I'd have the same approach with the lav. Maybe I'd trade the refreshment center for another seat.

Will be interesting to see what the Garmin upgrade will do to the CG and whether you will need ballast in the nose if you fly solo.

I assume Garmin is giving you a free upgrade in exchange for doing a video on your Youtube channel?

My plane lost 380 lbs empty weight with the Garmin upgrade. Insist on dead wire stripping, the wiring harness can be half or more of the total avionics weight for older systems.

My empty CG moved back dramatically since most of the weight removed was in the nose. In my Citation V, if I fly it solo, I need 200 lbs in the nose baggage, if flying 2 crew, 50 lbs, anything more than that, no ballast is needed. The prior owner complained about the plane being so tail heavy they had to add ballast as the number of people increased, which is going the wrong way.

I decided not to install permanent ballast in the plane since that reduces flexibility. My usual ballast is about 100 lbs of tools and spares, and 100 lbs of landscape rocks in a plastic bin. The rocks are available at any home store for about $4 per bag, and a bag is 50 lbs. If I fly with the rocks and need the useful load, I can dump them on the side of the road. If I'm empty and need the ballast, then $8 at a home store buys me 100 lbs. This is way better than water which can freeze, leak, and takes more space.

My plane has an oxygen bottle way back in the tail that I hope to move to the nose. If that gets done, the it has the same effect as 50 lbs of ballast, so I'd be down to 150 lbs ballast solo and none flying as 2.

Mike C.

My friend flies his straight CJ the same way—always conservative N1. I just don’t understand this approach on the Williams engined jets. It’s essentially a rental engine. Williams owns the ecosystem. The temp and speed limits are well defined and instances of early maintenance seem to be very low. It’s all covered in TAP. Why not focus on max speed and minimum airframe time to the exclusion of all else if the stats bear that out?
For legacy 500 series on the higher time engines it makes sense.

It's in the avionics shop getting fresh glass, can't wait to fly it some more.

The weight reduction from the total glass upgrade is nice, but is that a bit of a liability from an obsolescence standpoint?

Say you keep the plane 10 years and then want to sell it. By then maybe the Garmin system is no longer supported. A total new "upgrade" may be required. Big money. Whereas if you replaced discrete components the obsolescence issue is on a case-by-case basis.

I fly my JT15D-1As flat out. I only pull back if I need to for range. My N1 limit is 102.1. Where I fly in the mid 30's that yields an ITT of 665. Max Cruise ITT is 670, Max Continuous (bottom of the yellow) is 680, and Max Takeoff (redline) is 700. Those numbers are from a flight in August so it was definitely a ISA+ day.

But I agree with Mark. With a Williams engine you have to be on programs and if anything happens it's on them so treat it like a rental car.

As these are legacy planes, all of the components are discrete. These aren't integrated G1000-type systems. My plane was the STC bird for Jet Tech for their Garmin upgrade back in 2014. It has 2 x G600 and 2 x GTN750 (plus transponders, audio panels, etc). At any point I could swap one or both GTN750s for the newer Xi model and it would be plug and play. The G600 upgrade would require a new panel to be cut as I believe they are physically larger but everything on the back end could remain so very little labor involved in the upgrade.

Some people have done a G600 for the pilot and left the steam copilot instruments. Some will do duel 750s, some a 750 and 650. Some just do the 750s and leave all steam. You can do as much or as little as you want.

My friend flies his straight CJ the same way—always conservative N1. I just don’t understand this approach on the Williams engined jets. It’s essentially a rental engine. Williams owns the ecosystem. The temp and speed limits are well defined and instances of early maintenance seem to be very low. It’s all covered in TAP. Why not focus on max speed and minimum airframe time to the exclusion of all else if the stats bear that out?
For legacy 500 series on the higher time engines it makes sense.

I'd trade in the refreshment center, but port side seats to fit there are very uncommon to find.

My CG will certainly shift even farther aft as did MikeC's, but any weight loss is good in my opinion. I'll deal with it accordingly.

Yes, garmin promised Plutonium as well!

The refreshment center is what it makes it look like a big boy Jet.

It looks impressive in photos, as does the entire cabin. It's a bit smaller in real life.

Agreed, but I'm realistically never going to use the electric coffee or hot water tanks, or the easy bake oven...

This is a Citation Ultra (S# 560-0522), so has a different wing design than the 501, but just posting this video to show how the AOA gauge appears to be mis-calibrated. I don't think the wing is supposed to stall when the AOA needle is still in the yellow.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/WfLMnBujuOU[/youtube]

That was hilarious.

That was hilarious.