What does the type of aircraft training have to do with hotel selection? Just select a better hotel?

Keep ya Lancair/Cessna

I just did some numbers, RV10, air con, leather, as good as it gets. 1000nm, same range, same pax etc, and the jet is 240 knots Vs 160 knots. Otherwise no mission benefit besides higher levels. The fuel cost alone is eye watering in comparison. Even with Jet fuel being cheaper.

That being said if that was the machine that did it for me, I would love it to bits!

Has the order book grown at all since the thing has actually existed?

The planes being delivered now started as a $1M dream sold more than 10 years ago.

Now it is a ~$3M actual thing where reality can't be hidden. It is basically a turboprop which burns more fuel, uses more runway, and takes more training. It isn't even quiet enough to avoid headsets, just like a turboprop.

I don't see people lining up to sign new purchase contracts.

When people talk about how many they have sold as confirmation of the plane's value, those were the dreams, not the reality, that was sold.

Mike C.

Are you on the membership committee?

If you don't have time to get an ME rating once, you don't have time to be a jet pilot, even in a toy jet. Being a jet pilot is an ongoing commitment level far beyond getting an ME rating. You have to fly to ATP standards to get the rating, and basically pass a checkride to the standards EVERY YEAR to keep current.

Just remember that when salivating over the dreamy photos in the brochure. Being an SF-50 pilot is real effort and having only one engine did almost nothing to change that.

Mike C.

Are you on the membership committee?

If you don't have time to get an ME rating once, you don't have time to be a jet pilot, even in a toy jet. Being a jet pilot is an ongoing commitment level far beyond getting an ME rating. You have to fly to ATP standards to get the rating, and basically pass a checkride to the standards EVERY YEAR to keep current.

Just remember that when salivating over the dreamy photos in the brochure. Being an SF-50 pilot is real effort and having only one engine did almost nothing to change that.

Mike C.

LOL, now you're just being silly.

Look, I've got a genuine 1.5 hours of left seat time in the Vision Jet. It is a really nice airplane. Comfortable really, quite nice to ride in and fly.

There are no 7-seat RV10
There are no pressurized RV10. (8000' cabin at FL310)
There are no 310kt RV10.
There are no RV10 with FIKI.
There are no RV10 with RVSM at FL310.

It's at least $2M less than a TBM940 and it fits in a 40' T-hangar.

A friend of mine seriously inquired and they have a 3-year backlog of over 500 orders.

Honestly, if I had the money and need, I'd buy one. In a heartbeat. It is a winner.

Go rent an hour with instructor in one. You'll see why there are 500+ on order.

The SF50 is my next airplane at this point for one simple reason. It can be ground handled by one person and it fits in a 40’ T hangar. For an owner pilot I don’t think this issue can be overstated. Even a PA46 isn’t going in most Ts with that long wing. You’re never going to move an MU2 / KA90 / TBM / PC12 by yourself and even if you could it’ll be in a community hangar with a bunch of other bigger planes you can’t. The only step up from the BE58 that’s short of an SF50 is a 58P and I can’t justify the additional opex for the relatively small increase in capability.

Joel:

I agree that is a significant advantage for some. With the upturn in Aviation, I am finding that the large FBO hangars are stuffed full and getting more expensive. I prefer controlling my own plane, working on it in my hangar and doing my own tug work to avoid ground damage.

Having your personal jet in a standard T hangar could save a net of $300 plus per month and give some privacy and convenience not found in the common hangar.

KJ

An Eclipse EA500/550 fits that description, but alas, was ruined by other decisions that easily could have been avoided.

That is, you don't need a single engine to make it fit a hangar and be manually handled, you just need it to be light. When full of fuel, the SF50 is actually heavier than the EA500.


Plenty of MU2 owners move their own planes in and out of their own T hangars. For example, Carlson at KSQL. They have little tow tugs.

Or even fancier:

[youtube]https://youtu.be/A6sQVVM16Cw[/youtube]

I'm kept in a community hangar with valet service. Plane is on the ramp when I show up, and put back after I leave. Saves buckets of time over having a hangar of my own. I get it that having your own hangar has other benefits, but speed isn't one of them. An MU2 with valet service can be faster than a jet (a real one) where you have to tug it out yourself.

The hangar, towing, etc problems are solvable, and manually moving around a 6000 lbs airplane is not that easy, so the SF50 owner will likely need powered assistance. A climate with ice and snow potential increases the issues, as does slopes and hangar door tracks/obstacles.

Mike C.

I already manually move around a 5400lb aircraft (God bless Redline). The logistics of a community hangar are a non starter to me. I want to be able to go sit in the plane and mess with avionics, pull it out where I can get GPS signals to play with things, go somewhere at the drop of a hat at 2 in the morning. I’m sure it would save me some time to have the plane already on the ramp ready to go when I get to the airport, but with the tug it only takes me a couple of minutes to get it out myself and it provides a bunch of extra flexibility.

Super tow works great on 6,000 lb planes. With chains and weighted tires, the super tow moved my 6,200 lb gross weight P Baron in Ohio winter ice and snow with no trouble...they claim 8,000lb limit.

They have larger versions as well

Around here, that 40' hangar vs bigger box hangar is a toasty $700/m jump in price (plus property tax on the damn hangar!!!) --- if you can even get one sometime in the next decade.

Some friends I know picked a third partner for a PA46 - because he already had the box hangar.

All the above works for me with valet service. The FBO is 24/7. I can have the plane on the ramp at all hours.

The thing you lose with community hangar is ability to store stuff at the airport (on the positive side, you don't collect a lot of junk, either). Everything else is easier than your own T hangar, IMO. No tug to maintain/use, no doors to open/close, no waiting for fuel trucks, and passengers have a nice terminal to sit in rather than milling about next to a rusty old T hanger. I show up, preflight, load, and takeoff. I land, unload, and go home. All from the main terminal with nice lounge, restrooms, and amenities like places to charge their cell phones.

The majority of turbines are kept in community hangars due to size and convenience.

Mike C.

Yep, not a problem at all moving it myself. I have a Supertow IV (needs the wide carriage for dual nose wheel). Works great.

I have a second one at KTRK. It works OK in snow, can be bought with tire chains. It is more difficult in snow, but works.

Also more challenging with full fuel due to simple weight as well as CG moving forward a little. But still manageable. Key is to keep nose strut inflated properly as well as tug tires.

...to push it back into the ocean when it strands on dry land ?

I like the cirrus jet concept and as a practical matter I like most everything about the plane, but i'm not sure i could stand to look at it every day