Big kernel of truth/accuracy stated above. The Cirrus pistons are also targeted towards the
"path of least resistance types", and they are enormously, commercially successful. Textron/Beech could learn a lot from aspects of the Cirrus model.

They own them. They just don't fly them much.

You can't own something that doesn't exist. There are only a handful of these airplanes left. How many BT members are there??? 30K?

You can't own something that doesn't exist. There are only a handful of these airplanes left. How many BT members are there??? 30K?

Very astute observation. Cirri in general appeal to people who would not be interested in GA otherwise at all. They create their own market. And once they become owners, you don't see them on forums much, because they were never steeped in it.

BTW, this is also why SETP have been so successful. People who fly them don't have time to do MEL's. I don't care what anyone says, it's a huge mental barrier and time eater. Had Pilatus/TBM/SF50 made a twin it wouldn't have worked and never gotten the "path of least resistance" successful self made owner/flyers.

That may be the case when it comes to legally using your preferred runway on a particular day.

The runway adjustments for wet, icy, snowy runways can be very large. It is a situation where the turboprop wins over jets.

Mike C.

ME rating is 2-3 days, one time. It is simple and easy.

Type rating is 2-3 weeks, plus 3-4 days every year for recurrent. The type rating is complex, hard, and to ATP standards.

If what you say is true, then these mentally blocked, time strapped folks cannot own an SF50.

SETPs are successful because of their operating economics compared to a King Air. Make SETP cost the same to fly as a King Air, they don't exist, regardless of the pilot training barrier you perceive.

Mike C.

We can rational it and point to the facts that MEL is easy, but I know the SE thing is a huge mental block. I'm not sure why, but it is. I see it in almost every younger pilot I speak to.

More myth than reality. Cirrus did not bring in many new pilots, a few owners who contract out to pilots but overall not many.
The PPL to IR program Cirrus had/has does not get a lot of takers. Look at the accident statistics (including chute pulls). You will find most owners and pilots had hundreds of hours, there were stats a few years ago that showed over a thousand hours on average.
Where do you see all the new Cirrus owners who never had a plane before; outside of a magazine.

Tim

Because older pilots always talk about how hard the ME is to maintain and the annual required training....

Tim

A type rating is not indicated for those folks.

The FAA doesn't require annual training for an ME rating. It is a darn good idea, of course, but not required.

The FAA does require annual training *and* an annual check ride for a type rating, the 61.58 check. Every year, you have to pass the check ride again, to ATP standards.

People who buy an SF50 because they think an ME rating is hard are delusional.

Mike C.

I think you're proving my point more than you're refuting it.

I have an ME rating. It was easy.... and silly.

That may be the case when it comes to legally using your preferred runway on a particular day.

The runway adjustments for wet, icy, snowy runways can be very large. It is a situation where the turboprop wins over jets.

Mike C.

The fact the SF50 doesn't require a multi rating was debated, so it is on point.

Mike C.