How do laws of physics explain why a V35B is 3-4 kts faster than identical F33A?

The SF50 has 4 surfaces with two ventral fins, so it is really an X tail. So it has 4 places for interference drag.

Mike C.

The SF50 has 4 surfaces with two ventral fins, so it is really an X tail. So it has 4 places for interference drag.

Mike C.

Must be true since it is in a marketing brochure.

Do you comprehend what it means to make a 400 series Cessna fly 10 knots faster?

That is equivalent to increasing the power output of the engines by 16%, adding about 100 HP to a 421.

You think strakes do that?

The claims of performance increase come mostly from variability from day to day and wishful thinking and not from any real improvement. Whatever real improvement there is is not some magical benefit but solving some sort of air flow disturbance under the tail that wouldn't be there with better design in the first place.

Mike C.

I have a friend who put strakes on his 425. It's the same speed as it was before.

I have a friend who put strakes on his 425. It's the same speed as it was before.

After reading most all these pages and feeling how uneducated I must be here is my .02 cents. The SF50 has the chute and nothing else that makes any common sense.

What about the raisbeck strakes on King Airs? Calling Tom C.

The chute doesn't make sense, either.

Engine failure? Vastly less likely than SR series due to turbine engine.

Passenger use? No passenger initiated uses on SR series.

Incompetent pilots? They had to get a type rating, so SHOULD be better than SR series.

Bad weather? Flies over most of it.

Icing? Will be FIKI.

Midair? Will be flown IFR most of the time simply due to fuel flow reasons if nothing else.

When you review the list of CAPS activations for the SR series, they all seem significantly less likely for the SF50.

There hasn't been a single fatal accident in an Eclipse and it has no chute. This is a plane of similar size, weight, power, and, most importantly, mission.

The chute only exists as a marketing tool to appeal to buyers mistakenly expecting the unreliability of a piston aircraft in a turbine.

Mike C.

You are making a massive assumption here and state it in absolutes.
Unless you can perform a Vulcan mind meld with every single purchaser of the SF50, you cannot state it in absolutes. Further, unless you can perform the mind meld, you will have to rely upon surveys of the buyers which I doubt Cirrus would release the surveys and no one else seems to have published.

If I had the wealth, would I buy the SF50? If it fit my mission, sure. Why? I want two engines or one engine and a chute. It comes back to preserving options.

Tim

The chute doesn't make sense, either.

Engine failure? Vastly less likely than SR series due to turbine engine.

Passenger use? No passenger initiated uses on SR series.

Incompetent pilots? They had to get a type rating, so SHOULD be better than SR series.

Bad weather? Flies over most of it.

Icing? Will be FIKI.

Midair? Will be flown IFR most of the time simply due to fuel flow reasons if nothing else.

When you review the list of CAPS activations for the SR series, they all seem significantly less likely for the SF50.

There hasn't been a single fatal accident in an Eclipse and it has no chute. This is a plane of similar size, weight, power, and, most importantly, mission.

The chute only exists as a marketing tool to appeal to buyers mistakenly expecting the unreliability of a piston aircraft in a turbine.

Mike C.

So what about the x-tail on King Air mods? Just marketing?

The chute doesn't make sense, either.

Engine failure? Vastly less likely than SR series due to turbine engine.

Passenger use? No passenger initiated uses on SR series.

Incompetent pilots? They had to get a type rating, so SHOULD be better than SR series.

Bad weather? Flies over most of it.

Icing? Will be FIKI.

Midair? Will be flown IFR most of the time simply due to fuel flow reasons if nothing else.

When you review the list of CAPS activations for the SR series, they all seem significantly less likely for the SF50.

There hasn't been a single fatal accident in an Eclipse and it has no chute. This is a plane of similar size, weight, power, and, most importantly, mission.

The chute only exists as a marketing tool to appeal to buyers mistakenly expecting the unreliability of a piston aircraft in a turbine.

Mike C.

No person has a monopoly on the laws of physics, that's why they're called laws. People can say whatever they want about them, but measured reality is measured reality.

A V-tail has less wetted area than a comparable straight or T tail.

So? What is your point?