Cirrus being very generous with trade in’s and cheap money helps. That appears to be coming to an end.

Here in my mailbox is another announcement of having sold 500.

So Socata sold 500 TBM 900 series since 2014, yet Cirrus sold 500 Vision Jets since June 2016, in two years shorter time frame...

Let's wait for expert market analysis from the hive

Yep. I’m not really trying to make a point, just thought it was interesting/coincidental that another manufacturer had the same basic press release.

No, there is very clearly a price for that.

Ask any Cirrus salesman, he can tell you what it is.

Mike C.

And inevitably, someone will point out that a used <whatever> of comparable capability costs less than this new thing, as if that's an indictment of the manufacturer. But of course, used things generally do cost less than new, that's hardly an insight. It also doesn't imply that any of the design choices the manufacturer were wrong or could have been better, as it would be equally true whatever they made. No manufacturer could make a new plane cheaper than comparable used planes, and even if they could, it would just drive down the price of those used planes until they were once again cheaper than the new ones.

And TBM is just a new model off an existing production line, which is a lot easier than ramping up an all-new production line from scratch,.

That is silly. The single turbine has amazing reliability and heck it has a parachute. Now as far as range, on a headwind day is going to have issues. Especially if you need to leave any fuel behind. I am guessing could have found a willing pro-pilot for that mission.

No, there is very clearly a price for that.

Ask any Cirrus salesman, he can tell you what it is.

Mike C.

There are some paid commercial pilots that might take that mission. Years ago a much younger me might have done so in order to get the turbine time. Maybe even more so if it were twin turbine (KingAir or Citation) time.


There are no old bold pilots.

That is silly. The single turbine has amazing reliability and heck it has a parachute. Now as far as range, on a headwind day is going to have issues. Especially if you need to leave any fuel behind. I am guessing could have found a willing pro-pilot for that mission.

Second jet engine is less fuel used, faster, higher, longer range, over weather, redundant thrust, redundant pressurization, redundant electrical/bleed power, safer.

The SF50 is the result of blindly applying a piston single engine religion when designing a jet.

Mike C.

A twin jet from Cirrus if they had some jet sense.

The Eclipse was well under $3.3M and had far superior performance on less total thrust and less total fuel load.

Mike C.

Clearly the market has spoken in favor of the Cirrus Vision Jet, in spite of all the ‘wisdom’ to the contrary here on BT.

I remember when all the ‘real jet’ pilots called the Citations ‘Near Jets’ too.

I saw 2 of the early Vision Jets at Camarillo. They were in town for a photo shoot (the pics ended up in AOPA magazine). The pilots opened them up and let us all look inside, ask questions, etc.

They are certainly unique and it would be fun to be able to fly one. The cockpit and passenger seating looked quite comfortable and roomy.

I’m not surprised that they have sold a lot of them.

A twin jet from Cirrus if they had some jet sense.

The Eclipse was well under $3.3M and had far superior performance on less total thrust and less total fuel load.

Mike C.