You should work on an STC to add thrust reversers non TR'd airplanes!

Keep us updated.

Mike makes very compelling arguments for the Citation V. He is getting 90% of what I have in my plane, at probably 25% of the annual cost, including capital costs. I gave this some consideration, but I am somebody that wants a fairly hands off ownership experience, and I like having all of the avionics automation, and bells and whistles. I don’t really care what the 3+ cost me, because I am simply spending my disposable wealth. I have everything I need/want in life, and the funds I spend on the 3+, to get exactly what I want, won’t adversely change my lifestyle. It’s like staying at the Ritz for $1,000 per night, and not using the amenities. I can stay at a Courtyard for $200 per night, and get all the same stuff in the room, yet somehow I end up at the Ritz. It’s stupid money, and completely unjustifiable. Heck, if we all stop and think about it, airplanes are a luxury for most of us. We could probably all save a lot of money if we flew Southwest.

I’ll say this though …. If you want to get into jet ownership at a lower costs, read all of Mike’s posts on the forum, and CJP. He is technically brilliant, and very adept at operating his plane at a low cost. He runs his airplane the way I ran my construction business … a bit scrppy, with lots of knowledge. That method works. I suspect many of us could at least get close to what he accomplishes, if we wanted to take some extra time to save money. I fully respect what he is doing, but I have a different mindset today, than when I was working full time.

Long story short, I am a firm believer that there is no perfect airplane. Each person needs to look at their own set of objectives, and carefully weigh the options. I think far too many people base their purchase decision on anecdotal owner reports, and that is NOT the way to go find the best airplane for you.
Oh, and I LOVE my CJ3+. THIS was my last upgrade.

Thanks Mark! Awesome info!!!

I would add that the Phenom 300 has similar op cost to the CJ3/4 for about 9 1/2 years, but that 10th year swings the pendulum.

The 10 year inspection / gear can easily top $300k and if you divide that over a typical owner flown utilization of 150 hours per year, it really changes the hourly cost.

If you are an operator flying 800 hours per year, with limited inspections between 10 years, the math works really well. Which is one of the many reasons it is so popular for charter operations.

I agree.

The twin jet is held back by all sorts of factors. All engines, it performs vastly better than the numbers.


Usually, #3 doesn't matter, it hardly ever controls, especially in light twin jets.

Then #1 and #2 are made to be the same by adjusting V1. If accel stop is too long, lower V1. If accel go is too long, increase V1. Then #1 and #2 will match, so called "balanced field length".

Landing is assumed with 50 ft TCH, so there's a 1000 ft of runway not being used. Basically, ground roll on landing is 1000 ft less than book figures. If your runway is close, land before the touchdown markers and you gain margin. Also, be on Vref or even Vref minus 5. None of these techniques are particularly hard.

On takeoff, the OEI clearance height is 35 ft. Under typical conditions, this is another 1000 ft of runway you aren't using. So there is margin in those numbers. The accel stop numbers do not have margin, however, so if you are at all close to V1, flying is usually the better option.


That's 1526 ft of ground roll, assuming dry runway and you really stomp the brakes. Vref+10, easy on the brakes, floating flare, you can add 2500 ft to that distance easy. Short field work in a jet will not win accolades from passengers on landing, you got to get it down.


I don't have the money to do otherwise.

Your operating environment is different. If I had my money and your philosophy, I'd be flying a Cirrus SR22. Something new, something modern, and something I give the shop a blank check for maintenance, but low enough cost to fit my condition.

My operating philosophy allows me to own an airplane "above my pay grade". To do that, I have to be involved. It isn't a huge time sink, certainly less than many think, but it requires attention.

One wonders how hands off and wealthy you need to get before you decide that charter/frax is the way to go. That is even less overhead. Are you close to that point?

The different philosophies between me and you is why you get such different operating costs estimates. One person can say $1300/hour, another can say $3500 an hour. Same plane. The plane matters less than the owner's decisions in many cases for what it will cost.


We could all save a lot of money by living in a mobile home park, too. I feel like that is a comparable choice to flying Southwest.

On your death bed, the score is not how much money you have left but how much enjoyment you got from life.

Mike C.

I could probably charter for comparable money if I chose to do so. That would probably cover the flights where I need to get from A to B. I wouldn’t be able to fly as often, and a lot of the flights that I make are simply excuses to go fly someplace. Angel flights, Jamaican relief mission, or simply thinking of someplace to go that my wife and I can ride bikes for the day.

That said, as lazy as I am when it comes to wanting to deal with maintenance issues, I’m quite passionate about being a pilot. I spend a fair amount of time studying all things aviation, because I enjoy it, and I think it helps keep my mind sharp as I move towards full-time retirement. Even if it was cheaper, I don’t think I would be much interested in riding in the back.

“On your death bed, the score is not how much money you have left but how much enjoyment you got from life.”
Amen brother , this is not a practice run .

Why do I not believe you.

Why do I not believe you.

Tying a few subjects together:

I referred the buyer to Chip even though I’ve never spoken to Chip. Chip’s presence here told me what I needed to know. Buyer is super smart guy who is a great business person. He doesn’t waste money. He has now used Chip twice, because Chip provides value.

The description of Textron support is amazing - really world class. My guess is they have supported high need/demand customers like NetJets which “forced” them to a high service model and allows the mass needed to support everyone well. At least those that are willing to pay.

In the spirit of Mike’s “my plane is better than yours” mantra, I said the buyer is smart, but obviously as not as smart as me He has ridden in an Avanti but didn’t buy one. He wanted something newer, more mainstream and with a different support ecosystem.

But…when Mark describes where the Phenom 300 is better than the CJ3:

1. Faster and farther
2. Single point refueling and and externally servicable lav, with a sink.
3. Heated tail deice vs boots on the CJ3
4. Dual climate zones for cockpit and cabin
5. Better cabin

The P180 is also better in 3.5 of those (lav not externally serviceable) plus lower capital costs, lower FBO fees, more efficient, most trips will be within 15-20 minutes, better pressurization (if you call 9.0 better than 8.9psi). And personal experience: In 4.5 years I’ve never been AOG, and only a few times have I had to visit the shop but once per year.

But there are reasons there are only 100 Avanti flying in the US…people prefer mainstream over niche, people like jets, and most people like newer jets…

I hope I get a ride the CJ3+. You never know….but when my wife rode in P300 she said “I like ours better…”

I’ll trade rides with ya! I’d love a ride in the P180.

That said, if your wife didn’t like the P300, she definitely won’t like the 3+. The P300 cabin is simply bigger, with better accommodations. I have flown right seat in the P300, and found the seats a bit more comfortable than my plane. My only gripe is having to get both feet over the console. In my plane, I can just squeeze my legs through the opening between the seat, and the console.

Quite frankly, all of these single pilot turbines should take a cockpit ergonomics lesson from Cirrus. A lot of the people buying these things sit up front with a spouse. Ditch the damn bulkheads, and let those seats slide back to a secondary stop, so you can have some legroom, and don't need to be a gymnast to get in the front seats.

To all that said a win for the Phenom 300 is the dual climate control, after right at 2500 hours in a 300, I would say that you can take it off the list.

The cockpit temp control is TERRIBLE, it has mood swings no matter how long the flight, from “I need a winter coat” to “ I need to be in my underwear” . The cabin control is WONDERFUL, steady, I would say great - and since the owners (in my case) sit in the back, that’s ok. I have flown 7 different 300’s (from early to late serial numbers) and they are all the same.

I don’t know how the temp control in the CJ3+ works, but it is hard to imagine it being worse than the cockpit control in the 300.

Brad

Thanks Ross!

When my wife first saw the hangar, she had a smirk on her face, and asks me “why so big if the 3+ is my last plane?” I told her that the extra space was for the clothes she doesn’t wear. She laughed, but said there better be enough space for ALL of “my” belongings!

The CJ3+ and P180 are both true pilot's planes. I love flying both. The P300 is more capable than either, but it's just not as fun to fly; it has a minivan feel. The one year wait at CAE is also a huge turn off. Man, you better schedule those trainings way in advance in hold the schedule.

Indeed, I just gave a demo flight in the P180 to another pilot on Friday and his conclusion was, "I need one of these." And: "Everyone says how quiet and comfortable these things are, but I still wasn't prepared!"

And I know it's a bit cognitively dissonant to be a pilot and care about CO2, but with the P180 I do feel better about the fact the plane burns literally half as much fuel per mile as anything with a similar cabin size. And I am no mechanic and haven't needed to be one for my P180. Like Mark, I study pilotage extensively but have no interest in getting deeply involved in maintenance.

Last thing: while the best plane would never break and have amazing service, if I have to choose, I choose dispatch rate over fast service. When you preflight a plane and it flunks, it's a high-stress gong show making it where you need to go on time. With even 6 hours advance notice, making alternate charter or commercial arrangements is easy enough. So if I had to choose between AOG once every 3 years for a week or AOG three times in 3 three years for one day, I definitely go with the former. That said, in three years, I've been AOG in my piaggio for one business day due to a stater-generator fault.

Mark are you in one of the larger hangars they are finishing up by sheltair?

Anthony,

No I’m at Ascension. I’d like to move, but I don’t know if they’d try to hold me to the lease. Things are a bit better, but leaving the hangar doors up all day drives me crazy. You’re at SRQ, correct? Let’s meet up sometime.

My new hangar is at my home field at Laconia NH, LCI. I like that a LOT better! Photo of that below: