”Old tech and uncomfortable” yup AMG stole the same wording from the cessna brochure.
Although in the G Wagon, the bumpier the road the better it does.
Chip-

I "upgraded" my Bo with this years ago. I call it BLDD, or bathroom landing deterrent device. Aka The Bladder.

It's never been used. Which is the whole point!

"Look, you can either go in that or wait until we land at our destination".

They always wait.

And yes, it's for #1 only!!

Yep, 3.5M for a Jet and then crap in a bucket?

For less than $1M, I have a toilet and I even have a fully enclosed room for it so you can do your business in total privacy.

Last year, I rebuilt the dividers so they operate properly now.

So far, zero uses, but the idea it is there is a significant comfort to my passengers.

As is the fact we have two engines.

Mike C.

Wouldn't that make it a........wait for it.........CRAPS save?

That could be a save even Mike C would endorse. Though, he'd probably claim you didn't go at the hangar because you knew the bucket would save you!

We have a fully enclosed flushing lav as well, but like the Citations it’s just an upgraded version of the 5 gallon bucket. It’s also never been used. Pilot John/Janes for all, but you can use it behind closed doors.

Chip-

Yes, do not buy an airplane because it has a "flushing lav", you'll never use it, nor will your passengers

Now an externally serviceable flushing lav, that's a bit different....anyhting else is a glorified bucket

I just came out of a Vision Jet, and I'm now flying a TBM 960. I’ll weigh in on some of the pros/cons of the Vision Jet:

Pros:

1. It’s dirt simple to fly. Cirrus did a great job of automating many of the systems, reducing pilot workload, and simplifying the learning curve.
2. The cockpit is as comfortable as any plane I have sat in. The ergonomics and visibility are exceptional. Ingress and egress from the cockpit is also better than anything in its class.
3. The Cirrus Jetstream program makes the administrative tasks of ownership easy. The program fee includes recurrent training, base satphone and wifi subscriptions, Jepp and Garmin subscriptions/databases, and maintenance tracking.
4. The chute and autoland availability are nice safety features. Even if you don’t feel you need them as a pilot, they certainly provide some comfort for passengers and many spouses.
5. The rear seats can all be removed or reinstalled, without tools, in less than 5 minutes. We would regularly fly with 2 full size mountain bikes, without needing to disassemble anything but the front bike wheels. It is nice to be able to easily reconfigure the cabin.
6. The Cirrus service centers that can service the SF50 all seem to have a good reputation.
7. It fits in many T hangars, although the aft wing location is prohibitive in many T hangars without sufficient depth to the intermediate wall that is parallel to the door.
8. It is faster than most turboprops, at over 310 KTAS at FL310.

Cons:

1. Typical range at max cruise is about 950 nm, no wind. Accordingly, it is best suited to people with a typical mission of 800 nm or less, once you consider headwinds 50% of the time.
2. Payload with full fuel, and 4 installed seats, is only about 375 lbs.
3. The Jetstream program is about $600 per hour, with a 150 hour per year minimum. While this rate does include items that are beyond maintenance (referenced above), it is still an inflated rate, particularly if you fly anything more or less than the 150 hours per year.
4. Cirrus is a monopoly for all things SF50. You must use Cirrus for annual training, service, parts, and programs. If Cirrus has a hiccup, you get the flu.
5. Cirrus parts availability has been sketchy, to put it mildly. However, IMO, based upon good market knowledge, I think that area is improving.
6. Cirrus requires a very basic 100 hour inspection, that is not required by the FAA. It is only a one day inspection in most cases, but it requires flying to a service center, and thus burns up fuel and Jetstream time.

Long story short, I think the SF50 is a great plane for a pilot stepping up from a piston, that wants a simplified ownership experience, and who can live with the range and payload profiles.

So, why did I buy a TBM?

1. I can take 4 fat guys and golf clubs on a 1,000 nm trip.
2. I can make my 1,150 nm milk run from NH to FL nonstop (most of the time), in +/- 4 hours, with 4 people, and ample baggage.
3. I can land at the 3,000 ft strip that is 5 minutes from my daughters house.
4. Cabin seats can easily be removed, adding payload, and providing cargo type versatility.
5. Lower operating costs, albeit at a higher capital cost.
6. Daher has an exemplary reputation for service.

Why didn’t I buy a twin jet?

1. No autoland, an amenity my wife would prefer for her peace of mind.
2. No hangar availability at my NH field, unless I build a new one.
3. The smaller jets won’t make my 1,150 nm milk run much of the time. An M2 is close, but that has a payload that isn’t much different than the Vision Jet.
4. No good way to carry our 2 big mountain bikes without lots of disassembly. My wife and I take these on every trip as a couple.

The TBM provides a lot of versatility. That said, if my mission were 600 or 700 miles, I’d still be in the Vision Jet.

Happy to answer any questions on either airframe.

Hey!!! I thought only Cirri got bashed here . Chip and I have g-wagon wives. Not sure how they are old tech, though. Fricken car massages you in the 22-way seats, has apple car play, sets mood in 4D with different internal lights, temps and wind with its own music. But the real kick in the pants is that throaty growl from that big V8 that plants you in your seat and leaves a mid range beemer in the dust and rear view mirror. She likes it, all that matters. Plus she likes to fly, so keeper material.

Duplicate

With the money spent on the G wagon you could have a second engine

No brainer to me

If the G wagon keeps you from having to get a second wife, it’s a HUGE money saver!

Ok, the G Wagon for the fictional couple was just a way of saying that non-aviation wife gets out of her new luxury vehicle and gets in an airplane, she may expect the same feel, finish and amenities.

I do live in Franklin, TN… so it’s also a bit of a play on the local flavor of celebrities.

I rarely go a day without seeing a Lamborghini, Rolls, Maybach, etc. but nothing screams trophy wife like the G Wagon.

My wife is around airplanes on a regular basis, she has been in everything from a Mustang to a Gulfstream… even at the delivery of a new Phenom 300E last year she was underwhelmed. But when we walked into a hangar a few months ago and she saw the TBM 960 she ran to it with an ear to ear grin.

Why can Socata sell a little single engine airplane for north of $5M… that is why!

Did the black paint heat up the cabin on sunny days?

I may be biased on the G wagon as it’s made for small people. I can’t even spread my legs in one. Literally the most uncomfortable SUV I have ever been forced to drive.

The cost is crazy but again some people are into status. I have a 1100hp f150 that smokes any G wagon and cost half. But it’s not going to impress anyone.

So program cost on a VJ is $600 an hour? Well there goes the cheap to fly argument. Haha

I don’t know what the automation is that makes the VJ so easy to fly. My Eagle II is pretty damn easy. I can’t imagine there are any more things I need to do flying my plane than a VJ.

Mike