Sam
The chute doesn't penalize you that is for sure - however there really isn't much of a credit to have one in terms of premium. One underwriting market was offering incentives specifically for the chute aircraft - that market has all but closed its doors. (Not related to their incentives offered to cirrus aircraft policies of course). It is my understanding that once the chute is deployed in an "event" that the hull is a total loss? Perhaps someone can correct me there if I have misspoken but all of the chute deploys I have been privy to - the aircraft hull was a total loss due to the G loading on the airframe at "touchdown"

A short answer.....a 500k valued SR22 driver is not paying less insurance than what the same pilot in a 500k valued T182T is paying. So there must be actuarial tables which suggest the Cirrus should not be lower priced to insure than any other fixed gear 4 place 500k machine.

The Baron and TBM aren't even comparable. The Baron is half the cost of the SF50 and while the TBM is so much more capable than the Cirrus it's also 1.5 times as expensive.

The Meridian seems to be similar in price and likely share use profiles.

Ok, I've withheld through almost 50 pages.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that I'm in Mike C's camp. I think the SF50 is going to flop. He's got a lot of strong arguments that appeal to my logical side.

Now, am I willing to bet $1K? Hell no...but maybe 20 bucks.

I thought I recall a foreign airline ordering a number for ab initio pilot training. Middle East if I recall correctly. Sorry, no specifics...


Why didn't they do TKS on the SF50? They did it on the SR series. I find that odd.


They haven't certified a jet, especially a single. Icing tests are extremely fickle and companies who have been doing this for years find surprises.


You can find quotes from almost any previous attempt where they claim they have all the financing they need. And then they didn't. Delusional overconfidence seems to be a pervasive trait of all startup airplane projects.

Mike C.

Jets can't go everywhere a turboprop can (think wet, ice, snow, short runways).

It actually takes a pretty expensive jet to duplicate what a PC12 can do. In that range/load class, the PC12 is cheaper.

Turboprops burn less fuel. In some jurisdictions, taxes and fees for jets are high and not so much for turboprops.


Because cultivated ignorance is not a coping strategy that works. Pilots should know what they are getting into.

Because maybe someday Cirrus will do the right thing and make a twin jet.

Mike C.

Jets can't go everywhere a turboprop can (think wet, ice, snow, short runways).

It actually takes a pretty expensive jet to duplicate what a PC12 can do. In that range/load class, the PC12 is cheaper.

Turboprops burn less fuel. In some jurisdictions, taxes and fees for jets are high and not so much for turboprops.


Because cultivated ignorance is not a coping strategy that works. Pilots should know what they are getting into.

Because maybe someday Cirrus will do the right thing and make a twin jet.

Mike C.

Can you translate that statement into a hull rate?

Without numbers, I don't know what "well received" means.

A hull rate of, say, 1.5% means $33,000/year for insurance. For a transitioning piston pilot, this will require a mental adjustment.

Last 3 years, about 1.5% of the SR fleet (48 in about 3K airplanes) pulled the chute or had a fatal accident. If underwriters look at the SR fleet as the reference, could be some expensive insurance prices for SF50 owners.

Understand that Cirrus standards for a pilot are only 200 hours in an SR and an instrument rating. That's a low standard, IMO.

I'd be extremely surprised if the SF50 premium is less than an EA550. I could see it being substantially more.

If the SF50 gets to deliveries, then we will know how it has been "received" by the underwriters.

Mike C.

I'll take my bet to $10K.

If the SF50 makes it to market..... It will be the best selling VLJ ever made to date.

By that logic, we would buy cars with 30 miles of range.

People want long range airplanes even if this represents only 10% of their flight profiles. They don't want a second airplane just to complete those missions, and they don't want to have fuel stops which are risk, time, expense.

TBM is in another class from a Baron or Meridian. Much further, much faster, higher quality.

This looking at the average is a game the Cirrus salesman played. Here quoted:

"For example, we tracked all available flights of the Cessna Mustang for an entire year in 2009 (close to 9,000 flights), and found that the average distance flown for that fleet was 350nm, and the average max altitude was FL280. Based on this profile, the SF50 Vision Jet would be a perfect fit and provide a roomier and more economical option compared with today's options."

To the weak mind, this sounds like an SF50 can do what the Mustang can do.

Surely no one here is that stupid.

Mike C.

FYI to those it interests, tlhere is a major article in the January Flying on BRS/Cirrus/Flight Design chute experience, actually one of the longest pieces I've seen in the magazine in years. Not online yet but should be next week. Quotes the BT poll on chutes among many other data points.

How does the insurance industry deal with the moral hazard the chute offers?

If you need to cash out on your somewhat overinsured airplane, or you are underwater on your loan, go somewhere "safe" and pull the chute. Plane is totaled, Cirrus gets another "save", you get a check.

If the SF50 used value falls steeply due to more awareness of cost of operation, we could start to have a moral hazard with a lot of first owners underwater.

Won't hurt Cirrus, they'd get the publicity, liability reduction of one less aircraft in the field, and the potential new replacement sale.

Mike C.

That's a damn good point. I know of a guy who ditched an A* in a lake for insurance, crazy bastard. It worked, too. What's to stop guys with no morals from making a move that they think is safe?

Tim,

I'm not sure where you have Googled your info but a new Baron is $1.1MM you might want to recheck some of those other real purchase price numbers.

Tim,

I'm not sure where you have Googled your info but a new Baron is $1.1MM you might want to recheck some of those other real purchase price numbers.