My daughter calls BT 'facebook for pilots'.

This thread is closer to the youtube comments section.

That result says more about the source of the numbers than the true difference in cost of operation of the planes.

Mike C.

So Cirrus operators have a well understood propensity to falsify data while turboprop operators are inherently truthful?

Ah, the Ciholas distortion field.

"Any study or analysis that offers conclusions divergent from my personal opinions are naturally the result of faulty data."

Henceforth he will offer the aforementioned post as conclusive proof that any and all data offered by Cirrus operators is less truthful than any other operator's data.


This goes very well with the rule that any price increase is proof of prior unprofitability.

You are becoming difficult to take seriously.

What $/hr do they show for the SF50 and M600?

You've made the assumption the SF50 operating cost numbers from C&D are based on data from operators.

C&D was publishing a number for the SF50 before it was even delivered to a customer.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... s-compared

None of your post actually addressed the objective question of how a plane can cost twice as much to operate than another when their fuel and engine costs were the same.

Mike C.

Very different acquisition cost which should be factored into capex. Many that can afford a lower acquisition cost bird, can’t afford the higher cost bird to begin with.

Using a link YOU provided on Jan 4, 2019 in this thread:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... ting-costs

C&D says this about operating costs:

SF50: $595
PC-12NG: $727
TBM-930: $673
M600: $536

The AOPA listing is claimed to be data from C&D.

So why are you claiming the PC-12 and TBM operating costs are more double the SF50? And, at the same time, claiming C&D have reliable numbers? You have to be wrong on one of those statements using the data you provided.

Also, the SF50 numbers are suspect because we know the the engine/maintenance program is costing ~$340/hour. You can't pay for everything else in the $250 left from the C&D number, that doesn't even cover the fuel. The number in the above listing was before the plane was even delivered, too, so it can't be based on "operator data".

Mike C.

I've read all of Warren's posts and he doesn't define "huge success" in any of them.

So my question remains, how does he define "huge success"?

Mike C.

I don’t understand why it is so hard for people to understand the mission and position of this plane that Cirrus invisioned. This is a 800lb 800NM airplane or a 1000lb 600NM airplane. It is not designed to compete with the TBM, or PC12 these planes have a totally different mission. Cirrus primarily designed this plane for it’s current SR pilots to step up to the next level and it is obviously working.

Those are exactly the numbers I use for my 340, and they are scary accurate. I also use 1,000nm/ 600lb and that works well also.

Using a link YOU provided on Jan 4, 2019 in this thread:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... ting-costs

C&D says this about operating costs:

SF50: $595
PC-12NG: $727
TBM-930: $673
M600: $536

The AOPA listing is claimed to be data from C&D.

So why are you claiming the PC-12 and TBM operating costs are more double the SF50? And, at the same time, claiming C&D have reliable numbers? You have to be wrong on one of those statements using the data you provided.

Also, the SF50 numbers are suspect because we know the the engine/maintenance program is costing ~$340/hour. You can't pay for everything else in the $250 left from the C&D number, that doesn't even cover the fuel. The number in the above listing was before the plane was even delivered, too, so it can't be based on "operator data".

Mike C.

My daughter calls BT 'facebook for pilots'.

This thread is closer to the youtube comments section.

Using a link YOU provided on Jan 4, 2019 in this thread:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... ting-costs

C&D says this about operating costs:

SF50: $595
PC-12NG: $727
TBM-930: $673
M600: $536

The AOPA listing is claimed to be data from C&D.

So why are you claiming the PC-12 and TBM operating costs are more double the SF50? And, at the same time, claiming C&D have reliable numbers? You have to be wrong on one of those statements using the data you provided.

Also, the SF50 numbers are suspect because we know the the engine/maintenance program is costing ~$340/hour. You can't pay for everything else in the $250 left from the C&D number, that doesn't even cover the fuel. The number in the above listing was before the plane was even delivered, too, so it can't be based on "operator data".

Mike C.

I’m thankful all my decisions aren’t made using spreadsheets and common sense. Otherwise we’d never would have had children and I could afford a Vision Jet.

Peace,
Don

And, if I wouldn’t have been spending money on flying and 9 airplanes the past 31 years, I’d buy a Vision Jet too!