BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 10:42

Username Protected wrote:

Just the fact that we're now talking about a 300 knot airplane holding up traffic shows how utterly senseless this thread has become.

Seriously. You say 'senseless', I say idiotic.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 10:44

Cirrus sells the Cirrus lifestyle, which is a culture, and pretty vibrant one. Lots of enthusiasm on the COPA forums.

The Jet is a compromise, but no more than any of the competition out there. There are faster, higher, longer, more efficient options, but they all have compromises as well.

If you equate the chute with safety, this bird has it. Although, with type rating requirements, modern avionics, turbine reliability, I don't see it being deployed very often if ever.

For those moving up to the turbine world, if you want modern avionics, for single pilot owner operators, in a modern airframe, the SF50 brings one more option. I think right now the main options for someone moving up from a piston single or twin, are in no particular order the Meridian, TBM, M600, SF50, Eclipse, and Mustang. Most anything else is experimental, overly complex, or kind of old, with all that maturity entails. ;-)

The SF50 will be as easy to fly as the Eclipse and Mustang. A little less complex, so maybe the type rating will be a little easier to master. Does not replace the Meridian, since the Meridian will, in the foreseeable future, remain the most efficient and least expensive to operate factory new certified turbine.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 10:47

Hey you gotta admit tis thread is nothing if not entertaining.

And just to the keep the insults flying Okahoma ain't got nothing to do with the "South" :lol:

we may be illiterate but we ain't stupid!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 10:52

Username Protected wrote:

Don't know exactly, I don't have FJ33 performance data available at that altitude. By extension of FJ44 of similar thrust, it will be about 110 GPH at MCT at 17.5K.

VFR and jets don't go together.

Mike C.

Good thing its not a real jet :)

The reason I ask is I am based in the southern side of the PHX Bravo. On a trip east or west, jets are sometimes sent to Prescott (DRK) on the DP or inbound on the arrival.

Heading direct to CHEKR below 17,500 (in the 421) used to put me in front of turbine departures who had to go well out of their way departing from P19 for example. It was never an issue to pick up a clearance into the mid 20s from there.

I'm wondering if the lower fuel burn at 17,500 will allow for Direct -TO on portions of routes for the SF50, which would narrow the speed difference vs a CJ1 for example (where the cruise speed difference is only 60kts). DPs and arrivals can add a lot of time. If the SF50 is efficient at FL250, would it be that bad at 17,500? It would be interesting to test block fuel and time vs traditional jets in this scenario.

I see TPs do this often. It really adds to their net speed.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 11:37

Username Protected wrote:

Cirrus sells the Cirrus lifestyle, which is a culture, and pretty vibrant one. Lots of enthusiasm on the COPA forums.

The Jet is a compromise, but no more than any of the competition out there. There are faster, higher, longer, more efficient options, but they all have compromises as well.

If you equate the chute with safety, this bird has it. Although, with type rating requirements, modern avionics, turbine reliability, I don't see it being deployed very often if ever.

For those moving up to the turbine world, if you want modern avionics, for single pilot owner operators, in a modern airframe, the SF50 brings one more option. I think right now the main options for someone moving up from a piston single or twin, are in no particular order the Meridian, TBM, M600, SF50, Eclipse, and Mustang. Most anything else is experimental, overly complex, or kind of old, with all that maturity entails. ;-)

The SF50 will be as easy to fly as the Eclipse and Mustang. A little less complex, so maybe the type rating will be a little easier to master. Does not replace the Meridian, since the Meridian will, in the foreseeable future, remain the most efficient and least expensive to operate factory new certified turbine.

The price is within about 10% of the Meridian. No prop, add the chute, roomier cabin, fits in a small hangar, a little faster, heavier wing loading (better ride)... Did I mention no prop?

How does the payload for a similar mission compare? I don't fit in the Meridian. I'm not alone.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 11:49

The old Lockheed is a two pilot rig so that might not be so much to your liking ! Big and Cool. :thumbup:

If you want one, I can fix you up! I have more than one :crazy:

!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 11:49

Username Protected wrote:

Higher than FL280? RVSM?

Yes, both PC12 and TBM can be RVSM and fly higher than FL280.

PC12 ceiling is FL300, TBM is FL310.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 11:55

Username Protected wrote:

And who knows, I might buy one for the simplicity. Shooooosh and I'm in the islands.

Ah, the dream. Shoooosh and you are there.

Exactly what "simplicity" do you think the SF50 has? Are you falsely associating "single" with "simple"?

The SF50 has all the complexity of a twin jet without the redundancy in thrust or systems.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 11:58

Come'on Jason your going to make the twin guys upset with your fuel flow of 43gph doing ~285TAS. :thumbup:

Just love this thread too many taking too few too seriously.
:coffee:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 12:29

Username Protected wrote:

Cirrus sells the Cirrus lifestyle, which is a culture, and pretty vibrant one. Lots of enthusiasm on the COPA forums.

The Jet is a compromise, but no more than any of the competition out there. There are faster, higher, longer, more efficient options, but they all have compromises as well.

If you equate the chute with safety, this bird has it. Although, with type rating requirements, modern avionics, turbine reliability, I don't see it being deployed very often if ever.

For those moving up to the turbine world, if you want modern avionics, for single pilot owner operators, in a modern airframe, the SF50 brings one more option. I think right now the main options for someone moving up from a piston single or twin, are in no particular order the Meridian, TBM, M600, SF50, Eclipse, and Mustang. Most anything else is experimental, overly complex, or kind of old, with all that maturity entails. ;-)

The SF50 will be as easy to fly as the Eclipse and Mustang. A little less complex, so maybe the type rating will be a little easier to master. Does not replace the Meridian, since the Meridian will, in the foreseeable future, remain the most efficient and least expensive to operate factory new certified turbine.

The purchase price is within about 10% of the Meridian. No prop, add the chute, roomier cabin, fits in a small hangar, a little faster, heavier wing loading (better ride)... Did I mention no prop?

How does the payload for a similar mission compare? I don't fit in the Meridian. I'm not alone.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 13:33

Chip,

Great numbers. Just one more example of different strokes in the marketplace.

Best,

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 13:59

Username Protected wrote:

+1. PC12 is certified to FL300. Burns 300PPH at FL300.

Jason,

Do you avoid DPs and STARs VFR when it makes sense?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 14:10

Username Protected wrote:

There are a few turboprops that are faster, most are slower. This won't hold up traffic any more than a early KA90 or a loaded up Beech1900.

Just the fact that we're now talking about a 300 knot airplane holding up traffic shows how utterly senseless this thread has become. BTW, no slam at you Florian. You didn't take this there.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 14:18

Any 300kt airplane fits well in the airspace below FL300. The more crowded space is from FL300 to FL360 (airliners). Once you get to FL400, most everything is below you, and a few big dogs (Falcons, Gulfstreams, etc.) are above you. Airspace won't be an issue for the SF50.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Apr 2016, 14:21

Username Protected wrote:

Any 300kt airplane fits well in the airspace below FL300. The more crowded space is from FL300 to FL360 (airliners). Once you get to FL400, most everything is below you, and a few big dogs (Falcons, Gulfstreams, etc.) are above you. Airspace won't be an issue for the SF50.

This seemed obvious to me. I flew in the same airspace in a piston and it was hardly ever a problem. Of course my plane was aluminum, so maybe that was the reason.

Cirrus SF50