Tony,

Great summary.

Tim

Tony,
Let me challenge you on your idea's about altitude.

This morning's flight http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N212EA/history/20151228/1030Z/KVRB/KCDW I had a choice to go down to 35K or up to 41K. I choose 41 for several reasons, mostly to stay out of the fast movers way. Lots of airliners in the 30's. Also I have grown to hate turbulence and with all that altitude to play with you usually can find smooth air and typically higher is smoother.

Also the Eclipse Owners group has a pinch hitters course for non-flyers and every one that has taken the course lands the plane 3 times and thinks they could do it in a emergency.

Finally its pretty cool to wake up in Fla. and get to work by 8:45 in NJ.

That is cool. How long was your flight up?

You're still comparing an Eclipse that costs more than a million $$ than the SF50.

Sure it would be great if the SF50 can go higher. Maybe it will. But if it doesn't and that's what you want, you can pony up another mil for the Eclipse.

Like I have said before, Cessna and other sales reps are waiting for upgrades from the SF50. The smart ones will quickly flip their slightly used SF50 for a slightly more used Mustang or Eclipse or Phenom 100 while the backlog is high.

Why not go ahead and buy the Mustang or Phenom 100 then? They have a G1000 too. Why wait?

I say the same thing to my friends with HondaJets on order. I'm like "got buy a CJ.... what you waiting for"?

Why not go ahead and buy the Mustang or Phenom 100 then? They have a G1000 too. Why wait?

I say the same thing to my friends with HondaJets on order. I'm like "got buy a CJ.... what you waiting for"?

Allen,

You may be, and probably are, right about piston pilots being the primary buyers of the SF50. Still, sneeringly referring to them as "fan boys" seems beneath you.

Andy,

I get your point. Personally, I want as many options as I can afford and I'm sure there are plenty of times being able to go higher is an advantage. I don't think I'm likely to buy an SF 50 but flying at 41k isn't why. My point is that the plane will offer a tremendous increase in capability, compared to their former planes, for most that do.

There are many definitions of fan boy that are not pejorative. Simply put - a passionate fan who lets his passions override his judgement.

I don't follow why you feel this way either. Weren't you a piston pilot at one point in time?

I'll say it again..... The SF50 I'm reading is $2.2MM brand new. Nothing else turbine is close to that. Stop comparing it to your CJ2+ that costs over 3X what an SF50 costs.

I've never bought a new airplane. Probably never will. But many, many people do. So you can't discount it.

From reading the position holder's posts on the SF50 web site, I have to concur. The questions asked show a distinct lack of turbine operational knowledge, or even enough knowledge to ask the right questions. They don't know what they don't know.

It wouldn't surprise me if ALL SF50 position holders have never owned or operated a turbine airplane. It really does seem like a bunch of SR22 owners trying to stroke their jet lust.

Mike C.

From reading the position holder's posts on the SF50 web site, I have to concur. The questions asked show a distinct lack of turbine operational knowledge, or even enough knowledge to ask the right questions. They don't know what they don't know.

It wouldn't surprise me if ALL SF50 position holders have never owned or operated a turbine airplane. It really does seem like a bunch of SR22 owners trying to stroke their jet lust.

Mike C.

And exactly what is wrong with that? Its their money, and despite the fact that you dont approve, it will most likely still prove to be an economic success.
This whole thread reminds me of Atlas Shrugged.