Fast forward 3 years and assume that these get certified and produced. Which small jet would you choose? Piper Jet Diamond D-Jet Cirrus Jet Typical trip - 350NM with two people. Sometimes up to 5 total.
The Cirrus and Djet are slow just over 300kts and don't carry much. I'd call them Nearjets... The Piper is faster, and has a bigger cabin, but cost's 2x as much, so it isn't much of a value. For just over $2m I'd be thinking about something other than the Piper. And another problem is that most of these single engine jets are going to end up cruising at 29,000 ft or below. ATC has seen to that. The Cirrus and Djet realize this and aren't certified for any higher. The Piper can go higher but is going to be a gas hog under 30k. There is a big hole in the market between pistons and planes like the Mustang. I just don't think that these airplanes have the right mix of payload, range and speed to make a whole lot of sense. I really liked the Epic, single turboprop, but their lack of capital doomed them, too bad cause it was a neat airplane, lots of useful load, big roomy cabin, lots of range and faster than both the Nearjets.
I don't understand the personal jet market yet. Out of all of them I like the Mustang, but the most expensive. For that type of money don't understand why you don't get a new CJ or used other jet for real speed and load. As said, for personal use and 300 kt. speed get a turboprop.
At the current market prices, I would go buy a Citation CJ1 and climb above the other airplanes and spend the $1.0 Million I saved from buying a new Mustang on a couple new F-cars......You can do everything in the CJ1 that you can in the Mustang with more people and more range.
Why not the Honda Jet as an option? 1+6 passengers, 1400 NM range, and a maximum speed of 420 knots. Plus... it looks really good... Mike in Kuwait
For 350 nm trips a jet is likely a major over kill unless there are major weather issues to get above. In this price range new acquisition versus used bigger/faster should play into your decision process. One issue will be the capital cost can be financed but operating cost are straight out of the pocket. Something else to put in the mix is if you want to put the aircraft out for charter. The used bigger aircraft may be able to generate more net revenue than the smaller aircraft. Give thought to not just your passenger count but total baggage in weight and volume. Some of the small aircraft may run of this capability quickly. Another thought to consider is interior size. Some of these aircraft are going to be pretty cramped inside. You as a pilot may be just fine but the others may feel confined, especially on longer distances. Jeff
As some of you know we looked hard at this market segment and did not buy... Cirrus jet? Based on our experience Cirrus has no business building a jet. Beyond that the plane is slow, very mission limited and stands little chance of seeing certification before the second coming...if ever, Cirrus financial woes are common aviation news fodder these days. Diamond Jet? Slow, mission limited...all the operating costs of a jet and none of the performance/capability. Piper Jet? As said before acquisition cost/performance/passenger comfort. Cessna Mustang? After falling in love with it and test flying numerous times we were ready to sign-up; however, when the sobering reality of writing the check came we lost our rose colored glasses and started to realize the short comings and as has been stated numerous times above a used CJ1 was a way better choice. Honda Jet? WOW...look at the price of admission 3.9 in "standard config" and when will they actually deliver a plane? After looking long and hard we decided to sit tight until there is a clear path to our mission...speed, efficiency, payload & range. To be honest the TBM is appearing as the clear winner for us.
This is in today's on-line distribution of Aviation International News: 2010 Should Be Profitable Year for Cirrus Aircraft Despite plummeting new aircraft sales and continuing challenges paying some bills, Cirrus Aircraft should return to profitability next year, according to president and CEO Brent Wouters. The company remains committed to the Vision SF50 single-engine jet program, he affirmed, and 80 full-time personnel are working on the design while the search continues for the capital needed to complete the jet. Although Cirrus had to move the jet team back to company facilities in Duluth, Minn., because it couldnt afford the rent on the former Northwest Airlines hangar it was using, that move proved beneficial, he said. Moving [the jet team] back here improved communication. That saves $2 million that I can spend on resources rather than utilities. Cirrus will build three more Vision prototypes, and Wouters believes that certification in 2012 is still achievable. At its Grand Forks, N.D. parts manufacturing plant, Cirrus is behind on rent by nearly $850,000. Wouters explained that he has been working with Grand Forks officials for months on devising a plan to repay that money eventually but keep the doors open so that jobs arent lost
Just my personal opinion, but I think Cessna 350/400 will start knocking the Cirrus out. I have spent much time analyzing current production single engine pistons and the Cessna 350/400 is far superior.
That plane does seem to have it all... speed, size, economy. Are there any negatives to that plane? I wonder what the operating costs are on that plane compared to say a Mustang or CJ1 or on the other end of the scale, TBM 850.
The Meridian is a good bit slower and doesn't carry much. The TBM cost's a lot more because it is a whole lot more airplane. Depends on what suits your needs in terms of payload and range, and how fast you want to go, but I'd have a hard time trying justify the Meridian at the price since is is so slow. If you are shopping used, those things tend to equal themselves out, with the better airplanes holding onto more value longer, and the weak sisters depreciating more.
The Meridian is a great airplane, but does not compare to the TBM or PC-12 when it comes to speed or range. For me personally, If I HAD to have a turboprop, I would go with a PC-12/47/47E or NG, instead of the TBM. The TBM is a high flying, fast airplane, but I think the PC-12 wins out when it comes to capability. The TBM is definitely a lot smaller on the inside and it feels it. It does have a high-performance feel to it and it climbs like a jet. The PC-12 has an SUV type feeling to it, and the interior is very spacious, especially with the cargo door. I have always been in awe of the airplane and the places it can get in and out of. I know a guy in the CLT area that manages and operates a fleet of them if you want some real time feedback on them. You could always up the CJ1 and go with a CJ2........the prices are falling monthly it seems like.
If I had to choose one of the original three listed Cirrus, Diamond and Piper, I would choose the Diamond. Cirrus Jet: windshield is too big, I can foresee some serious pressurization problems and window issues. Piper: Don't really like the idea of flying a V-1 I worked for Diamond for awhile. Good engineering and they currently build a great set of airplanes. But for the money I would buy a used CJ or CJ1 because I can offset the ownership costs by chartering it. Just my $0.02
At least in our case the TBM seems a better fit, I like the 30+knt speed over the PC-12 and the lower acquisition cost. Don't get me wrong, I would luv to have the PC-12 but I don't have enough friends to fill the seats and I don't think you could offset the acquisition cost with a lease back due to the single engine.
Wouldn't that cost A LOT to maintain (at least compared to the ones he listed)? I really have no idea, but it is a substantially larger jet (and older).
a jet is useless for 350nm. I like the mustang the most out of all those. However, for your intended mission I'd get a TBM850.
I would also get a PC12, but you can't really compare it to a TBM. The 850 is FAST, fast fast... did I mention it's fast? It's more like a mooney, whereas a PC-12 is like a cherokee six; a bit slower but with a lot more space, and a useful cargo door. The TBM is tight inside, it's more of a 2-4 person plane. A meridian is usually not a favorite, it's got problems with the magnesium intake corroding, it's not as fast as an 850, etc. However you can't really compare because the TBM is much cheaper, what other turbine can you buy new for that money???
If you intend to fly at night or over mountainous areas, I'd get a twin. I've heard about too many PT6 failures to be comfortable. Sure, the odds are low that one will fail, but for me it's about peace of mind.
It's all relative, people fly night IMC over mountains in single pistons, some say they're crazy and it's a twin piston at least, some think those are nuts and they'd only do it in a turbine, etc. FWIW, my father knew a guy that would fly a 172 hundreds of miles into the ocean at night looking for plankton... oh, he carried with him a tractor tube in case of emergency lol.
Not sure I read that correctly, are you saying the TBM is much cheaper than the Meridian? If so, that's not the case at all.
The statistics show that single engine turbines are quite safe-- at least as safe as multiengine turbines. However, I'm not talking about statistics, but rather about peace of mind.
