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.

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.

I remember years ago talking to the TBM HEAD OF SALES. he said they were targeting the owner pilots who “could not” or “would not” get a multi engine rating.

I believe Cirrus has targeted the same pilot group.

These days it's all about insurance, they convinced the insurance gods to allow someone to transition from an SR22 to an SF50.

Done.

If I was starting Jet Acquisitions today and trying to build a client base, I would be the SF50 expert! selling like hotcakes and every owner will soon be ready for an upgrade.

Jesus Mike, give it a break. I really respect your insight and enjoy reading your posts. You axe grinding on the Vision is just petty. I get it, it’s not the plane for you. I knew when I saw the post of this you would be in shortly to piss all over it.

Kevin

So I'll begin by saying that I know little about the Vision jet, but the concept is intriguing to me.
Not everyone needs to fly at FL410 every where they go, doing 500 knots, and a fuel range of 5000 NM.

Oh sure sometimes that would all be handy to have, but do we need it?
I honestly believe that us who have a plane at all, regardless of what it is, are very blessed.

I would love it if someone were to give me a Vision jet.

As for the comments about freezing to death in the mountains if they parachuted in, well for 1 planes glide a fair distance if they have some altitude. But even if you did parachute onto a mountain top, the ELT should work good, so hopefully rescue isn't too long, and in the wait time put on good cold weather clothing that you packed for emergencies.
Someone who can afford a Vision, can also afford some top quality gear.
I snowmobile in the mountains all winter, and that means getting blasted by wind from the speed, and regularly showered in powder snow from riding, and yet I finish every ride warm.

Haters obviously won't buy one, which is good for those on the wait list, which is already too long.

Is it my dream plane, no its not.

But nobody is going to sell me an F14, so my dream plane is out of reach anyway, even if I could afford it.

Someone will always hate your plane, car, motorcycle, boat, snowmobile, travel trailer, or whatever it is.

Often I wonder do they truly hate it, or are they a wee bit jealous, so bash it to feel better.

I attended a Fly in pancake breakfast this summer, where shortly after landing some guy who i don't know proceeded to endlessly bash my Arrow. Didn't let it get to me though, and certainly wouldn't sink to his level and start bashing his plane.
To this day I wonder if it was all jealousy on his behalf.

Also modern turbines are so reliable, that the most common reason for them to quit is fuel starvation, which is 100% pilot error.

Eclipse's last go at it was funded by Chinese money, and it didn't go well. Having lived through Chinese ownership at another OEM, I can understand why. The owner who bought it out of bankruptcy apparently has no interest in developing the plane and returning it to market, just building parts to support the fleet.

To bad because it's a heck of a plane. I flew one once and it was really easy to fly. The avionics were not cutting edge touch screen but worked fine. The biggest issue is that they weren't Garmin and everyone seems to think that's what you have to have.

My boss has 3 or 4 Vision Jets. He puts them out on charter at his 135. Apparently it's a money maker.

Eclipse's last go at it was funded by Chinese money, and it didn't go well. Having lived through Chinese ownership at another OEM, I can understand why. The owner who bought it out of bankruptcy apparently has no interest in developing the plane and returning it to market, just building parts to support the fleet.

To bad because it's a heck of a plane. I flew one once and it was really easy to fly. The avionics were not cutting edge touch screen but worked fine. The biggest issue is that they weren't Garmin and everyone seems to think that's what you have to have.

My boss has 3 or 4 Vision Jets. He puts them out on charter at his 135. Apparently it's a money maker.

Fantastic accomplishment.
Congrats to them.

I had no idea there were that many.

They’re like rabbits… every time I go to Tune airport there’s three more.

Cirrus has Chinese money to save them from bankruptcy, otherwise, the numbers would have been opposite with potentially zero SF50s delivered.

Both planes have flaws, Eclipse was the avionics, SF50 is the single engine religion.

Nothing about being single engine improves the SF50. Had they made it with two smaller engines, everything would have been improved.

Mike C.

Already been an engine failure in an SF50, just after takeoff. Fortunately, they manage to be high enough, just barely at about 1000 AGL, when it happened for the chute to work, but there is that danger zone where it won't.

Most turbine airplanes are multiengine, so you won't hear of engine failures due to having redundant thrust. An engine failure is a relatively minor nuisance, not a life threatening critical situation.

Worldwide, the airlines shutdown an engine in flight hundreds of times per year, nearly every single day it happens somewhere.

Mike C.

[/quote]

Most turbine airplanes are multiengine, so you won't hear of engine failures due to having redundant thrust. An engine failure is a relatively minor nuisance, not a life threatening critical situation.

Worldwide, the airlines shutdown an engine in flight hundreds of times per year, nearly every single day it happens somewhere.

Mike C.[/quote]

Do the makers of the Pilatus PC-12, and the TBM series, know about this?

Cirrus has Chinese money to save them from bankruptcy, otherwise, the numbers would have been opposite with potentially zero SF50s delivered.

Both planes have flaws, Eclipse was the avionics, SF50 is the single engine religion.

Nothing about being single engine improves the SF50. Had they made it with two smaller engines, everything would have been improved.

Mike C.

Yeah, they know about it:

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/17025

"Over a period of several hours the occupants lost sight of the floating aircraft and after about 15 hours they were picked up by a Russian container ship and airlifted to Sakhalin Island."

They got lucky and were found, could have ended up being fatal.

I bet everyone on that plane wishes they had a second engine.

Engines do fail, even turbine ones.

Mike C.