OK, here’s the Speed vs Range figures:
What looks like an advert from a Cirrus dealer has been deleted until I get time to look into it.
Here is the CirrusJet next to me in Fargo, North Dakota in April. Personally I think it looks a bit weird.
Peter wrote:
What looks like an advert from a Cirrus dealer has been deleted until I get time to look into it.
Back to the Eclipse (I thank that was what the thread starter wanted to talk about…): Eclipse is buying back the old airframes and bringing them up to current standards. This is then sold as the “Eclipse SE”. Here is a comparison table of different models:
http://www.oneaviation.aero/eclipse/differences.php
I think currently, they are selling much more SE’s than 550’s.
I have been in an Eclipse. They are very fast and handle nicely. The avionics are very non standard (ie non-Garmin like) but work fine. I don’t love the panel but it does its job. I think its biggest problem is size. It is really small inside. Effectively a 4 seater in my opinion. If you want a jet for 2-4 people to get around in with minimal luggage it is a good fast option. I think it and the CirrusJet define Very Light Jet in my mind. The Mustang is smaller than a CJ but of the same scale. That said it is less efficient than the Eclipse.
Obviously the other key issue is service network. While it has improved for the Eclipse, it will never match the scale of the Citation Service Centres.
There is a cottage industry keeping the dozen or so Morane MS760 airframes on the civilian register flying. Admittedly the fuel burn of these 1950 design pure jets must be impressive. They seem to trade at less than a nicely presented TB20, and they have nice lines.
A couple modern turbofans in the 760 and they would make for nice personal jets, as they were designed to be from the beginning.
The Eclipse 550 vs Mustang is actually quite an interesting comparison. They are both powered by PW600 series engines but with different variants. I also added in the Cirrus SF50. I find a parachute in a type-rated jet to be rather silly.
Eclipse
MTOW – 2722 kg
Engines – 2xPW610F – 900lbs/engine
NBAA IFR Range – 1125nm
Useful load – 1089 kg
Max cruise – 375kts
Max Operating Altitude – FL410
Mustang
MTOW – 3921 kg
Engines – 2xPW615F – 1460lbs/engine
NBAA IFR Range – 1207nm
Useful load – 1422 kg
Max cruise – 340kts
Max Operating Altitude – FL410
Cirrus Jet
MTOW – 2727 kg
Engines – 1xWilliams FJ33-5A – 1800lbs
NBAA IFR Range – not known
Useful load – 1107kg
Max cruise – 300kts
Max Operating Altitude – FL280
Krister_L wrote:
A couple modern turbofans in the 760 and they would make for nice personal jets, as they were designed to be from the beginning.
I think they do offer that upgrade. But I have no idea whether they can actually deliver. Or which engine they selected.
Eclipse
MTOW – 2722 kg
Did anybody come up with a 1999kg STC yet?
I think the problem with the Eclipse are the avionics. The airframe can not be separated from this strange and in many versions half finished Avio glasscockpit as it controls so many parts of the airframe. I think they could sell more planes with a cheap G600/GTN750 combination plus old school switches etc.
