BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 17:14

Username Protected wrote:

yes, the schedules are the same with a few exceptions as the airplanes evolved and different avionics may have different inspection elements.

What make the CJ's more appealing to me, being a lower utilization operator is that ANNUALLY, i don't have to budget or spend as much money because I don't hit the big inspection trigger (Doc10) annually.

In the Phenoms, you hit the big one every year, or 600 hrs, whichever comes first. If you fly that many hours annually, or close, then it's all the same, or similar.

On per hour basis, thing between the CJ's and Phenoms should be relatively similar.

Got it. Thank you for the explanation. Makes sense.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 17:24

Username Protected wrote:

I burn through 125 in a few months and I'm not trying that hard.

That's because your plane is sloooow.

Couldn't resist. It's ok mine is about 10 knots slower than yours.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 18:05

Username Protected wrote:

I burn through 125 in a few months and I'm not trying that hard.

That's because your plane is sloooow.

Couldn't resist. It's ok mine is about 10 knots slower than yours.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 20:20

Most of our clients struggle to make the 150 hours a year that they have to pay to TAP!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 20:35

Username Protected wrote:

Most of our clients struggle to make the 150 hours a year that they have to pay to TAP!

Curious if those low time owners look at Netjets?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 20:55

Username Protected wrote:

just a 525 (straight CJ) with G1000

I think those are a killer deal. A few years ago you could scoop up a nice one for 800k, they seem to have gone up in value a bit.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 21:10

Username Protected wrote:

Most of our clients struggle to make the 150 hours a year that they have to pay to TAP!

Curious if those low time owners look at Netjets?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 21:44

Username Protected wrote:

I'm a fan of the Phenom 300, but the aircraft was really designed for high utilization and the maint schedule shows that with most items due at 600hrs or 12 mos. There are quite a few Phenom 100 and 300's getting 600 hr inspection with only 100 hrs +or- annually.

You'd rather own an airplane designed for "low utilization"?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 22:00

Username Protected wrote:

That's the beauty of a legacy 550 that you can fly yourself is that you leave it sitting in the hangar for 3 weeks and fly it 125 hours a year and not feel guilty. That's 45,000 miles a year; that's a lot of traveling regardless.

I was assuming the clients Chip was speaking of weren't all pilots.

Still not following how a jet pilot doesn't fly for 3 weeks then hops in and goes. I go a week or so because of MX and I forget how to turn everything on.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 22:02

Username Protected wrote:

I wouldn't want an airplane designed for low utilization. However, having one with a maintenance schedule that will economically accommodate low utilization is desirable.

Understood. I get it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 22:16

I might have said or implied that, but what I meant was it would accommodate it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Mar 2019, 22:18

Username Protected wrote:

Quite capable birds and not much to dislike. I was just offered the ability to buy block time in a fairly well equipped CJ. 100 hrs for $1800/hr dry. I think I'll stick with my SR22T for now...

I lease a CJ2 for $1400. $1800 is nuts