24 Dec 2025, 23:37 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50  Posted: 07 Jan 2019, 20:01 |
|
 |
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20978
Post Likes: +26453
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams_FJ33
Applications
Adam A700
ATG Javelin
Cirrus Vision SF50
Diamond D-Jet
Epic Elite
Flaris LAR01
Spectrum S-33 Independence
Sport Jet II
Eclipse 700 Reads like the membership list for the Broken Dreams Jet Club. Selecting an FJ33 is like the kiss of death. It should be noted that the FJ33-5A in the SF50 isn't a "true" FJ33. It's a modified FJ44-3AP. Williams found it more expedient to adapt an FJ44 than provide a true FJ33. Thus the FJ33-5A is on the FJ44 type certificate. Maybe that's why the SF50 is the only plane listed above to make it to deliveries. There is a "true" FJ33, the FJ33-4A-15. It has been certified, on its own type certificate, and was slated to power the D-Jet, but that program was canceled. It was too weak for the SF50. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 07 Jan 2019, 20:04 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/17/10
Posts: 4034
Post Likes: +2050
Location: canuck
Aircraft: x23mouse
|
|
too late now but better choices out there? missed this part.. Major applications Diamond D-Jet Cirrus Vision SF50 thoughts on this? Quote: Below the jet’s ruddervator tail is the aircraft’s yaw stability augmentation system that comprises of two small surfaces on the aft end of the strakes. From the runway to 200 feet AGL, the surfaces automatically provide provides a “weak” yaw damp. After 200 feet, the yaw damp kicks in with more force. http://twinandturbine.com/article/cirrus-vision-jet/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams_FJ44Major applications Beechcraft Premier I Cessna CitationJet PiperJet Altaire Saab 105 Grob G180 SPn Developed into Williams FJ33 i see 3 citation models using FJ44 variants here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation_familyApplications L-39 with the FJ44-4M engine Source:[8] FJ44 trainer Aero L-39NG Alenia Aermacchi M-345 Saab 105 business jet Beechcraft Premier I Eviation Jets EV-20 Vantage Jet Cessna CitationJet Grob G180 SPn Hawker 200 Pilatus PC-24 Piper PA-47 PiperJet/Altaire Scaled Composites Triumph SyberJet SJ30 https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... a-turbofanhttp://www.flaris.pl/offer/
_________________
nightwatch...
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 01:36 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 8231
Post Likes: +7967
Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: To make the TF60 profitable? Likely.
But that's true of the SF50 as well.
Total program costs, development, manufacturing, support, and liability, I think the SF50 and TF60 are a wash. They will sell more TF60s.
We have no way to judge profitability, but I bet they would sell more SF50s for $2.5MM than TF60s for $3.5MM.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 01:41 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20978
Post Likes: +26453
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: We have no way to judge profitability, but I bet they would sell more SF50s for $2.5MM than TF60s for $3.5MM. Not clear to me that is true. The TF60 would be such a far superior airplane that it may well sell as well or better at that premium. In any case, the TF60 won't cost appreciably more to make than an SF50, so it would be vastly more profitable if that is the pricing. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 01:43 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20978
Post Likes: +26453
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: thoughts on this? You write vague posts. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 05:35 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/17/10
Posts: 4034
Post Likes: +2050
Location: canuck
Aircraft: x23mouse
|
|
meant this i think computerized auto yaw damper deal, good? bad? necessary? what if it quits, acts up or jams? Quote: Below the jet’s ruddervator tail is the aircraft’s yaw stability augmentation system that comprises of two small surfaces on the aft end of the strakes. From the runway to 200 feet AGL, the surfaces automatically provide provides a “weak” yaw damp. After 200 feet, the yaw damp kicks in with more force. in this link http://twinandturbine.com/article/cirrus-vision-jet/
_________________
nightwatch...
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 09:54 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20978
Post Likes: +26453
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Why would the "hypothetical" TF60 be $3.5MM when a new HondaJet is $5MM and a new M2 is $5MM and a new Phenom 100 is $5MM?? Same reason a P100 is half the price of a P300. It's smaller. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 09:59 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/30/09
Posts: 6025
Post Likes: +3389
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KPWA)
Aircraft: planeless
|
|
Username Protected wrote: thoughts on this? You write vague posts. Mike C.
I believe he also hates sentences. However, he is a big fan of the URL.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 10:04 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Same reason a P100 is half the price of a P300.
It's smaller.
Mike C. "Size" isn't the only reason.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 10:06 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The longer this thread goes on, the less I think jet prices are connected to costs.
For example, Cessna dropping the M2 prices when Mustang production ended.
I think Cessna and the others just charge what the market will bear to maximize profits. This was the model that allowed TBM and Pilatus to effectively create the SETP market.
Tim Ya think? Wow, you engineer types are genius.... ha. Why would one maximize profits when one could just sell something for a % of cost?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 10:10 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20978
Post Likes: +26453
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: So the fact that Cessna has never built a single engine jet is largely meaningless Cessna (and every other jet maker) never built an SEJ because they know it isn't a viable product. Far from being a threat, the SF50 is a gateway drug to real jets. The SF50 is not stealing a single sale from any of those, but creating a new potential customer base. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 10:11 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The SF50 is not stealing a single sale from any of those, but creating a new potential customer base.
Mike C. That's where the market is.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 08 Jan 2019, 10:16 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 3766
Post Likes: +5578
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
|
|
Username Protected wrote: So the fact that Cessna has never built a single engine jet is largely meaningless Cessna (and every other jet maker) never built an SEJ because they know it isn't a viable product. Far from being a threat, the SF50 is a gateway drug to real jets. The SF50 is not stealing a single sale from any of those, but creating a new potential customer base. Mike C.
Probably yes and no. I do know people that would have moved into a SETP or a new or used light jet if the SF50 didn't pop up. So yes it is stealing sales. However, the unknown, as people realize the range and payload limitation of the SF50, how many will move up into a SETP or light jet for the increased speed, range, payload available? This is not a bad thing, but sure to happen. Personally, I think the more people that get into turbines the better. Turbines are safer, more capable, fly more, and support the GA infrastructure better. i.e: brings more money into the system.
_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT
|
|
| 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 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
