banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 11:43 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7667 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424 ... 512  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 13:48 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/11/12
Posts: 2384
Post Likes: +1317
Company: Fractal Rock Solutions, Inc.
Location: Atlanta, GA (KPDK)
Aircraft: 1970 Baron B55
Username Protected wrote:
MAX CAPS ACTIVATION SPEED
LOWER OF 135 KIAS OR 145 KTAS



At FL280, 145 KTAS is 92 KIAS. That's pretty slow.


Mike C.


Wouldn't 92 KIAS be substantially lower than 135 KIAS? I'm pretty sure the intent is to not pull the chute with excessive air flowing around the airframe. The air is thinner at altitude, so wouldn't KIAS be the primary governing number? Seems like something is being taken out of context here, but it's admittedly not my area of expertise to the plane or to high-altitude operations.

_________________
====================
1970 Baron P600
202(?) F1 Rocket - build in progress


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 14:55 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 6624
Post Likes: +7925
Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
Username Protected wrote:
Haven't heard any complaints that they don't perform as advertised.

They advertised it as the "slowest, lowest, and cheapest jet available".

After more than a decade of intense development, they managed, somehow, to achieve those difficult goals. Other manufacturers took the easy way out and have been trying to make jets that fly faster and higher. Wimps.

The challenge Cirrus had to overcome to be slowest and lowest was recognized by the industry with the Collier award. It remains to be seen if the Collier award is an indicator of commercial success or an omen of failure as it was for Eclipse.

Virtually the entire order book is locked in at the $1.39M price point, approaching half what the sales price is today, suggesting Cirrus is losing money on each delivery. That's ultimately what killed Eclipse, selling product below cost.

Mike C.


THe $1.39M price isn't locked; it's subject to compounded CPI increases calculated at time of delivery, and is the "base price" of the jet without options which are typically $400,000, or maintenance service contracts at $209,900.

https://www.alljets.com/uploads/9/9/2/4 ... tion_2.pdf


"New deliveries out the door in 2017 are priced around $2,200M ($1.390M base price + CPI Inflation Adjustments + Options + Service Programs)"

Last edited on 09 Dec 2018, 15:10, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 15:00 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17507
Post Likes: +21013
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
No problemo Paul, just be sure they use the same escalator as Social Security programs ;-)

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 15:19 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 6624
Post Likes: +7925
Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
Username Protected wrote:
No problemo Paul, just be sure they use the same escalator as Social Security programs ;-)


Dave, I'd be happy just to get social security increases equal to what our local government employees get in COLA increases. :eek:

Even if the Cirrus jet could be bought for $1.39 million, it would still be about $1.29 million out of my price range affordability. :D


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 15:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17507
Post Likes: +21013
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
I completely understand, Paul. I had a secure retirement before I purchased the King Air, and I paid cash for the plane.

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 15:47 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 6624
Post Likes: +7925
Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
Username Protected wrote:
I completely understand, Paul. I had a secure retirement before I purchased the King Air, and I paid cash for the plane.


But remember Dave, you can always sleep in your King Air. :D


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 15:58 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17507
Post Likes: +21013
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
I'd probably be charged rump fees :D

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 16:16 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/03/08
Posts: 16179
Post Likes: +8782
Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
Username Protected wrote:
http://servicecenters.cirrusdesign.com/tech_pubs/sf50/pdf/SB/SF5XBulletins/SB5X-90-04/SB5X-90-04.pdf

Disables CAPS autopilot takeover.

Installs placard that says:

MAX CAPS ACTIVATION SPEED
LOWER OF 135 KIAS OR 145 KTAS


Pretty narrow range of usefulness, you have to be high enough, and slow enough. A typical flight will be within chute deployment envelope only a tiny fraction of the time, maybe just a few minutes. If you have the altitude and the control to be within chute deployment envelope, you probably have lots of options other than chute deployment to consider.

At FL280, 145 KTAS is 92 KIAS. That's pretty slow.

Do jets need parachutes? Here's the fatal private jet accidents so far this year:

4/2/2018: CJ hits 152 on landing in Marion, IN. Chute useless for that.

4/15/2018: CJ hits mountain in Crozet, VA while scud running in low weather. Chute useless for that.

8/13/2018: CJ hits house in Payson City, UT, suicide with attempted murder. Chute useless for that.

10/4/2018: Falcon 50 runs off end of runway at Greensboro, SC. Chute useless for that.

11/30/2018: CJ loses control sometime during initial climb, Jeffersonville, IN. Chute useless for that due to high speed of event all the way to the ground.

So the chute would be 0 for 5 this year had jets been so equipped. It is hard to find any private jet accident where the chute would have been clearly useful.

The chute is a "solution" developed for unreliable piston engines fitted to slow, light weight aircraft. It fails miserably to deal with the true nature of jet accidents. The application of piston think to a jet causes the fundamental flaws of the SF-50, the chute being one of those flaws. The chute simply does not provide the protection and safety benefits people think it does.

Mike C.


The same can be said of a second engine for all the accidents you cited.

Same applies to seatbelts.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 16:41 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 6624
Post Likes: +7925
Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
Username Protected wrote:
MAX CAPS ACTIVATION SPEED
LOWER OF 135 KIAS OR 145 KTAS



At FL280, 145 KTAS is 92 KIAS. That's pretty slow.


Mike C.


Wouldn't 92 KIAS be substantially lower than 135 KIAS? I'm pretty sure the intent is to not pull the chute with excessive air flowing around the airframe. The air is thinner at altitude, so wouldn't KIAS be the primary governing number? Seems like something is being taken out of context here, but it's admittedly not my area of expertise to the plane or to high-altitude operations.


You're right Mark. Any Cirrus pilot experiencing an engine failure at cruise in the flight levels isn't going to pull the chute then, but at a lower altitude. slower speed. The accidents Mike cited aren't the type where a chute comes into play, but the comments miss the point that CJ2's aren't single engine jets subject to total power loss with the loss of one engine, the Cirrus 50 is.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 21:27 
Online




User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 30418
Post Likes: +10534
Location: Minneapolis, MN (KFCM)
Aircraft: 1970 Baron B55
Username Protected wrote:
Why is it that the TBM with one engine is faster and more efficient than any other twin turboprop on the market with less total HP and it does not apply to this se jet?

Because props and jets are different.

A jet needs to fly high to be efficient, in the 40s. A TBM can't even get there.

Is a ducted fan (e.g. high bypass turbojet) actually more efficient than a turboprop at jet altitudes? I've wondered why most if not all twin engine tuboprops have maximum altitudes of 31,000 or less.

Quote:
Pylons are also the safest place for a jet engine. Really bad things can happen and the plane still lands.

I do wonder what kind of damage an uncontained compressor failure would do to the tail of a Cirus Jet.
_________________
-lance

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 22:16 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/12/18
Posts: 150
Post Likes: +34
Location: KILM (Wilmington, NC)
Aircraft: Mooney C
Username Protected wrote:
I'd probably be charged rump fees :D

ROTFL Now That is bound to be a classic!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 23:21 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 11885
Post Likes: +2848
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
To get a jet up there, though, you need redundancy in the pressurization. A single engine could be designed to do that, but it's complicated. By far the easiest way is to have a second engine.


That is a current regulatory requirement. How do you know Cirrus has not found a way to get an alternative level of safety approved?

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2018, 23:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/17/11
Posts: 1761
Post Likes: +1084
Location: KFRG
Aircraft: 421C
I like it... look at that visibility

[youtube]https://youtu.be/S3OPlmc7hNk[/youtube]


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 10 Dec 2018, 01:45 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Wouldn't 92 KIAS be substantially lower than 135 KIAS? I'm pretty sure the intent is to not pull the chute with excessive air flowing around the airframe. The air is thinner at altitude, so wouldn't KIAS be the primary governing number?

The placard says the lower of 135 KIAS or 145 KTAS.

At FL280, 145 KTAS is 92 KIAS, thus that is controlling. The cross over point is about 4,900 ft altitude. Above that, you have to lower KIAS so KTAS stays under 145.

Most, but not all, aerodynamic effects are related to indicated airspeed. Some are related to true airspeed. An example would be props where blade angle is strongly affected by true airspeed and much less so by indicated airspeed.

It appears there are factors in the chute deployment related to true airspeed, hence the limitation. An example could be the jerk from the chute inflating. The canopy may develop a separation speed based on true airspeed and not indicated, and thus that has to be managed.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 10 Dec 2018, 01:50 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
The $1.39M price isn't locked; it's subject to compounded CPI increases calculated at time of delivery

From 2013 to now, 5 years, CPI-W works out to 6.9% in total. Not as big a factor as you might think in recent times.

Quote:
and is the "base price" of the jet without options which are typically $400,000,

I've heard the "options" are not optional, so a bit of a misleading term.

Quote:
or maintenance service contracts at $209,900.

That shouldn't be counted in a purchase price.

Using your approach, the current contract price for an SF-50 is north of $3.0M by the time you include CPI, options, and contracts.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7667 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424 ... 512  Next




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

Jump to:  

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 2007-2024

.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.