First Flight in Cirrus Vision Jet G2+ | Montgomery KMYF to Big Bear Lake KL35 V2 

Hi Patrick - This is Rich and I'm glad you enjoyed the video (we will have more up shortly). I'm 67 ATP/CFI Single/Multi-engine with 12,000+ hours and have flown 400 aircraft representing 110 makes/models, and a bunch of type ratings. I currently teach in a number of jets, turboprops, and some high-performance piston aircraft and write for a few aviation magazines as well --- this is my 'retirement from academia' gig.

@@PersonalWings Rich Thanks for the reply! Patrick

Matt - thanks for the comment. As a pilot, and sometimes aircraft tinkerer that has helps many an avionics install, I appreciate the dedication and efforts that experts like yourself expend on our behalf. The plane is fun to fly, and one of the reasons is how well the systems are integrated. I have another article on the Vision Jet (my 5th) in the upcoming June 2022 issue of Twin & Turbine.

Exactly. Especially auto-throttle explanation was very useful.

The Vision Jet is a well designed, and marketed, aircraft. I was just flying it again last week and you are correct - the views are amazing. We have other Vision Jet videos on our channel and will be publishing more - when we have more time on the ground! Thanks for watching.

Thanks and we are glad you enjoyed it! you can check out our other videos on the Vision Jet, Eclipse Jet, Cessna 206, CJ, as well. We also have 360 VR videos in the Eclipse from KMYF into KSAN, and through the Caribbean. They would be nice on the sim. If you need any route details for loading in the sim flight plans, just let us know and we can post them if it helps. Rich and Tigre.

@@PersonalWings Thank you! Oh yeah, I would be tremendously grateful for interesting route tips! I flew to Big Bear City this morning too, when I realized that I had just practiced ILS approach so far with this airplane but not RNAV, so this is something that I have to learn quickly, because I could land, yeah, but it wasn't too perfect, and I like perfection. :D I hope that FlightFX won't be lazy and keeps adding the yet-not-simulated content to this lovely aircraft. :)

Tim, the transition from aviating years ago and now is incredible. The laws of aerodynamics still apply - but that may be all :) When used properly the new technology is extremely helpful as you know. I'll let you know if I get over to your airport - thanks. Rich

Thanks. No, you can't change the order of displays like that due to FAA regulations certifying it in that layout/display/etc. Things do feel a bit odd and strange at first, but with time you learn to adapt to the reality of the flight deck and instruments. Thanks for watching!

@@PersonalWings Thank you very much for your prompt reply and explanation !!!!!

I think it is more advanced than a number of jets including most of the ones we fly as well! With the new autoland capabilities it is incredible.

Not a dumb question - in jets there are multiple ways to control fuel, etc for the engine. The SF50 uses a FADEC which is a full digital control of many functions, including the ECU. Jets just spray fuel into the engine and after initial ignition the combustion is self-sustaining. No mixture control is needed - the air comes into the hot section, fuel is sprayed by a slinger ring (in the Williams) or fuel nozzles (other jets).

@@PersonalWings it's not a two stroke

Thanks for the visit

It's a great opportunity to fly these amazing aircraft!

Marv, the total runway distance for takeoff on that day was approximately 2600 feet which is about the same as the Eclipse I had- both with 1800 lbs of total thrust and the same weight. The G2+ performance much better than the earlier versions at higher altitudes (pressure or density). Jet by their nature are more sensitive to higher temperatures than turbocharged pistons or turboprops - hence the takeoff performance differences. Their true advantage comes to light with the higher speeds and altitude capabilities. To compare aircraft runway performance you need to account for all variables, including take-off-weight, etc. Some of the jets I fly take more, and some less. The Beechcraft Premier I use for my flights takes a lot of runway, however once it rotates then cruises at 0.80Mach you forget how much runway distance it took to takeoff:) Rich

We have noted this and try to lower it on other videos. The challenge is keeping communication with ATC. I'm so used to managing multiple audio inputs it works for me, however on a video it is definitely more challenging. Thanks for the comment and watching.

The primary flight controls are manual - controlled by pushrods, etc. and don't require power. There are also alternative methods of gear extension not requiring electrical or computer operation. With multiple systems, while possible to have a complete failure, it would be extremely rare. There are also independent flight instruments that operate independently of the main avionics systems.

Ron, My experience is that the G2+ exceeds Cirrus' claims. My article in Twin&Turbine just came out on my flight review: www.twinandturbine.com/cirrus-vision-jet-g2-high-and-hot-performance-improvements-2/

3,000 feet to lift the mains??

@@avfan967 We rotated at approximately 2700 feet, which is a significant improvement over the Vision Jet G2 under the same conditions. I fly a variety of jets and take them up to Big Bear for lunch (nice airport cafe) which gives me a nice test set.

@@richpickett I was trying to count the stripes and approximate the lift off distance. Agree, much better performance than earlier versions of the same aircraft. Will be very exciting if they truly go to the next generation of engine in the G3 as the rumors go Thanks for the video. Very enjoyable.

​@@avfan967what next gen engine? What g3 rumors? 😮

Hi, I agree. I'm looking into lower ATC sidetone for the videos. I'm so used to discerning the audio, sometimes I forget it would be good to lower it for the videos. Rich

Hi - the plane I flew was in development status since the upgrade was not yet in production. Hence, the warning. All production airplanes are in standard category.

@@PersonalWings Thanks for the response and the great video!

Hi Ehsan, to me the Vision Jet is latest example of a fully systems-integrated light jet - the Eclipse being the first. The integration does make the plane easier to fly since the pilot workload is diminished, and safer in many phases of flight. A jet can be easier to fly than a piston or turboprop from a power management perspective, since you have one power control, however some of the new piston and turboprops (e.g. PC-12 NGX - I reviewed in in my Twin & Turbine article) have nice integration. The systems in jets are generally more complicated than pistons, for example, and require the pilots to be very efficient in understanding the complexity. The Vision Jet is very nice to fly, with easy control inputs and is very stable. In comparison with other light jets available, the airplane is easier to fly. As with any high-performance aircraft the pilot has to be very proficient with IFR procedures, operating at higher airspeeds, and adherence to procedures. You need these skills in other airplanes - you just need to be able to do them all at faster speeds in a jet! Rich

Hi - there can be risks with increased automation, primarily when pilots are overwhelmed by the technology, or over reliant. There have been some accidents when that occurs. With proper training, both initial and recurrent, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. One term we use in aviation is 'Situational Awareness - SA', which means a pilot is aware of their environment (traffic, weather, position, aircraft systems, etc.). The technology can greatly enhance the capabilities, however as I remind all of my aviation students - they still need to fly the airplane! Thanks for watching - Rich.

Adam, it is about a 20 minute flight to Big Bear from San Diego. Rich

@@PersonalWings Thanks, Rich! From a fellow San Diegan.

jajaja. thanks for your armchair pilot conclusion and for watching!

it does have its perks.

Thanks Scott, we have muted , or at least lowered, ATC on subsequent videos in various planes. In some airplanes it is a bit of a challenge to monitor ATC on only one side, while still having the intercom audio work. We think we have found a way in some of the many aircraft we fly.

Thanks Werner. I think I will lower ATC on the passenger headsets which would allow me to hear them well, but have a lower volume on the video. The suggestions are always welcome. Rich

100% agree. It’s challenging when also needing to monitor ATC. Thanks for watching it anyway.

All jets use a lot of fuel on takeoff and climb - one reason we climb fast to get higher! In the CJ3 we will burn 1000PPH each side on takeoff. Imagine a 737 or a F18!

Thanks for the feedback, Don. Will ask our editor to lessen the music while we're talking.

I thought it be better to come on during voids of conversation but don’t mind it playing

@@avfan967 We agree and will reduce the background music. Rich

we wholly agree. when we get back in a vision jet we will re-record.

We agree, so are toning it down on other videso.

I agree, we are working on reducing/eliminating the music outside of the intros. ATC comm is part of the flight and while I could mute it specifically for the video - then my responses to ATC wouldn't make sense. I'll probably try to lower the ATC volume.

@@PersonalWings I think lowering the ATC volume will do the trick. Awesome job, this is just the kind of video I was looking for!

@@joellouisfire Thanks! Yeah, it's a balance of monitoring ATC and not. Since we were on the ramp, we probably could've turned it down for a bit before getting started. Thanks for watching!

Yes - we are thinking about ways to reduce it. It is really tough in busy airspace to isolate ATC in the audio feed in some planes, while at the same time give folks a feel of the real time experience - something pilots have to do all the time. Rich