Cirrus has formally introduced a $500,000 Rotax 916-powered three-place trainer called the TRAC10. Word of the aircraft, developed under contract by Cirrus and its majority shareholder Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), got out a couple of years ago through FAA certification documents, but at the time Cirrus said there were no immediate plans to sell the plane anywhere other than China, where it’s called the AG100. AVIC said a few years ago it had orders for the trainer but didn’t say how many.
With flight training still strong and flurry of new designs likely to be announced when the certification rules for the Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certificate (MOSAIC) are released later this month, Cirrus pulled the trigger on the new design. “The TRAC10 is our most deliberate answer yet to what professional flight schools need to succeed,” CEO Zean Nielsen said in a news release. It’s aimed at aviation career training programs. According to the certification it grosses out at 2,150 pounds and has a maximum cruise speed of 139 knots. Cirrus says it’s powered by a turbocharged Rotax 916 iSc FADEC engine. It is not approved for aerobatics and spins.
In addition to the trademark whole plane parachute, the TRAC10 has Electronic Stability & Protection (ESP) and the Blue Level Button (LVL). To prevent those forbidden spins, it has stick shakers and wing cuffs. The plane also transmits performance data to fleet management software.
#1, The FAA needs to stop approving any new piston designs needing 100LL.
#2, Not going to be a useful trainer for CFI candidates since spins are not approved.
#3, What flight school is going to be able to afford to pay over $500,000 for a trainer?
The trac10 site lists the 916is & AVGAS 100LL, UL91/UL94 and select MOGAS blends.
With respect, the airframe still needs to be certified separately from the engine. Complete waste of time and effort to certify for a fuel that will be phased out or banned in 4 years, or earlier if lead additive is discontinued prior.
Fair point, but I’m just pointing out that the Cirrus site lists the 916, not the 915, as in the type certificate linked above, and type certificates can be revised. Cirrus is also listing those fuels as approved. Still an expensive trainer, but much cheaper than a new 172S.
You’re correct but the FAA type certificate data sheet lists the 915 with 100LL only. I’m going to go with Cirrus’s information. I’ve amended the story.
A $500,000 3-place trainer is a joke!
200% Agree!! …They just don’t ‘Get-it’! (see previous comment in AVBrief Article):
https://avbrief.com/utah-start-up-to-build-lsa-turboprops-under-mosaic/
How much do you think a new 172 costs??
A new 172 at least has 4 seats (even if they can only be filled with partial fuel), so it has a useful life outside of flight training. It is also approved for spinning (useful for the CFI rating).
3-seat trainers have been tried before, and I’m not aware of any that were considered a success.
No one is filling 4 seats in a 172 especially in training environment. 3 seats makes perfect sense. My guess is they will sell a ton of these – way more than any other trainer. It will also make the step up/ transition to the SR series very straightforward.
” It will also make the step up/ transition to the SR series very straightforward.”
Bingo!
Train in a Cirrus, then buy an SR20/22, then eventually a Vision Jet. It’s a brilliant plan, and no other company has any similar lineup. I’m not a big fan of Cirrus, but they are one of the companies keeping GA alive.
Just take a look at the Piper Pilot 100i, basically an Archer with G3X instead of G1000 instrumentation for flight schools with three seats. Just a few years waiting time from ordering until delivery.
So what is the hourly rate for a $500k trainer airplane?
$242 AN HOUR WITH INSTRUCTOR
I calculated ownership and operating costs of $233 per hour not counting property tax or hangar cost based on 600 hours per year, a 10 year ownership period, $100,000 terminal value, 7% interest on average investment, fuel and lubricants at $40 per hour. This doesn’t include instructor cost.
Close enough to the $242 an hour that I received from an FBO that is owned by a former veteran with me of the USAF.
Is it just me, or does the nosewheel look very much like that of the C162?
I wonder if the trainer will flip over and spin as easily as the SR22 apparently does. Many have been lost in the pattern when the pilot gets slow and over-banks.