23 Apr 2024, 08:37 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50  Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 11:45 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 04/06/14
Posts: 1038
Post Likes: +606
Location: Everywhere
Aircraft: TP/Jet
|
|
Username Protected wrote: When you get your " motorcycle", I want a ride in it. This thread will probably be the #1 reason I start riding a motorcycle. Hey - at least you don't need a ladder to fuel it. Who thought that one up?
_________________
tREX terSteeg, aka PEE-TAH, aka :deadhorse:, Mr 007
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 12:24 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17628
Post Likes: +21394
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If Elon Musk came to Mike C . and ask hem about investment , he would never have built Tesla  Well, Elon certainly would have been fully apprised of the risks. 
_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 12:30 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14151
Post Likes: +9096
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
|
|
Username Protected wrote: 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....  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. Except that Pilatus is building a twin jet.
_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 12:34 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/06/14
Posts: 1038
Post Likes: +606
Location: Everywhere
Aircraft: TP/Jet
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Except that Pilatus is building a twin jet. I would sell a liver to buy that new twin jet. That thing is beyond sexy. Both in stats and performance. $9M - but its backordered until forever.
_________________
tREX terSteeg, aka PEE-TAH, aka :deadhorse:, Mr 007
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 12:50 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 286
Post Likes: +511
|
|
Username Protected wrote: 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.... 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. Except that Pilatus is building a twin jet.
I realize the SF50 is single engine jet, my intention was to illustrate the advantages of filling a market yet to be filled, not how many engines the aircraft has attached.
Interesting to note, Steve Jobs time after time, created products the consumer didn't know they wanted...but now can't imagine not possessing.
Sign me up for #85 PC-24 built! 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 13:04 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/03/08
Posts: 16187
Post Likes: +8797
Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Except that Pilatus is building a twin jet.
And it'll break the company.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 13:12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 286
Post Likes: +511
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Except that Pilatus is building a twin jet.
And it'll break the company.
Mr. Weilke, please postulate your premise.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 13:15 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23622
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: One could contrast the Cirrus SF50 with what Pilatus put forth on October 1989: You've bent the Pilatus PC-12 story to fit your argument, but it doesn't really hold. Quote: "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." It wasn't a new market, it was a market well established by twin turboprops. Pilatus marketed the PC-12 as a lower cost King Air, one of the more well defined markets in aviation if ever there was one. The basic message was it does what the King Air does, but cheaper. The PC-12 was also fast, long range, and capable. The SF50 is slow, short range, and carries not much. The PC-12 is a working airplane that delivers economic value. The SF50 is a toy for owners to play with and won't serve a true business or commercial need. Quote: The PC-12 holds the distinction of being the best-selling pressurized, single-engine, turbine-powered aircraft in the world Well, there are only really only two contenders, the other being a TBM, so perhaps not as bold a statement as it may appear. Textron sold more King Airs in 2016 than Pilatus sold PC-12s. Quote: and now is close to delivering the "jet version" of this aircraft. Which, of course, has two engines, as it should. Quote: ...unproven design from a unproven aircraft manufacturer, etc.... Pilatus was very far from an "unproven" aircraft manufacturer. Quote: I hope the people at Cirrus succeed. :clap: They would have already done so if they built a twin jet. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 13:23 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23622
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Interesting to note, Steve Jobs time after time, created products the consumer didn't know they wanted...but now can't imagine not possessing. All successful Apple products filled existing markets. There were smartphones before iPhone. There were music players before iPod. There were computers before Mac. The Apple fan base engages in revisionist history to make Apple appear to be the first to do many things, but it ain't so. What could be attributed to Jobs was a certain design aesthetic when it comes to relating to technology. This is more about implementation choices than about creating a new market. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 13:33 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/15/11
Posts: 2398
Post Likes: +1063
Location: Mandan, ND
Aircraft: V35
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The SF50 is a toy for owners to play with and won't serve a true business or commercial need. There you go, making sense. Finally you say something I can agree with!The SF50 isnt meant to serve a business or commercial need. At least from the presentation I was at on Thursday. Lots of people say "business" when expensing something. Does not mean it serves a business purpose. SR22 owner wants to step up to something better. Now Cirrus has something for them to step up to.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 13:34 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 286
Post Likes: +511
|
|
From the "pilot shortage" forum relating to the same subject matter: Steven Schultz said: "In the most basic airplane (altimeter, VSI, RPM, Artificial Horizon, etc..) a pilot can use one instrument to cross-check another instrument to verify its accuracy and operability. How many times while in IMC, you decide "you know all these gauges are telling me I'm level at 1000 feet, but I don't believe it, it feels like I'm banking hard and climbing like a homesick angel....therefore I'll bank opposite and push the nose down, I know more than any damn instrument!". Since you're here typing, I'm guessing never. It was once thought a glass cockpit would NEVER happen, automation and computers CANNOT be trusted, garbage in/garbage out. Computers work until they don't and everyone will die. Fly by wire, NO FREAKING WAY, manual reversion is an absolute necessity. One never knows what those wacky electrons will do.....must have cables! WHAT THE F@Ck DO YOU DO IF A WIRE BREAKS!?!?! IMPOSSIBLE IT WILL NEVER HAPPENS, FLIGHT CONTROLS WILL ALWAYS BE CONTROLLED BY MECHANICAL MEANS! NO REAL AIRPLANE WILL EVER BE FLOWN BY ELECTRICITY, NOT IN A 100 YEARS, IF THEN! Two engines over water! No FREAKING WAY, you need at least 3 if not 4 engines! That's suicide! What if an engine fails!?! PASSENGERS WILL NEVER ACCEPT FLYING LONG DISTANCE OVER WATER ON A TWO ENGINE AIRLINER! AND NO REAL PILOT WILL EVER ACCEPT A FLIGHT UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS! NEVER!!!!!! Two person crews! Ridiculous! The Captain and FO are too busy to do the preflight and get the galley power on early so the "girls" can get the coffee on! We need a Flight Engineer! You can't trust fuel, electrical, hydraulics and pressurization to a damn computer! What if it has a glitch? Carbon Fiber! Hell no! Aircraft have to be made from METAL!!!! Not some damn FABRIC! Fabric is for clothes! Passengers will never fly on a cloth airplane! WOMEN PILOTS, HELL NO! Pilots are men! If women want to fly they can do it by serving drinks in the back! WOMEN DONT HAVE THE STRENGTH TO FLY THE PLANE IN MANUAL REVERSION, BEST TO LEAVE THIS WORK TO MEN! It's for the women's own good, trust me.  " Anyone over the age of 60 have heard the above for 40 years. If I had a dollar for every time "it will never happen" happened, I would be a very rich man, indeed.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 29 Apr 2017, 14:27 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 11898
Post Likes: +2854
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: What the above doesn't address is all the folks that didn't make it that said things like that. A few did, but the road to success is paved with many carcasses. Yes, and what will be the first sacraficial lambs for single pilot or no pilots? Tim
|
|
| 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 2007-2024
|
|
|
|
