BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 01:23

But generating new sales etc is different than the argument that it saves money and time, which was what we were debating. They're not the same. Of course you can increase revenue or closures by being there in person, no argument. Saving time and money when you factor in everything? Highly unlikely.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 06:30

I’ll wade in

If a business owner is leveraging the airplane over multiple employees training can pencil out

Saving 40-50 employee hours per month would not be hard.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 10:16

Username Protected wrote:

The SF50 should be compared to the M600 and E1000.

Exactly, and the cabin is far superior in the Cirrus and it's quieter.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 10:19

Username Protected wrote:

Saving 40-50 employee hours per month would not be hard.

I just did that in one trip, and closed a much bigger follow on project at the same time.

Just because it doesn't work for someone doesn't mean it doesn't work for everyone.

It is also damaging to promulgate the idea that general aviation is NEVER economical. That is very false and provides ammunition to anti GA forces.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 10:22

Username Protected wrote:

But unless comparing to a piston, I have never heard the Vision described as quiet.

Like most turboprops and unlike most jets, it is a headset airplane for all aboard. The engine mounted to the cabin roof conducts sound into the cabin.

It is a turboprop with added jet negatives.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 10:39

My pax do not wear headsets in my plane, do not even have jacks for them in the back, not needed

So not all turboprops require them, a MU2 pilot assuming they do makes sense though, you got the short end of the comfortable/quiet stick

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 11:22

Username Protected wrote:

My pax do not wear headsets in my plane, do not even have jacks for them in the back, not needed

Does your KA have ANR? I've spent a decent amount of time in the back of older 200's doing organ procurement runs. They're not piston GA loud, and you don't NEED a headset ... but they're loud.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 11:32

Username Protected wrote:

My pax do not wear headsets in my plane, do not even have jacks for them in the back, not needed

Does your KA have ANR? I've spent a decent amount of time in the back of older 200's doing organ procurement runs. They're not piston GA loud, and you don't NEED a headset ... but they're loud.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 13:32

Username Protected wrote:

But unless comparing to a piston, I have never heard the Vision described as quiet.

Like most turboprops and unlike most jets, it is a headset airplane for all aboard. The engine mounted to the cabin roof conducts sound into the cabin.

It is a turboprop with added jet negatives.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 15:06

Username Protected wrote:

Exactly, and the cabin is far superior in the Cirrus and it's quieter.

Was just reading a post from Rich Pickett. He compares a lot of planes. He said the Vision was a little louder than the Meridian. Neither require headsets for passengers in the back, at least by OSHA standards. But in both pax will likely be more comfortable with ANR’s. My kids are 50/50 in wearing headsets in the back. I have been by the engines in an Airbus and recorded the same dBa’s as the cabin in my M600, so a lot of variables. But unless comparing to a piston, I have never heard the Vision described as quiet.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 15:43

Username Protected wrote:

To be fair, are we talking about the G1, G2 or G2+ ? I understand the G1 was a lot louder than its successors.

You are correct.

Quote:

During my time with the airplane I took off my headset and climbed into the rear cabin and was surprised at how well Cirrus reduced the cabin noise—it’s a huge improvement over the old airplane. And overall improvement is a good way to describe the G2 Vision Jet.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/aircra ... ter-safer/

Quote:

Operators report that current production aircraft are noticeably quieter inside the cabin than first-gen models. Cirrus installs Mid-Continent True Blue lithium-ion phosphate batteries in the former, affording much greater starting power than the original lead-acid batteries and saving considerable weight. Lithium-ion batteries indeed have triple the power density of lead-acid types. This allows the use of heftier acoustical insulation in aircraft but still results in a slight net empty weight savings. Notably, True Blue lithium-ion batteries use a different chemistry than older lithium-metal batteries that proved problematic aboard the Boeing 787 and Cessna Citation CJ4.

Early Vision Jets have noticeably higher sound interior levels than other entry-level turbofan aircraft, making use of active noise canceling headsets a virtual must. Current models, while being considerably quieter inside, allow passengers to use conventional headsets or earbuds for inflight entertainment.

https://aviationweek.com/business-aviat ... ors-survey

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 22:23

Username Protected wrote:

You could say the same for a College education.

There is utility in investing time into a capability that then becomes useful at some critical moment.

That may be so, but how much value would you add to your business if you took all the time you've spent learning to fly, training, researching the airplanes, managing the plane maintenance, posting on BT, etc. and you invested all this time in sales, engineering and other business activities?

I suspect it would be much more than $75K a year it takes to hire a pro pilot to run the company plane. :peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2021, 23:02

Username Protected wrote:

That may be so, but how much value would you add to your business if you took all the time you've spent learning to fly, training, researching the airplanes, managing the plane maintenance, posting on BT, etc. and you invested all this time in sales, engineering and other business activities?

I would be the most unproductive person on the planet if I spent all of my available time doing my business and didn't have other activities to pursue.

Quote:

I suspect it would be much more than $75K a year it takes to hire a pro pilot to run the company plane.

You have a very ideal concept of what a pro pilot does and what they actually cost. My maintenance costs would probably double under such a scenario, and I wouldn't be able to fly on every day I wanted to. I would also have to devote some of my time to managing the pilot.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jul 2021, 11:48

Username Protected wrote:

You have a very ideal concept of what a pro pilot does and what they actually cost. My maintenance costs would probably double under such a scenario, and I wouldn't be able to fly on every day I wanted to. I would also have to devote some of my time to managing the pilot.

How do you know, have you hired a pilot in the past?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jul 2021, 13:10

Username Protected wrote:

…but how much value would you add to your business if you took all the time you've spent learning to fly, training, researching the airplanes, managing the plane maintenance, posting on BT, etc. and you invested all this time in sales, engineering and other business activities?

I suspect it would be much more than $75K a year it takes to hire a pro pilot to run the company plane. :peace:

As said on BT many times, you don’t know what you don’t know.

Anyone here flying a Vision jet?