That would work in the US (only) 
Elsewhere, you can fly these only as far as the nearest border, before you have to start getting permits… and don’t even mention IFR without which the Evo is barely usable. It would work within a few countries in Europe, only. I did look at the Evo very carefully (past threads on it).
I would settle for being able to fly the one I do own sigh
You aren’t the only one… It looks like half the people I know right now are grounded in “maintenance” for extended periods.
My daydream would a Cubcrafters and a TBM.
But, especially if I had a TBM, would I have the time and patience to fly VFR at 90 kts, to go play say with Jacko in Scotland ?
I guess a SET takes you too far from basic flying for a private owner to be super-current in both fields. Having such a performer means you want to make the best of your time so would you still have time to manage and enjoy a more basic plane ?
loco wrote:
Yeah, that 130kg full fuel payload on the Vision is just perfect for a family vacation.
is it really that bad? In which case, why bother to put so many seats. Same as with most planes unfortunately. But the Jetprop is often worse, some even have a negative payload with full fuel… Also some Mooneys are awful in tha regard. Me, I’d change certification criteria that for every seat installed there has to be at least 70 kgs payload at full fuel, for any airplane. Then this constant overload potential would go away.
On the vision jet I understood there is some sort of sweet spot weight vs fuel (800 lb payload , but as they don’t publish neither the POH nor real empty weights, it is difficult to say. Wikipedia sais 1102 kg payload all together.
Standard family, 2 adults, 2 kids and 20 kgs bags each would yield some 300 kgs payload which leaves 800 kgs fuel/293 USG. Looking at the figures published by various tests, 293 USG would yield a range of close to 900 NM @ 270 kt and 50 GPH. That includes 1 hour at cruise final reserve and 75 USG for climb, which may be high. So call it 800 NM for a family of 4? Not too shabby either.
Looking at an intermediate cruise of 270 kt I see ranges between 1100 NM with 2 on board to 350 NM with 6 on board. Considering that most of these planes fly with 2-3 on board, it will do most of what SEP’s do but 100 kts faster and in a pressurized cabin.
There may be better planes but the “why the heck not” moment is quite present with this plane…
Yeah, that 130kg full fuel payload on the Vision is just perfect for a family vacation.
I think this is how it should be. The plane has got a payload and the pilot can exchange fuel against passengers and cargo. Any plane with more full fuel payload was designed with not enough tank volume.
The problem is that the Vision has enough range for most European flying only if carrying 1 person and luggage.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
There may be better planes but the “why the heck not” moment is quite present with this plane…
For several years I was in line to get a Vision together with my friend. Planning to share 50/50 as we share the TBM now. Per early POH the FF payload was around 220kg. Now I got some more info about weights for a fully equipped plane. Not so rosy anymore. I agree that one can trade range for payload, but but this plane doesn’t have it. Took a test flight and it was noisy as hell. Quietness was in my mind the biggest advantage of jet over prop. Then I found out that we’d be paying closer to 3 rather than 2. Roughly these are the reasons why I think „why bother” rather than „why not”.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Standard family, 2 adults, 2 kids (…) close to 900 NM
At about 2:40 owner says 590NM with family is possible only if wind permits.
We have the discussion in Germany at full blast right now, because Friedrich Merz, a candidate for leader of the conservative party is a successful businessman and lawyer and owns a TBM 850 and a DA62, and the liberals and the left go ballistic trying to smear him for that. In fact he owns the TBM in an SPV and rents it to his company. Normal procedure. But Germans like to point the finger at others instead of themselves when it comes to who is more successful and why, so it was to be expected.
