15 Jan 2026, 18:52 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 09:17 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4438 Post Likes: +3306
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
|
Steven,
Do you have any insight as to what happened in the westwind crash in Alabama a while back?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 09:44 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Debating twin versus single with someone who has no twin experience is pointless. Flying a twin requires a higher level of proficiency, it's no secret. If you aren't comfortable with the risks, don't reap the rewards, simple as that.
Definite thread drift for sure. Then how do I go to the places I go in a Pilatus (single)? I hit all the amazing places of the world just like a guy that a jet does. Probably more. Higher level of proficiency to fly a twin has nothing to do with going places. I fly into Teterboro and Aspen all the time. I never miss a beat. It's not that hard to do. What level of proficiency am I missing out on? Do you ever get of Flightaware and look at 50+ PC12's flying at any given time all over the world? Waaaaaaaaay more than any SP jet. Where am I lacking in proficiency? What are the rewards I'm missing out on flying a Pilatus? I make my destinations non stop with a full boat. What SP jet can do this? What are the rewards? Please explain. If the reward of JET was so great, wouldn't they hold their value better? They crash in value like no product I've ever seen. Sell me on "jet". I'm ready. I can afford it. I crunch the numbers constantly. It doesn't take much number crunching before I realize the only reason I'm doing it is to say "I have a jet".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:10 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21079 Post Likes: +26518 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Do you ever get of Flightaware and look at 50+ PC12's flying at any given time all over the world? Slow airplanes stay in the air longer. :-) If you only look at owner flown PC12s, then not so many PC12s flying. The cargo, freight, and other commercial uses of PC12 is what drives the utilization, so not a true apples to apples when looking at SP jets. Quote: Where am I lacking in proficiency? Do you really want someone to answer that question? No good pilot thinks they are 100% proficient. There is no such thing in my view. Quote: What are the rewards? 100 knots faster, 10,000 ft higher, quieter, safer, simpler. Main negatives to jets are cost and runway issues (short and/or slick). Turboprop can go when and where jets can't in some cases. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:16 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21079 Post Likes: +26518 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: What happened to this Lear? Appears to be loss of awareness while flying over a dark ocean. Their inability to manage altitude and heading is strange. That flight appears to have two passengers sitting up front and no pilots. Fly the airplane first. NTSB has yet to release findings, so there could be some other reason for the accident that emerges. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:25 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21079 Post Likes: +26518 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Do you have any insight as to what happened in the westwind crash in Alabama a while back? Little to go on. Sounds like improperly set pitch trim or flaps and stall right after liftoff. They had just switched pilot flying, one wonders if something got missed on the checklist. http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviat ... 3251&key=1Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:29 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/30/12 Posts: 2388 Post Likes: +364 Company: Aerlogix, Jet Aeronautical Location: Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: B-55, RV-6
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Debating twin versus single with someone who has no twin experience is pointless. Flying a twin requires a higher level of proficiency, it's no secret. If you aren't comfortable with the risks, don't reap the rewards, simple as that.
Definite thread drift for sure. Then how do I go to the places I go in a Pilatus (single)? I hit all the amazing places of the world just like a guy that a jet does. Probably more. Higher level of proficiency to fly a twin has nothing to do with going places. I fly into Teterboro and Aspen all the time. I never miss a beat. It's not that hard to do. What level of proficiency am I missing out on? Do you ever get of Flightaware and look at 50+ PC12's flying at any given time all over the world? Waaaaaaaaay more than any SP jet. Where am I lacking in proficiency? What are the rewards I'm missing out on flying a Pilatus? I make my destinations non stop with a full boat. What SP jet can do this? What are the rewards? Please explain. If the reward of JET was so great, wouldn't they hold their value better? They crash in value like no product I've ever seen. Sell me on "jet". I'm ready. I can afford it. I crunch the numbers constantly. It doesn't take much number crunching before I realize the only reason I'm doing it is to say "I have a jet".
As I said, debating this with you is pointless. Mike raises some good points.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:38 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/31/10 Posts: 13686 Post Likes: +7843 Company: 320 Fam
Aircraft: 58TC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: That flight appears to have two passengers sitting up front and no pilots.
And yet these were two pro medivac pilots who likely had more experience than both of us. There are no absolutes in aviation.
_________________ Views are my own and don’t represent employers or clients My 58TC https://tinyurl.com/mry9f8f6
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:42 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Do you ever get of Flightaware and look at 50+ PC12's flying at any given time all over the world? Slow airplanes stay in the air longer. :-) If you only look at owner flown PC12s, then not so many PC12s flying. The cargo, freight, and other commercial uses of PC12 is what drives the utilization, so not a true apples to apples when looking at SP jets. Quote: Where am I lacking in proficiency? Do you really want someone to answer that question? No good pilot thinks they are 100% proficient. There is no such thing in my view. Quote: What are the rewards? 100 knots faster, 10,000 ft higher, quieter, safer, simpler. Main negatives to jets are cost and runway issues (short and/or slick). Turboprop can go when and where jets can't in some cases. Mike C.
Yes, my airplane is slower than a jet if you take only cruise speed into account. But that's only 25% of the equation. Out of Atlanta, a jet will NOT beat me to NYC, Chicago or S. Florida.
Did I say I was 100% proficient?
Who cares if it's "owner flown"? It's a PC12 doing what PC12's do.
Again, cruise speed is only 25% of the of the equation. I've flown all over the Western Hemisphere of this planet and never needed 10K more feet. maybe a jet is quiter but I already don't wear a headest. "Safer" is totally subjective. There are no numbers to back this up. "Simpler"? How?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:43 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/18/13 Posts: 1152 Post Likes: +770
Aircraft: 737
|
|
|
Ain't that the truth. You do everything you can to keep it safe and reduce the luck factor needed to complete a flight safely, but when your number is up...
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:45 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/18/13 Posts: 1152 Post Likes: +770
Aircraft: 737
|
|
|
Hey Jason- my plane is faster than yours. Also, I have larger genitalia that comes only with operating a twin. Nah nah.
Lol. This thread is fantastic, but I'm tuning out after it hits 100 pages. It's like stopping in at a bus crash in slow motion.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:45 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: As I said, debating this with you is pointless. Mike raises some good points. It's pointless because you can NEVER back up your position. You just say things like this and give up. I asked you to "sell me". I'm all ears. I want a jet. I just can't make the math work. I'll probably get one anyways because I want one. But at least I acknowledge why I'm doing it and that it's totally irrational.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:46 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/30/12 Posts: 2388 Post Likes: +364 Company: Aerlogix, Jet Aeronautical Location: Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: B-55, RV-6
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Steven,
Do you have any insight as to what happened in the westwind crash in Alabama a while back? I do recall they were conducting training. Beyond that, I haven't heard anything and I hate to speculate with no other indicators of what could have went wrong. Our biggest issue on Westwinds was the flap system. Split flaps while conducting V1 cuts could definitely cause some issues, but that is a shot in the dark and probably worth what you paid for it. I'll follow up and see what I can find out.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 11:53 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/30/12 Posts: 2388 Post Likes: +364 Company: Aerlogix, Jet Aeronautical Location: Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: B-55, RV-6
|
|
Username Protected wrote: As I said, debating this with you is pointless. Mike raises some good points. It's pointless because you can NEVER back up your position. You just say things like this and give up. I asked you to "sell me". I'm all ears. I want a jet. I just can't make the math work. I'll probably get one anyways because I want one. But at least I acknowledge why I'm doing it and that it's totally irrational.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 12:10 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/31/09 Posts: 5193 Post Likes: +3038 Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I want a jet. I just can't make the math work. I'll probably get one anyways because I want one. But at least I acknowledge why I'm doing it and that it's totally irrational. Using a headset (or boom mic) is a requirement for SP jests. You won't like that. Stay with your PC12. It seems to be serving you fine.
_________________ Allen
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2026
|
|
|
|