That's not good.

A piston single engine, unpressurized, fixed gear pilot SHOULD be intimidated by flying a 300 knot, pressurized, flight levels, retract, jet.


Which isn't the same as making sure the owner is ready for flying it safely.

I predict there will be a few positions for sale when the dreamy new owner realizes what a type rating involves and how not ready he is for that.

Mike C.

Eventually the numbers will catch up to you. You'll realize your paying more to fly a single engine jet than flying a twin.

The SF50 is perfect. No known flaws. That's because it doesn't exist in the real world yet. No one outside of Cirrus has even flown in it, much less flown it themselves. I find that odd.

When it actually comes to market, and real people fly it on real missions, the compromises will become evident. The worst of these is FL280 ceiling, if they even get that approved.


Many companies exist selling stuff to those who can't do math.

They are selling a jet to those who have piston think. The ingrained belief is that one engine must be cheaper, easier than two, as that is the case with piston twins.

That doesn't work for jets. Just watch and see.

Mike C.

I don't want a ceiling limited, slow, fuel guzzling jet with no propulsion, pressurization, and systems redundancy.

Mike C.

No, I don't really think that, and realize it is not the same market. But I do think it is worth tweaking the fact that the fancy new toy is remarkably incapable given how much more modern its design. I wish they would have built a personal aircraft that was of "real" jet speed, range and capability, not the dumbed down version. I would probably buy that.

I am like Jason in some ways, I do not want a crewed jet. I want a personal aircraft that is a capable airplane and not dramatically limited compared to 50 year old designs.

The one thing we can all agree on is that Cirrus does great marketing?

I would think any airplane with a G1000 or up would alleviate most intimidation.

Get a twin rating. In my experience most people without a multi rating have not shut down an engine in flight.

It's best to do that your first time when you have another engine.

That was my decision two years ago. 2 engines or a chute.

I chose the chute. But was a close decision.

Eclipse is lower per hour, lower per mile.

Eclipse has longer range on 45 less gallons.

The low altitude of the SF50 is a tremendous penalty.

Mike C.

I think most of the problems are not with the airplane Cirrus , problem with Continental engine .

The Eclipse is a very intriguing and capable airplane. Unfortunately the company that supports it has a very uneven reputation to say the least.

For a $2 million dollar airplane I want a company I can count on for excellent support and service. Cessna provides that in the personal jet market and if its anything like their piston performance Cirrus will as well.

If you had a citation mustang would you fly it at 300kts and FL250?

Only in the climb .

That, of course, was not my point in my original post.

Cirrus really understands their target market and does a great job of selling the lifestyle. It will be very interesting to watch the impact that the SF50 will have on GA.

Mike, you're a techie guy, you really need to spend some time in a Cirrus...an SR22 would make a great "2nd airplane" backup to the Mitts. My favorite airplanes are legacy, steam gauge, 'system' airplanes. But if I have multiple meetings/trips in the same day, I'll take an SR22 every time. The effort they've put into ergonomics and simplicity make flying boring...it's genius really. That's what I see in the SF50, it will change "jet think".

Actually, I don't think that is true.

I think two PW610Fs burn slightly less fuel than one FJ33-5A at comparable altitudes.

Not saying Eclipse is better, but I am saying the reflexive assumption that one engine is less fuel than two doesn't hold for jets necessarily. This is piston think.


Remains to be seen. The odd part is that as fuel prices go down, the SINGLE jet wins more on balance due to burning more FUEL per mile. That is the opposite of pistons where higher fuel prices HURT the twin.

The SF50 is perfect because only the marketing department of Cirrus gets to say anything about it. The Eclipse has a troubled and well known history. What will we think of the SF50 ten years from now?

Mike C.