banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 11:14 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2020, 20:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/01/10
Posts: 3431
Post Likes: +2381
Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
Username Protected wrote:
A 300 knot airplane is fast until you turn it into 150 knot headwind.

Very true. A headwind component that's a significant percentage of TAS will make a long day longer. Furthermore, 300 knots is only fast until you fly a 400 knot airplane. And, if you've flown a 500 knot airplane for long, you're ruined.

_________________
Previous A36TN owner


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2020, 20:54 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/20/15
Posts: 556
Post Likes: +311
Location: KFAT
Username Protected wrote:
I’m not a fan of the plastic jet.To slow too low no go!

A 300 knot airplane is fast until you turn it into 150 knot headwind .

:hide: :hide: I got blasted a long time ago before the plastic jet came out because I said it would be a flying roadblock. and guess what it’s still Is!



How is it any different of a roadblock than a TBM or King Air?

The issue is the FAA's classification of "turbojet" for SIDs and STARs. Just like approaches, there should be speed categories (regardless of what propels the aircraft). Old school rules getting in the way


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2020, 21:00 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/01/10
Posts: 3431
Post Likes: +2381
Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
Username Protected wrote:
How is it any different of a roadblock than a TBM or King Air?

The issue is the FAA's classification of "turbojet" for SIDs and STARs. Just like approaches, there should be speed categories (regardless of what propels the aircraft). Old school rules getting in the way

In reality, I don't think it's any different than a TP from a traffic standpoint, since it cruises at TP altitudes. If it went up in the 30s or 40s, it would be more of a roadblock.

_________________
Previous A36TN owner


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2020, 23:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 174
Post Likes: +79
Location: Camarillo, Ca.
Aircraft: 2005 Meridian
Username Protected wrote:
I’m not a fan of the plastic jet.To slow too low no go!

A 300 knot airplane is fast until you turn it into 150 knot headwind .

:hide: :hide: I got blasted a long time ago before the plastic jet came out because I said it would be a flying roadblock. and guess what it’s still Is!


I don't go if there is a 150kt headwind, but if I had to I would prefer to be in a plane that goes 300 kts to one that goes 150


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 31 Dec 2020, 01:07 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
In reality, I don't think it's any different than a TP from a traffic standpoint, since it cruises at TP altitudes.

The FAA handles the SF50 as a turboprop for routing. Altitudes and speeds are comparable.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 01 Jan 2021, 04:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/03/11
Posts: 1845
Post Likes: +1819
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
True but the SF50 gets the turbojet routings to and from Denver. I can’t fly them even though I am much faster than Vision jet. It’s annoying bc the jet routings are so much more favorable.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 01 Jan 2021, 10:35 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 06/09/09
Posts: 4573
Post Likes: +3298
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
IMO the fuel is too tight for the trip that was enquired about. At least I would not want to recommend that to a family member.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus Vision jet request
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2021, 08:13 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2513
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
The "real jet" mantra reminds me of the stigma of the 337 Skymaster "not a real twin" drumbeat.

I see them both as revolutionary in their niche markets; the safety of Skymaster in the light twin market, and the safety of the entry level single pilot jet market for the Cirrus jet; and in my mind it's a "real jet."

Anything pressurized that cruises at FL310 is exposed to the possibility of a Rapid D from a blown out window, or other, and it wouldn't be fun in a single pilot operation. That's real.

Late to this thread, but wanted to add that ironically (or perhaps fittingly if you're a Vision Jet detractor), the Skymaster, as much as I think it's a cool plane, did not turn out to be all that safe. You have about twice the chance of an engine failure as a single (maybe more as the rear engine sometimes had issues) and an engine failure is not as easy to detect as it is in a conventional twin. And in a lot of Skymaster takeoff scenarios you'll need BOTH engines to successfully continue the takeoff. So in that respect at least, it is a "real twin".

It's a great aircraft though if you want twin reliability (once you're in the air) and good downward visibility.

_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4




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

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