Just for clarification, the SF50 is NOT certified. Period.


TBM runs circles around an SF50. Longer range, more payload, more speed, more altitude, etc. And most importantly, less operating cost, by a lot.

Mike C.

I have flown the last 1,000 hours in mountains every week for business travel (scheduled). Night, IMC, weather, etc. A deiced piston twin that can make FL280 will do it safely for a pilot who can interpret weather. This jet will outperform a 421C.

Did Klapmeier give you swirlies in school or what?

That is how it is marketed.

"the Vision is designed to be simple to fly and easy to operate in formerly challenging environments"

That is how the pilot will view it. A go any time, go any place airplane.

Few jet pilots are going to explain why they can't go on a ski trip due to some clouds. You spent $2.3M and STILL can't go? Really?

Witness Klapmeier's infamous icing video for the SR series. Night, IMC, icing, mountains, rushing to get in ahead of storm. He's proud of that.


I think you are in the minority, or are engaging in a bit of self delusion.

People don't buy a jet to make piston no go decisions.

Mike C.

V1 cuts in Lear 20 series can get exciting if you aren't on the ball, but it all comes down to proficiency.

Jason, all of your talk about how unsafe twins are, how many twin hours do you have? Have you ever trained in a simulator for a twin?

Mike,
I know the TBM is a better plane, I have one! I would not trade it for an SF50, but the jet will be an attractive alternative.

Meridian, TBM, Pilatus are all marketed (and Flown) as all weather transportation. The SF50 should be just as capable as those planes.
I bought a TBM to eliminate commercial flights within the US. In 18 months of ownership, that has been the case.

Absolutely. In this class airplane, the deal is you can go any time.

But the pilot is a critical piece of the "system" and also has to be up to the task.

Having two engines makes it easier since you can go higher.

Having one engine makes it harder since you are altitude limited.

This has nothing to do with engine failure.

Mike C.

Other's opinions might differ of course, but not only will it sell, it will sell well.

Once past V1, the twin can fly away.

The single? Only option is crash. Too low for chute or glide, too far down runway to stop.

How is the single safer?

People have been imaginatively crashing Lears for a long time, but I don't personally know of a V1 engine failure that ended up badly. References?

Mike C.

How do you figure the lower cost part? SF-50 is about 2 MM. Very similar twin (Eclipse) is over 3 MM. Sounds like making it a twin would add a cool mil to the cost.

At similar stages of each project, the EA500 was the same price.

The EA500 is now more expensive because it was designed for a high volume manufacturing process that is expensive to do in small quantity. Plus it has an expensive proprietary avionics system.

They've delivered only 10 EA550s in total, and suspect most of these are really refurbs of partially built EA500s from the bankruptcy. This makes the per unit price of each EA550 high. There is no "real" manufacturing of Eclipse going on, not at the rate that Cirrus would make the SF-50.


No, Cirrus could make the TF-50 for about what it is charging for the SF-50.

They have the manufacturing experience to do it, which Eclipse didn't have, and they are building it in a way compatible with their experience and knowledge. They are also not screwing up on the avionics.

Mike C.

Absolutely. In this class airplane, the deal is you can go any time.

But the pilot is a critical piece of the "system" and also has to be up to the task.

Having two engines makes it easier since you can go higher.

Having one engine makes it harder since you are altitude limited.

This has nothing to do with engine failure.

Mike C.

Not with one engine shut down.

I have 40 hours in twins (Aztec and BE400) and an ME rating.

It's really not about me. If twins didn't crash I'd be in your camp. Tell me about the pro pilot flown Phenom 100 that crashed into the house last month killing 6 people. I'm not saying singles are safer. I just don't believe they are less safe. Pick your poison.

I bought the PC12 because of it's performance. I wrote off small CJ's and Phenom 100 because they didn't have enough performance. I couldn't afford a Phenom 300. The numbers on the PC12 were better than the KA200 so I bought the PC12. My decisions have nothing to do with single v. twin. It's not a polarizing factor to me the way it is with you and others. I will buy a twin jet but it has nothing to do with it being a twin. I will learn to fly it properly and love it. That's it.

TBM is certified to FL310, you don't need to go higher as its a TP and more efficient than a jet at lower altitude. Sure FL350 would be nice on long trips but that would never happen because of the single turbine.
I wouldn't want to be limited to FL250 as that would suck.