Long Odds, Happy Endings

Pilots, by and large, like to be in control and there are many ways to accomplish that goal. One way or another we have to manage risk if we're to maintain control. One way to manage risk is thoroughly planning each flight, but the best laid plans don't always pan out. Prudent pilots like to have more than one plan - the illustrious Plan B. There are folks out there who do little or no planning, just assuming that everything will be fine. Perhaps they are optimists or believe themselves to be Super Pilot, capable of handling anything than arrises. Having one or more back-up plans, just in case, is a wise choice because the unexpected is always waiting for us. It's all a matter of odds.

Rushed and Forgotten

A busy schedule recently had me instructing in seven different aircraft types in seven days. Long hours and fatigue are not good ingredients for beginning a safe flight. That crossed my mind as I was running out the door last week to head to the airport. It also crossed my mind that my minimalist flight bag felt lighter than usual. This was just a passing thought until, settling into the right seat of the aircraft in which I was about to instruct, it became obvious why my flight bag was so light. I'd left my iPad at home and so it was time for an unplanned test of my back-up strategies: Using my iPhone and the minimal selection of paper charts I keep in my flight bag.

SkyCharts Pro and ForeFlight work just fine on the iPhone, though there's no GPS to be had. That's because, being a good citizen, I put my iPhone into airplane mode before takeoff and that disables bluetooth. Not to worry because plan B was the very capable panel-mounted GPS receiver in the aircraft.

With the iPhone I can do virtually everything normally done on the iPad with the main disadvantage being the small size of the iPhone's screen. There were a few more differences: I haven't enabled multi-tasking gestures on my iPhone and some of the user interface details of ForeFlight are different from the iPad version. I appreciate a good challenge so it was time to adjust, adapt, and overcome.

Taking Notes, iPhone style

My weapon of choice for writing notes in flight is the iPad app Penultimate, but it isn't supported on the iPhone. Turns out there is a free iPhone app that offers similar features. Sure, I had to write smaller letters and use more pages, but Handwriting worked surprisingly well. There's no erase or undo. If you make a mistake, just start a new note. Did I mention it's a free app?

Back-up Paper Charts

Printing paper copies of local terminal procedures should be a part of every iPad pilot's back-up strategy. For me, nothing beats ReadyProcs, a Java-based app that runs on a bunch of different operating systems. I print out a selection of charts, in booklet format, staple them and slip them in my flight bag. No muss, no fuss.

In the unlikely event of an iPhone failure, I still have a basic complement of paper charts.

All in SloMo

Lately I've been fortunate to teach occasionally in a new, air conditioned Cirrus and the AC certainly does reduce fatigue in hot weather. Climbing out on top of a Bay Area cloud layer, I watched as my GNS 5870 bluetooth receiver came unstuck from dashboard, fell between my knees, glanced off the carpeted shroud that covers part of the AC (the evaporator unit, I think) under the right front passenger seat, before it disappeared with an odd rattle. Moving my seat back and feeling around confirmed my worst suspicion: My bluetooth GPS must have fallen through one of the numerous gaps in that shroud. It would have to be retrieved once we were back on the ground.

The interesting part was that in spite of being shielded by a fair amount of metal, the seat itself, and 175 pounds of pilot, the GNS 5870 kept satellite lock for the rest of the flight. The iPad continued to show the same ground speed and location as the G1000. Pretty remarkable ...

Back on earth, it became clear that tools would be required to retrieve the GPS. I carefully removed two bolts from the front of the AC shroud, but another fastener underneath the right seat still held the shroud in place. Uncomfortable with the idea of removing the seat, I was able to lift the front of the shroud enough to see the GNS 5870 lodged on the inboard side of the AC equipment and retrieve it. We replaced the two bolts and I intend to try leaving the GPS in my shirt pocket while flying air conditioned Cirrus aircraft!

Something New under the Sun

Pilots who rely on GPS got a wake-up call recently as increased solar flare activity began to affect GPS and WAAS signal integrity. It's important to remember that GPS, like any navigational system, has limitations. Solar activity can affect GPS signals and that's just what happened last week.

WAAS LPV availability on 8/6/2011

Things are mostly back to normal, but the Northeast and the Upper Great Lake states appear to have been most affected on the date shown. The unusual solar activity is forecast to continue. Regardless of where you live, be ready to navigate by alternate means and don't count on getting LPV minima on RNAV approaches. To access the current status of the LPV service volume (along with other cool GPS stuff), you might want to bookmark this link.

Power of ... Love

After our basenji Hunter passed away in 2008, we waited a year before deciding to get a new dog through Basenji Rescue and Transport (BRAT). We adopted a pair of tricolor basenji about 2 1/2 years ago and though it was initially challenging, it has been immensely rewarding. When Rio and Kadee (aka Taz) came to us, a lot of training and compassion were required. We were Rio's fifth home and it was clear that someone along the way had been unkind to him. He was very mistrustful of men, in particular, and easily frightened. Unwinding his fearful behavior required a lot of patience.

Kadee came to us with the name Taz and though she became comfortable in our home, she remained aloof and distant. After about a year, it occurred to me to try calling her by her original name, Kadee. The results were remarkable and if you ask me, anyone who says dogs don't have long memories is mistaken.

Here's a photo of Rio and Kadee, taken shortly after they'd come to live with us. I'd forgotten how underweight Rio was at the time - just under 20 pounds.

Here's a photo from last week. Kadee is more attentive and Rio now weighs in at a normal 24.5 pounds. In a highly competitive society, it's good to stop and remember that care, attention and love can overcome even longest of odds.

Sweat the Small Stuff

Papers pile up on your desk, stuff accumulates in your garage, weeds grow in your garden, and you reach a point where action must be taken. Call it cleaning house or a garage sale, nothing beats finally clearing away all the junk, reorganizing, and simplifying. Think about complexity in aviation, specifically under Instrument Flight Rules, and it's easy to see some house cleaning is in order. Needless complexity in aircraft equipment and instrument procedures has increased errors, gaffes, and worse on the part of controllers and pilots alike. Both the FAA and GA manufacturers could take simple steps to clean things up and here is a list of just a few of the needed fixes and improvements.


By Any Other Name ...

The FAA Instrument Approach Procedures Division has done a great job of creating a plethora of RNAV approaches with vertical guidance. Kudos! Now it's time to tackle a much simpler problem: Instrument approach procedure names. They have become needlessly convoluted and naming conventions are important because pilots and controllers say those names over the radio, thousands of times a day. Pilots have to look-up instrument approaches, sorting through long lists of similarly named procedures. Add to the mix similarly named approaches to parallel runways and it's obvious that selecting the wrong approach by mistake could have serious repercussions.

Controllers and pilots can often be heard saying something like "Cleared RNAV GPS 32 approach" when it should be simply "Cleared RNAV 32 approach." Many pilots and controllers apparently don't realize that approach title items that appear in parenthesis are not to be used when referring to the approach. Who came up with that convention? Bet it wasn't a pilot or a controller.

Complicated, dumb naming conventions add no value, but they do create confusion and extra workload for all concerned. Consider this subset of the RNAV approaches at my home airport:

• KOAK RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 27R
• KOAK RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 27R
• KOAK RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 27L
• KOAK RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 27L

How about a naming scheme where RNAV would refer to approaches for use with appropriate area navigation or GPS, RNP would refer to approaches with curved paths reserved for authorized aircraft and aircrew (i.e. not most GA aircraft)? And lose the stuff in parenthesis fer cryin' out loud! The list of KOAK approaches would then read as follows:

• KOAK RNAV RWY 27R
• KOAK RNAV RWY 27L
• KOAK RNP RWY 27L
• KOAK RNP RWY 27R

That would make it easier (and safer) for everyone, now wouldn't it?

Smart Vectors-To-Final

Adhering to crossing restrictions at step-down fixes leading to an ILS is important because early interception of the glideslope does not necessarily guarantee compliance with altitude crossing restrictions outside the final approach fix (FAF). This is where Garmin's implementation of Vectors-To-Final (VTF) for instrument approaches comes under scrutiny.

Let's see, 5 plus 2.3 plus 2 = ...

Since the late 1990s, when the 430/530 units were first introduced, activating an approach with VTF has remained virtually unchanged. VTF causes any step-down fixes outside the FAF to disappear, the current waypoint becomes the FAF, and the only distance displayed is the distance to the FAF. To locate step-down fixes before the FAF, the pilot must perform some interesting mental math. This is particularly vexing because when a pilot hears a controller say "fly heading 210, vectors ILS 27 right" and they see an option named "Vectors-to-final," they naturally assume that's the option to choose. The standard operating procedure is actually to never use VTF on approaches with step-down fixes outside the FAF, even if the controller says "vectors RNAV 28 left approach."

The vectors-to-final option should result in the GPS receiver figuring out where the aircraft has intercepted the approach course and all fixes outside the FAF should be depicted. If the current behavior is required by the relevant Technical Standard Order (TSO), then Garmin and the FAA need to work to change those TSOs. Touch screens interfaces on GPS receivers are great, but pilots have been waiting for a fix for VTF behavior for over a decade. This isn't rocket science.

Alternate Airports

With the exception of the discontinued CNX 80, Garmin GPS receivers do not provide the ability to define an alternate airport as part of a programmed flight plan. In fact, the flight plan behavior of the Garmin units is so convoluted that it would take an entire blog post to describe the work-arounds pilots have to do when navigating to their alternate after a missed approach. Pilots don't need increased workload during critical phases of flight. Hello? Garmin?

Required Equipment

When pilots and instructors sit around the hangar and debate the possible reasons why ADF is required on an approach, something is wrong. An instrument approach needs to be clear so that it can be accurately flown. In the evolving world of RNAV, the convention of encoding the equipment required for an approach in the procedure name is quickly breaking down. So here's some heresy: The design details that require certain equipment for an approach should be opaque to pilots.

Pilots don't need to know why, we just need to know what. The FAA needs to list the required equipment (along with other  restrictions) on the plan view, in plain view, and in a font big enough that pilots can read. Pilots shouldn't have to theorize what stuff they need in the panel to legally fly a particular approach.

User-defined Holding Patterns

The CNX 80 allowed the pilot to program an ad hoc holding pattern and then allowed the GPS and autopilot to fly that holding pattern. The CNX80 has been discontinued and follow-on models still don't seem to have the user-defined hold feature. It's great that Garmin is working on voice-controlled avionics, but user-defined holding patterns is a basic feature that's still missing. Again beating up on Garmin, but they make it so easy. 

PT Required or No PT?

A decade ago it appeared RNAV approaches would all be designed with Terminal Arrival Areas (TAA) that would simplify the delivery of approach clearances, reduce workload on controllers, and allow pilots to navigate on their own using RNAV. While some older RNAV approaches do provide minimum safe altitude information by TAA sectors and explicitly include the No PT notation for entire TAA sectors, the TAA seems to have fallen out of favor and isn't included in many of the new RNAV approaches. Perhaps this is a cost-saving maneuver, but it sets up a bad situation with regard to procedure turns.

You were just cleared direct to an Initial Approach Fix on an RNAV approach with a 30 degree intercept to the approach course, but you're not on a transition that tells you the Hold-In-Lieu-of-Procedure turn is not required (NoPT). If the controller doesn't say "Cleared straight in RNAV ..." you're expected to fly once around the hold. Of course if the controller simply forgot to specify "straight in" and you fly the hold, you'll probably get yelled at or worse (cf. Limitation on Procedure Turns). The best advice for pilots in the situation is to query the controller if they don't get a straight-in clearance.

Perhaps depicting MSA sectors is not feasible for technical reasons, still the FAA should find a way to clearly specify when a procedure turn on an approach is required and when it isn't.

Which Weather?

Approach procedures into some non-towered airports specify that you should use the surface weather for a nearby airport. In the current age of electronic information, why can't the FAA (and by extension, Jeppesen) include the frequency for that airport's surface weather? This sort of simple cross-referencing is what computers are good at.

Digital Charts

The days of individual paper chart purchases are quickly fading and the production of these charts needs to be modernized. VFR and IFR charts need to be produced in a way that allows seamless electronic display. Many EFB users may not realize it, but there is significant effort going on behind the scenes to stitch together these charts for EFB display. And while we're at it, geo-referencing on instrument approach charts should not require significant third-party effort and cost to provide. The times they are a changin' and the Aeronav folks have been working hard to keep up with those changes. Let's hope their chart products continue to be modernized.

Jeppesen has had over a year to get their digital chart act together for the iPad, but geo-referenced en route and approach charts are still missing in action. One assumes that once these features are finally available, they still will cost you your other arm and/or leg.

Digital Documents

Cessna/Textron has probably made more training aircraft than any other manufacturer in history, but you can't get PDFs of their pilot information manuals. Diamond, Cirrus, and even Garmin provide important documents for download as PDFs. Given the rapid acceptance of electronic tablets like the iPad, Cessna needs to get with the program.

And speaking of Cessna, ever try to figure out if your aircraft's Approved Flight Manual and all of its supplements are up to date? Good luck to you because it's a nightmare!

Anyone Listening?

You may have ideas for simple fixes that would result in big payoffs for little investment, but you may ask "What's the use? Is anyone in a position to make the changes actually paying attention?" Before glossing over the idea that seemingly trivial improvements really can have a tremendous impact on any system, take a few minutes to watch Rory Sutherland's TED talk on the subject. The important points are toward the end, but it may just change the way you look at small stuff.

Killing Zone

In my spare time, I've been reading a book entitled The Killing Zone by Paul Craig. The book's thesis is that pilots whose number of flight hours fall within a particular range are more likely to be involved in fatal accidents that other pilots with more or less experience. The book draws heavily on NTSB reports and statistics, presenting a compelling argument for several types of flying that pilots should treat with a great deal of respect and care, given their level of experience.

According to the Nall Report, an analysis of GA accident data published each year by the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association's Air Safety Foundation, the popular ways to get into trouble in a small plane are to run out of fuel, attempt to continue VFR flight into deteriorating weather conditions, and low-level maneuvering flight. The highest risk last year was low-level maneuvering flight and the most likely to lead to a fatality was continued flight into deteriorating weather. While it's early in the accident investigation process, it seems that the crash of an SR20 yesterday into a high-rise building on New York's Upper East Side involved the intersection of at least two of these risk factors - low level flight and marginal VFR weather conditions.

Several other factors have been cited that should have helped mitigate the risks of that flight. News stories have latched onto the fact that the SR20 was equipped with an aircraft parachute that could have saved the day. Even if the 'cute had been deployed, it's unclear whether or not the aircraft would have avoided damage or injury to people on the ground during the descent. I think many Cirrus pilots are hesitant to consider pulling that parachute handle because doing so is guaranteed to total the airframe. The parachute is really a last resort when you can no longer fly the plane. Based on witness reports, it appears the pilot and instructor were still trying to fly the plane.

This brings up the second factor that should have made the flight less risky - the report that there was a flight instructor on board. According to the Nall Report, flying with a flight instructor is statistically the safest GA flying you can do. I haven't yet seen an attempt to quantify the instructor's level of experience with the level of safety, but it is my experience is that younger, low-time instructors are hungry. Many of these instructors seem willing to fly in marginal weather since flying is how they earn their meager income and build the flight time required to move on to better paying, more respectable flying. Add to this equation a client who really wants to fly that day and you have the potential for some risky decision making.

The last factor that has been mentioned is the advanced avionics found in Cirrus aircraft, which some say should have prevented the crash. I don't know the vintage of the SR20 involved in the accident, but some of the older SR20s are steam gauge planes and lack many of the advanced features of the later models. And this just in - a glass panel cannot keep a pilot from hitting an obstruction. Used properly, terrain awareness can increase the safety of flight, but it is no guarantee.

After learning of the accident, I did a quick check of the surface weather observations for Tereboro Airport, where the flight originated, for the time period before and after the accident.

KTEB 111551Z 10007KT 060V120 7SM OVC015 17/12 A2994 RMK AO2 SLP139 T01670117
KTEB 111651Z 11007KT 7SM OVC015 17/12 A2993 RMK AO2 SLP133 T01670122
KTEB 111751Z 09007KT 7SM OVC017 17/12 A2990 RMK AO2 SLP125 T01670122 10172 20150 58017
KTEB 111851Z 08007KT 7SM OVC019 17/13 A2987 RMK AO2 SLP115 T01720128
KTEB 111951Z COR 09008KT 3SM DZ OVC019 17/13 A2986 RMK AO2 DZB48 SLP109 P0000 T01720128
KTEB 112031Z 07004KT 2SM RA OVC017 17/13 A2985 RMK AO2 DZE02RAB02 P0005
KTEB 112051Z VRB05KT 2SM -RA OVC019 16/13 A2984 RMK AO2 DZE02RAB02 SLP106 P0010 60010 T01610133 56020

It's too early to know all the details of this particular crash, but it clearly was not a good day to be flying VFR. While the visibly at times was more than 5 miles, the cloud ceiling was never above 2000 feet.

The probability of a technically advanced aircraft with a qualified and appropriately rated flight instructor on board flying into a building at a low altitude in marginal VFR conditions is very, very low, but that probability is not zero. If you think it can't happen to you, think again.

Night Flights, Hearing Voices, & Small Arms Fire

The weather in Northern California the past two weeks has been excellent for flying. Warm, but not too warm. Calm winds and a pressure gradient pattern that has kept the marine layer mostly off the coast. Add to this equation a full moon and you have the perfect setting for a couple of excellent, instructional night flights.

The first was a night flight with an instrument candidate. It was warm and mostly dry with light and variable winds all the way to 6000 feet MSL. With a slight haze, we made our way toward Susin Bay for an LDA practice approach as the sun set over the Pacific. Outbound on the procedure turn was were I caught the first glimpse of the nearly full moon - an unbelievably large Mandarin orange crescent rising from behind the distant Sierra Nevada Mountains. Of course my student couldn't see this, being under what Hamish calls the cone of stupidity. So I did the decent thing and asked my student to look up. He took a few moments to appreciate the sight and, after the requisite oouuhaa, it was back to the salt mines. During the flight, the moon rose higher and higher, bathing the sleeping countryside in a soft, silver light.

The next night involved an hour in the traffic pattern at Oakland so my student pilot could log the necessary night landings. The tower controller was most accommodating, demonstrating light gun signals twice upon request. I usually point out a good landmark like the Hayward Civic Center to help pilots line up on downwind. Last night, the full moon rose from behind the Sunol Ridge and provided the best target imaginable. We did all the landings available on the menu - normal, short field, power off, and the always popular no-flaps landing without cockpit or landing lights.

Yesterday was a flight in the Cirrus to Reno, part of a warm up for the pilot who will be taking a trip over some mountainous terrain. We succeeded in getting the SR22 doors to latch and we were on our way, climbing to 9,500 feet for the trip over the Sierra Nevada. The winds aloft forecast called for 20 knot winds out of the south and as suspected, the ride turned decidedly bumpy as we passed over the Hangtown VOR at Placerville. I find it amusing that the VOR is actually called Hangtown, which was Placerville's infamous moniker during the mid-1800s gold rush, presumably because of the frequent dispensing of hanging as a form of justice.

This was the view as we slipped just northwest of Lake Tahoe.


We climbed to 11,500 feet and things smoothed out a bit, but the winds aloft were higher that what was forecast and pushed our ground speed to just under 200 knots. You can see that pesky ALT2 light is on, indicating it has failed. This has been a recurring problem and the shop just can't seem to get to the bottom of it.



The descent into Reno got bumpy, but close to the surface the winds were calm and the temperature a moderate 30 degrees Celsius. Approach gave us a right base entry to runway 16 left, which gave us time to slow down and descend. On the ground, I made a quick call home. Surprised to learn that I was in Reno, my wife mentioned that she felt lucky and encouraged me to find a slot machine. Alas, I couldn't find a single one-armed bandit in the FBO. So after a short stop for lunch and some very expensive fuel (which reduced the ramp and airport fee), we were on our way back.

With the midday sun shining through clear skies, the climb out of Reno was decidedly more bumpy that when we arrived. During the climb out, following I-80 through the pass, the VSI alternated between 200 feet per minute and 1200 feet per minute - a good indication of the updrafts and downdrafts we were flying through. Now fighting a 28 knot quartering head wind, our ground speed slowed to 145 knots and provided a nice opportunity to discuss strategies for recognizing and avoiding mountain waves as well as other way to maximize passenger comfort. One simple rule is to avoid flights over mountainous terrain when the winds aloft forecast exceed 25 knots. Another guideline is to avoid flying at midday and fly early in the morning or late in the day, when solar heating of the earth's surface is reduced.

We originally planned to cruise back at 10,500, but the ride was so rough we decided to climb to 12,500 for the brief 15 minute ride across the Sierra Nevada. At the pilot's request, we diverted south a bit and descended to get a view of a lake just to the east of Ice House Reservoir. I was surprised to see several aircraft below us appear as targets on the Cirrus' traffic watch. We did a few orbits around the lake, staying above 10,000', as much to avoid the other aircraft as to avoid the turbulence below.

Here's a view of the Sierra Nevada while we were gently banking.


One thing that didn't happen on the entire flight was the annoying terrain warnings I mentioned earlier. Why no "Terrain, pull up!" scoldings? I discovered that a Garmin 396 that was added to this plane as a backup system was actually wired into the audio panel. This fact came to light quite by accident. Seems the other partner in the aircraft was listening to the built-in XM radio on the trip before ours and I immediately heard music when the avionics switch was turned on. I had not realized that the 396 was connected to the audio panel. That's when it occurred to us that the aural terrain warnings must have been coming from the 396. So we turned it off and that simple solution provided a peaceful flight. An interesting lesson on the complicated interactions that are possible when different equipment is connected to the aircraft by different people.

Back at the home base, we were putting the aircraft back in the hangar when I heard what sounded like gunfire. I stuck my head out of the hangar door and saw an airport vehicle involved in bird hazing - trying to scare birds away by shooting firecracker-like ordinance in their direction. I have no idea what sort of equipment is used to do this hazing, but I could see a puff of smoke in the air each time I heard the report from a small explosion. I returned to helping get the plane secured and when I went back out of the hangar, I saw the unintended consequences of the bird hazing. Somehow one of the rounds being shot had sparked a grass fire. Luckily, this airport has fire fighting trucks on the field and the small blaze was quickly extinguished. Bet the birds were scared away, too.

Going Somewhere

Cessna recently revealed it has been working at a new high-performance aircraft they are calling NGP, which stands for Next Generation Piston (aircraft), by making a fly-by at Oshkosh. The plane sports a high-wing cantilever design, vaguely reminiscent of the Cardinal, with some Cirrus-like features. A castering nose wheel and what looks to be a laminar-flow wing, not to mention the tail, are all reminiscent of the Cirrus as Ron mentioned. I don't attribute this to outright copying so much as engineers coming to the same design conclusions. Look at automobiles and you will see that most have similar shapes in an effort to reduce the coefficient of drag.

Cirrus aircraft have numerous drawbacks, some serious, that Cessna could capitalize on with its new NGP design. The Cirrus have had door problems from the get go. I have a nice bruise on my right forearm from trying like hell to get my door shut and latched (top and bottom) on a SR22 G2 earlier this week. There I was, holding the brakes with the engine running, repeatedly closing and opening my door. The temperature on the ground was about 104˚F and by the time I finally found a way to get the door latched, I was wringing wet with perspiration. Part of the SR22 G2 (second generation) marketing claims was that the doors would shut easily. Since all the late model Cessna aircraft have positively locking doors, one would think that the Cessna NGP would offer the same.

A new 182 is much more fun to hand fly than the Cirrus, but it has very heavy heavy elevator control pressures. You really need to trim the 182 or have a lot of upper body strength to hand fly it successfully. The new 182 reminds me of a Caravan, which is probably why I have a soft spot for it. The heavy control feel makes the plane very stable when flying IFR, but it can be tiring. The Cirrus is a weird plane to fly by hand, but if you have a very sensitive touch, there is some control feel you can establish in spite of the spring-loaded trim cartridges. Given all that horsepower and torque up front, the lack of rudder trim in the SR22 I fly is a shame, really. The Cessna NGP could really have an advantage if it is a more pleasant to fly aircraft, but laminar-flow wings, while offering good cruise characteristics, tend to be temperamental at slower speeds.

Cirrus has electrical system problems and its Master Control Unit is widely recognized as a potential Achilles Heel. The Cirrus I fly has had repeated ALT2 failures and at least one complete MCU replacement that I know of. I'm not the first SR22 pilot who has considered the possibility of a complete electrical system failure in IMC and I know at least one SR22 owner who flies with a hand-held Garmin GPS as a backup.

Another issue with the Cirrus is the ridiculous placement of circuit breakers, alternate air, and alternate static source controls, which would be pretty easy to address in the new Cessna design.

The pitiful ventilation in the Cirrus is barely better than the Diamond Katana (aka Ka-sauna), though you can leave the Cirrus doors open during taxi and that helps a bit. I'm told there is an after market air conditioner available for Cirrus, but I'm also told that the installation requires some serious modifications. A high-wing aircraft is not immune from being hot, but a high wing does give you some shade from the sun and shelter from rain in bad weather. Air conditioning as an option in the new Cessna would be ... cool.

The Cirrus is a noisy beast, hence the Bose headsets that Cirrus markets with the plane. I found my LightSpeed Mach1 works well in the Cirrus, easily dampening the loud racket. Still, one would expect the new Cessna would be quieter inside.

The Cirrus have had brake issues that, combined with the unfortunate placement of the fuel sump drains, has resulted in some ground fires that have completely consumed a few SR22s. With a castering nose gear, the Cessna NGP will need some beefy brakes and Cessna has not had a great track record with its brake systems on single-engine aircraft. Even some Caravans I have flown had some brake problems, so Cessna better get the brake system right on the NGP. The fuel sumps being far away from the wheels should obviate the fire danger and one assumes the NGP, like all late model Cessna, will have a bevy of fuel sumps.

Other things that could help make the NGP serious Cirrus competition?

TKS icing with known icing certification.
A vacuum-driven attitude indicator.
A back-up alternator similar to the one on the Caravan and just one battery.

And if I win the lottery and Cessna does produce the NGP, I'd opt for a turbine engine version.