BeechTalk - BT - real world Phenom 300 vs CJ2/3 operating costs

Username Protected · **Posted:** 01 Aug 2023, 23:00

Username Protected wrote:

It occurred to me that a couple of photos might go a long way when talking about the difference in ramp appearance and airstairs, here’s a Phenom 300E and a CJ3 that we acquired recently.

Isn’t the 300e faster, goes further, hauls more, and a more refined interior?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 01 Aug 2023, 23:13

Username Protected wrote:

It occurred to me that a couple of photos might go a long way when talking about the difference in ramp appearance and airstairs, here’s a Phenom 300E and a CJ3 that we acquired recently.

Isn’t the 300e faster, goes further, hauls more, and a more refined interior?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 01 Aug 2023, 23:17

Username Protected wrote:

Slower, about the same, bigger cabin.

I don’t know that I would say the interior is more refined, but it’s definitely more impressive and has more technology.

We are also comparing the CJ3 and the P300, because the Op asked about those two, but the CJ4 is the direct competitor to the Phenom 300.

https://www.avbuyer.com/articles/jet-co ... 00e-112758

From my understanding the only thing that doesn’t make the 300e a slam dunk is the brake system

Username Protected · **Posted:** 01 Aug 2023, 23:25

Username Protected wrote:

Slower, about the same, bigger cabin.

I don’t know that I would say the interior is more refined, but it’s definitely more impressive and has more technology.

We are also comparing the CJ3 and the P300, because the Op asked about those two, but the CJ4 is the direct competitor to the Phenom 300.

https://www.avbuyer.com/articles/jet-co ... 00e-112758

From my understanding the only thing that doesn’t make the 300e a slam dunk is the brake system

Username Protected · **Posted:** 01 Aug 2023, 23:50

Username Protected wrote:

Thankfully the pilots shut everything down and fired it back up and the problem cleared itself.

"Thankful" is not how I would describe my feelings on such an occurrence. The brakes randomly don't work? Nice!

Having TRs, my dependency on brakes is significantly reduced.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 00:00

Username Protected wrote:

Thankfully the pilots shut everything down and fired it back up and the problem cleared itself.

"Thankful" is not how I would describe my feelings on such an occurrence. The brakes randomly don't work? Nice!

Having TRs, my dependency on brakes is significantly reduced.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 00:14

Username Protected wrote:

This was a brake failure indication, the issue seems to be locking up, not failing to work.

My understanding was you get one brake application to trust in the electronics, if you let off and reapply no dice

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 00:21

Username Protected wrote:

This was a brake failure indication, the issue seems to be locking up, not failing to work.

Locking up is failing to work.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 03:58

Username Protected wrote:

Slower, about the same, bigger cabin.

I don’t know that I would say the interior is more refined, but it’s definitely more impressive and has more technology.

We are also comparing the CJ3 and the P300, because the Op asked about those two, but the CJ4 is the direct competitor to the Phenom 300, the CJ4 is faster, goes further and carries more… but less impressive cabin / ramp.

Chip - if i am reading your statement correctly, your data is incorrect. The 300 is a 78 airplane, the 300e is an 80 airplane. The 300e has about a hundred pound gross weight increase over the straight 300 as well, but it doesn’t carry more fuel, all payload.

I don’t realize that the CJ4 was that fast as well, if so, that a big improvement over the CJ3.

The interior of the 300e is much nicer and more refined than the straight 300; armrests tucked in the seats for a “wider” aisle, individual air shows instead of a single unit, etc.

As far as brake issues, I have never seen that in a 300 unless you have your feet on the brakes during startup. I’m sure that they fail, but it is rare unless self induced, at least that’s my experience over the last 7 years and 5 airframes. BCU 10 has been a vast improvement.

Brad

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 04:47

Username Protected wrote:

Slower, about the same, bigger cabin.

I don’t know that I would say the interior is more refined, but it’s definitely more impressive and has more technology.

We are also comparing the CJ3 and the P300, because the Op asked about those two, but the CJ4 is the direct competitor to the Phenom 300, the CJ4 is faster, goes further and carries more… but less impressive cabin / ramp.

Chip - if i am reading your statement correctly, your data is incorrect. The 300 is a 78 airplane, the 300e is an 80 airplane. The 300e has about a hundred pound gross weight increase over the straight 300 as well, but it doesn’t carry more fuel, all payload.

I don’t realize that the CJ4 was that fast as well, if so, that a big improvement over the CJ3.

The interior of the 300e is much nicer and more refined than the straight 300; armrests tucked in the seats for a “wider” aisle, individual air shows instead of a single unit, etc.

As far as brake issues, I have never seen that in a 300 unless you have your feet on the brakes during startup. I’m sure that they fail, but it is rare unless self induced, at least that’s my experience over the last 7 years and 5 airframes. BCU 10 has been a vast improvement.

Brad

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 06:24

Username Protected wrote:

[/quote ]

Piaggio isn’t a jet

Turbo prop wise the dispatch rate and build quality on the PC12 blows the doors off the piaggio

But this is about jets

Build quality in pc12 isn’t substantially better. More like different. Piaggio is quite stout. 9psi cabin. Parts of pc12 are a bit oil canny imo. Front end of a new Piaggio is much nicer and wears better than pc12. Interiors on a new evo better than new pc12x. I sat in both at same hangar. Pc12 has a few heavy duty features for sure but saying it’s blanket better misses a lot.

They may share same engine but one does go jet speeds and has a bigger cabin than all of them (at least sp ones). I love pc12s but you compare them to king airs, not jets, or Piaggios.

But this is a thread about jets

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 06:43

Username Protected wrote:

Slower, about the same, bigger cabin.

I don’t know that I would say the interior is more refined, but it’s definitely more impressive and has more technology.

We are also comparing the CJ3 and the P300, because the Op asked about those two, but the CJ4 is the direct competitor to the Phenom 300, the CJ4 is faster, goes further and carries more… but less impressive cabin / ramp.

Chip - if i am reading your statement correctly, your data is incorrect. The 300 is a 78 airplane, the 300e is an 80 airplane. The 300e has about a hundred pound gross weight increase over the straight 300 as well, but it doesn’t carry more fuel, all payload.

I don’t realize that the CJ4 was that fast as well, if so, that a big improvement over the CJ3.

The interior of the 300e is much nicer and more refined than the straight 300; armrests tucked in the seats for a “wider” aisle, individual air shows instead of a single unit, etc.

As far as brake issues, I have never seen that in a 300 unless you have your feet on the brakes during startup. I’m sure that they fail, but it is rare unless self induced, at least that’s my experience over the last 7 years and 5 airframes. BCU 10 has been a vast improvement.

Brad

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 06:56

Correct - The P300 is faster than both the CJ3 and CJ4.

First hand experience :

P300 - M.78
CJ4 - M.77
CJ3 - M.73

I haven’t flown a P300E.

I’ll second that I’d love to see Textron roll out a CJ5 to give themselves a chance against the competition.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 08:07

Username Protected wrote:

The thread is awesome and I am getting info I desired.

Jon C - thanks for reminding me how efficient Piaggio is for my mission!

For your evolving mission, which is largely about uptime, you should get two Piaggio’s. One always available. Capital cost probably less than a big jet. Depreciation hit definitely less. Fuel burn a lot less.

Slightly crazy, maybe, but also slightly rational?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2023, 09:23

Username Protected wrote:

P300 - M.78
CJ4 - M.77
CJ3 - M.73

The practical difference between those planes in travel time is very little. On the longest leg, 4 to 5 hours, maybe 15 minutes, likely a bit less. On a 1 hour flight, maybe 2 minutes.

If your airplane's wing, brakes, TRs allow use of a shorter, but closer, runway, that would trump a few hundredths of Mach speed advantage in most cases. In general, the faster you cruise, the longer runway you require, or you have to make a more complex wing to compensate.

The effort to go faster than about Mach 0.75 gets exponentially harder. This is why a CJ3 has a straight wing and the CJ4 has a swept wing, even for that modest speed improvement.

Mike C.