BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 15:56

I'm just gonna sit here... mind my own business and watch this thread come completely unwound!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 16:01

Username Protected wrote:

:popcorn:

I'm just gonna sit here... mind my own business and watch this thread come completely unwound!

It did 150 pages ago.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 16:30

Username Protected wrote:

I don't get the perceived consternation about type ratings. The insurance companies will require XYZ training for most any turbine with a prop or not. It's not really any more to do a type rating, just a checkride. Anyone who's going to spend the money to buy one and the time to get trained for one, isn't going to lose any sleep over a checkride at the end.

+1. We;ve said this in this thread 100 times. PC12 is 1 week of SIMCOM for initial. Phenom 300 is 2 weeks in Dallas for a type rating. I can deal with either and...... I do want to learn who to fly the airplane. It's not a big deal.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 16:31

Username Protected wrote:

:popcorn:

I'm just gonna sit here... mind my own business and watch this thread come completely unwound!

It did 150 pages ago.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 17:31

Everybody's waiting for the launch. Somebody nailed back a ways: Every four pages say the same crap 50 times.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 17:57

Username Protected wrote:

I don't get the perceived consternation about type ratings. The insurance companies will require XYZ training for most any turbine with a prop or not. It's not really any more to do a type rating, just a checkride. Anyone who's going to spend the money to buy one and the time to get trained for one, isn't going to lose any sleep over a checkride at the end.

+1. We;ve said this in this thread 100 times. PC12 is 1 week of SIMCOM for initial. Phenom 300 is 2 weeks in Dallas for a type rating. I can deal with either and...... I do want to learn who to fly the airplane. It's not a big deal.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 18:25

Username Protected wrote:

Your signing up for a checkride every year with a jet.

Which most of the time is done with a DPE employed by the simulator outfit.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 18:26

Username Protected wrote:

:popcorn:

I'm just gonna sit here... mind my own business and watch this thread come completely unwound!

It's a self-winding thread. Goes in circles 'yeah but!'

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 19:04

Username Protected wrote:

I don't get the perceived consternation about type ratings. The insurance companies will require XYZ training for most any turbine with a prop or not. It's not really any more to do a type rating, just a checkride. Anyone who's going to spend the money to buy one and the time to get trained for one, isn't going to lose any sleep over a checkride at the end.

+1. We;ve said this in this thread 100 times. PC12 is 1 week of SIMCOM for initial. Phenom 300 is 2 weeks in Dallas for a type rating. I can deal with either and...... I do want to learn who to fly the airplane. It's not a big deal.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 19:56

Username Protected wrote:

It takes a full wardrobe of big girl panties to go get a type rating and then maintain it every year. It is a serious commitment in time, effort and expense!

The type rating is a big deal. If you don't think so go get a a couple. :dancing:

.

Yawn. In many countries you get a type rating for every model, i've probably got 40 of them. It's no big deal. In a small plane like this it's just going to be part of your annual recurrent. Probably take 2-3 days.

Not to disparage your accomplishments in achieving a type rating. Well done.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 20:24

Yes,
The TBM as a type rating in Canada as its over 250 kts VMO.

Username Protected wrote:

It takes a full wardrobe of big girl panties to go get a type rating and then maintain it every year. It is a serious commitment in time, effort and expense!

The type rating is a big deal. If you don't think so go get a a couple. :dancing:

.

Yawn. In many countries you get a type rating for every model, i've probably got 40 of them. It's no big deal. In a small plane like this it's just going to be part of your annual recurrent. Probably take 2-3 days.

Not to disparage your accomplishments in achieving a type rating. Well done.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 20:29

Username Protected wrote:

It takes a full wardrobe of big girl panties to go get a type rating and then maintain it every year. It is a serious commitment in time, effort and expense!

The type rating is a big deal. If you don't think so go get a a couple. :dancing:

.

Yawn. In many countries you get a type rating for every model, i've probably got 40 of them. It's no big deal. In a small plane like this it's just going to be part of your annual recurrent. Probably take 2-3 days.

Not to disparage your accomplishments in achieving a type rating. Well done.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 20:31

Username Protected wrote:

It is a jet with none of the jet advantages. No redundancy, no speed, no altitude, no range, no reduction in training requirements.

But it's a JET!

There will be buyers who want one just because it allows them to say they have a "private jet" of their own. There will be wives (and not a few husbands) who believe any jet is SO much better than any "prop airplane" even though some of those lowly "prop planes" have more to offer.

Even savvy purchasers of big ticket items are often swayed by their emotions and IMO pretty much anyone who manages to rationalize the purchase of an airplane used for pleasure (and plenty used for business purposes) has as much emotion factored into that decision as logic.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 20:49

Username Protected wrote:

If you compare the SF50 to other single engine jets like the F16 or the F105 it stills comes out poorly! I'm sure the original idea on the cocktail napkin made sense to the designer! :crazy:

Great, now you are comparing a passenger plane to a fighter jet.

Talk about that intelligence test... :hammer:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Apr 2016, 21:18

Username Protected wrote:

Jeff,

It might be a yawn for a pro like you, but it just doesn't jive with the Type Rating threads from Mark Hangen or Dave Siciliano. The perceived effort and cost is definitely a factor in my single pilot Part 91 flying decisions. I have no type ratings and feel it is more of an investment in time and money than I want to bite off right now. And yes, I think it will be a factor for Cirrus buyers as well.

Mike

Mike,

I have not done a type rating yet. But based on reading Mark H, Dave S and many other threads on it. Plane complexity and speed are two major factors in the effort to get a type rating. Neither of which does the SF50 have much of.

Tim

Cirrus SF50