[youtube]https://youtu.be/CjynyeMzskA[/youtube]

Austin not a big fan.

Yep, I can’t understand why people want a NEAR jet.

Pretty reasonable arguments. Is he wrong?

It’s shaped like a sperm. I’d imagine you would need some serious thrust to make that thing go any faster.

Seem's like it's more of an endorsement for the Epic than a real criticism of the Cirrus. The Cirrus compares a lot better to a TBM and is much cheaper.

The numbers for the Epic are excellent no doubt.

I was thinking more of a Pregnant Guppy. We have three of them on our home field, East Hampton. I guess it is on par with the Citation 500 and A-37 I have flown and only sucks fuel for one engine. And has a parachute and can be equipped with auto land. If I could afford one, I would stretch and get a used Pilatus.

There's always been a tradeoff between easy-flying airplanes and best-performing airplanes. Cirrus has consistently gone for user-friendly and they have sold a lot of airplanes doing so.

Certainly a Lancair IV is going to outperform an SR22, but which sells more? Which has a better safety record? Which is easier to get insurance on?

It's really the same argument made for jets....

^^^^^exactly

https://gama.aero/wp-content/uploads/20 ... portQ3.pdf

Thru 3 quarters in 2022
10 vs 53 deliveries...Cirrus wins

He might not be a fan, but I am glad Cirrus knows how to build something that sells.

If I had to buy one of those two planes I am taking the Cirrus Jet every time.

If I were really in the market for a turbine in this category the Cirrus Jet would be a the top of the list. 300kts and a 1200-mile range put most of the CONUS in reach from Kansas City non-stop in 4 hours. Most of my trips are more like 600NM and would only take 2 hours; I'd be very happy with that. Going 20Kts faster would hardly matter on the clock.

Plus I really can't fit comfortably in a TBM and I suspect I'd have trouble in an Epic. The Cirrus is made for pilot comfort since that business model says the guy paying the bills is going to be in the left seat, not in the back. Very comfortable for a big guy.

I want one, now we just gotta sell enough stuff to afford one.

If you ignore insurance and finance options, which are almost cost prohibitive or non existent

Austin is great with the physics of flight, but not the finances of flight, this has held true for quite some time throughout his ownership of the Evo, sounds like he has his eye set on the Epic now

That was a fun watch. I needed that break today.

The idea of a jet (or even SETP) with everyone seated inline is find of fun to think about, though. Maybe give each person a camera and a screen so they can "zoom call" talk to everyone else.

There are always trade offs for increase in speed, and there is almost always something a little faster than a particular model.

"Near jet"

For those flying pistons, they aren't flying something anywhere near any jet.

Edit: The Cirrus jet is twice as fast as what I fly now, much more comfortable, has a parachute, and the only jet with one engine to maintain/overhaul. It's range fits well within the flying I do.

Not me, 500 lbs of full fuel payload is a deal breaker. I'd not buy any jet that can't take 8.

It doesn’t compare in any respect to a TBM. it’s shorter legged. it’s slower. It’s lower (28 vs 31). I think it’s less comfortable. It requires an annual 61.58 ride (more dollars). I’d never pick it over a TBM.

My Citation kind of does both. Easy to fly, 420 knots.


Things do a get lot more complicated to go faster than my plane, for example, swept wings.

The SF-50 is slow because it is altitude limited because it has only one engine. Thick air prevents it from flying fast.

Mike C.