BeechTalk - BT - Lear 30-series vs. Citation V/Ultra

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jan 2016, 07:34

Here you go:

http://jetav.com/israel-aircraft-westwi ... nce-specs/
http://jetav.com/gates-learjet-35a-performance-specs/

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jan 2016, 10:51

Username Protected wrote:

Here you go:

http://jetav.com/israel-aircraft-westwi ... nce-specs/
http://jetav.com/gates-learjet-35a-performance-specs/

Quite a bit of runway needed for both of these aircraft, especially if high and hot.
Impressive how much better the performance number is for the Citation V on this aspect, which was one of the two the aircraft the OP was looking at. Looks like you need the runway at Cape Canaveral for the Learjet on a high density altitude day, not so true of the Citation V.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jan 2016, 11:27

I think you found one of the issues for me, runway length along with hot and high performance.

The newer jets do much better in that department

My commander has very similar climb rates OEI as all these jets and a better OEI climb gradient.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jan 2016, 11:50

Username Protected wrote:

Quite a bit of runway needed for both of these aircraft, especially if high and hot.
Impressive how much better the performance number is for the Citation V on this aspect, which was one of the two the aircraft the OP was looking at. Looks like you need the runway at Cape Canaveral for the Learjet on a high density altitude day, not so true of the Citation V.

For sure a straight winged citation with low ref speeds is going to be a better short field performer!

I'll have to cross check those numbers on the Lear, the ones in that article seem very, very high. I use a 3900 foot runway at 1,000 ft elevation pretty regularly (lighter weights) and almost ALL of the runways I use are 5,000 feet. I went into Denver a lot in the summer and even with 6300 lbs of fuel and 1500 lbs of people and crap on an 80 degree day I thing the longest balanced field length I ever saw was around 7,000ft.

It's true that performance suffers when it gets high and hot. I had a hangar at North Vegas for a while, and with the temp was over 100 degrees, (DA of 9,000 feet on a sub 5k foot runway) I could leave with enough fuel to go 500 miles. BUT, that applies to a lot of jets. My neighbor who operates a 501 will reposition to McCarran on those hot days if he needs to take any passengers or more fuel.

Edit: Today coming out of denver with fuel for a 1200nm flight and 4 people plus bags gives me a takeoff distance of 4256 feet. Thats at 30 degrees OAT. If I change that to a 70 degree day, the takeoff distance goes up to 5962. Keep in mind those are balanced field lengths, which in the Lear is usually accelerate-go distance. That means, lose an engine at v1, rotate, and accelerate to v2 and clear a 35 foot obstacle. Your 'actual' takeoff roll will be less.

If you take the numbers from a Phenom 100, Citation mustang, (Any part 23 certified jet), they are probably going to give you actual takeoff roll numbers, which will 'look' better. That was one of my main complaints of flying the Eclipse, you didn't get much data in the POH because they never had to prove any of the items required under part 25 certifcation. (single engine performance, balanced field, contaminated runway, etc etc etc)

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jan 2016, 21:44

Username Protected wrote:

If you take the numbers from a Phenom 100, Citation mustang, (Any part 23 certified jet), they are probably going to give you actual takeoff roll numbers, which will 'look' better. That was one of my main complaints of flying the Eclipse, you didn't get much data in the POH because they never had to prove any of the items required under part 25 certifcation. (single engine performance, balanced field, contaminated runway, etc etc etc)

Citation Mustang AFM gives you Balanced Field Length per Part 23 Commuter Category. Takeoff distance criteria under Part 23 Commuter Category accounts for the greater of accelerate-stop, accelerate-go, or 115% of the all-engine takeoff distance.

You get contaminated runway factors and single engine performance takeoff climb distances and increments.

I can't say for the older Citation models but I know for the Mustang and CJ line they give Part 23 Commuter performance data at a minimum.

Attachment:

2016-01-22_2042.png

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Jan 2016, 07:56

Some of you may remember this story from years ago but I had the good fortune to fly two short flights from the left seat of a Lear 35A. Me, a little Bonanza pilot in a Lear, it put a big grin on my face for at least a week! The Copilot was sitting in the back and the Captain only asked that I let him have the brakes on landing. We flew to an airport that I used for many years so I knew most everyone there, they were a bit surprised to see me in the left seat as we taxied up to the FBO. When we took off later the Captain asked if I wanted to show off a little so we departed like a homesick angel, what a day!

Oh, don't ask me about the taxi out for takeoff on the first flight though, you should have seen me trying to keep it on the yellow line. :oops:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Jan 2016, 13:04

As a former TWA pilot, I love the N1TW registration, TR! Nice looking jet.

Todd

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Jan 2016, 15:30

Username Protected wrote:

It would be tough to imagine any day where the 35 couldn't manage a 1400nm flight! Last week I did a 1400nm flight with 100+ knots average headwind and landed with almost 2,000 lbs. And the week before that I did a 1600 nm flight with with 60 knot average headwinds and landed with 1200lbs. You can stay in the air comfortably for 4.5 hours, shoot an approach and land with 1200 lbs. You can stretch that to longer than 4.5 if you need to, but you need to pull the power back to econo cruise around .70. I prefer to fly at .8! The 36 comes into play only if you need to do 2,000+ nm consistently Medivac operators run the 36 from Washington state to Hawaii ! :eek:

I've owned my 35A for a year now and have put over 200 hours on it. Considering you can buy a very, very nice one for $1m (the junk brining far less), I think there is nothing which can come close to it for the money. On every flight my block speed is at least 440 knots. Cruise can be as high as 470 knots depending on attitude, temp, and weight. It burns less fuel per nm than any straight wing citation. Oh, and it's an absolute blast to fly! One of my regular flights is 1400nm. Eastbound, I will do that flight in 2 hours and 45 minutes. I take off as a ~14,000lb airplane which means my climb to FL410 typically takes around 18 minutes, even with level-offs and short delays from ATC.

My complaints? The cockpit is a little tight and I wish the A/C and heating worked better up there. Altitude pre-select would be nice (I missed the newer autopilot by just a few serial numbers). 200 extra gallons of fuel would be nice for when I fly to Europe and back (Ala Lear 36), but I'm not sure I would want to do 6.5+ hours in that seat anyway! Overall, it represents an excellent value in the private jet market and is probably one of the last real pilot's jets built. It seems everything which came after this was designed mostly with the guy in the back in mind. Even newer jets which were designed to be owner flown, seems that they were designed to be owner-'programmed' and flown with buttons and switches. Flying a tip-tanked Lear, you need to be a pilot, but that is part of the fun for me.

Theodore,

Did you go with a low utilization program? I am interested to know how your 1st year of mx went and what a rough estimate of hourly operating cost on the 35A. Dispatch reliability?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Jan 2016, 03:42

I flew the Lear 60 years ago and loved that airplane. A few years later I got my CE-500 type rating and flew the V Ultra. I didn't think I would like it especially after the Lear 60, but I loved it. It climbed great, cruised almost as fast as the Lear, would go into a lot of shorter runways where the Lear couldn't, had the same big Honeywell PFDs as the Global Express, and was fun to fly. It was like a perfect blend between a Learjet and a King Air. I always thought to myself it would be the perfect personal airplane. It's an added huge bonus if it can be flown single pilot!