28 May 2025, 17:11 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 10:11 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/23/12 Posts: 2407 Post Likes: +2981 Company: CSRA Document Solutions Location: Aiken, SC KAIK
|
|
Username Protected wrote: can you imagine having to explain to SWMBO that the new plane doesn't have a chute? Sounds no harder than having to explain it has only one engine. Further, you have to explain why, compared to the twin jets, it is so slow, so low altitude, and just as expensive to fly. You can also explain the safety record for twin jets which is outstanding. You also have to explain the chute doesn't work near the ground. If your spouse is incapable of understanding those arguments, you could probably put a button on the panel labeled "CHUTE" and they would feel comforted by that, despite the fact the button does nothing. Quote: It is pretty apparent that most of them (including a couple of women owners) could realistically spend a lot more without feeling any pain, but elected to stay with a plane they felt capable in as PIC. Single plus chute is not simpler or easier than twin jet for the pilot. The single plus chute pilot has to deal with the complexity of failures in those areas where the chute does not work (near the ground, for example). Even at higher altitude, engine failure is far more complex for the single than the twin. Having one engine does not make the plane simpler, nor meaningfully change the pilot training effort. Buying a single jet thinking it will be simpler is a false premise. Mike C.
Mike,
While I appreciate your tenacity at dispelling my comments, certainly you understand that for a majority of the population we don't make decisions like an engineer. For example I've bought 5 vehicles in the past 4 years and I haven't set up one spreadsheet to comparison shop. Same will be true for lots of new airplane purchases - those buyers will be concerned about "perception". I'm not really sure how that fits into a spreadsheet. As far as being simple - I was comparing a FADEC system to the "complicated" turboprop set-up. Power and condition levers, beta modes, engine classes, all seems way more trouble than showing up at jet class, getting typed and flying off in my new plane that fits in my old hangar and makes me feel good (another tough one to put on the spreadsheet).
I love spreadsheets for my businesses and in evaluating future investments and takeover opportunities. For personal purchases not so much....the reality is if most of us applied the same rules to our airplanes, vacation homes, luxury vehicles, watch, gun, jewelry collections we wouldn't enjoy any of them. I don't really care what it costs to have any of the aforementioned things....I do care about how they make me feel....
Peace, Don
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 13:23 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2350 Post Likes: +2564 Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If your spouse is incapable of understanding those arguments, you could probably put a button on the panel labeled "CHUTE" and they would feel comforted by that, despite the fact the button does nothing.
My spouse is incapable of understanding any logical argument... but she's the boss! I usually have the final word which boils down to "yes my dear". Perhaps I could put a button on her forehead and label it EJECT for those times where logic means nothing and I would feel comforted by that, despite the fact the button does nothing.... I probably would be summarily executed a short while after. 
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 13:52 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 04/26/13 Posts: 21663 Post Likes: +22221 Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Article on Avweb on SF50: http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Ae ... 110-1.html"The SF50’s unique automatic flight control system will be an integral part in the CAPS deployment sequence and will intercede to pitch the airplane into slower flight if the pilot commands a deployment outside the system’s airspeed envelope." My take on this is that unlike the SR series, the chute's purpose in the SF50 is only to address engine-out issues in a single engine jet. If the engine quits you activate CAPS, the AFCS puts the airplane in the deployment envelope and "bang". What happens in other failure modes? Good question. Here are my random guesses: Maybe it's not just a handle in the SF50. Maybe it's a button and a handle. If you're in an unusual attitude/disorientation situation you push the BLUE AFCS button and it fixes it. If the airframe is intact, and the engine quits you push the RED button and the AFCS ensures that you are below V PD and then it fires the 'chute. If everything's $#!t, grabbing the handle will immediately say a hail Mary and fire the rocket and maybe it works, maybe it doesn't.
_________________ My last name rhymes with 'geese'.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 14:01 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20191 Post Likes: +25310 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Cirrus is a luxury goods manufacturer just like Hublot or Louis Vuitton. That is what Lear thought, then Cessna introduced the Citation which proved small jets were about being practical. The SF50 is a luxury item only because it doesn't exist yet. Once it exists, the gulf between the dream and reality will take the shine off the luxury. One thing about luxury items is that they lose value really fast. The luxury addicts don't buy used stuff. The SF50 will lose value really fast, so in that sense it could be considered a luxury item, basically an item where the majority of the value is in the idea of owning it, not in using it. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 14:10 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20191 Post Likes: +25310 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: My take on this is that unlike the SR series, the chute's purpose in the SF50 is only to address engine-out issues in a single engine jet. A jet engine fails about 50 times less often than a piston engine. If you look at the SR series, there have not been 50 engine failures which led to a chute pull in ~7 million flight hours. The SF50 might not have a true engine failure in decades. Witness the TBM and PC12 accident history, exceptionally few engine failure fatalities, and a jet engine is more reliable than a turboprop engine. What that means is the vast majority of chute pulls for the SF50 will be something OTHER than engine failures. Quote: If you're in an unusual attitude/disorientation situation you push the BLUE AFCS button and it fixes it. If the airframe is intact, and the engine quits you push the RED button and the AFCS ensures that you are below VPD and then it fires the 'chute. The Matrix choice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pillThe SF50 chute is not quite the simple emergency system one hopes it would be. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 15:13 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/05/11 Posts: 5248 Post Likes: +2426
Aircraft: BE-55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If your spouse is incapable of understanding those arguments, you could probably put a button on the panel labeled "CHUTE" and they would feel comforted by that, despite the fact the button does nothing.
My spouse is incapable of understanding any logical argument... but she's the boss! I usually have the final word which boils down to "yes my dear". Perhaps I could put a button on her forehead and label it EJECT for those times where logic means nothing and I would feel comforted by that, despite the fact the button does nothing.... I probably would be summarily executed a short while after. 
+1
While Mike can take a plane apart and literally put it back together, at least at the engineer level, he hasn't yet learned the "art", not science, of "woman". And salesmanship. As I understand it they already have 600 signed for, and it will happen.
_________________ “ Embrace the Suck”
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 15:23 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2350 Post Likes: +2564 Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: As I understand it they already have 600 signed for, and it will happen. Maybe we can start selling EJECT buttons! We probably already have 600 interested customers....
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 15:34 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/29/10 Posts: 2757 Post Likes: +2585 Location: Dallas, TX (KADS & KJWY)
Aircraft: T28B,7GCBC,E90
|
|
OK, I get that some people (well, Mike...) don't like the fact that the Cirrus Jet only has one engine, and two would have been better. Fine. I also get that you can purchase used lets (Mustang, etc) for less. Fine.
However, let's compare the Cirrus to its nearest NEW AIRPLANE competitor: The TBM850.
The TBM850 is about $3.5m, has slightly more range and about the same speed. I think the TBM has a little more full fuel payload, but not actually sure.
Assuming the CJ comes in around $2-$2.5m, wouldn't they start stealing sales from the TBM?
In other words, why would someone spend at least $1m more on a TBM instead of a Cirrus Jet?
Robert
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Apr 2016, 16:35 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07 Posts: 8111 Post Likes: +7831 Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: People buy houses, cars, boats and airplanes with their heart. In fact they buy most things emotionally. All you need to do is capture imagination and you're good to go.
Look at PPR or LVMH consortiums - they own almost every luxury brand in the world. Luxury has great margins and it's a market that has kept growing and growing. It is impervious to downturns, price or even logic. Cirrus is a luxury goods manufacturer just like Hublot or Louis Vuitton. All they need to do is capture the imagination, which they already have, and they'll sell loads of them. I wouldn't necessarily compare SF50 to Louis Vuitton bag (the former actually has a purpose), but I sat in the cockpit of SF50 at Sun'n Fun, and I loved it. It feels like cockpit of shuttlecraft from Starship Enterprise. Cirrus will sell lots of SF50s just on the look and feel of that cockpit alone. 
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Apr 2016, 12:22 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20191 Post Likes: +25310 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Can anyone tell me what's the hype with the SF50 ?? The false perception that being a single makes it more economical or simpler. It is a jet being sold by a piston aircraft company to piston pilots. No jet aircraft company wants to make a single, no jet pilot wants to fly a single. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Apr 2016, 12:25 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 06/25/10 Posts: 13148 Post Likes: +21059 Company: Summerland Key Airport Location: FD51
Aircraft: P35, GC1B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Can anyone tell me what's the hype with the SF50 ??
The V-tail.
_________________ Being right too soon is socially unacceptable. — Heinlein
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 23 Apr 2016, 12:35 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/05/11 Posts: 5248 Post Likes: +2426
Aircraft: BE-55
|
|
] Username Protected wrote: Can anyone tell me what's the hype with the SF50 ??
What's the hype with the Cirrus?
_________________ “ Embrace the Suck”
|
|
Top |
|
|
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
|
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
|
|
|
|