FIFY

Doug

FIFY

Doug

Worse than -1000fpm for sure. Probably closer -1600fpm.

41 to go

any main points yet?

They may be fine for corporate operated, on program aircraft. They fail pretty miserably with owner flown and managed aircraft where the owner is making an effort to be economically efficient.

The numbers they spit out for MU2s are just wrong, seemingly developed by using King Air financial models. I think they just develop some generally good sounding formulas and spit out data. There's no way to know how much effort (or lack there of) they spend, and there's not incentive for them to put extra effort into a product that is basically sold as a confidence game.

People in the past have defended them by saying they survey lots of operators. I don't know any in the MU2 crowd where that is true, and there's not enough history to support their numbers for an SF50, so it seems obvious that number is not based on actual results but predictive ones.

Mike C.

It's wrong.

[*] Rate of Climb 2,099
[*][*] One engine out -1200

Mike C.

The OEI service ceiling was much lower than the normal ops one, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_Vision_SF50

looks like a bottom line, ..failure??
viewtopic.php?p=2290573#p2290573

I don't understand this post.

how is this a failure?


total SF50's 41 units
total of the others 51 units
pretty impressive failure. I wish all my failures were that good.

Now that is the plane that I would be really interested in. Would solve some of the issues that the SF50 has with range, payload, short field, high and hot operations. Could they get 300 knots out of it.... Sure. Would take 1000HP ish, but there is no real difference between 260 and 300 knots, and 260 would be a lot more efficient with better range and payload specifics. Would be an easier transition for the Cirrus pilots wanting to upgrade, no type rating or 61.58 stress/hassle.

Probably not, more like 600-700 HP, which puts it in the small block PT6 series, much less costly than the PT6A-6x in the TBM/PC-12 class (which are much heavier and larger airplanes).


There is for me. A 40 knot headwind is a pretty big factor and I'd hate to have that built into the airplane everyday, what a bummer that would be.

Mike C.

Make it a pusher and they'd have come full circle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_VK-30

Cirrus has been shipping for 6 quarters that we have data on (2Q2017 through 3Q2018). Total units shipped: 63.

Eclipse through 6 quarters (1Q2007 through 2Q2008) had shipped 210 aircraft.

Shipping is not the same as being successful, nor does it indicate recent market interest for an aircraft starting deliveries with a long backlog. The people getting an SF50 now made the decision to buy it more than 10 years ago based on brochure, a bunch of vague promises.

The number I'd like to hear is how many new sales contracts for an SF50 have been signed since the plane has actually existed and the prospective customer had a ride in one prior to signing. Thus it had to sell based on its actual merits and not the brochure.

I suspect this number is very low, probably single digits. If so, that means they have saturated the market at ~500 units, or the plane doesn't sell well based on its true merits. Given there are already a fair number of used aircraft for sale, I count 5 of them so far, about 8% of the fleet, there's no reason to sign a delivery contract with Cirrus.

Mike C.