Why would anyone buy a Baron?

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

....As Peter brought to our attention with the Eclipse 500
http://www.eclipseaviation.com/500jet/overview.htm

The jet twin Eclipse 500 costs $1,175,000

A new Baron 58 costs $1,154,210

(When you're talking a million, a $20 grand difference is not going break
the bank.)


The Baron: six seats, non pressurized, useful load 1,514 lbs, range 1,027
nm, 198 kt cruise speed, analogue instruments.

Eclipse 500: six seats, pressurized, useful load 2,250 lb, operates at
41,000 ft, range 1,280 nm, 375 kt cruise speed, Avio Avionics glass cockpit.

Panel:
http://www.eclipseaviation.com/images/jet_photos/Instrument_Panel_med.jpg


I don't see any contest here it does everything much better. So why would
anyone go to the factory and buy a new Baron?

Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Dallas <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote:

> The jet twin Eclipse 500 costs $1,175,000
>
> A new Baron 58 costs $1,154,210

The person about whom I was posting currently owns a beautiful 1999 Baron
and that is exactly his thinking.

Of course, it helps that he is the heir of the family who ran a very
successful, large electronics repair empire.

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Operating costs?

--
....Carl Frisk
Anger is a brief madness.
- Horace, 20 B.C.
http://www.carlfrisk.com


"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message news:%%AQd.1470$kU3.1469@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> ...As Peter brought to our attention with the Eclipse 500
> http://www.eclipseaviation.com/500jet/overview.htm
>
> The jet twin Eclipse 500 costs $1,175,000
>
> A new Baron 58 costs $1,154,210
>
> (When you're talking a million, a $20 grand difference is not going break
> the bank.)
>
>
> The Baron: six seats, non pressurized, useful load 1,514 lbs, range 1,027
> nm, 198 kt cruise speed, analogue instruments.
>
> Eclipse 500: six seats, pressurized, useful load 2,250 lb, operates at
> 41,000 ft, range 1,280 nm, 375 kt cruise speed, Avio Avionics glass cockpit.
>
> Panel:
> http://www.eclipseaviation.com/images/jet_photos/Instrument_Panel_med.jpg
>
>
> I don't see any contest here it does everything much better. So why would
> anyone go to the factory and buy a new Baron?
>
> Dallas
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Carl Frisk <c.frisk@REMOVE.verizon.net> wrote:

> Operating costs?

Supposedly will be cheaper with the Eclipse.

However, the cost of insurance, training, and recurring training might tip
the scales in the Baron's favors in the short term (until some safety
statistics start to emerge).

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[destroyer]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

barons are nice but too expensive,i would love to fly the eclipse 500
it's a jet at a lower cost,faster longer range and has a toilet.all
glass
cockpit way nice avionics,

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in
news:%%AQd.1470$kU3.1469@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> ...As Peter brought to our attention with the Eclipse 500
> http://www.eclipseaviation.com/500jet/overview.htm
>
> The jet twin Eclipse 500 costs $1,175,000
>
> A new Baron 58 costs $1,154,210
>
> (When you're talking a million, a $20 grand difference is not going
> break the bank.)
>
>
> The Baron: six seats, non pressurized, useful load 1,514 lbs, range
> 1,027 nm, 198 kt cruise speed, analogue instruments.
>
> Eclipse 500: six seats, pressurized, useful load 2,250 lb, operates at
> 41,000 ft, range 1,280 nm, 375 kt cruise speed, Avio Avionics glass
> cockpit.
>
> Panel:
> http://www.eclipseaviation.com/images/jet_photos/Instrument_Panel_med.j
> pg
>
>
> I don't see any contest here it does everything much better. So why
> would anyone go to the factory and buy a new Baron?
>
> Dallas
>
>

Ratings.
I can get a twin engine ticket (after my IFR, of course) at a reasonable
cost. Then I have to build time so the insurance companies will start
answering my calls. Without a respectable amount of turbine time, I just
can't get insurance, even with a Ford Excursion full of cash.

--
e v e n S k y

Athlon 266Ghz
1 G Ram
GeForce FX5900XT
160G H-D
80G H-D
W2K, FS9
Wingman Strike force 3D

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:%%AQd.1470$kU3.1469@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> ...As Peter brought to our attention with the Eclipse 500
> http://www.eclipseaviation.com/500jet/overview.htm
>
> The jet twin Eclipse 500 costs $1,175,000
>
> A new Baron 58 costs $1,154,210
>
> (When you're talking a million, a $20 grand difference is not going break
> the bank.)
>
>
> The Baron: six seats, non pressurized, useful load 1,514 lbs, range 1,027
> nm, 198 kt cruise speed, analogue instruments.
>
> Eclipse 500: six seats, pressurized, useful load 2,250 lb, operates at
> 41,000 ft, range 1,280 nm, 375 kt cruise speed, Avio Avionics glass
cockpit.
>
> Panel:
> http://www.eclipseaviation.com/images/jet_photos/Instrument_Panel_med.jpg
>
>
> I don't see any contest here it does everything much better. So why would
> anyone go to the factory and buy a new Baron?
>
> Dallas

Good point. I know a guy who owns an Eclipse (and a Falcon 900) - I'll see
if I can track him down and ask him the same question! What are the
relative maintenance cost dynamics like? (They will be "dynamic" for
sure!!)

Cheers,
Dave (Sydney)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Dave E <i.am@my.wits.end.with.spam> wrote:

> Good point. I know a guy who owns an Eclipse

I cannot imagine that he is flying it yet. The aircraft is still in the
certification stages and the first one is still a year to a year and a half
from being delivered to its first customer.

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Why? "Getting insurance on a jet".


Dave BLevins


On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:39:07 GMT, "Dallas"
>
>I don't see any contest here it does everything much better. So why would
>anyone go to the factory and buy a new Baron?
>
>Dallas
>

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Carl Frisk"
> Operating costs?

The Baron holds 194 US gals and has a range of 1,027 nm.

The Eclipse 500 holds 230 US gals and has a range of 1,280 nm.

If want to figure "mileage":

Baron: 5.3 nm/gal
Eclipse: 5.6 nm/gal

Eclipse wins.

(I don't know how much an engine overhaul costs..)

Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Dallas <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote:

> Eclipse wins.
>
> (I don't know how much an engine overhaul costs..)

Time between overhauls for these engines is much longer, in the order of
two to three times as long as a piston engine.


--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:39:07 +0000, Dallas wrote:



Here are a couple of reasons.

Average hourly cost for the Baron = $297
Average cost for a year for the Baron = $44560

Average hourly cost for the Eclipse = $1750
Average cost for a year for the Eclipse = $172000

None of the above costs have anything to do with the purchase
price for the aircraft.

Source is a Honeywell Aerospace study.


Part of the problem as I understand it, is that the FAA considers the
Baron to be a private aircraft but the Eclipse to fall under the rules of
a commercial Jet Aviation company.


Hagar

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"evenSky" <
> Ratings.

Yeah, I was thinking that.... but I was thinking just about the cost of
getting the rating not the insurance company. That's a good insight.

Dallas

 

[user]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

> Why? "Getting insurance on a jet".

For those of us totally out of the loop, what would the cost difference be
on this between a fully qualified/certified pilot and owner of a Baron vs.
the Eclipse? Inquiring minds want to know

Doug

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Hagar" \
> Source is a Honeywell Aerospace study.

Is that study available on-line? I'm not challenging your creditability...
I'd like to have a reference like that.


Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 05:07:14 +0000, Dallas wrote:

>
> "Hagar" \
>> Source is a Honeywell Aerospace study.
>
> Is that study available on-line? I'm not challenging your
> creditability... I'd like to have a reference like that.
>
>
> Dallas

I just did a google search. It came from two places so it was not really
a side by side comparison. I noticed several like studies out there for
all kinds of planes so they seem to be plentiful.

The one that surprised me was for the Lear. Man, that little jet is
EXPENSIVE to fly by the hour.

Hagar

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Hagar"
> I noticed several like studies out there for
> all kinds of planes so they seem to be plentiful.

That's nice to know because I'm finding the last place you want to get your
comparison information is from the manufacturer's marketing departments.

Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Hagar <horrible@nowhere.com> wrote:

> Part of the problem as I understand it, is that the FAA considers the
> Baron to be a private aircraft but the Eclipse to fall under the rules of
> a commercial Jet Aviation company.

Not true. The Eclipse Aviation jet, if it ever becomes certified, will be
allowed to be flown under FAR (US Aviation regulations) Part 91, which is
the same set of less stringent rules that regulate Piper Cubs, C172s, and
other piston and turbine aircraft that are not flown for commercial or
military reasons in US airspace.

What you probably encountered in your Google search was the discussion that
this new line of "private" jets will be *also* very attractive for air taxi
companies. There is speculation that companies that utilize these jets
will be able to provide price-similar competition to the large air
carriers.

When flying specifically as an air taxi service, these jets *will* then be
subjected to the much more costly and rigorous FAR Part 135, which are a
separate set of rules requiring more routine aircraft inspections and pilot
examination.

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Arthur]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

A toilet? A toilet? WOW......that's the plane for me! Who cares about
fuel economy and overhaul costs if you have a toilet! Would probably be the
only one the wife would let me buy anyway.

Arthur

"DESTROYER" <DESTROYER@forums.simradar.com> wrote in message
news:1108583756.25785@forums.simradar.com...
> barons are nice but too expensive,i would love to fly the eclipse 500
> it's a jet at a lower cost,faster longer range and has a toilet.all
> glass
> cockpit way nice avionics,
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

a toilet.all glass


hmmm sounds a bit like a Hugh Heffner plane to me

--
Quilljar
see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi
Do not reply personally, all such emails go into my spam filter

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"pr" <nope@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:1bchccxshzyyg$.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
> Dave E <i.am@my.wits.end.with.spam> wrote:
>
> > Good point. I know a guy who owns an Eclipse
>
> I cannot imagine that he is flying it yet. The aircraft is still in the
> certification stages and the first one is still a year to a year and a
half
> from being delivered to its first customer.

Yes, you are right - Peter has committed to a purchase and intends to use it
for those trips when the Falcon isn't viable. I wasn't aware that it was so
far off. It's been some months since we spoke. He has a fairly tough life
from what I can glean. As for me, I'm still chuffed that I can solo
circuits in the (rented) 152.



Cheers,
Dave (Sydney)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Dave E <i.am@my.wits.end.with.spam> wrote:

> He has a fairly tough life from what I can glean.

LOL! I'd say. Stay in contact with him so that you can ride along in the
co-pilot seat of the Eclipse when he receives it. That's what I am trying
to do with the gentleman I met last fall.

> As for me, I'm still chuffed that I can solo circuits in the
> (rented) 152.

Congratulations! That is an accomplishment.


--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Arthur"
> A toilet? A toilet? WOW......that's the plane for me! Would probably be
the
> only one the wife would let me buy anyway.

What good would it do ya? You could never get her outta there...

Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I don't know the specific numbers, but I can assure you that the
insurance companies are going to be *very* nervous about insuring these
light jets - at least one reason why is that things happen so much
faster in an aircraft that goes that fast, and they're gonna want to see
a bunch of relevant time and/or (emphasis being on "and") training in
"type".

That kind of speed makes for a very busy pilot - and since these
aircraft will almost always be flown on IFR flight plans (because jet
engines burn less Jet-A at high altitudes, and anything above 18,000
feet is by definition IFR airspace), the pilot's workload will be quite
high during the climb, descent, and approach phases of flight. (As
opposed to punching holes in the sky with a <250hp airplane 8^).)

In addition to the outright speed of the Eclipse (and other most light
jets), there is the challenge of learning to manage a jet engine
properly. They are much different beasts than piston-powered airplanes
-all jet pilots ( even turboprop'd ones) have to get used to a new
methodology of energy management, because jet engines do not react to
the pilot's power changes as a piston engine will - there is a lag time
involved, whereas in piston aircraft the response is more immediate for
a similar size of the airframe and number of engines. This is one of the
reasons why the US Air Force lost so many pilots transitioning from
pistons to jets in the 50's - it is a whole 'nuther kind of flying.

There are probably other reasons why the insurance companies want more
time. Give me a minute and they'll come to me 8^) .

Dave Blevins


On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 04:15:54 GMT, " -" <xvvvz@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> Why? "Getting insurance on a jet".
>
>For those of us totally out of the loop, what would the cost difference be
>on this between a fully qualified/certified pilot and owner of a Baron vs.
>the Eclipse? Inquiring minds want to know
>
>Doug
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" wrote :
: The jet twin Eclipse 500 costs $1,175,000
:
: A new Baron 58 costs $1,154,210
:
: (When you're talking a million, a $20 grand difference is not going break
: the bank.)
:
A fellow for whom I fix planes has a Baron and a King Air at my field.
Just the other day he and his wife zigged in for a quick flight to a half
dozen different fields in one afternoon (didn't ask why). Said he was
taking the Baron because it takes less time to preflight.

His jets are at the regional field down the road. I'll have to ask him about
the cost differential.

Dave