14 Jan 2026, 23:21 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 13:59 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: You went to Cancun around Xmas New Years. I've done that trip at that time. I think your ATC delay was due to flow control into Cancun and not ATL traffic saturation. Once you were in the air it was hard for ATC to hold you for flow control so you just slipped into the system.
Many 135 operators are required in their OPSPECS to be IFR with passengers and can't use that dodge. Also you can burn into your fuel reserve quicker in a jet VFR low. Heading into Cancun is not when I want to be getting low on fuel because I was low for a while picking up my clearance into the FLs. I agree. But Cancun, Atlanta, tomato, tomato. Doesn't really matter why. It was a zoo out there. That said, once I got over Florida everyone was bitching about ATL ATC and the "supposed" delay. Miami center said "I don't know why they're claiming a delay... there's no delay, I'm climbing everyone". ATC is another cog in Murphy's Law. It's just another thing to go wrong Even at 15k' the whole way I would land with 1200lbs on board.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 14:06 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/09/13 Posts: 1910 Post Likes: +927 Location: KCMA
Aircraft: Aero Commander 980
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If I lived in NYC, I'd have a jet like you. The main reason I bought PC12 is Atlanta. I'm close to everything except the ski slopes. Sitting at the Ritz in SOBE writing this. Flew down to FXE on Friday. Bit of icing departing the NY area that the hot wings handled easily. 3:14 flight. 150+ headwinds in the lower FLs from NY to NC. Went up to FL450 for about an 80kt headwind. Put a raft in the back and went down AR21 overwater. Used a lot of the capabilities of the CJ2+ to make it a nice relaxing flight.
This illustrates the one disadvantage of a TP. Jets can't get above winds and pistons can get below. TP speed offsets the advantage of the pistons but I wanted to get my plug in for piston twins.
They have their place but I strongly consider winds before blasting off long distance during winter in my piston twin.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 14:38 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/25/13 Posts: 615 Post Likes: +128
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This illustrates the one disadvantage of a TP. Jets can't get above winds and pistons can get below. TP speed offsets the advantage of the pistons but I wanted to get my plug in for piston twins.
They have their place but I strongly consider winds before blasting off long distance during winter in my piston twin.
This actually illustrates the advantage of SETP. Penalty to stay at FL180 in a TBM is 25knots and 25gph. You can do 290knots at 85gph all day long. I still think TBM/Pilatus are impossible to beat time and/or economy wise on any trip under 600nm. But to some, including me, pumping that extra 40gph is worth the piece of mind of knowing I won't become a glider. Been there, done that, don't want to do it anymore.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 15:03 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21067 Post Likes: +26508 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Out of Atlanta, a jet will NOT beat me to NYC, Chicago or S. Florida. Show us an example of an SP jet being beat by a PC12 flown on the above trips within a few hours of each other. Be patient, it will take you some time to find it. Quote: Who cares if it's "owner flown"? The owner. It is misleading to suggest the PC12 is popular with owner operators when most of them do something else. Quote: "Simpler"? How? No prop, no prop deice, no prop governor. These are all added items over a jet, including the failures and emergency procedures associated with them. A twin jet is simpler when an engine fails. A jet is simpler to fly over weather the PC12 can't top. A jet is simpler to fly over turbulence. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 15:06 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/31/09 Posts: 5193 Post Likes: +3038 Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Even at 15k' the whole way I would land with 1200lbs on board. When you get irrational and buy your jet you will like SE a lot of that flexibility. I seem to have no reason to go around ATL. Last time I flew into the area was when NVAA was there.
_________________ Allen
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 15:08 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21067 Post Likes: +26508 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Stay with your PC12. If I owned a jet, I would say the same thing to Jason. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 15:25 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I seem to have no reason to go around ATL. Last time I flew into the area was when NVAA was there. Nobody has a reason to come to Atlanta. I'm only here because this is where business and family are. Otherwise I'd be in NYC..... with a jet. 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 15:27 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Show us an example of an SP jet being beat by a PC12 flown on the above trips within a few hours of each other.
Mike C. I never said anything about a PC12 "beating" a jet. I'm fine with being slower than a jet Atlanta to NYC. "How much slower" is the question. 1 minute? 3 minutes? 15 minutes? Single Pilots PDK to TEB it's not up to "US". It's up to ATC. The rest of your post is 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 16:11 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21067 Post Likes: +26508 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Out of Atlanta, a jet will NOT beat me to NYC ... I'm fine with being slower than a jet Atlanta to NYC. Good thing your are consistent otherwise nobody would know what you are saying. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 16:46 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4438 Post Likes: +3306
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
|
Jason,
When did you file your flight plan for your delayed trip to cancun?
A two hour delay sounds to me like you may have tried to file just before departure as is the norm in the US or Canada but not when leaving to many other countries.
Two hours is the required advance filing for many Central American and South American countries.
I always go IFR and have never been delayed. I always file the night before.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 17:55 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Jason,
When did you file your flight plan for your delayed trip to cancun?
A two hour delay sounds to me like you may have tried to file just before departure as is the norm in the US or Canada but not when leaving to many other countries.
Two hours is the required advance filing for many Central American and South American countries.
I always go IFR and have never been delayed. I always file the night before. Just the opposite. I was anticipating the rush and filed 24 hours prior. Wasn't til I tried to pick up my clearance that I was told about the delay. Then I refiled on my phone and boom. I've flown/filed international for years last minute. That's the first time anything like this has happened. It's really just due to holiday rush and mass confusion in the government.
Last edited on 14 Jan 2015, 17:57, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 17:56 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13087 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Out of Atlanta, a jet will NOT beat me to NYC ... I'm fine with being slower than a jet Atlanta to NYC. Good thing your are consistent otherwise nobody would know what you are saying. Mike C. You said "faster". I never said "faster". Nor don't I care if I'm 10 minutes faster or they're 10 minuets faster. The difference in time would be due to ATC and not to the performance of the airplane. That's all I'm trying to say.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 18:13 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/03/10 Posts: 1561 Post Likes: +1810 Company: D&M Leasing Houston Location: Katy, TX (KTME)
Aircraft: CitationV/C180
|
|
Let's do a raffle- I will reserve the wine cellar at Pappas or Del's in Houston (central and I live here) 8 highest bidders and me Dinner with Mike and Jason Jason flies in his PC-12 and fills the seats with his ahem...top 8 "friends" Mike flies in his MU-2 and puts a big white board in it to bring to dinner The 8 highest bidders get to have dinner with Mike, Jason and his special guests as they DUKE out the single twin debate. Upon completion of that topic, we will move on to the merits of the SF50 and its imminent failure or success in the market. we will post pictures and the FINAL results of both topics the following day or whenever we are able.... 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 14 Jan 2015, 18:32 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/09/13 Posts: 1910 Post Likes: +927 Location: KCMA
Aircraft: Aero Commander 980
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This illustrates the one disadvantage of a TP. Jets can't get above winds and pistons can get below. TP speed offsets the advantage of the pistons but I wanted to get my plug in for piston twins.
They have their place but I strongly consider winds before blasting off long distance during winter in my piston twin.
This actually illustrates the advantage of SETP. Penalty to stay at FL180 in a TBM is 25knots and 25gph. You can do 290knots at 85gph all day long. I still think TBM/Pilatus are impossible to beat time and/or economy wise on any trip under 600nm. But to some, including me, pumping that extra 40gph is worth the piece of mind of knowing I won't become a glider. Been there, done that, don't want to do it anymore.
What's the advantage?
|
|
| 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
|
|
|
|