BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2019, 21:52

Username Protected wrote:

Big advantage to TBM on take off and landing distances

Not really...

TBM 850 takeoff = 2035 feet; landing groundroll = 1840 ft; Vso = 65 kts
SF50 Jet takeoff = 2036 feet; landing groundroll = 1628 ft; Vso = 67 kts
http://www.tbm.aero/wp-content/uploads/ ... -Pilot.pdf
https://cirrusaircraft.com/aircraft/vision-jet/

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2019, 22:08

Username Protected wrote:

How much useful load increase does vision need to match tbm? Cabin sure seemed bigger to me crawling around both. How far apart are the ranges?

From some quick Googling:

With full fuel, payload is about 500 lbs in the Vision Jet and about 600 lbs in the TBM 850. The TBM has more range (1700 miles at 290 mph, with the Vision Jet going about 1200 miles at 345 mph).

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2019, 22:24

Username Protected wrote:

Big advantage to TBM on take off and landing distances

Not really...

TBM 850 takeoff = 2035 feet; landing groundroll = 1840 ft; Vso = 65 kts
SF50 Jet takeoff = 2036 feet; landing groundroll = 1628 ft; Vso = 67 kts
http://www.tbm.aero/wp-content/uploads/ ... -Pilot.pdf
https://cirrusaircraft.com/aircraft/vision-jet/

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2019, 22:38

I am a huge fan of Cirrus aircraft and spent a lot of time looking at the Vision. Had the opportunity to be one of the early owners which was tempting. I think it is an aircraft with a lot to recommend it but for my missions the TBM just made more sense. As I look at other light jets the TBM still makes more sense for my missions. It's a very flexible airplane.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2019, 22:52

So I realize it’s not a perfect way to do the comparison, but just for fun I ran my W&B down to the 6000 lb max TO of the SF50. Realistically the range and payload should be normalized but I am too lazy. Here is what it looks like, under 1300’ takeoff roll.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2019, 23:44

I have the same 2013 TBM 850.
Most TBM 850 have around 900 ibs useful load with full fuel. Real life 1300 nm range @ FL310@ 310 kts tas.

Username Protected wrote:

How much useful load increase does vision need to match tbm? Cabin sure seemed bigger to me crawling around both. How far apart are the ranges?

From some quick Googling:

With full fuel, payload is about 500 lbs in the Vision Jet and about 600 lbs in the TBM 850. The TBM has more range (1700 miles at 290 mph, with the Vision Jet going about 1200 miles at 345 mph).

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 21:45

Is that 1300 a vfr number or IFR?

What reserve do you have after that distance? A tbm is 282 gallons or so right? So a 1300nm flight at 300 knots is going to be about 4:45. Assuming a fuel burn of 55 gallons per hour, how does that math work? Is my fuel burn assumption too high?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 22:14

Username Protected wrote:

From some quick Googling:

With full fuel, payload is about 500 lbs in the Vision Jet and about 600 lbs in the TBM 850. The TBM has more range (1700 miles at 290 mph, with the Vision Jet going about 1200 miles at 345 mph).

That's just penalizing the TBM for including the ability to go further with a light load. Try comparing the useful loads with full fuel in the Vision Jet and the TBM fueled for the same leg length. To be completely fair, use the jet's range with power reduced just enough to make the same block to block time as the TBM.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 22:27

We had a TBM in the hangar that abuts the pilot's lounge that according to scuttle but had the cargo door open in flight. Apparently did significant damage. Anyhow the TBM has been absent for over a month.

Just noticed a Vision Jet in that hangar don't know if it is replacing the TBM or a new plane they both would fit in that hangar with room to spare.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 22:47

Username Protected wrote:

Is that 1300 a vfr number or IFR?

What reserve do you have after that distance? A tbm is 282 gallons or so right? So a 1300nm flight at 300 knots is going to be about 4:45. Assuming a fuel burn of 55 gallons per hour, how does that math work? Is my fuel burn assumption too high?

Only way to get that is a light airplane, long range power setting, cruise FL310, and VFR reserve.

Usable fuel is 281 gal. I see TAS of 310 unless it’s summertime.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 23:05

Bummer. I always thought a tbm could work for my main mission which is 1300nm. Guess not.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 23:35

The 9x0 series are faster/more efficient but I don’t know the details.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 23:52

The newer 850/900 holds 300 gallons.
I will do the 1300 nm in 4.5 hrs, landing with 60 gallons of fuel, IFR reserves.

FWIW, You will do that trip non stop about 50% of the time depending on the winds.

Username Protected wrote:

Is that 1300 a vfr number or IFR?

What reserve do you have after that distance? A tbm is 282 gallons or so right? So a 1300nm flight at 300 knots is going to be about 4:45. Assuming a fuel burn of 55 gallons per hour, how does that math work? Is my fuel burn assumption too high?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2019, 23:56

The front cargo door?
If its the one I heard about, its a bagage suitcase that fell off and hit the tail that did all the damage.

Username Protected wrote:

We had a TBM in the hangar that abuts the pilot's lounge that according to scuttle but had the cargo door open in flight. Apparently did significant damage. Anyhow the TBM has been absent for over a month.

Just noticed a Vision Jet in that hangar don't know if it is replacing the TBM or a new plane they both would fit in that hangar with room to spare.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Mar 2019, 07:40

Tom n Marc,
Hasn’t there also been an opening of main door too in flight? Landed and no or little damage?

TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet