I'm not feeling very good about GA right now. Until Mike pointed it out, I never realized just how dumb and naive pilots can be. I mean, here are examples of several very, very wealthy people buying a "crippled" jet! Do they not see the folly of their ways??

ps: choose the appropriate font color for the above post depending upon your personal views. All opinions are my own and do not reflect the general views of this or any other forum.

If it wasn’t invented in Cessna engineering, it must be wrong.

Geez you guys are rough. Especially the Cessna accusation. It's really just a style vs substance debate. I agree with Mike; as a jet this thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I want a jet with the vision interior , two engines, and a regular tail that sips kerosene at FL410. Basically a better eclipse. But I'm an Engineer, if we had the same mindset as everyone else we wouldn't be Engineers.

Thats rough? How about insinuating every Cirrus owner must be a complete fool? Thats the underlying premise isn’t it?

If the argument was “different strokes” then the points are all valid. Thats not the argument as I have read it.

Thats rough? How about insinuating every Cirrus owner must be a complete fool? Thats the underlying premise isn’t it?

If the argument was “different strokes” then the points are all valid. Thats not the argument as I have read it.

Actually I agree with much of what Mike is saying regarding the jet itself. The disconnect is the engineering mindset vs what the market wants and the compromises therein. This is hardly a new concept and not trashing Mike personally. When he was first looking into jets I was the guy who sent him all of my materials from Simcom for the Citation.

I also believe he is plenty capable of defending himself.

Don’t assume.

Just calling them like I see them; and don't tell me what to think. I will assume anything I want to.

:D

The "logic" is "the SF50 could be a better plane for 2X the price like the Mustang and the Eclipse which aren't made anymore".

Of course the SF50 would be better with 2 motors on it. It would also be 2X the price. This isn't rocket science and doesn't require a shred of engineering background to comprehend.

I really need to get off the internet.

Bingo.

Both Eclipse and Cirrus crushed those dreams by making major high level mistakes that were completely avoidable. Their religion got in the way.

Mike C.

I think that cirrus knew what they were doing, they built a jet that a lot of the sr22t owners can afford. Can it do fl410 at 400kts for 1500nm no but then again it again if did those things it would price itself out of reach for a lot of cirrus customers .

It wouldn't.

Here are some things the twin version would NOT have that the SF-50 has:

1. Chute
2. Autopilot chute interconnect (now disabled)
3. Dual yaw dampers
4. Stick pusher
5. Ruddervator mixer
6. Tail trim mixer
7. Exhaust deflector
8. V/X tail
9. Dual generators on an engine
10. Passenger headsets

Here are some things the twin version would have that the SF-50 doesn't:

1. Two engines of half the size

Take out all that complex crap on the single, add the second engine, fuel for the same cabin payload and trip length, the twin is not heavier and could be lighter.

The extra systems in the single are not only production cost but also added weight. Perhaps the greatest effect is the development time and money for all those systems setting back the program timeline. 5000+ days from deposit to delivery.

Mike C.

It wouldn't.

Here are some things the twin version would NOT have that the SF-50 has:

1. Chute
2. Autopilot chute interconnect (now disabled)
3. Dual yaw dampers
4. Stick pusher
5. Ruddervator mixer
6. Tail trim mixer
7. Exhaust deflector
8. V/X tail
9. Dual generators on an engine
10. Passenger headsets

Here are some things the twin version would have that the SF-50 doesn't:

1. Two engines of half the size

Take out all that complex crap on the single, add the second engine, fuel for the same cabin payload and trip length, the twin is not heavier and could be lighter.

The extra systems in the single are not only production cost but also added weight. Perhaps the greatest effect is the development time and money for all those systems setting back the program timeline. 5000+ days from deposit to delivery.

Mike C.

Gee, that Walter Beech must have been a real idiot. Why would he put this heavy, expensive, complex v-tail on the Bonanza?

Eclipse EA500.

Same gross weight, 6000 lbs. Flies farther, higher, faster (way faster, 370 knots), on LESS total thrust, and LESS fuel capacity.

Also, glide ratio with an engine out is infinite, OEI service ceiling is FL250.


About the same when adjusted for inflation.

Mike C.