BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Apr 2017, 17:25

Username Protected wrote:

Still waiting for Yakima or Thule to get the STC for a roof rack

Attachment:

1 (6).jpg

Yeah, little bit hard for Raisbeck to fit wing lockers on there!

:scratch:

"drop tank" style cargo pods might be fun.......

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Apr 2017, 17:39

Username Protected wrote:

So...the SF50 did not show in Bismarck today. Some kind of torn engine gasket in Denver that there wasn't a part readily available for. Didn't get to see it.

But the Cirrus rep gave a little PPT. Very impressive. They specifically looked at the NEW airplane market between high end singles and bizjets. Their chart didnt show anything in that range. That is why they marketed to it.

Also, they said they tracked all trackable Meridians, Pilati and TBMs for 1 year on Flightaware. They said their data rarely showed the planes going over 280 and most trips were shown as 400 miles. Also a segment they were targeting.

Clearly the SF50 will not go 1300nm with a full cabin. But it seems (I was far back in crowd) that you can clearly fill the seats, and go 400 miles with reserves, with a full cabin. That is what they were targeting.

FWIW

Wait a minute. You mean to tell me Cirrus actually thought this through and studied the markets? I was thinking from reading Mr. MU2's posts that they just threw this plane together and brought it to market.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Apr 2017, 17:55

Username Protected wrote:

So...the SF50 did not show in Bismarck today. Some kind of torn engine gasket in Denver that there wasn't a part readily available for. Didn't get to see it.

But the Cirrus rep gave a little PPT. Very impressive. They specifically looked at the NEW airplane market between high end singles and bizjets. Their chart didnt show anything in that range. That is why they marketed to it.

Also, they said they tracked all trackable Meridians, Pilati and TBMs for 1 year on Flightaware. They said their data rarely showed the planes going over 280 and most trips were shown as 400 miles. Also a segment they were targeting.

Clearly the SF50 will not go 1300nm with a full cabin. But it seems (I was far back in crowd) that you can clearly fill the seats, and go 400 miles with reserves, with a full cabin. That is what they were targeting.

FWIW

Wait a minute. You mean to tell me Cirrus actually thought this through and studied the markets? I was thinking from reading Mr. MU2's posts that they just threw this plane together and brought it to market.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Apr 2017, 19:13

I Ci a hole in his argument now.

I would fly one tomorrow.

I would also fly an MU2. The percentage of pilots who can fly an MU2 safely is small. Need to train.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Apr 2017, 23:47

Username Protected wrote:

The CJ series aircraft are far more economical than the legacy Citations.

My research tends to indicate this isn't true, there isn't much difference of comparable airplanes, say CJ3 versus 560, or CJ versus 501. The workhorse of the legacy fleet, the 550, is out there flying everyday on trips where cost is an issue, and doing it well.

This is the sort of thing some says to justify spending a lot more on a newer airplane.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 00:07

Username Protected wrote:

You mean to tell me Cirrus actually thought this through and studied the markets?

Yes, they studied what piston pilots thought they wanted in a jet.

That's like asking bicyclists what they want in a car, and then being proud of how poorly it performs compared to real cars.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 00:14

Mike's back...

Seriously...where did you go Mike? I was starting to have withdrawals, and the boards were becoming boring.

After listening to the Cirrus guy yesterday, they weren't designing a jet, they were designing a step up plane from a SR22. It just happens to have jet propulsion. Big differnce IMHO.

Anyway, glad to have you back Mr. C!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 00:36

Username Protected wrote:

Seriously...where did you go Mike?

Work. Major project. Probably be not on BT much for a few weeks.

Quote:

After listening to the Cirrus guy yesterday, they weren't designing a jet, they were designing a step up plane from a SR22. It just happens to have jet propulsion. Big differnce IMHO.

The bicyclist will initially like the car they designed, but soon enough, they will understand why real cars are made differently.

The hole in the market exists for a reason.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 00:38

Username Protected wrote:

they studied what piston pilots thought they wanted in a jet.That's like asking bicyclists what they want in a car

When trying to sell cars to bicyclists, that's exactly what you should do. It's a lot more likely to succeed than telling them, I know it isn't what you want but it's what you should want, and would want if you were as smart as I am, which you're not.

These better cars/jets have been available for a while and your target customer hasn't bought one so they clearly are not what he wants; if he did, he'd have bought one and wouldn't be your target anymore.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 00:47

Username Protected wrote:

The bicyclist will initially like the car they designed, but soon enough, they will understand why real cars are made differently.

And then they will no longer be the market Cirrus was aiming for. They will be in the "current [car/jet] owner looking to upgrade" market, already a battleground for numerous manufacturers. That's not where Cirrus saw an opportunity.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 01:14

Username Protected wrote:

Yes, they studied what piston pilots thought they wanted in a jet.

That's like asking bicyclists what they want in a car

Or maybe they created a motorcycle and you're comparing it to a Cadillac?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 09:15

Username Protected wrote:

Yes, they studied what piston pilots thought they wanted in a jet.

That's like asking bicyclists what they want in a car

Or maybe they created a motorcycle and you're comparing it to a Cadillac?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Apr 2017, 10:47

One could contrast the Cirrus SF50 with what Pilatus put forth on October 1989:

"Pilatus believed that the PC-12 would fit a new market not served by existing aircraft" (sound familiar?), "and that the type would be the first single-engine aircraft capable of a large volume at high speed across long distances."

Pilatus delivered 90 new PC-12 NG aircraft in 2016 – an over 20 percent increase over 2015 sales. This sales level will earn the PC-12 NG the honor of being the top- selling model of turbine-powered business aircraft in the world for the year.

Stong pre-owned market; a ten-year-old 2006 model PC-12 is still valued at 80 percent of its original Factory New Average Equipped List Price. A study conducted by Rolland Vincent Associates, LLC in January, 2016 determined that the 10-year average annual depreciation rate for a Pilatus PC-12 was only 1.6 percent – far lower than any other category of business jet or turboprop.

The PC-12 holds the distinction of being the best-selling pressurized, single-engine, turbine-powered aircraft in the world and now is close to delivering the "jet version" of this aircraft. I wonder how the market will respond.... :scratch:

There were a lot of negative comments about the Pilatus PC-12 back in 1989; that Pilatus couldn't compete against Beech's King Air, no one will buy a single-engine turbine, unproven design from a unproven aircraft manufacturer, etc....

I hope the people at Cirrus succeed. :clap: