It’s interesting that the Kelly Website says “available now” (for the Columbia).
Neil wrote:
It may be that the real life experience modifies your view, but in any case anti-ice equipment on a single is not a panacea, Hard IMC in a single is not everyone’s cup of tea.
No-one is suggesting you fly into “hard” IMC on purpose. But I have a respect for ice. And you can get that stuff unexpectedly. Are you saying you would rather risk icing catching you with your pants down?
Flyer59 wrote:
PS: you don’t have to rub it in,we all know that the hot wing is the best solution
I have boots and look up to Neil and Josh who melt the ice….
Oh, the Mustang has boots, right! See how impressed I was … I thought you’re in the ice melting league already! (Would there not be enough energy, or is the hot wing system simply too expensive for a light jet?)
Not sure, it is obviously simpler to use boots and prob cheaper. They are still run off bleed air for inflation/deflation but I assume harder to route the hot bleed from fuselage pod mounted engines. . The engine inlet anti-ice is bleed air heating metal.
AIUI, to prevent runback re-freezing, “big” jet leading edges are heated to a temperature which vapourises the water droplets.
Thermawing would not achieve that. Even the huge alternator (figures posted here previously) is not enough to get the temperature. And on composites you could not do it anyway. So runback would still be an issue. But I suspect that the demand is just not there. The C400 sales are too small. Also I recall talking to somebody who used to work for Air Touring (a C400 dealer for a brief time before it all collapsed but not before they did an IPO, following the usual pattern 
) when this came out and it was very easy to cause damage to the material, too.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
You live near the alps and will fly a lot over water? I really don’t get a profile here.
Oh Man! 
Hey, Mooney_driver, hear that sound? that’s the sound of your credibility disappearing forever. Now, whenever you write anything contentious on here, 1000 people will remember that you were the guy that didn’t know the Alps meet the sea right near my home base and snigger.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
if you need a loan then that suggest you can’t even start to think that way
It’s surprising that for someone who writes so clearly (and English isn’t your first language I believe. I’m impressed) your thinking is so fuzzy. There are many reasons why someone might choose to finance a plane with a loan: not wanting to trigger a tax charge; getting a better rate of return than the cost of the loan; prefering to match the cost of their flying with a particular income stream, I could go on. But the only explanation you can imagine is that I don’t have a pot to p1ss in. That probably says more about you than you realise.
There was a lot more snark in your post which was uncalled for. When you can be so wrong on a subject on which I am an expert (me) why should I take you seriously when you pontificate on aviation?
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Sorry for being so blunt.
Not blunt (Martin is blunt ), rude.
Peter recently asked why more people don’t post here. J’accuse!
Peter,
Sorry about that. I’m not the kind of person who stays up all night “because someone said something wrong on the internet” but my amour propre could not let that go.
On a serious note: I get a hint that the big boys here think that low time pilots like me should not be thinking about purchasing anything bigger than a 172. That would be a fair point, I often think that myself. In fact it is such an important point I might start another thread.
On another point: I posted this under the heading “learning and starting out” but most of the posts have been, as usual, on various types of arcane equipment and IFR techniques. Guys, start your own F#$%ing threads
I think: Any pilot who has a PPL can learn to safely fly the SR22 in about 10 hours.
Hey tinfoil hat, I like you!,
✊
tinfoilhat wrote:
On a serious note: I get a hint that the big boys here think that low time pilots like me should not be thinking about purchasing anything bigger than a 172. That would be a fair point, I often think that myself. In fact it is such an important point I might start another thread.
Certainly not me. I had about 220 hours (accumulated 10 years earlier) when I got back into flying in the UK. Did a US standalone IR (I had an Australian IR which had lapsed) and bought a PA46 Mirage. It isn’t about the hours in my mind, it is about the seriousness to which you apply yourself. I firmly believe training and currency is the key not hours.
And in my opinion whether you finance and aircraft, boat, car or house is irrelevant.
