25 Jan 2026, 12:00 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50  Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 10:22 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/13/14
Posts: 9234
Post Likes: +7757
Location: Central Texas (KTPL)
Aircraft: PA-46-310P
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I would like to give my Baron to my son, but ...I will probably scrap the Baron or give it away and buy my son a new SR22 ...
Dad? Is that you?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 10:31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/24/10
Posts: 7501
Post Likes: +5207
Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I would like to give my Baron to my son, but ...I will probably scrap the Baron or give it away and buy my son a new SR22 ...
Dad? Is that you?
I did get a letter by fedex recently from a man claiming to be my son from a relationship I supposedly had in college. He was not a pilot so I didn't claim him. 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 10:45 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 10/04/14
Posts: 1227
Post Likes: +1809
Location: KFRG
Aircraft: Bonanza V35B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Then any thread with the following curse words/phrases you should avoid: - Cirrus
- Chute
- Twin vs Single
They tend to devolve into name calling and unfounded assertions.  I always hope for something better; but it takes a fair number of posts to bury the crud and get the topic back on track. Tim Tim- You forgot to include Dukes/Pigs 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 11:04 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12203
Post Likes: +3089
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Then any thread with the following curse words/phrases you should avoid: - Cirrus
- Chute
- Twin vs Single
They tend to devolve into name calling and unfounded assertions. I always hope for something better; but it takes a fair number of posts to bury the crud and get the topic back on track. Tim Tim- You forgot to include Dukes/Pigs
That is well known, as such does not need to be restated. 
Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 11:13 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 1910
Post Likes: +927
Location: KCMA
Aircraft: Aero Commander 980
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Your full span flaps are not needed it's excess baggage. That's my point. A little more wing and you could be free of that complexity. In a jet you actually get something, not so in a MU-2. In an MU2, you get smother ride, faster speed, smaller hangar, better roll control at slow speed, lack of inflight breakups, and lack of spar ADs. Mike C.
I hate to Intrude on the SF50 thread but come on!
if I am getting a rough ride in my Commander I slow down and guess what the ride gets better!
The MU-2 and Commander are within 5% of each other in both the high speed and low speed range.
Smaller hangar, you got me there!
If spoilers were a better choice for control surfaces then ailerons would be the rarity not the other way around. Spoilers equal no control feel, the Commanders handling qualities are well know to be excellent.
Mu-2s do have a lack of in fight breakups but that is of little comfort when you look at the shear number of accidents the MU-2 has been involved with.
My Commander has no spar AD, never has. The models that do have the AD have mostly been modified. It's easy enough to just buy one with the modification.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 11:18 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8871
Post Likes: +11609
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm buying a CJ1 for a gentleman right now, two different brokers have said "You should get him a Citation II, it's more airplane for less money" and my response to both was "you don't understand, he doesn't think like you" Probably too much thread drift, and not knowing the key differences between the two models, why is your customer insistent on a CJ1? What's the feature or characteristic he's enamored with? Just curious.
The main consideration is hourly operating cost. The CJ series aircraft are far more economical than the legacy Citations. If this were the only factor you could argue that the cost savings buying the older airplane offsets the higher fuel consumption and maintenance... but it is much more than the hard cost, it's the inconvenience. The CJ's pretty much go doc to doc with very little maintenance and very rarely an unscheduled event in between.
Plus, you are getting an airplane that wasn't built (as my 10 year old says) "back in the 19-somethings"
Glass panel.
And specifically for this client, it is predictable. TAP Blue, ProParts... we'll have an op account that hourly funds go into to cover anything that comes up. No surprises are likely. He doesn't like surprises. Legacy Citations are full of surprises.
He cares far less about how much money the airplane cost than he does having unplanned expenditures.
Economical. Simple. Safe. Predictable.
We also looked at Premiers, but not as predictable and didn't provide the ability to (in a simple transition) move up in aircraft. I would expect a CJ2+ will be in the not so distant future.
_________________
Be kind. You never know what someone is going through.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 11:20 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8871
Post Likes: +11609
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I hate to Intrude on the SF50 thread but come on!
if I am getting a rough ride in my Commander I slow down and guess what the ride gets better!
The MU-2 and Commander are within 5% of each other in both the high speed and low speed range.
Smaller hangar, you got me there!
Since when is smaller better?
_________________
Be kind. You never know what someone is going through.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 11:52 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have lots of pilot buddies. Non are on BT or even know what BT is. I have lots of pilot buddies. Most of them are on BT, but I don't think any of them told me they were your buddy. Maybe being your buddy and being on BT are just incompatible. Mike C.
I think you mis-read my post. I wasn't saying "I have no buddies on BT". Obviously, we're all here on BT utilizing BT. I'm talking about the pilots I know that are not on BT and have never heard of BT. Because..... if they were on BT they wouldn't be the people I was just posting about.
Amazed this needs to be clarified.... and it has nothing to do with what my point was.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 12:00 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/03/08
Posts: 17130
Post Likes: +29178
Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
|
|
|
so...you and I aren't "buddies" but I enjoy reading your posts...but if we ever met in person and became "buddies" would I have to drop off BT and stop reading your posts? And would i also have to remove the ailerons from my airplane? Or is your anti-buddies who have no ailerons? It's so confusing. But I love the SF50 and hope to catch a ride in one someday, maybe we should start a thread about the SF50 since it's such a neat idea ?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 12:03 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: so...you and I aren't "buddies" but I enjoy reading your posts...but if we ever met in person and became "buddies" would I have to drop off BT and stop reading your posts? And would i also have to remove the ailerons from my airplane? Or is your anti-buddies who have no ailerons? It's so confusing. But I love the SF50 and hope to catch a ride in one someday, maybe we should start a thread about the SF50 since it's such a neat idea ? I've been lost on the "ailerons comments" the last few pages. I think I just start blocking things out after a while. 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 12:06 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11
Posts: 11068
Post Likes: +7099
Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have lots of pilot buddies. Non are on BT or even know what BT is. I have lots of pilot buddies. Most of them are on BT, but I don't think any of them told me they were your buddy. Maybe being your buddy and being on BT are just incompatible. Mike C.
Quote: I think you mis-read my post. I wasn't saying "I have no buddies on BT". Obviously, we're all here on BT utilizing BT. I'm talking about the pilots I know that are not on BT and have never heard of BT. Because..... if they were on BT they wouldn't be the people I was just posting about.
Amazed this needs to be clarified.... and it has nothing to do with what my point was.
Well, before Don L and the word people step in, your prose definitely states that you have lot's of Pilot Buddies and non(e) are on BT.......
that being said, Jason and I are buds 
_________________
---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 12:12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Well, before Don L and the word people step in, your prose definitely states that you have lot's of Pilot Buddies and non(e) are on BT.......
Yup. I'll proofread better next time.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 12:31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/30/15
Posts: 797
Post Likes: +843
Location: NH; KLEB
Aircraft: M2, erstwhile G58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If you talk to the sales guys from Cirrus, they'll tell you the chute is everything. I was sitting in the Cirrus booth at Osh, talking with a rep, while people lined up to sit in their planes (50 people in the display) . The Beech display was empty and the reps looked like they were at a funeral. Partly due to chute... partly due to the fact that they have not updated their pistons in 50 years, except for Garmin. The planes literally look like something from Ozzie & Harriet that someone dropped a couple of glass panels into. A weird combination of "your Father's Oldsmobile" and Brylcreem meets Garmin. Beech's cabin aesthetics are abysmal compared with Cirrus. Cirrus screams 2020. Beech screams 1920. The numbers show it. This coming from a guy who bought a Baron.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 20 Apr 2017, 14:10 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/07/11
Posts: 883
Post Likes: +492
Location: KBED, KCRE
Aircraft: Phenom 100
|
|
|
Pretty sure CAPS event 68 was initiated by the passenger.
Chip-
|
|
| 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 2007-2026
|
|
|
|
