banner
banner

14 May 2025, 17:39 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 174 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 08:34 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13079
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
Jason, I get it when stopping but do you do all your preflight checks while taxiing?

There really aren't any "preflight checks" once the motor is running. The stick shaker test is done "on the role". Most everything is done before startup. Check the controls are free and clear and check that fuel flow looks good and you're done.

I followed the same rule when I had my bonanza. Mag check etc. "on the role". Nothing beats up a prop more than sitting still powering up the motor.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 10:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/14/09
Posts: 819
Post Likes: +312
Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian,SuperCub
No prop over-speed or beta test on the ground in the Pilatus?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 10:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12131
Post Likes: +3031
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Interesting points on simplicity of M600 vs TBM.

When I look back on a lot of plane comparisons, I think you see planes that are "simple" are the ones which generally sell better.
A few examples:
  • Cirrus SR22 was ahead of many others with simple avionics, and two power levers versus three.
  • Diamond DA40NG now selling to fleet buys better than others. Jet-A, single lever, overall simplicity is considered a major selling point.
  • PC12 vs KA-200. One engine, less to manage.
  • TBM vs KA-90. One engine, less to manage
  • SETP vs old piston twins. One lever versus six....

I am sure there are more. But as companies find ways to reduce the number of pilot tasks, and not sacrifice performance except in edge cases, you see the market tends to move in that direction. I know there are also examples for six fuel tanks versus four, but I cannot recall the models...

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 12:21 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13079
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
No prop over-speed or beta test on the ground in the Pilatus?

No.

I use beta while taxiing.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 12:23 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/14/09
Posts: 819
Post Likes: +312
Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian,SuperCub
Username Protected wrote:
No prop over-speed or beta test on the ground in the Pilatus?

No.

I use beta while taxiing.

Interesting on the prop. I guess I meant testing the beta block, that it cannot go into Beta when in the air. The Meridian has a test for that.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 12:26 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13079
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
Interesting on the prop. I guess I meant testing the beta block, that it cannot go into Beta when in the air. The Meridian has a test for that.

No, there's no test for that. But I can put it in beta while flying if I want.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 13:23 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6060
Post Likes: +709
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
I would like to see that in the POH. :eek:



Username Protected wrote:
Interesting on the prop. I guess I meant testing the beta block, that it cannot go into Beta when in the air. The Meridian has a test for that.

No, there's no test for that. But I can put it in beta while flying if I want.

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

Marc Bourdon


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 14:06 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/15/11
Posts: 2574
Post Likes: +1178
Location: Mandan, ND
Aircraft: V35
You can put a KA or 441 "over the gate" in flight. POH prohibits it. Stupid Pilot trick would allow it.

And flying a 441 in manual mode approaching to land, the urge is strong to "go over the gate". ;)


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 14:09 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/26/11
Posts: 483
Post Likes: +289
Location: Fort Worth, TX
This guy decided to put the power levers into beta while in flight. It didn't work out so well for him. Fried the engines instantly. Probably not a good idea to try that...


https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19940201-0


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 17:24 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 07/01/17
Posts: 64
Post Likes: +32
Location: Irvine, CA
Aircraft: DA-42-NG
I'm surprised going into beta in flight didn't cause an immediate loss of control...

I love the conclusion of the report which is that it's partially a design-fault for the lack of a squat switch (interpreted / paraphrasing) to prevent beta being activated in-flight. I mean it has a gate, he had to lift it over the gate?!?!

Reasons no one can drive a manual transmission anymore (everything has been idiot-proofed) :D

Username Protected wrote:
This guy decided to put the power levers into beta while in flight. It didn't work out so well for him. Fried the engines instantly. Probably not a good idea to try that...


https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19940201-0


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 17:52 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/21/08
Posts: 5720
Post Likes: +7078
Location: Decatur, TX (XA99)
Aircraft: 1979 Bonanza A36
Username Protected wrote:
No, there's no test for that. But I can put it in beta while flying if I want.

you don't want to.

_________________
I'm just here for the free snacks


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:35 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13079
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
Username Protected wrote:
No, there's no test for that. But I can put it in beta while flying if I want.

you don't want to.

Obviously.....

Never knew it was up for debate?

I can also stall it and roll it over. I can also turn the motor off in flight. I can also open the door in flight if I want. How did this conversation get here?

Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12131
Post Likes: +3031
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
Obviously.....

Never knew it was up for debate?

I can also stall it and roll it over. I can also turn the motor off in flight. I can also open the door in flight if I want. How did this conversation get here?


  1. It started with Cirrus is stupid.
  2. Then went to TBM is the best thing since sliced bread. The OP obviously should have bought a Duke.
  3. Followed by Piper making life easier for the pilot in the M600 when compared to the TBM.
  4. Anyone who wants an easier pilot life is not a real pilot.
  5. From there went on a tangent to a TBM that porpoised on landing, somewhere. And
  6. then the consideration of coral reef, low prop clearance for the TBM compared to
  7. pretty much every other SETP. How this is not an issue for the PC12, and you
  8. shutdown the engine before coming to a stop to reduce prop erosion.
  9. Follow up question on using beta for taxi and startup on sketchy runways in the Caribbean.
  10. Which then migrated to beta controls, gates and squat switches.

Fairly typical for BT I think.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 21:00 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 09/02/09
Posts: 8670
Post Likes: +9161
Company: OAA
Location: Oklahoma City - PWA/Calistoga KSTS
Aircraft: UMF3, UBF 2, P180 II
Username Protected wrote:
Obviously.....

Never knew it was up for debate?

I can also stall it and roll it over. I can also turn the motor off in flight. I can also open the door in flight if I want. How did this conversation get here?


  1. It started with Cirrus is stupid.
  2. Then went to TBM is the best thing since sliced bread. The OP obviously should have bought a Duke.
  3. Followed by Piper making life easier for the pilot in the M600 when compared to the TBM.
  4. Anyone who wants an easier pilot life is not a real pilot.
  5. From there went on a tangent to a TBM that porpoised on landing, somewhere. And
  6. then the consideration of coral reef, low prop clearance for the TBM compared to
  7. pretty much every other SETP. How this is not an issue for the PC12, and you
  8. shutdown the engine before coming to a stop to reduce prop erosion.
  9. Follow up question on using beta for taxi and startup on sketchy runways in the Caribbean.
  10. Which then migrated to beta controls, gates and squat switches.

Fairly typical for BT I think.

Tim



:coffee:

Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper M600 vs Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 21:33 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/03/11
Posts: 2000
Post Likes: +2048
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
Username Protected wrote:
Obviously.....

Never knew it was up for debate?

I can also stall it and roll it over. I can also turn the motor off in flight. I can also open the door in flight if I want. How did this conversation get here?


  1. It started with Cirrus is stupid.
  2. Then went to TBM is the best thing since sliced bread. The OP obviously should have bought a Duke.
  3. Followed by Piper making life easier for the pilot in the M600 when compared to the TBM.
  4. Anyone who wants an easier pilot life is not a real pilot.
  5. From there went on a tangent to a TBM that porpoised on landing, somewhere. And
  6. then the consideration of coral reef, low prop clearance for the TBM compared to
  7. pretty much every other SETP. How this is not an issue for the PC12, and you
  8. shutdown the engine before coming to a stop to reduce prop erosion.
  9. Follow up question on using beta for taxi and startup on sketchy runways in the Caribbean.
  10. Which then migrated to beta controls, gates and squat switches.

Fairly typical for BT I think.

Tim


All it’s missing is that mu2 is perfect for the mission followed by pages of rebuttals...

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 174 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next



Aviation Fabricators (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 2007-2025

.Elite-85x50.png.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.dbm.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.concorde.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.