banner
banner

28 Jan 2026, 23:16 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7667 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237 ... 512  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 08:47 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6065
Post Likes: +719
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
Im sure you never fill your tanks everytime you land at PDK.
Thats what you need to do with these shares.

I like to buy fuel pretty much at all airport were I land but rarely fill it unless a long trip and I need full range.





Username Protected wrote:
The point I don't get is filling full fuel all the time when you bring it back.
What do you do when you want to bring a full cabin of passenger 1-2 hrs away and the plane as full fuel?
Then you pay ramp fees because you don't want to takeoff heavy again at destination?
I fuel my plane when I know where im going and what payload I have.

When does any of this happen?

_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.

Marc Bourdon


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 08:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
Thats what you need to do with these shares.

That's not true at all.

AscensionAir (the program I posted) does everything for you. It's not a rental program. Staff is there when you load up and is there to greet you when you land. You do nothing but fly.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 12:31 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/22/09
Posts: 5643
Post Likes: +1121
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Aircraft: 1977 A36
Username Protected wrote:
But there will always be the day when you want the plane to be somewhere and someone else booked it. For that annoyance you just paid $525K... :crazy:


Adam,
I think you have that backwards. You saved $500k by having the inconvenience or you are flying equipment you could not afford or you have access to two different birds (for different missions). Of course, the amount of hours flown by each of the three partners would be important. You would not want three peeps all flying 500 hours a year. However, for people who only use their cross country plane 3-4 times a month, it might work out and allow them to be flying a jet. :peace:

_________________
It is possible to fly without motors, but not without knowledge and skill.WW


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 12:45 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12206
Post Likes: +3089
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Plane sharing agreements are like partnerships.
Sometimes they work, sometimes they do not. The key is to understand your requirements and the requirements of others in the partnership/program.

For example, if I had stayed in TN there was a potential partner I was in discussions on with for a small share in a Citation. They used the plane extensively for business almost every week from Tuesday through Thursday, I would have really on used it on one or two weekends a month. For a small buy in, it really was ideal.

It all comes down to matching the requirements and the costs. If you want the flexibility to have both a Jet and Piston plane that you can fly at any time, then look to spend 3+ million over three years, likely a lot more then that. Or with one of these programs, you can spend $800K and have lower costs/risks but at the sacrifice of some availability.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 14:36 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6065
Post Likes: +719
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
The only beef I have is the plane is left full of fuel every time you fly that's not something you want in a jet or any turboprop.

Username Protected wrote:
Thats what you need to do with these shares.

That's not true at all.

AscensionAir (the program I posted) does everything for you. It's not a rental program. Staff is there when you load up and is there to greet you when you land. You do nothing but fly.

_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.

Marc Bourdon


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 14:38 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
The only beef I have is the plane is left full of fuel every time you fly that's not something you want in a jet or any turboprop.

Once again..... That's not true at all. What are you talking about? Are you reading what I';m writing?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 14:39 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/03/08
Posts: 17164
Post Likes: +29254
Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
Username Protected wrote:
The only beef I have is the plane is left full of fuel every time you fly that's not something you want in a jet or any turboprop.

or anything bigger than a quicksilver


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 14:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13087
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
The only beef I have is the plane is left full of fuel every time you fly that's not something you want in a jet or any turboprop.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 15:22 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12206
Post Likes: +3089
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
The only beef I have is the plane is left full of fuel every time you fly that's not something you want in a jet or any turboprop.


I have only seen this done for training aircraft or at owner specifications.
Who else does it?

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 17:51 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 3835
Post Likes: +5699
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
Username Protected wrote:
However, for people who only use their cross country plane 3-4 times a month, it might work out and allow them to be flying a jet. :peace:


I would have to say that I am not sure someone flying 3-4 times a month should really be flying a flight level plane in a most weather mission. Flying the plane is not hard, but learning to handle the curve balls thrown by mother nature and ATC requires more time in the saddle IMHO. Maybe if you are an experienced cross country high altitude flyer and moving into an SF50, that works. But most of these position holders are new to pressurization, new to turbine, new to jets, new to flight level flying, new to radar, new to real icing, new to high altitude convection, new to SIDS and STARS. Not sure you can do that flying 3-4 times a month.

_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 18:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12206
Post Likes: +3089
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
I would have to say that I am not sure someone flying 3-4 times a month should really be flying a flight level plane in a most weather mission. Flying the plane is not hard, but learning to handle the curve balls thrown by mother nature and ATC requires more time in the saddle IMHO. Maybe if you are an experienced cross country high altitude flyer and moving into an SF50, that works. But most of these position holders are new to pressurization, new to turbine, new to jets, new to flight level flying, new to radar, new to real icing, new to high altitude convection, new to SIDS and STARS. Not sure you can do that flying 3-4 times a month.


Sorry, I disagree. The SF50 is shorter ranged then you are used to thinking in terms of jet. It really is more like a turboprop in terms of incremental performance. The SF50 probably best compares to a Meridian or KA-90.

I probably made a larger jump from a Cirrus SR20 to an Aerostar 700 then many of the pilots in these programs are making.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 18:39 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/14/09
Posts: 6068
Post Likes: +3329
Company: tomdrew.lawyer
Location: Des Moines, IA (KDSM)
Aircraft: 1973 Baron E55
How many Piper M500's owner/pilots are out there flying 100ish hours a year? IMO, a lot more than we think. But, I agree, even though the single engine turbo prop and SF50 are quoted as being, "easy to fly" they are going to be flying around in high workload environments.

I am fascinated by the SF50 and look forward to watching it roll out to see how it gets flown. I know this, it seems like every fourth plane I hear on ATC is a Cirrus these days.

A random (possibly irrelevant) sample: About 2.5 times more SR22's showing up on Flightaware right now than A36's.

_________________
C340A/8KCAB/T182T
F33C/E55/B58
PA 28/32
Currency 12 M: IPC/BFR, CFII Renewal


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 21:13 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12206
Post Likes: +3089
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
But, I agree, even though the single engine turbo prop and SF50 are quoted as being, "easy to fly" they are going to be flying around in high workload environments.


Define high workload.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 21:54 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/14/09
Posts: 6068
Post Likes: +3329
Company: tomdrew.lawyer
Location: Des Moines, IA (KDSM)
Aircraft: 1973 Baron E55
Username Protected wrote:
But, I agree, even though the single engine turbo prop and SF50 are quoted as being, "easy to fly" they are going to be flying around in high workload environments.


Define high workload.

Tim


Them: "Cirrus xyz cross Annie intersection at and maintain 6000, expect Cirrus 4 arrival for the ILS 14L, 200kts or greater for now please."

Me: "Ok, I got the Cirrus xyz part, please repeat everything thereafter."
_________________
C340A/8KCAB/T182T
F33C/E55/B58
PA 28/32
Currency 12 M: IPC/BFR, CFII Renewal


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2016, 22:05 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14463
Post Likes: +9585
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Seems to me the higher I go on the equipment ladder the easier things get.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7667 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237 ... 512  Next



Electroair (Bottom Banner)

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 2007-2026

.concorde.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.Aircraft Associates.85x50.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.LogAirLower85x50.png.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.BT Ad.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.Plane Salon Beechtalk.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.Plane AC Tile.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.v2x.85x100.png.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.avnav.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.SCA.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.8flight logo.jpeg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.suttoncreativ85x50.jpg.
.ElectroairTile.png.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.AeroMach85x100.png.
.rnp.85x50.png.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.