The SF50 is an upgrade path for Cirrus SR22T owners. Some may use the small jet as a charter plane since it is pressurized and is relatively cheap compared to any other jet made. One of the major common elements is the BRS chute. I am aware of a few Cirrus SR22T owners that are taking delivery of a new SF50.
Here is some of the long awaited performance data. Someone posted it on the COPA forum, the source is the owner’s site for the SF50:
Whatever the figures, I personally think the Cirrus Jet will sell well. Most humans don’t buy from rational decisions and if there is any rational reasoning going on it is to support the decision already made. I love the TBM900 or Jetprop, but I like the cockpit view of the Cirrus Jet and it could simply be something like this that makes me “fall” for a Cirrus Jet and throw overboard all the other arguments. :-)
Apart from the fact that that graph is pretty much marketing and does not really tell us much other than very basic figures, I would have to say that if they are realistic, they do paint a pretty attractive picture.
Doing a quick and dirty calc however, those figures seem quite real.
The airplane has 296 USG fuel capacity. Climb to FL280 uses 32 USG, leaving 264 USG, let’s assume 4 USG for taxi, so 260 USG for the cruise and descent and reserves which for this dirty calc I assume at 45’ at cruise fuel flow.
At 300 kts MCT this would result in 3-06 cruise time, which results in a no wind range fo 970 NM (including 64 NM climb)
At 242 kts Eco Trust this would result in 5-33 cruise time, which results in a no wind range of 1220 NM.
There are still a lot of unknowns. What is the realistic empty weight of this airplane. We know the ramp weight of 6040 lb, which at full fuel means an available zero fuel weight of 4264 lb. So how many pax and how much baggage can the jet realistically carry with that?
Still it is not a bad idea to be able to fly from South England to Dubrovnik or Faro in 3 hours or from Zurich to Heraklion in maybe 3-30 at a bit of a reduced cruise power… ah well, we can continue dreaming 
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I would have to say that if they are realistic, they do paint a pretty attractive picture.
Yes, 1.000 nm at high speed is usable. It won’t fill the more specialized requirements but so won’t the Meridian.
The numbers they are hoping to hit are 800lbs payload for 800 miles( Including NBAA IFR reserves).
They have not released enough detail yet to know if this is doable.
Hopefully we will get more data soon.
One good thing is that the seats are modular and can be quickly popped out so if you dont need them, you can save weight.
Here is a good NBAA calculation graph
Mach 0.53? Overtaken by turboprops…
That’s really rather slow!
Of course. It is in the same speed category as a TBM850/900, maybe a bit slower, with a bit less range, a bit smaller, a bit lighter, and probably slightly longer runway requirements. It has a parachute, is probably simpler to operate, and costs a LOT less.
For anyone who does not need the range or beefiness of the TBM, this is a great aircraft. I am sure they will sell quite a bit better than TBM.
The Cirrus jet is an upgrade for Cirrus SR22T customers that love the brand and believe in the parachute and want pressurization. The top speed and price of the SR22T is 215ktas and $850k USD seats 4+1. The jet is pressurized, 300ktas, $2m USD, seats 7. Those not now a Cirrus customer may buy the jet because it is fuel efficient, safe, pressurized, and less costly than other jets and some turbo-props.
The engine is not the sole consideration.
