07 Dec 2025, 09:19 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet  Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 09:40 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13086
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I thought this was a thread about TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet? OK.... add some information about one of those planes then.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 09:49 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12192
Post Likes: +3076
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Assuming we ignore the 380 piston planes Cirrus delivered.
Also assuming all "piston twins" are the same.
Why don't you want to discuss the real topic? 1. Because Cirrus does not make a twin. 2. Because I have debated the single/twin so many times that I know the arguments on both sides and have no real interest in it. Compounded by the fact that I believe we do not have adequate data or control of the variables to be able to draw a conclusion. Back to the thread title. I think the SF50 will eat the TBM's lunch in terms of the market. Sure there are things the SF50 cannot do yet (mostly the range); but the plane is so much simpler that I am fairly sure the operational costs are lower and the CapEx is also a lot lower. This gives the SF50 an advantage that will really hurt the TBM market. Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 12:41 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 09/16/10
Posts: 9050
Post Likes: +2086
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Back to the thread title. I think the SF50 will eat the TBM's lunch in terms of the market. Sure there are things the SF50 cannot do yet (mostly the range); but the plane is so much simpler that I am fairly sure the operational costs are lower and the CapEx is also a lot lower. This gives the SF50 an advantage that will really hurt the TBM market.
Tim And various piston sales too. Some of which don't have great carrying ability and range at the same time. Though there is a chance that it will get some people into a turbine aircraft, then they will want more.
_________________
A person with no regrets, has a bad memory.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 12:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13086
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Assuming we ignore the 380 piston planes Cirrus delivered.
Also assuming all "piston twins" are the same.
Why don't you want to discuss the real topic? 1. Because Cirrus does not make a twin. 2. Because I have debated the single/twin so many times that I know the arguments on both sides and have no real interest in it. Compounded by the fact that I believe we do not have adequate data or control of the variables to be able to draw a conclusion. Back to the thread title. I think the SF50 will eat the TBM's lunch in terms of the market. Sure there are things the SF50 cannot do yet (mostly the range); but the plane is so much simpler that I am fairly sure the operational costs are lower and the CapEx is also a lot lower. This gives the SF50 an advantage that will really hurt the TBM market. Tim
Why doesn’t Cirrus make a twin? It’s not because they wish they could.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 12:52 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/12/08
Posts: 7847
Post Likes: +2518
Company: Retired
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Aircraft: '76 A36 TAT TN 550
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Family rules for airplane trips are 1 carry on size suitcase and one duffle bag for adults, and one duffel bag per kid. LOL! No way SWMBO would put up with that. Our ‘76 A36 has a surprisingly large baggage area between the cockpit and club seats and with our extended baggage mod (same as on a 79 and newer A36) we’ve got plenty of baggage room. We’ve been traveling since ‘90 in this aircraft - family of 4 with 2 daughters. Yep, they can pack some luggage. Jim
_________________
ABS Life Member
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 13:40 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 06/02/15
Posts: 4252
Post Likes: +2957
Location: Fresno, CA (KFCH)
Aircraft: T210M
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Family rules for airplane trips are 1 carry on size suitcase and one duffle bag for adults, and one duffel bag per kid. LOL! No way SWMBO would put up with that. Our ‘76 A36 has a surprisingly large baggage area between the cockpit and club seats and with our extended baggage mod (same as on a 79 and newer A36) we’ve got plenty of baggage room. We’ve been traveling since ‘90 in this aircraft - family of 4 with 2 daughters. Yep, they can pack some luggage. Jim
Why the LOL ?
The rule I stated is for 5/6 people, and is for actual luggage. Yes the ladies also have a make-up bag, a "cabin" bag with magazines & snacks. The kids have their portable playstation cases.
We recently had a full size SUV, (whatever the Infiniti model is called) completely full of baggage, outlet shopping bags, and roadside fruit stand products. It was all loaded into the TBM with a 5 seat configuration with room to spare in the cabin. Didn't even bother to put anything in the non-pressurized compartments. The TBM is certainly not thought of as an "SUV of the sky", yet in both volume and weight it will carry passengers and cargo equivalent to a modern SUV in pressurized comfort, above most traffic and weather, cruising 300 kts.
_________________
1977 Cessna 210, with "elite" turbocharging.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 13:54 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/01/10
Posts: 3503
Post Likes: +2476
Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Why doesn’t Cirrus make a twin? It’s not because they wish they could. This is a really good point that we really haven't paused much on. Why doesn't Cirrus make a piston twin? As turbine engines continues to evolve, piston twins continue to diminish. If one looks at late model G58s for more than $1mm, it doesn't take long to start comparing with turbines. Plus, with pressurization and higher service ceilings why mess with NA piston power?
_________________
Previous A36TN owner
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 14:19 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13086
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Why doesn’t Cirrus make a twin? It’s not because they wish they could. This is a really good point that we really haven't paused much on. Why doesn't Cirrus make a piston twin? As turbine engines continues to evolve, piston twins continue to diminish. If one looks at late model G58s for more than $1mm, it doesn't take long to start comparing with turbines. Plus, with pressurization and higher service ceilings why mess with NA piston power?
And the fact that piston twins have a horrible safety record and the parachute does not.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 15:58 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13086
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Too bad the PC12 doesn't have a parachute. Major safety oversight on Pilatus' part.
You keep missing the part about PC12's track record since 1994.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 16:45 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/30/09
Posts: 3880
Post Likes: +2435
Location: $ilicon Vall€y
Aircraft: Columbia 400
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Too bad the PC12 doesn't have a parachute. Major safety oversight on Pilatus' part.
You keep missing the part about PC12's track record since 1994.
Yeah, you have to admit, it would have been a lot better with a parachute system.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: TBM 850 vs Cirrus Vision Jet Posted: 09 Apr 2019, 16:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13086
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Yeah, you have to admit, it would have been a lot better with a parachute system. A lot better than what? No engine failures?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
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
|
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
|
|
|
|
