Places that offer Citation training in level D simulators include at least this list:

Flight Safety
CAE
Simcom
Loft
RTC

There is quite a lot of choice.


It certainly was harder during COVID but not as bad now.


There are failures that you can't do in the plane easily or safely, like manual gear extension, instrument failures, TR emergencies, windshear, etc.

You get a lot of hours flying the actual plane, but you don't get hardly any hours flying it during some failure. The sim provides that.

I alternate sim and in airplane training for my recurrent because each has value.


Tell me how you train for inadvertent TR deployment in the airplane, for example. There's no good way to do this as far as I know.

I find the in airplane training telegraphs what is about to happen so the surprise factor is mostly absent. In the sim, not so much. If the sim instructor triggers a TR deployment, you will be surprised and that test your true reaction time.


Your view differs from mine substantially. The training ecosystem around Citations is robust, and using a sim is very valuable.

Mike C.

Not aware that the competition is that stiff. Not many options in the Citation world beyond FSI and trying to get booked with them can be a challenge.

WRT the ground school, two sim training sessions, one sim test session format, I can see the frustration. Ground school sessions, not the most efficient use of time and then you get slammed into the sim, on a very compressed time to task ratio. Too much time in GS, not enough sim time, really no sim time, outside of practice for the test and taking the test. But have fun trying to book additional training at FSI. Those sims and sim instructors are booked flat out.

Like Phil, when able, per insurance, I try to do my recurrent in-plane. More efficient use of time, doing the actual tasks in the plane that flies like a plane and not a sim, not spending time in ground school sessions that are inefficient, and then slamming stuff in the sim.

I know, I know, there are scenarios in the sim that can be flown more realistically than in tne plane, like a V1 cut. But beyond that not sure the advantage of the sim.

YMMV, but some of use prefer in-plane for a number of reasons.
Also, given how slammed the sim centers are, very difficult to get additional time.

With regard to competition? Am not aware that there is much if any in the Citation or the Phenom world. Buffet is not stupid. He bought a business that is damn near a monopoly. Only real competition is in-plane and the insurance companies, in many instances, restrict the in-plane training events.

May be different at CAE, but this is the view from the outside ref FSI.

These people go to the factory service center and give them a blank check.

They pay a lot for the privilege of being uninformed even at the most basic level.

This is how you can ask two operators of the same type and get wildly different answers for what it costs to fly. The guy who flies MCT in the mid 30s and takes it to a service center will easily pay double what I do per mile.

There are a fair number of Citation operators such as myself who are involved in their airplane's care to at least some basic level. It doesn't take that much. A reasonable shop, the parts catalog, and contacts at salvage yards can save you a ton.

If I had a service center fix all the things on my plane that have been fixed since I owned it, I'm sure it would have cost me $250K more than my approach. That's not an exaggeration.

An oner who is involved is also vastly better educated about the systems which helps in an emergency, and they are also far more helpful to the mechanic when trying to debug an issue. On that last point, the service center standard debugging technique is to replace the most expensive part in any system and see if that fixes it. That feels like a joke but it really isn't.

Mike C.

Please go back and read my posts. I NEVER said that any firm is intentionally failing anyone.
Please go back and re-read, was not I.

My comments were that I thought the ground school was suboptimal in its use of time and that the SIM was booked hard for training for tests and actual test, not that available for training outside of the syllabus.

Happy to engage in discourse, not happy to have my posts mischaracterized.

It's even more cool when the boss hires a mechanic, a flight attendant, and a personal assistant so all you have to worry about is getting the plane from one place to another, which is enough of a headache on it's own.

Thank you for the important clarification Brad.

But competition is the issue; there is no competition. CAE teamed with Embraer on the Phenom training, sole sim source. Combine that with insurance requiring CAE you have the definition of a monopoly. You should attend an EJOA conference and listen to the pilots unload on the training; they are not a happy customer.

I flew a Phenom 100 for over seven years and have been flying the Phenom 300 for five years so I've had plenty of visits to CAE Dallas. I haven't had any issues with the instructors; though, I wish the ground school was taught by pilots who have actually flown the real jet. Often the students teach the ground school how it 'really works'. My issue is the "new" part 91 format. I used to leave CAE with at least one new tool in the proficiency box; not anymore.

Regarding buying more sim time; not likely. The sim is booked solid 24x7 nearly a year in advance. An additional hour of sim time is $3500 per hour! I have direct experience trying to freelance additional training as I used to buy an hour for my wife to do "pinch hitter" training. It was a waste of money becasue the sim instructors simply don't know how to fly a non-syllubus session. Again, not faulting them but its simply a fact.

Regarding the subject of the Post "what is so special about a Phenom 300"; lots, it is an amazing machine that I have been blessed to fly. However, sim training is definitely one of the negatives. One of the other negatives is the EJOA. It is changed its focus to the large Part 135 operators; money talks. The Phenom Pilots blog was started to fill the void but is struggling to reach critical mass.

Sorry to go off on the training.

Why is the Phenom 300 special. I can tell you why I bought one:
1) Its a sexy airplane. It looks awesome sitting on the ramp and even better in my hangar!
2) It has a real air stair. Makes you feel like your climbing into a much larger $$ jet.
3) It has a real externally serviced private bathroom with a flushing toilet and a sink with running water. This was HUGE for my wife.
4) It has great range for its category. Coast - Coast going East and Coast to Colorado going West.
5) Its built like an airliner by a company that builds airliners.
6) Its fast for its category. You cruise at the same speeds as the airlines and don't get in the way.
7) Its efficient $/mile (see my comment about climbing direct to FL43/45)
8) Its single pilot which is important not only to Part 91 guys like myself but also to Part 135. They can reposition aircraft with one pilot.

To be fair, a lot of jet owners wouldn't even put that amount of resources into repairing their vehicles. For them, buying a jet is the equivalent of buying time. ("Let me pay other people to do what they're good at which will allow me the maximum amount of time to do what I'm good at.")

The guy I manage and fly for didn't even see the last jet he bought in person until several days after we got it home. He packs his travel schedule full enough when he flies that it would not be safe for him to fly his own trips, as he would not be able to give flight planning and execution the focus it needs. He will freely state this himself. He tells me when he wants to fly, and the pre-flighted plane is waiting on the ramp when he arrives at the airport. He pays the bills and I handle everything else that makes the plane move. That's what he has decided serves him the best, and it's been that way ever since we started flying around together in a Seneca II 10 years ago.

With all that, I would still describe him as an engaged owner. He wants to know anything of significance that comes up from a maintenance perspective, how it gets resolved, and what it cost. I consult him (or the CFO) for any major expenditures. For him, these interactions probably average less than 15 minutes a week. If he were forced to get his fingers into the full management/maintenance details himself, he would be capable of it, but the jet would instantly start losing utility for him.

You make it sound like I'm the only one who can do it, which is wrong.

You can obviously spend more money and do less, but it also doesn't take much effort to do a little bit more for a huge benefit. Jet owner operators can't be so logistically challenged that I am the only one who can do this, and indeed I am not.

It is MUCH EASIER to do this on a jet than other types because we have these detailed maintenance status reports which make it easy to see what is coming up next and what the PNs are for things. It is so much easier to do this for my Citation than it was for my MU2, or even my Cessna 210. The jet is better tracked, documented, and has more ecosystem around it.


News flash: I hardly ever "work" on the plane. The vast majority of my involvement is logistical. I write email, make phone calls, and browse websites. No greasy hands. I'm filling the role of airplane manager, not mechanic.


I have a clear example of that: a non aviation couple bought a Beech Duke and hired a pilot to fly it for them. Trips are often 600 to 900 nm. They have already had two engines issues, a cracked case and a failed mag (which was in flight leading to an unplanned landing), in less than 2 years. I am convinced they would be able to fly a 501 on the same missions for close to the same cost and vastly improved safety and comfort. Whatever extra the 501 costs will be worth it.

The pilot is relatively new, too, and has not had any sim experience. I worry about the day an engine quits on takeoff and if he is up to the challenge. I would worry vastly less for a 501.

Just looking at fuel in cruise:

501 at 135 GPH, $4.50 fuel, 340 knots: $1.79/nm

Duke at 47 GPH, $6.50 fuel, 195 knots: $1.57/nm

The 501 on a LUMP will have less down time and will break far less often.

Mike C.

What is the advantage of his strategy over NetJets?

Paying you, the shop, the overheads, the cost of capital, it doesn't seem like he is saving any money over frax.

With NetJets, he won't have down time, AOG, etc. if his time is so valuable, why not improve it by going frax?

For me, the answer is obvious, I can beat NetJets cost by huge margin, but that comes with my involvement.

Mike C.

That's true. I was talking about the legacy Citations which have a fair amount of choice. I forgot the newer planes are more limited.

For the "new" planes, the pilots often want to fly sims that are outfitted with the exact avionics they have. This means a CJ sim, CJ1+ sim, and an M2 sim are different. Now you get into limited supply.

For me, I don't care about that in a sim. My V has Garmin panels, the sim I fly is a II with steam gauges. No big deal to me, it works well enough for the task at hand. That would bother some pilots.

Mike C.

TBM 60 GPH, $4.50 fuel, 290 knots: $0.93/nm

A few weeks a year scheduled down time, has never broken

You make it sound like I'm the only one who can do it, which is wrong.

Mike C.