BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:17

Username Protected wrote:

Have we made it to 450 pages yet? I’d like to thank Sean Mollet for starting all of this. Not sure what I’d do when I’m not flying or working.

Carry on.

Peace,
Don

Not yet.., but close!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:32

If Jason would have ignored this thread it probably would have died at less than 10 pages.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:34

Username Protected wrote:

If Jason would have ignored this thread it probably would have died at less than 10 pages.

100%

I like the back and forth though.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:43

I pity any newcomer that starts at page 1

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:49

Username Protected wrote:

I pity any newcomer that starts at page 1

This thread is the best source of info for the SF50 you'll ever find. Granted, I wish folks could debate without the insults. I think James and I did a good job of back and forth without insults flying.

People who purchase big ticket items just based on what the salesman told them always blow me away. Sitting in a room with 2 people debating a subject is the quickest way to learn the truth. Both sides can be right. It's a matter of determining which "right" is your "right". Which you will learn listening to people argue.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:51

No argument here.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:51

I wonder how many buyer's made a decision to not go forward with a purchase because of what they read?

None of our SF 50 owners ever mentioned or asked about the thread.

Everything we hear from them is how happy they are with the plane and the plus delta that it has increased their capabilities to see clients and prospects.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 16:53

Username Protected wrote:

I wonder how many buyer's made a decision to not go forward with a purchase because of what they read?

I don't think anything in this thread would make a person not buy an SF50.... just the opposite.

Is the SF50 slower and lower than other jets costing 2X the price? Yes.

Does the SF50 do 300 knots on 65gph? Yes.

OK... I'll take one.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:18

Username Protected wrote:

I pity any newcomer that starts at page 1

This thread is the best source of info for the SF50 you'll ever find. Granted, I wish folks could debate without the insults. I think James and I did a good job of back and forth without insults flying.

People who purchase big ticket items just based on what the salesman told them always blow me away. Sitting in a room with 2 people debating a subject is the quickest way to learn the truth. Both sides can be right. It's a matter of determining which "right" is your "right". Which you will learn listening to people argue.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:28

Username Protected wrote:

This is true and your comment about 99% of the flights being an hour rings true for me as well. There are different kinds of people though and even though speed and range wouldn't matter in 90% of the flights for me it would burn my ass on the 10% of the flights I could use more speed or range.

After Range Rover's, Porsches and just about every other kind of vehicle there is, I drive a Raptor. I've used 4x4 one time but I sure am glad I have it. That's how I picture the SF50 for me. Once I got in it, it would burn my ass that I couldn't go farther, higher and faster and I'd want to see what I could get that would for the $2.8M. Buy your last plane first, right?

The alternative to a Raptor is "some other car".

The alternative to the SF50 is "flying commercial".

Everyone wants their own jet. Cirrus is marketing the SF50 to those people who will use it for 90% of the flights the private jet users fly. It's genius. Cirrus doesn't need to build a bigger jet. SF50 covers 90% of the market.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:31

In 5 years I bet the following will be true:

- this thread will be 1000 pages
- the vision will be certified to at least 31k which I bet will increase range at least 10% - that’s what it does on my solitaire and I bet it’s a bigger benefit for the jet
- the engine will have more power and as such it will be able to take off with 5 adults and full tanks
- the original ones will be a screaming deal at 1.5mm and like old meredians will make a lot of pilots very happy
- it will have some form of anti skid
- beech will still have not delivered a single Denali
- China’s airspace will get opened up and a lot of visions will be buzzing around there

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:39

Username Protected wrote:

This is true and your comment about 99% of the flights being an hour rings true for me as well. There are different kinds of people though and even though speed and range wouldn't matter in 90% of the flights for me it would burn my ass on the 10% of the flights I could use more speed or range.

After Range Rover's, Porsches and just about every other kind of vehicle there is, I drive a Raptor. I've used 4x4 one time but I sure am glad I have it. That's how I picture the SF50 for me. Once I got in it, it would burn my ass that I couldn't go farther, higher and faster and I'd want to see what I could get that would for the $2.8M. Buy your last plane first, right?

The alternative to a Raptor is "some other car".

The alternative to the SF50 is "flying commercial".

Everyone wants their own jet. Cirrus is marketing the SF50 to those people who will use it for 90% of the flights the private jet users fly. It's genius. Cirrus doesn't need to build a bigger jet. SF50 covers 90% of the market.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:43

Username Protected wrote:

I think you're right. You've convinced me. The one hour avg. flight time is a key point.

It really is a key point. Lear Jets and other highly powerful/highly complex airplanes designed in the 1960's and 1970's when JetA was .$50 were "showboats". It was all about "bigger, faster stronger" and nobody really cared about efficiency or range. Haul ass to the next gas stop at 500MPH and fill'er up. Lot's of folks around here can't get past that concept.

Nowadays it's all about "efficiency" and "simplicity". Which is lame but it is what it is. Efficiency and simplicity sells airplanes.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:50

I'm getting there........But I'm not ready to drink the Cirrus truth serum just yet.......I might need to have a Phenom 300 first.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 17:52

Username Protected wrote:

I think you're right. You've convinced me. The one hour avg. flight time is a key point.

It really is a key point. Lear Jets and other highly powerful/highly complex airplanes designed in the 1960's and 1970's when JetA was .$50 were "showboats". It was all about "bigger, faster stronger" and nobody really cared about efficiency or range. Haul ass to the next gas stop at 500MPH and fill'er up. Lot's of folks around here can't get past that concept.

Nowadays it's all about "efficiency" and "simplicity". Which is lame but it is what it is. Efficiency and simplicity sells airplanes.

Cirrus SF50