That's a hull rate of about 1.3%. Not actually horrific.

That's slightly less than my hull rate, and without isolating liability, hard to compare.

High hull value comes with a LOT of cost to owners in terms of cost of capital, insurance premiums, and taxes. If you want to fly for less, buying new isn't the way to do it.

Mike C.

The cost of right seaters isn't the problem.

The scheduling of them is the problem.

It is chartering the human.

You pay $10M for a fancy new jet and now you can't fly it when you want. Bummer.

Meanwhile, I buy an "experienced" jet and I can fly it anytime I want, like right now over a holiday period.

Mike C.

The barrel diameter of the 500 series and the 525 series are the same. This means the cross section is the same.

The spar in my 560 is behind the last row of seats and so only comes into play for someone who goes further back than that, which is rare since that is only the toilet room behind it.


I take it "nicer" isn't the same as "bigger" since the CJ3 isn't bigger cross section.

Mike C.

This impression is from the subtle design elements, such as color, accents, etc, that make you think it is more roomy, but if you get out a tape measure and look at the interior diameter, it isn't meaningfully different. The thickness of the soft goods in the various models don't vary that much, and the metal parts are the same dimensions.

Here are the cabin cross sections:

They are basically the same. The impressions you have of more size are just that, impressions from the design elements, not actual increases in measurements.

Mike C.

This impression is from the subtle design elements, such as color, accents, etc, that make you think it is more roomy, but if you get out a tape measure and look at the interior diameter, it isn't meaningfully different. The thickness of the soft goods in the various models don't vary that much, and the metal parts are the same dimensions.

Here are the cabin cross sections:

They are basically the same. The impressions you have of more size are just that, impressions from the design elements, not actual increases in measurements.

Mike C.

Still waiting for it.

Still waiting for it.

Here's a fair comparison that shows how a Citation V is actually cheaper on a per seat mile basis.

King Air B200, $1518.00 per hour, 200 hours per year = 53,000 miles, $4.49 per mile.
Citation V, $2669.00 per hour, 130 hours per year = 53,000 miles, $5.17 per mile.

As you can see the speed of the V really closes the cost gap, even with $6 a gallon gas.

This makes the V almost as cheap to operate as the King Air... but I said cheaper... right?

The Citation V has one more passenger seat than a King Air.

A King Air has 6 cabin seats plus the side potty, 7 total. The V has 7 seats plus the potty (and some have 8 seats plus the potty)

King Air 6 pax $4.49 per mile or .74 cents per seat mile.

Citation 7 pax $5.17 per mile or .73 cents per seat mile.

Citation 8 pax $5.17 per mile or .65 cents per seat mile.

So, as promised I was able to show that the Citation V is cheaper to operate, without any shenanigans such as leaving engine reserves out! I didn't have to use LUMP numbers or owner sourced parts either.

By the way, before I became a King Air and Citation guy, I sold Learjets, I could use the same logic to justify the op cost of a Learjet. It did work a lot better with $3 - $4 gas!

*any jet is subject to unplanned maintenance cost that typically exceed that of a turboprop. That potential expense is not included in the numbers above.

Forgot the cost of the unproductive labor in the back. Slower plane = more unproductive hours paid to the people in the back. Stacks it more in the favor of the V.
We fly to save time. Forgot the cost of time .

Some of the business trips we do the “hourly payroll” of the people in the back exceeds the cost of the plane per hour. By a lot. And this is NetJets prices.
Not that they are paid per hour, but you get the idea.

One very large company actually uses that figure as when to airline them vs take the plane. And this isn’t for top execs. . Private saves them money.

If you look at it from "How much are they earning me", the numbers are even more enticing. When I look at employee costs, I am always looking at it from the angle of how much value are they creating for the company.

Most are creating zilch at FL360 and the 2 hours before the flight going through security and waiting to board. Even flying teams commercial, it's worth paying more to have them spend less time in transit.

Routes change these numbers a lot. My most common route is CCR to VNY. Departing CCR you're held below 15k ft until FRAME, departing VNY you're held below 12k ft until GMN. On this route the Citation V beats the pc12 on time by maybe 10% at best, certainly not 35% faster. Also the V burns 1250 lbs of fuel vs 650 for the pc12. I'm always taking 4-5 pax so who cares about seat mile efficiency if those seats are empty, however you could put the two jump seats in the back call it a 10 seater and beat the jet every time on a "per seat mile" basis. Lastly, the cabin is bigger and more spacious on the 12. CCR to Cabo, the jet wins or at least breaks even and saves 35% flight time or so. The jet doesn't make sense until you start gong far.

A 285 nm route between two congested urban airspaces is not going to favor any jet.

It doesn't really favor a turboprop either. A 200 knot piston single will be maybe 20 minutes slower.

When you want to go further, then the jet looks a lot better. Say KNVY to KBFI, 817 nm.

Now do that with headwinds and the turboprop really starts to look weak. Chip left out the fact that headwinds more seriously affect the slower airplane, and that you spend most of your time in headwinds.

It has been remarkable to me how winds that would annoy me seriously in the MU2 are of almost no consequence in the V. I can make a trip with 60 knot winds (headwind one way, tailwind back, say), and the trip time is like 4 minutes difference in the V. In the MU2 it would be like 20-25 minutes.

A 100 knot winter headwind really makes a turboprop look lame, it doesn't for a 400+ knot jet.

Mike C.

My folks often travel to client sites for work. Our terms at that we charge labor for travel time.

Using the V turns a 3 day trip into a single day. The cost savings for the client can total $5-8K *per trip* using the V over the airlines depending on the number of people and the destination.

My V easily pays for itself in the productivity it returns to myself and my employees.

Mike C.

Mike,

Did we figure out if you have ever actually been in a Mustang or a CJ3+?

You were claiming the interior of the CJ3+ isn’t actually wider inside because of numbers you found on the internet… can you back that up with actual hands on knowledge?

Chip, why? Seriously, why you keep pushing. You know the answer and yet you keep pushing. Is this good for BT? Nope.