29 Mar 2024, 03:37 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 04 Sep 2018, 21:36 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4573 Post Likes: +3298
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Obviously.....
Never knew it was up for debate?
I can also stall it and roll it over. I can also turn the motor off in flight. I can also open the door in flight if I want. How did this conversation get here? - It started with Cirrus is stupid.
- Then went to TBM is the best thing since sliced bread. The OP obviously should have bought a Duke.
- Followed by Piper making life easier for the pilot in the M600 when compared to the TBM.
- Anyone who wants an easier pilot life is not a real pilot.
- From there went on a tangent to a TBM that porpoised on landing, somewhere. And
- then the consideration of coral reef, low prop clearance for the TBM compared to
- pretty much every other SETP. How this is not an issue for the PC12, and you
- shutdown the engine before coming to a stop to reduce prop erosion.
- Follow up question on using beta for taxi and startup on sketchy runways in the Caribbean.
- Which then migrated to beta controls, gates and squat switches.
Fairly typical for BT I think. Tim
Tim, do you still fly at all? If so then what?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 04 Sep 2018, 21:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 6232 Post Likes: +3735 Location: San Carlos, CA - KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
Username Protected wrote: All it’s missing is that mu2 is perfect for the mission followed by pages of rebuttals...
See, we’ve done such a good job it doesn’t even have to be stated anymore, it’s automatically assumed to be part of the conversation.
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 04 Sep 2018, 22:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/26/15 Posts: 357 Post Likes: +296 Location: KHSV
Aircraft: SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: ... How did this conversation get here? I seem to be asking myself this same thing more and more frequently around here. Too many contradicting ideas that are supposed to be accepted simultaneously. 1. Technology is good for aviation & Technology is bad for aviation. 2. I want a SETP because of simplicity/reliability & I want a 36-step Pre-Takeoff Checklist and 43 dials to stare at while I manually move fuel around every 0.3 hours. 3. We need to grow the next generation of pilots/save GA & Millenials are no-talent assclowns who can’t be trusted to text and breathe at the same time. 4. {Insert plane here} sucks & {insert plane here} is very popular. 5. Look at my $$,$$$ sexy glass cockpit & real pilots run steam. 6. My plane is harder to fly than yours & My plane was intentionally designed to be hard to fly. 7. AOPA sucks & Support AOPA on {insert issue here} I’m all for the debate and hearing opinions (that’s why I read BT) but sometimes the willingness to “win” the argument just wrecks these threads. I know, I know... back to my hiding place
_________________ Dan Brown Yours: Bell 406, EC45, BE20, C182, H60, TEX2, H500 Mine: SR22
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 04 Sep 2018, 23:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/01/10 Posts: 3435 Post Likes: +2388 Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
|
|
Username Protected wrote: - It started with Cirrus is stupid.
- Then went to TBM is the best thing since sliced bread. The OP obviously should have bought a Duke.
- Followed by Piper making life easier for the pilot in the M600 when compared to the TBM.
- Anyone who wants an easier pilot life is not a real pilot.
- From there went on a tangent to a TBM that porpoised on landing, somewhere. And
- then the consideration of coral reef, low prop clearance for the TBM compared to
- pretty much every other SETP. How this is not an issue for the PC12, and you
- shutdown the engine before coming to a stop to reduce prop erosion.
- Follow up question on using beta for taxi and startup on sketchy runways in the Caribbean.
- Which then migrated to beta controls, gates and squat switches.
Fairly typical for BT I think. Tim Perfect thread summary. Nailed it.
_________________ Previous A36TN owner
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 05 Sep 2018, 08:13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/03/08 Posts: 16179 Post Likes: +8782 Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm surprised going into beta in flight didn't cause an immediate loss of control...
The Pilatus PC6 I used to skydive out of descended with the prop in beta 30 times per day. Not sure whether it's in the poh, they did that year around for 20 years before they upgraded.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 05 Sep 2018, 08:45 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26431 Post Likes: +13064 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I seem to be asking myself this same thing more and more frequently around here. Too many contradicting ideas that are supposed to be accepted simultaneously. 1. Technology is good for aviation & Technology is bad for aviation. 2. I want a SETP because of simplicity/reliability & I want a 36-step Pre-Takeoff Checklist and 43 dials to stare at while I manually move fuel around every 0.3 hours. 3. We need to grow the next generation of pilots/save GA & Millenials are no-talent assclowns who can’t be trusted to text and breathe at the same time. 4. {Insert plane here} sucks & {insert plane here} is very popular. 5. Look at my $$,$$$ sexy glass cockpit & real pilots run steam. 6. My plane is harder to fly than yours & My plane was intentionally designed to be hard to fly. 7. AOPA sucks & Support AOPA on {insert issue here} I’m all for the debate and hearing opinions (that’s why I read BT) but sometimes the willingness to “win” the argument just wrecks these threads. I know, I know... back to my hiding place I believe the "back and forth" banter is the quickest way for a newbie to learn something. But when you already know so much it gets annoying. Threads run out of steam. It's best to just quit clicking on them when they do.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 05 Sep 2018, 08:48 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 11885 Post Likes: +2848 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: All it’s missing is that mu2 is perfect for the mission followed by pages of rebuttals... Well, it was such a small tangent, I forgot. I mean who wants a plane where it scares people on the ground with the howling noise, even when not Halloween, and falls from the sky on such a regular basis that it requires special training.... Tim (could not resist)
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet Posted: 05 Sep 2018, 08:51 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 11885 Post Likes: +2848 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Tim, do you still fly at all? If so then what? yes, rented for a few years. Some 172, mostly SR20. Actually closed a couple of days ago with some partners on a 2003 SR22. Based on some of the trips I like to do, it worked out cheaper than renting. 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
|
|
|
|