21 Nov 2025, 06:56 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet  Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:06 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 3701
Post Likes: +5467
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Charles,
What’s the max range you are comfortable with in the M600?
Kevin
No wind, no apologies, no question range at normal cruise with IFR no alternate (45 min) reserve is 1400 nm. Now if you really fill the tanks, consider pulling the throttle back a little to maybe 255-260 KTAS, easily pushing 1600nm. I did this non-stop flight from Anchorage to Ogden (1865 nm) at 242 KTAS with a little push although the first 2 hours had a headwind. I think the average push was around 30 knots. Landed with 1.5 hours fuel. Attachment: PANC KOGD 032918-2.jpg
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:15 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: There are a lot of corners cut on the SF50 compared to comparable turbine aircraft. Great for simplicity and price, but have led and will lead to some interesting failure modes. Name 1 comparable aircraft to the SF50.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:21 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 3701
Post Likes: +5467
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
|
|
Username Protected wrote: There are a lot of corners cut on the SF50 compared to comparable turbine aircraft. Great for simplicity and price, but have led and will lead to some interesting failure modes. Name 1 comparable aircraft to the SF50.
Meridian
_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:37 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Meridian How much is a new M600?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Just to be more specific:The Meridian M500
They both have about a 1000nm range, less at normal loads and power settings.
The Meridian has seating for 6 adults as opposed to 5 in the SF50.
Range and payload is roughly equivalent.
They both have cutting edge Garmin installs with envelope protection, blue level button, automatic pressurization etc. How much is a new M500? How fast is a new M500?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:45 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 174
Post Likes: +79
Location: Camarillo, Ca.
Aircraft: 2005 Meridian
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Just to be more specific:The Meridian M500
They both have about a 1000nm range, less at normal loads and power settings.
The Meridian has seating for 6 adults as opposed to 5 in the SF50.
Range and payload is roughly equivalent.
They both have cutting edge Garmin installs with envelope protection, blue level button, automatic pressurization etc. How much is a new M500? How fast is a new M500?
2 mil, 260 kts@ 38GPH
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 11:53 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
2 mil, 260 kts@ 38GPH
SF50 is $1.7MM and 300 knots. Also has a chute and a snazzy new design. Honestly, between these 2 I'm buying the SF50.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 12:00 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/03/10
Posts: 1561
Post Likes: +1810
Company: D&M Leasing Houston
Location: Katy, TX (KTME)
Aircraft: CitationV/C180
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
2 mil, 260 kts@ 38GPH
SF50 is $1.7MM and 300 knots. Also has a chute and a snazzy new design. Honestly, between these 2 I'm buying the SF50.
I don’t get it. If Cirrus could do that with a clean sheet SE jet why not with TP? A clean sheet SETP for under 2M that seats 6 and goes 300 knots would have been more disruptive to the market. My guess is they know this and didn’t do it because it’s THEIR market on the SR22 that would be disrupted most.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 12:11 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/30/09
Posts: 6025
Post Likes: +3389
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KPWA)
Aircraft: planeless
|
|
The free castering was probably optional on the model with the second engine where you use differential thrust for steering. Username Protected wrote: One thing that is a little atypical for a plane of this caliber is that the nose gear is free castering. I didn't think that was true for the SF50, the nose wheel was steerable. "Once you get rolling, forward taxi visibility is terrific. You steer the jet with its steerable nosewheel, but if you’re coming from an SR22 and are used to using differential braking, well, that will actually help matters considerably." https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/articl ... vision-jetMike C.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 12:12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don’t get it. If Cirrus could do that with a clean sheet SE jet why not with TP? A clean sheet SETP for under 2M that seats 6 and goes 300 knots would have been more disruptive to the market. My guess is they know this and didn’t do it because it’s THEIR market on the SR22 that would be disrupted most. Who wants a turboprop when they can have a jet? Of course Cirrus is disrupting their own piston market. They're smart. They see the writing on the wall. Now they have a product nobody else has. No, the M500 is not comparable.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 12:16 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 03/01/11
Posts: 213
Post Likes: +106
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don’t get it. If Cirrus could do that with a clean sheet SE jet why not with TP? A clean sheet SETP for under 2M that seats 6 and goes 300 knots would have been more disruptive to the market. Years ago, when he was still at Cirrus, I asked Alan Klapmeier about that exact thing. His answer surprised me: the bill of materials would be more because of the price of the PT6. So they went turbofan for their otherwise turboprop aircraft. Fast forward to Kestrel, and he faced pretty much the same issue. This time he addressed the cost by going with the less-expensive Honeywell TPE-331 engine. Ken
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 12:18 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6063
Post Likes: +715
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
|
|
I dont think Cirrus is profitable at $1.7M or even $2m. Once pilots see what it cost to fly a jet vs a TP they will move to a TBM. Or a real jet with some range & payload. Username Protected wrote: I don’t get it. If Cirrus could do that with a clean sheet SE jet why not with TP? A clean sheet SETP for under 2M that seats 6 and goes 300 knots would have been more disruptive to the market. My guess is they know this and payload.
didn’t do it because it’s THEIR market on the SR22 that would be disrupted most. Who wants a turboprop when they can have a jet? Of course Cirrus is disrupting their own piston market. They're smart. They see the writing on the wall. Now they have a product nobody else has. No, the M500 is not comparable.
_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.
Marc Bourdon
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus Jet Posted: 28 May 2018, 12:19 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 02/27/08
Posts: 3450
Post Likes: +1498
Location: Galveston, TX
Aircraft: Malibu PA46-310P
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
2 mil, 260 kts@ 38GPH
SF50 is $1.7MM and 300 knots. Also has a chute and a snazzy new design. Honestly, between these 2 I'm buying the SF50.
Isn't the Sf50 really $2.1 unless you want to wait until 2021? I am big fan of the snazzy new SF50 design, but a bigger fan of an established mature airframe like the Meridian.
That being said if the SF50 and Meridian 500 are both $2.0-$2.1MM I would probably go with the jet "because it looks cool"
Kevin
|
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
