banner
banner

29 May 2025, 11:32 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2023, 10:24 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20198
Post Likes: +25328
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Is the altitude a legal limit or power limit to go higher?

Mostly regulatory.

Has to do with pressurization redundancy to go higher. Hard to do that with one engine, so much so that the simplest thing is to hang two engines if you want to go higher.

Also, one engine has configuration penalties that limit performance versus a plane with two. There's just no good place to have one jet engine versus two on pylons. This is why an Eclipse with less total thrust and the same weight climbs much better than the SF50, more efficient engine placement.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2023, 10:32 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/03/11
Posts: 2004
Post Likes: +2048
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
If it’s regulatory how does Epic get away with higher?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2023, 10:40 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20198
Post Likes: +25328
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
If it’s regulatory how does Epic get away with higher?

The regs state a performance criteria for maintaining cabin altitude for some time limit after a failure, so you can nibble into the low 30s by having a tight cabin instead of showing redundancy that would enable FL410.

As the airplanes age, cabins tend not to be as tight and thus they probably don't meet the test criteria any more, arbitrary as it is.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2023, 16:13 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/22/12
Posts: 2831
Post Likes: +2780
Company: Retired
Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
Username Protected wrote:
The regs state a performance criteria for maintaining cabin altitude for some time limit after a failure, so you can nibble into the low 30s by having a tight cabin instead of showing redundancy that would enable FL410.
Yet these guys are confident their SE Jet will be certified to FL410. I wonder how.
https://www.stratosaircraft.com/certified-aircraft
I'm not privy to their plans, but it's possible that automated systems to detect pressurization failures and automatically descend will provide an equivalent level of safety to satisfy the FAA.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2023, 16:21 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/13/14
Posts: 8942
Post Likes: +7376
Location: Central Texas (KTPL)
Aircraft: PA-46-310P
Username Protected wrote:
Yet these guys are confident their SE Jet will be certified to FL410. I wonder how.
https://www.stratosaircraft.com/certified-aircraft
I'm not privy to their plans, but it's possible that automated systems to detect pressurization failures and automatically descend will provide an equivalent level of safety to satisfy the FAA.
What's also interesting about this plane is the panel. They show G3X touch EFIS displays, but those are not the "jet" version of the aftermarket Garmin EFIS. It's the G600txi.

Having said that, I like the panel configuration because it's modular and can be more easily updated in the future.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2023, 20:13 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20198
Post Likes: +25328
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Yet these guys are confident their SE Jet will be certified to FL410. I wonder how.

Ignorance enables aspirations beyond reality.

Quote:
I'm not privy to their plans, but it's possible that automated systems to detect pressurization failures and automatically descend will provide an equivalent level of safety to satisfy the FAA.

Hasn't in the past.

You will note that not a single company that makes jets proposed an SEJ because they know the rules and the problems. Such projects only come from companies who haven't done it, and only one reached the finish line (with a Chinese bailout).

The very first SEJ project, the failed Gulfstream Peregrine, was the first and last attempt any established jet maker ever made into the SEJ territory.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 25 Feb 2023, 00:40 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/22/12
Posts: 2831
Post Likes: +2780
Company: Retired
Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
Username Protected wrote:
Ignorance enables aspirations beyond reality.
And past success breeds confidence. These are many of the same people who got the SETP Epic certified to FL350. It's not their first rodeo.
Quote:
it's possible that automated systems to detect pressurization failures and automatically descend will provide an equivalent level of safety to satisfy the FAA.
Quote:
Hasn't in the past.
And no SE turbine had been certified to FL350, until Epic did it.
Quote:
not a single company that makes jets proposed an SEJ....The very first SEJ project, the failed Gulfstream Peregrine, was the first and last attempt any established jet maker ever made into the SEJ territory.
Au contraire, how could you forget the Eclipse 400? They not only proposed it, they built a prototype and flew it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_400


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 25 Feb 2023, 00:47 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20198
Post Likes: +25328
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
The very first SEJ project, the failed Gulfstream Peregrine, was the first and last attempt any established jet maker ever made into the SEJ territory.
Au contraire, how could you forget the Eclipse 400? They not only proposed it, they built a prototype and flew it.

Eclipse never reached the category of "established" jet maker.

The Eclipse 400 was a PR stunt as well. No real effort was made to turn it into a product.

Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Why is the Cirrus Jet so slow?
PostPosted: 25 Feb 2023, 00:54 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/22/12
Posts: 2831
Post Likes: +2780
Company: Retired
Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
Let's look at the tape.
Username Protected wrote:
You will note that not a single company that makes jets proposed an SEJ ....
Eclipse certainly made jets at the time, and they certainly proposed the 400, they even accepted deposits on it.

Myth: BUSTED


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13



B-Kool (Top/Bottom Banner)

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

Jump to:  

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 2007-2025

.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.concorde.jpg.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.dbm.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.rnp.85x50.png.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.