I am on a mission in flying for my head to be as comfortable as possible. I’m currently going through the process of experimenting with different ANR headsets to see which ones squeeze my head the least (which I’ll be writing a future article about). In the meantime, I decided to focus on sunglasses.
I wear glasses (can’t do contacts anymore since they irritate my eyes), so anytime I have a headset on, I have frames running underneath my ear cups. I had a pair of prescription sunglasses for years that were okay, but still caused soreness above my ears after more than 3 hours of flying. I routinely fly 4-5 hours a day in training folks, so I had to find a better solution.
I saw an ad in Flying Magazine one month for Flying Eyes sunglasses. It was a relatively new company with a cool concept. A pilot started the company with the goal to create as thin a pair of sunglasses frames as possible to increase the comfort and decrease the ANR loss when wearing sunglasses. What the company came up with is pretty cool.
The ultra-thin frames on the all the different Flying Eyes models are made out of Resilamide. The material is so strong that the frames can be bent back and forth while not breaking. The company even brags that the frames are virtually unbreakable. I had to try these out.
I ordered a pair of the Golden Eagle Sport sunglasses. The process of getting prescription lenses in them was no big deal and took about a week. The eyeglasses shop initially thought the shape of the lens could be an issue, but it proved no problem at all. The lens manufacturer even managed to chip the frames, but Flying Eyes sent a new set of frames for free, even though it was not at all their fault.
In about a month and a half of flying with them, they are very comfortable. Some squeeze on the side of my head after extended periods of wear underneath a headset, but I’m exploring headset options currently (see above). Much improved over my last set of sunglasses.
Flying Eyes offers several different frame models, some of which are prescription compatible and some which aren’t. The Golden Eagle Sport frames run about $180. Orders can be placed on the Flying Eyes website.
Ordering new sunglasses from Flying Eyes? Use this link to receive 10% off your order.
In July, Stratos Aircraft completed the first test flight of the single engine Stratos 716X personal jet. Stratos, based in Redmond, OR, is taking a page out of Epic Aircraft’s book in how the company is planning on bringing the Stratos 716X to market.
Epic Aircraft first released the Epic LT composite single engine turboprop in the early 2000s as an experimental. The first kit was completed and flying in 2005. Epic’s goal was to bring the airplane to market as a certified aircraft, a feat that took them almost 20 years to do, achieving full certification earlier this year.
Stratos Aircraft is hoping to learn a lot from their Bend, OR neighbors. The 716X is going to start off as a limited release experimental kit, while the company is working on achieving certification for the airplane. Once the plane is certified, it will be dubbed the Stratos 716. The 716X experimental kits will be assembled through a factory builder assist program (no garage built single engine jets here!). The kit will cost $2.5 million assembled, while the expected cost of the certified Stratos 716 will be $3.5 million.
Now, let’s talk about the airplane. 400 KTAS. One engine.
That’s right, you did hear correctly. The Stratos 716X is expected to cruise at 400 KTAS on only one engine. Compared to the Cirrus Vision Jet, that’s 100 knots faster. Think, “I’ll be relaxing at the hotel pool with a drink in hand when you are landing” type speeds. The fuel burn of the Pratt & Whitney JT15D-5 engine (3,000 lbs of thrust) is about 25 GPH more than the Vision Jet (the Stratos 716X will burn about 98 GPH of Jet A while the Vision Jet averages about 75 GPH of Jet A).
Comparing the two engines, the above numbers start to make sense. The Williams FJ33 engine on the Vision Jet only puts out 1,850 lbs of thrust, significantly less than the 3,000 lbs of thrust that the Stratos 716X Pratt & Whitney JT15D-5 puts out.
What does that mean to the pilot? In the Stratos 716X, it means less takeoff roll, better climb rate, faster cruise (as evidence by the 400 KTAS expected cruise speed), and a better payload. More power = more weight carrying capacity. And, the 716X is expected to have a service ceiling of 41,000 feet. I probably wouldn’t want to go that high single pilot with one engine, but I’d be very happy with that speed in the mid-30s.
The cabin, based on the pictures I’ve seen, looks very comfortable. The Stratos 716X seats 6 and can be configured in several different ways. Baggage is no problem as Stratos Aircraft stretched the fuselage from their original 714 Proof of Concept aircraft, adding a very roomy baggage compartment above the engine compartment. The passenger compartment is as big as a Phenom 100, providing more leg and head room than the Vision Jet. The front seats have plenty of legroom too, as Stratos has opted for a side stick instead of a yoke.
The avionics for the Stratos 716X are expected to be the Garmin G3X Touch for the panel which will be driven by a Garmin GTN 750 GPS. Autopilot will be integrated within the G3X. I would imagine that once the plane is certified, the panel will be switched to a Garmin G1000 NXi and a GFC 700 will be installed.
The genius of the design of the Stratos 716X is the aerodynamics of the engine placement. Instead of hanging the engine out in the slip stream and going with a drag inducing V-Tail like Cirrus did, Stratos took some notes from the myriad of single engine military fighter jets out there, placing the engine inside the fuselage. The fuselage is then built around the engine with two air scoops for intake directly in front of the wings. With two intakes instead of one, that leads to more air flow, which again, means more power. The Vision Jet has only one.
I’m going to keep tabs on the Stratos 716X (as I kept tabs on the Epic E1000). I’m hoping Stratos gets several flying soon (the company expects to do 3 kits a year till the airplane gets certified) and certification comes quickly after.
I got to stick my head in the mockup of the Stratos 716X when I went to Osh Kosh in 2018. I was very impressed and was excited to see the airplane was finally airborne this summer.
For more information about the Stratos 716X, check out the Stratos website.
Cirrus Vision Jet, meet your competition. In July, Stratos Aircraft completed the first test flight of the single engine Stratos 716X personal jet. Stratos, based in Redmond, OR, is taking a page out of Epic Aircraft’s book in how the company is planning on bringing the Stratos 716X to market. Epic Aircraft first released the…
A new app came out last year that fits a need for many owners. Coflyt, available on the Apple App Store for $14/month for up to two airplanes, helps immensely with staying organized. Those questions of, “When is my oil change due?” or “Has the plane had it’s IFR inspections?” are easily answered by checking the app instead of having to dig through maintenance logs.
Not only does Coflyt help keep track of maintenance, but it also houses squawk lists that owner’s can send to maintenance shops as well as keeping track of Airworthiness Directives. If the pilot remembers at the end of flights to put the amount in, it even shows how much fuel is remaining in the airplane.
For flying clubs and partnerships, it provides easy scheduling without having to share calendars. Payments can also be taken and flights tracked. No more paper flight sheets after flights to track down.
As a pilot, it helps immensely to be organized. For $14 a month ($36/month for partnerships or flying clubs), that’s a small price to pay.
A new app came out last year that fits a need for many owners. Coflyt, available on the Apple App Store for $14/month for up to two airplanes, helps immensely with staying organized. Those questions of, “When is my oil change due?” or “Has the plane had it’s IFR inspections?” are easily answered by checking…
In the market for a tow-bar? This one is basically brand new and hasn’t been used all that much. It has the Cirrus connections on it as well. For more information, contact Texas Top Aviation.
Many people ask, which set of charts is better? Should I use the FAA Aeroservices charts on Foreflight or pay extra for the Jeppesen charts? Since you have to pay for Jeppesen, they are probably better, right?
I am not here to say which one is better as a chart preference is just that, a preference for one over the other or for certain features. After a while, muscle memory and routine take over and you probably wont even notice the difference.
History
In 1934, Elroy Jeppesen began making his own charts and sold them to other pilots. His little company grew into the giant Boeing chart company we know today. Jeppesen charts are used internationally and therefore include information that might otherwise seem common knowledge, like transition altitudes. The key is, you cannot get FAA Aeroservices charts for international destinations. Jeppesen is the only option for outside the US.
National Aerospace Charting Office (NACO), or the new(er) name “Aeroservices” or FAA chart, whatever you decide to call them, are United States government issued charts. In addition to civilian use, Aeroservices charts are used by the military so there will be some terminology that does not apply to civilians. The best part about FAA Aeroservices charts are… they’re free!
If you are in the middle of a transition or trying to decide which charts to use, you have come to the right place. Here are a few key differences.
Obstacle Departure Procedure Chart KAXX (Angel Fire, New Mexico) ODP
Frequencies: FAA Chart provides the AWOS so you have all departure frequencies in once place.
Airport: Jeppesen highlight the airport, which is a nice feature so you can easily see the flow from the airport.
Notes and Remarks: Jeppesen bolds the speed restriction all over the chart so you won’t miss it. All other requirements are in the top right corner. Note the transition altitude 18,000′. Since Jeppesen is used internationally, it is published on the chart since other countries have different transition altitudes. It takes up a chunk of chart real estate, but it’s clear, easy to read, and always in the same place. The FAA charts post all the requirements and restrictions as notes off to the side. Since it’s in the same space as the chart graphic, it’s easy for the eyes to catch while studying the plate.
Take off Minimums: NOT APPLICABLE for PART 91 – however, it’s wise for all pilots to look and abide by them. Jeppesen displays the standard take off minimums table, as well as the rate of climb table, which is nice to have all in one place. The FAA chart gives the non standard information but you need to know/look up the rest in the Digital Terminal Procedures Supplemental document. (Hint: It’s in the Documents section of Foreflight)
Take Off Obstacles: About the same on both charts
Route Description: Similar on both charts, but larger font and clearer description on the FAA chart. When there are different routes from different runways, the FAA chart layout is really helpful.
Graphic Layout: Jeppesen and FAA use the same graphics for all their different charts and plates which makes it easy to read once you are familiar with the respective charts. FAA charts are easy to read and distractions are kept to a minimum. Jeppesen charts make things bold and enlarge pertinent information so you won’t miss it.
Airport altitude: This is only on the Jeppesen chart (the FAA chart doesn’t include it), but it is very helpful for situational awareness. As you brief the arrival altitudes, I think it’s important to have an idea what AGL you are at.
Approach Charts
One thing pilots love about Jeppesen approach charts is the clear set up for an approach brief. The top section is created as a “briefing strip” starting with the frequencies, then navigation frequencies, minimums, airport elevation and the missed approach. It’s very natural and user friendly.
FAA charts have a slightly bigger picture of the approach planview, but the profile view and minimums section can get a bit cluttered. It can feel a little discontinuous when briefing the approach to bounce all over the page. However, some pilots really like the small airport diagram in the corner, which I find really helpful for situational awareness (particularly for students learning circle approaches). Non- standard alternate and takeoff minimums are also clearly noted, but unfortunately we must hunt elsewhere to find them. The Jeppesen alternate minimums and takeoff minimums will both be on the airport diagram
Frequencies: Getting weather and tuning radios is easy on the Jeppesen charts – just follow the briefing strip. The frequency section on the FAA charts is still easy to read, but closer to the center of the page. It’s split up from the nav frequencies and other important briefing information. a. FAA charts are created by the government and have military specific information, which are the odd looking frequencies and channels on the chart.
Approach Navigation: On a Jeppesen chart, you will continue to the next line to verify your frequency, course and set minimums (assuming you are straight in on the ILS). On the FAA chart, you will then have to skip to the top of the chart to get the frequency and course, and then scan to the bottom of the page to input your minimums. However, since you could be flying a localizer approach or a circle to land, it’s a good reminder that not everyone using this approach chart will be using the same Decision Altitude (DA). The FAA chart also includes runway distance information so pilots can make determinations of approach speeds and stopping distance if the runway is wet or icy.
Missed Approach – Textual
Approach Lighting
Missed Approach- Graphical: The missed approach information is the same on both charts. The lighting information is key for determining a missed approach and is next to the missed approach text on the FAA chart. It’s found next to the missed approach graphic on the Jeppesen chart. Personally, I find it easier to find and read the lighting information on the Jeppesen chart. Remember, on both charts, the placement of the PAPI on the chart indicates the physical location of the lights (left or right of the runway).
Notes: Both charts have a notes box, but they use them a little differently. Once again, remember that Jeppesen charts are used internationally and include the transition altitudes and altimeter setting info. On both charts, the notes section will be where other critical information will be shared which isn’t really applicable for this airport. On the FAA chart, the tower frequency is starred to note that there are operating hours (you’ll have to check the chart supplement AF/D to find out what those hours are). There is also an L next to the frequency to indicate it is the pilot controlled lighting frequency. You will also find the note about the VGSI and the Approach Glide path next to the profile view on the FAA chart, whereas the Jeppesen chart has that note in the notes section at the top. The FAA chart also has the T and an A in black triangles to note that this airport has non- standard alternate and take off minimums. Again, those are found in separate documents when using FAA charts and on the Airport Diagram when using Jeppesen charts.
Minimum Sector Altitude: Similar on both charts, but in different locations (reminder: ATC vector altitudes may be lower. It is the pilot’s responsibility for safety of flight to maintain safe obstacle clearance, so if you are ever concerned about going below the MSA – just ask ATC).
Planview: Other then differences in size, visuals, and text, the information displayed on both is very similar.
Profile View: Again, the displays look different and pilots will have their preference, but the information is the same.
Minimums: Jeppesen charts not only note the category for each approach with its designated letter, but also displays it in knots. It is recommended that if you increase your approach speed (based on flaps or gusty winds or perhaps a faster speed for a circle to land approach) that you should use the higher category minimums. The reference guide makes that easy to look up. The other benefit of the Jeppesen charts is right the table that contains the time from the final approach fix to the missed approach point for a localizer approach, it also shows the rate of descent with the associated ground speed to maintain a 3 degree glideslope. Now there is no excuse not to set pitch and power! The minimums posted in parenthesis are for the military, but RVR in statute miles is also included.
Airport diagram: Only on the FAA charts, this particular feature is particularly useful for situational awareness. The arrow pointing to the runway shows the direction the approach is arriving from so planning a circle to land is a cinch. There is also a lot of other information that can be gathered from the airport diagram for quick reference or to help a disoriented pilot: lighting, displaced thresholds, closed taxiways, and runway placement and lengths. This is easily one of the best perks of an FAA chart.
Arrival/ Departure Charts: Sewzy 5 Arrival KAUS
The Jeppesen lay out is very attractive and draws the pilots eye in a clear way to all the important information. The colors pop out, so the required altitudes and speeds are easy to read and remember. The chart, which is the proper scale, shows MORAs , easy to find airports (and runway layouts) and is over all easy to follow. However, the texts, while very clearly laid out, are small and difficult to read and pushed to the very edges of the chart. FAA charts are simple and fairly easy to read, but the airports are not as obvious and the flow to the airport requires a good look. The table on the Jeppesen chart is a really nice format, but the text and Notes for arrivals on the FAA chart are easy to find and much easier to read quickly.
Frequency: FAA charts include the approach frequency on the arrival, which is helpful for having radios tuned. During a busy time when the controller changes your frequency, all you have to do is verify the frequency you already set, rather then totally stop what you’re doing to switch it. The Jeppesen charts add the airport elevation next to the ATIS, which really aids situational awareness.
Notes: Jeppesen notes are clearly numbered and tucked away nicely in a box, but the FAA chart notes pop out in the middle of the page and are easy to skim for pertinent information.
Planview: I think Jeppesen is the clear winner here- it is so easy to read, it only takes one glance to know where the primary airport is and how the arrival flows. The chart being at the proper scale offers the pilot important geographical information and over all is a clean look. Notice the small series of arrows after SMRFF on the the Jeppesen chart; those indicate the pilot should expect radar vectors. The FAA charts include those instructions in the text, but I find the visual reference on the chart helpful. The FAA charts are equally clean, with altitude and speed restrictions easy to read even if they don’t jump out. When there are multiple airports that the arrival serves, the airports are clearly marked, though, I think it would be nice to have a little more information surrounding the primary airport for better situational awareness.
MSA: only on the Jeppesen chart
Primary airport: The runway alignment and grey highlight on the Jeppesen chart stands out very clearly, while the FAA airports are a little more obscure.
Arrival route description: The table on the Jeppesen chart is easy to follow but the text is very small and pushed to the bottom. The route description is much easier to find and read on the FAA chart.
Airport Diagram
The Jeppesen Airport Diagram page has it all: frequencies, airport diagram, runway info, take-off minimums, departure procedures and alternate minimums. It’s a one-stop shop. It makes preflight planning easy when its all at your fingertips.
The FAA charts usually require a little more searching for different pieces of airport information. The Airport Diagram itself is just the airport layout. Above, you will see a simple FAA Airport diagram. It’s clean and simple, perfect for a knee board print out.
In the flight planning process, as you look at what approaches you will be using for the airport, you might see an A or T inside a triangle. Those indicate that you will need to look in the Alternate Minimum or Take off minimum documents for more information. The Takeoff Minimums document (see below) is also where you will find any obstacle departure procedures for that airport. Apps like Foreflight help you out by posting the take off minimums under the departure tab. Even though it’s a little more difficult to read, I didn’t crop out the airport information so you can see what it looks like in context.
FAA Alternate Minimums on the Left and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures on the Right
Many people ask, which set of charts is better? Should I use the FAA Aeroservices charts on Foreflight or pay extra for the Jeppesen charts? Since you have to pay for Jeppesen, they are probably better, right? I am not here to say which one is better as a chart preference is just that, a…
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.
You are hand-flying an in-the-weather descent, power back, heading for the FAF. You start a 30 degree banked turn at your lead point to cross the FAF, when your passenger behind you gasps. Looking over your shoulder, you see he has spilled his drink into his lap…too bad for him! However, when you turn your head back to your panel, your inner ear tumbles and you see 45 degrees of bank, 15 degrees nose low, airspeed increasing.
Congratulations! You have managed to get distracted and sucked into an unusual attitude recovery. By the book, you should roll wings level, pull to the horizon, and adjust power as necessary to keep the airspeed within limits. In this scenario, if you had not experienced vertigo, you might have been able to roll to less than 30 degrees of bank, recover your turn, pull the nose up to less than the original descent attitude, pulled a bit of power to slow back to your desired penetration speed and then resumed your desired ground track. However, this would only be appropriate if you had full situational awareness as to the deviations caused by the look over your shoulder, plus full confidence that the moderate corrective actions would put you back on your desired flight path.
As a military aviator, I learned unusual attitude recoveries based upon hard maneuvering at extreme pitch and bank angles. In the hard-maneuvering environment, an unusual attitude could be 90 degrees straight up, airspeed decreasing below 120 kts…or 80 degrees nose low, 135 degrees of bank, airspeed increasing through 500 kts… etc. In these cases, understanding angle of attack, or AOA, is critical to maintaining controlled flight and returning to a normal attitude.
In an extreme nose-high attitude, a military aviator is trained to roll the aircraft to 90 degrees of bank, ease off the back-stick pressure to reduce AOA, add power as required, and allow the nose to slice back towards level, rolling to wings level as the nose approaches the horizon. If nose low, the recovery procedure is to roll rapidly, within asymmetric g limits, until wings level, then to pull at optimum g loading to recover to level flight. For the nose-low recovery, power was normally reduced until airspeed could be assessed and brought under control. However, when doing the nose-low pullout at 7-9 gs, pulling the power for too long would leave you much to slow to resume combat.
The AOA gauge on a fighter’s glare shield is a primary reference during hard maneuvering and for landing. The AOA for optimum maneuvering is 13 degrees, displayed as the green circle or “green donut” on the gauge. The red chevron on top represents a slow condition of 15 degrees or more and the yellow lower chevron represents 11 degrees or less.
For normal landing in the F-16C, the pilot slows to 220 kts and configures abeam the touchdown point while mentally computing the final approach airspeed of 136 kts plus 4 additional knots for each 1000 lbs of fuel. When rolling off the perch and flying the final turn, the pilot would usually only glance once at the airspeed once to ensure final turn airspeed of 180 kts while using the AOA sight gauge as the primary indicator of a best performance turn. As long as the AOA was green donut (13 degrees) or less, you would not stall. If on speed and 13 degrees wasn’t going to get you around the turn to line up with the runway, you knew you were going to overshoot. You never wanted to see the red chevron of 15 degrees or more as that meant you were too slow, pulling too hard, and in danger of building an un-recoverable sink rate!
Few GA aircraft are currently equipped with AOA indicators, though there are several after market devices available for retrofit. However, knowing the impact of AOA and how to manage it is vital to safe aviating, even without an AOA gauge. The bottom line is, as long as you don’t ask the wing to produce more angle of attack than it can handle, you won’t stall.
Practicing final turn stalls, to know what the wing feels like as you get too slow or pull too much on the controls, increasing AOA past the critical point, will keep you safe when you encounter that unexpected overshooting wind or you find yourself inadvertently on too tight of a downwind leg. Better to overshoot or take it around to try again, than to pull too hard and exceed critical AOA.
Mike Hostage is a retired USAF pilot with 37 years of experience, flying a wide variety of aircraft. An instructor pilot for more than half of his 4800 flight hours, Mike is currently qualified in a Cirrus SR-22T and regularly flies his two homebuilt sailplanes.
You are hand-flying an in-the-weather descent, power back, heading for the FAF. You start a 30 degree banked turn at your lead point to cross the FAF, when your passenger behind you gasps. Looking over your shoulder, you see he has spilled his drink into his lap…too bad for him! However, when you turn your…
