BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:34

My data gives the nod to the Phenom on range. As always there's lots of variables. As mentioned above, planning the trip on fltpln.com and talking to owners about real world range is the best way to go.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:43

Wait Chip, let me check wiki...

:rofl:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:50

Username Protected wrote:

probably. But Cessna range map incluces a place for Pax and a separate place for one or two pilots. Their Specs are also in Basic Operating Weight which covers the weight of (one) pilot.

Flightrun.com has good comparative stats:

M2 NBAA IFR range 1300
phenom 100 1178

OK. Gotcha.

I wonder what altitude that range number assumes? The minute ATC drops you below 30K' all bets are off.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:51

Chip,

If the range rings are accurate for full fuel and load? then the 100 is a 892nm, no wind, plane with NBAA reserves at destination. Ouch that is ugly short legs for a beautiful blond.... M2 even worse. Am I missing something?

Not the plane for Jason or me. Darn I really like both.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:52

Username Protected wrote:

Wait Chip, let me check wiki...

:rofl:

I'm ready to go back to the old days... someone tell Mike that they DO have internet over there!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:53

Username Protected wrote:

Chip,

If the range rings are accurate for full fuel and load? then the 100 is a 892nm, no wind, plane with NBAA reserves at destination. Ouch that is ugly short legs for a beautiful blond.... M2 even worse. Am I missing something?

Not the plane for Jason or me. Darn I really like both.

And watch what happens flying into ATL or NYC or S. Florida or even Cancun...... ATC will have you in the teens for the last 45 minutes of the flight.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 15:56

Username Protected wrote:

Chip,

If the range rings are accurate for full fuel and load? then the 100 is a 892nm, no wind, plane with NBAA reserves at destination. Ouch that is ugly short legs for a beautiful blond.... M2 even worse. Am I missing something?

Not the plane for Jason or me. Darn I really like both.

I'd like some "real world" input, but I'm betting that with five people and luggage those numbers are right. I will say I trust ACC more than Cessna

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 16:03

Username Protected wrote:

Chip,

Ouch that is ugly short legs for a beautiful blond.... M2 even worse. Am I missing something?

The Phenom has long skinny legs!

(landing gear)

I'm working the Premier market right now for two different clients, it is really an impressive airplane cabin wise, and is not too shabby from an operating cost standpoint. I think I'd have to add it to my list if considering a used Phenom 100.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 16:42

The phenom 100 is a modern Citation 500. If it fits your mission pay your 3M and ride! It's not a bad airplane just a very entry level jet. Is slow for a jet and it's range is limited, but what can you expect for just 3M? :sad:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 16:58

I think Mike gets home this week and may be busy working to keep his bills paid like the rest of us. Or perhaps pay for his extended time abroad.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 20:21

That range map is not at all accurate! I own a Mustang and my range is 1000 nm more or less depending on wind. I can do 1000 nm with a 25-30 knot headwind.

My business partner has an M2 and he bought it because the range is greater. 1200 nm compared to the Mustang. And 400 knots.

The Phenom has a slightly larger cabin and definitely more ramp appeal than the M2 but unless you get a new EV model, the M2 has significantly better performance. Shorter takeoff and better hot and high.

Scott

And those numbers are with 4 people plus luggage.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 23:28

Username Protected wrote:

That range map is not at all accurate! I own a Mustang and my range is 1000 nm more or less depending on wind. I can do 1000 nm with a 25-30 knot headwind.

My business partner has an M2 and he bought it because the range is greater. 1200 nm compared to the Mustang. And 400 knots.

The Phenom has a slightly larger cabin and definitely more ramp appeal than the M2 but unless you get a new EV model, the M2 has significantly better performance. Shorter takeoff and better hot and high.

Scott

And those numbers are with 4 people plus luggage.

Interesting, I'm showing the M2 with 1200nm range with full fuel, so wouldn't you lose 80 - 100 gals with a load of people and bags?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 23:30

Username Protected wrote:

That range map is not at all accurate! I own a Mustang and my range is 1000 nm more or less depending on wind. I can do 1000 nm with a 25-30 knot headwind.

My business partner has an M2 and he bought it because the range is greater. 1200 nm compared to the Mustang. And 400 knots.

The Phenom has a slightly larger cabin and definitely more ramp appeal than the M2 but unless you get a new EV model, the M2 has significantly better performance. Shorter takeoff and better hot and high.

Scott

And those numbers are with 4 people plus luggage.

Yep. If the OP is buying new (and there are rumors of a FADEC update for retrofit) the NEW Phenom 100EV might but the takeoff and cruise performance numbers closer to the M2. Not sure if a faster climb and cruise helps or hurts range.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2016, 23:57

Jake,

The higher the faster the lower the fuel burn because you're in cruise.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Dec 2016, 06:44

have only been in there a short couple of times…

but comparing the M2 to the Phenom 100, is it just my impression, that, no matter what actual dimensions, the cockpit of the M2 at least feels less tight and more spacious than the one in the Phenom 100..?

M2 versus Phenom 100 ?