I think the difference is for most people a VJ is really just a toy. A way to hobby fly and go on vacations. There's not a whole lot of processing beyond "I want that and I can afford that'
No different than my plane or the majority of the people on this site.
For the vast majority of us owning a plane is nothing but a time suck and a large money sink for the sake of enjoying flying and owning a plane. Only difference is the overall budget as far as I see it.

People buying bizjets are rarely buying a toy. A few sure, but most are buying a means of transport where the financials trump the fun.

Only on BT will you hear jet owners question other jet owners about how much money they're spending on their.....jet.

I can imagine the conversation at the country club.

You spent how much for that Ferrari SF90?? My Tesla Plaid will stomp it and I paid a fraction of what you paid!!

First class problems!!

What a country!!

I have not flown the SF50, but sat in one, and also have a turboprop with basically the same systems. I have flown citations (maybe 25 hours total) enough to know them. There is no way that a modern citation is easier to fly than an SF50, much less a legacy citation with less integrated avionics. There are simply more button, more switches, more systems, more levers, more speed, more if this do that kind of operations. Not to even mention V1 cuts, thrust attenuators or reversers, and all the other stuff that has to be at the forefront of a twin jet pilot’s mind. I will give the performance advantage to the twin jet, but arguing that the SF50 is as hard to fly as a Citation is silly. Even things like flying a SID or STAR with the FMS of the G3000 and GFC 700 with or without autothrottles is stupid simple.

You don't think you're going to convince anyone with logic, do you?

He's chosen this hill, and he's going to die on this hill - even though he's never flown a VJ.

The rest of us can move on to something else, like "Celebrating the 500th Vision Jet."

Way to go, Cirrus!

I am flying to Vegas today. I better rest up for the big challenge of putting some crossing altitudes in my alt pre select. Might even have to adjust my throttles. Dang I hope I am up to it. LOL. Come on.

None of these SP jets are difficult to fly. The difference between a VJ and CJ is nothing. The fact that guys are buying the VJ over the CJ because people tell them the VJ is easier is silly. It’s 100% emotional.

It’s like with Motorhomes. I have a 45ft tag axle and we travel with some friends that have much smaller new motorhomes because they think the 45ft is hard to drive. LOL. It’s the same and in fact the 45ft is easier and way more comfortable. Those guys are just getting way worse capabilities and comfort because of fear of the unknown. Oh and many have spent way more on their small RV than I did mine. They had to have brand new because of the fear of something breaking. Ironically the new RV’s are the worst and they all break. Haha.

I am surprised anyone that thinks like that can even afford a VJ.


Mike

500 highly successful, really dumb people

The buy in and culture is turn key, and the planes are very simple to fly, very comfortable, and have the best safety systems available in all of general aviation. Auto land, ESP, automatic autopilot engagement if the pilot inadvertently loses control. Weight and balance and performance computing right on the MFD, all the other stuff like warning you before crossing a runway, warning you if you are lined up on the wrong runway, some of the new stuff in the M600, probably also in the SF50 or soon to be like automatic database downloads, ability to check the systems in your plane, fuel, battery health etc, from your iPhone from home, trend monitoring on every flight automatically uploaded, best radar available for any light aircraft, the GWX8000, cool view windows like your high end airliners, whole frame parachute as a last resort, on and on. Just cutting edge technology to make the pilots life easier and safer. If you drive a modern electric car, and can control your house form your smart phone, and that is your norm, the new turbines probably appeal to you. If you drive a 1973 Chevy suburban, and that checks all your boxes… probably not going to appreciate the technology.

You guys are focusing so much on the difficulty and complexity aspect, and completely ignoring the asset aspect of the airframe

A 40-50year old airplane with ten bankers boxes of logbooks vs a <3 year old airframe with a warranty and a very healthy market demand?

If you are putting 7 figures into a purchase, the latter makes all the sense to me, especially if depreciating + borrowing, the math will really work out well in a 3.5% or so market that most of these were purchased with

not true today of course

its a good thing we have options.

Sure the tech is great. I literally sell tech for a living. And I know first hand it can cause as many issues and cost a lot to maintain. it's not all good.

I bought a KIA to keep at the airport in LA for when I travel there for work. It has almost got me in a crash 3 times because of the "tech". It's always trying to drive for me and has hit the brakes when I didn't want it to. Yes for the ones that cant drive maybe it's better. But thats a slippery slope.

I guess at some point we will need all the tech because nobody will be able to drive or fly themselves.

Edit- Don't t get me wrong. There are lots of great things about the Vj and I have said them in this thread. By responding to the argument that the VJ is easier than a CJ does not mean I do not see thee value in the VJ. Obviously others do see the value and its their money. I am not telling people how to spend their money. Thats Chips and Cirrus job. I am just pointing out that many of the justifications and arguments are not accurate.

They are more emotional based than logic. Which is fine.

Mike

500 highly successful, really dumb people

The buy in and culture is turn key, and the planes are very simple to fly, very comfortable, and have the best safety systems available in all of general aviation. Auto land, ESP, automatic autopilot engagement if the pilot inadvertently loses control. Weight and balance and performance computing right on the MFD, all the other stuff like warning you before crossing a runway, warning you if you are lined up on the wrong runway, some of the new stuff in the M600, probably also in the SF50 or soon to be like automatic database downloads, ability to check the systems in your plane, fuel, battery health etc, from your iPhone from home, trend monitoring on every flight automatically uploaded, best radar available for any light aircraft, the GWX8000, cool view windows like your high end airliners, whole frame parachute as a last resort, on and on. Just cutting edge technology to make the pilots life easier and safer. If you drive a modern electric car, and can control your house form your smart phone, and that is your norm, the new turbines probably appeal to you. If you drive a 1973 Chevy suburban, and that checks all your boxes… probably not going to appreciate the technology.

[/quote]

Chip,

That a pretty ironic statement coming from you. LOL classic.

You realize that you are the one calling others frauds and liars, right? All of these arguments and threads are driven by you. You are calling anyone outside of your world idiots and flat out wrong.

I and Mike C have said many times were are the minority. But we also call out illogical arguments that are not true, many of which you make.

My plane is not right for many owners, nor is Mike C's V. Many guys would rather pay a premium for new and not have to know anything about their plane. Thats fine but don't do it thinking all the emotional sales crap is real.

Mike

You need to stop putting words in other people's mouths. None of us claimed we are the majority.

But we aren't the fringe either like you continue to claim. There is a healthy involved group of owner flown jets out there who get things done without the methods and strategies you favor. Even the folks flying a CJ3 on full factory programs have to get involved in their airplanes to some degree. The idea that owners flown jet operators are detached from those sorts of issues is just false. The only true detachment is going frax which comes with its own set of problems.


I don't.

The SF50 operators are financially inefficient in terms of capability for the money they spend, but that's a choice they chose to make. I've always operated with an intention of getting the most airplane for the dollar and that is evident in my selections. Right now, the cheapest way to fly a personal jet is a legacy Citation. They are easy to fly, easy to maintain, well supported, have a huge vibrant ecosystem, and are quite reliable. Pilots who fear them shouldn't fly any jet.

Mike C.

I think this is really what drives many of these choices. Right or wrong, people perceive that the SF50 will be largely taken care for them. Someone can be called to “deal with it”.

My personal opinion is that idea rarely works out as well as people hope, both because it’s expensive to hand the reins to someone else and you can never get as much turn-key as you hope. But… I also have moments where it sounds pretty attractive in theory.

I find having to deal with the airplane to also be a key component of good piloting. You know what is going on with different systems and/or squawks or whatever by having to figure out what to do about them on the ground, knowing what was recently touched, etc. But it does take time and attention.

I will add that yes the modern digital AP in new aircraft is amazing and safer. No doubt about that. Don't want anyone to think I am arguing against that feature. It's literally the only tech that I wish I had.

The rest of the modern "automation" I can do without.

Not that a home automation system is the same as an aircraft but we stopped doing lots of automation many years ago. People wanted the house to be "smart" and do things automatically. That almost never worked long term. Too many variables you cant control that causes unforeseen issues. For every smart feature we would get the call months later to make it stop doing that.

What we do now control systems. We give the user easy and intuitive control but do not build in "smart" features. The tech just isn't there yet to be smart enough to deal with all the variables. I think the same of tech in cars and planes. The tech can cause issues when there is unforeseen circumstance or failure modes.

Mike

Yes, I agree with both Mikes on this score - the automation is great and workload reducing for the typical cases. It’s where something atypical arises, be it unusual workflow or failure or whatnot, that suddenly the automation makes it worse because you have to figure out what’s going on using “muscles” you rarely use.

I think Cirrus would say you don't have to figure anything out, you pull the red handle.

Let's define a metric that measures the level of pilot knowledge of, and hands on engagement with, their airplane's systems and components. 1 is none/very low, 10 is extremely high.

I think it would be fair and accurate to say that the average for the Cirrus pilot population is lower than those of us flying older airplanes.

Doesn't mean that all Cirrus owners score lower and legacy airframe owners score higher.

And it doesn't mean that Cirrus pilots are "lesser" pilots then legacy airframe pilots.

It's a fair question to ask whether the Cirrus approach results in too many pilots who lack the knowledge, skills and experience their legacy pilot counterparts possess.

But then the question is does such extra knowledge, skills and experience of legacy airframe pilots, to the degree it exists, translate into superior fatal accident stats?

I think I'm correct in saying it does not, for one reason. The chute.

In short, Cirrus is saying "you don't need to obsess over things owners flying non chuted airplanes obsess over because you have a "get out of jail free" card that makes those things obsolete and unnecessary.

That notion is hard for those of us with high "hands of engagement" scores to accept.

Cirrus pilots have to have the same level of knowledge, skills and experience as we do dammit!!

Except they don't.

And if they did, they probably aren't buying SRs and SF50s because they aren't the type to want to have to do that. It's a fundamentally different market/buyer. One that is is clearly the largest market driving incremental new GA airplane sales.

Horses for courses.

BWTHDIK