at heavier weights and loses thrust at higher density altitude airports.
Does the Diamond DA62 have a whole-airframe parachute like Cirrus CAPS?
No. The DA62 redundancy is a second engine rather than a parachute. One practical difference in ownership cost: the Cirrus CAPS repack runs about $20,000 every ten years and is mandatory, while the DA62 has no equivalent recurring safety-system expense.
Shopping a Cirrus SR22T or Cirrus Vision Jet? A numbers-first look at how both compare to the Diamond DA62 on speed, payload, range, runway performance and the real cost of training.
Sadly, in January, a pretty great airplane was put out to pasture. Textron (the conglomerate that now owns Cessna, Beechcraft, Hawker, and Lycoming) announced it was ceasing production of the Cessna TTx. With the end of the Cessna TTx production, an airplane that was the main “competitor” to Cirrus (if you can call it competition; Cirrus consistently outsold the Cessna TTx by a wide margin each year), it leaves the SR series to stand alone atop the High Performance piston single market.
I got to go through Cessna’s FITS Accepted Instructor (CFAI) course back in 2012 and have flown in the Cessna 350 and 400 (which is what they were known as at the time; the Cessna TTx name came around in 2011) for about 120 hours. I really like the airplanes. I’m partial to the Cirrus, but the Cessna 350 & 400 are fast airplanes and great for 1-2 people. I flew a 350 (the non-turbo charged version) from New York to San Antonio last fall and routinely saw 170 knots at 12 GPH.
Columbia started out making the 350 & 400 (the turbo-charged version) in the early 2000s, but went bankrupt in 2007. Lancair started Columbia to make a certified version of their popular kit planes. If you see a Lancair ES floating around, you would swear it’s a Columbia with only 1 door. Cessna bought the design from Columbia in 2007 to begin manufacturing the airplanes themselves.
Cessna then made a huge mistake as they moved the production facility from Bend, Oregon to Mexico. Production completely halted in 2009 as the planes coming out of Mexico were found to have defective composite work. The sales never really recovered, even though Cessna put the Garmin G2000 panel in the Cessna TTx, complete with a touchscreen key pad. A FIKI system was added as an option in 2012.
A prospective buyer can still get a great value on a used 350, 400, or TTx, as they are valued a little lower than a Cirrus. The 350, 400 or TTx all make excellent single pilot or two person speedsters with very comfortable amenities.
Sadly, in January, a pretty great airplane was put out to pasture. Textron (the conglomerate that now owns Cessna, Beechcraft, Hawker, and Lycoming) announced it was ceasing production of the Cessna TTx. With the end of the Cessna TTx production, an airplane that was the main “competitor” to Cirrus (if you can call it competition;…
Looking for an airplane with more seats, more useful load, and good speed? Look no further than the PA-46-310P Piper Malibu. It feels like a corporate airplane, but this turbo charged piston single is good owner/pilot airplane for taking the family on vacation or using on business trips.
The original Piper Malibu, which was manufactured between 1984-1988, is a great next step airplane for Cirrus owners, Saratoga or Lance owners, and Mooney owners looking to move up to a pressurized, 6 seat piston. The pressurization has got to be one of the best parts of the Piper Malibu. The ability to climb up to the low flight levels (the service ceiling is FL250, but the airplane performs great between 16,000 and FL190) to catch better winds and get a better true airspeed (the airplane gains about 2.5 KTAS for every thousand feet) without having to wear oxygen makes the ride much more enjoyable.
Equipped with six seats and a 4,100 pound gross weight, the Piper Malibu allows for a lot more carrying ability than a Cirrus or even a Saratoga. Now, like most piston airplanes, you can’t take 6 average adults, bags, and full fuel, but here’s the great part: the Continental TSIO 320 only burns 16.5 GPH in cruise at 75% power. The plane will still fly 200 KTAS at 16.5 GPH. With 120 gallon capacity, even taking half tanks still allows for a 2.5 hour range with an hour reserve. At 200 KTAS, that’s 450 miles. And, you gain an extra 360 pounds useful load at half tanks. That’s not too shabby.
The Piper Malibu was designed to be comfortable, fast, and be able to carry some baggage. There are two baggage compartments, one in the nose behind the firewall and one in the rear behind the rear seats. The nose baggage is wide enough to fit golf clubs in, while the back baggage is large enough to fit rolling suitcases in (the front baggage has no problem with roller bags either). Lots of weight in bags? Again, no big deal. Just plan on taking less fuel and still flying for 2.5 hours.
From a pilot’s standpoint, the Piper Malibu is a pretty straightforward airplane to fly, though it does require some specialty training. A lot of PA-46s on the market right now have upgraded glass panels and digital engine monitors, making piloting the airplane that much more streamlined. Most Piper Malibus are equipped with the KFC 150 autopilot. Some have a yaw damper installed, others don’t. Some have the vertical speed and altitude capture installed, others don’t. It just depends on that specific airplane. They aren’t like a Cirrus where they are all made the same.
Looking to upgrade to something with more seats, a higher service ceiling, but not a significant increase in fuel costs? Look into the Piper Malibu. You can get one in good shape from about $300,000.
Looking for an airplane with more seats, more useful load, and good speed? Look no further than the PA-46-310P Piper Malibu. It feels like a corporate airplane, but this turbo charged piston single is good owner/pilot airplane for taking the family on vacation or using on business trips. The original Piper Malibu, which was manufactured…
I was flying in the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas a few weeks ago and heard an IFR clearance given to a King Air that pricked my ears up. It was a clearance from CRP to LRD, but the routing was one you don’t hear too often anymore. Because of active military airspace, the routing was via a radial and DME off the CRP VOR (so a point defined by the radial and DME) to another radial and DME point off the LRD VOR.
It took me a second to think about how to do this the easiest (without setting up the VOR and watching the DME). After a moment’s thought, it’s actually a snap with the G1000. You create 2 user waypoints, one for each Radial/DME spot, then put those 2 user waypoints in your Flight Plan.
Here’s how.
Step 1
Using the big knob, go to the Waypoint chapter. Once there, scroll down to the User Waypoint page using the small knob.
Step 2
Press the New soft key. If you want to name the waypoint something specific, you can do that at the top of the page. If not, it will default to something like VOR 1 or VOR 2.
Step 3
Under Waypoint Type, use the small knob to select RAD/DIS (stands for Radial/Distance).
Step 4
Under Reference Waypoints, again using the small knob (or your keypad), type or dial in the VOR identifier, the radial from that VOR, and the DME distance. Press enter and you are done.
Once you have both User Waypoints created, then just put them in your flight plan (if you forget what you named them, you can just go back to the User Waypoint page), and off you go.
I was flying in the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas a few weeks ago and heard an IFR clearance given to a King Air that pricked my ears up. It was a clearance from CRP to LRD, but the routing was one you don’t hear too often anymore. Because of active military airspace, the…
