28 Mar 2024, 18:41 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 14 Aug 2018, 21:22 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/24/07 Posts: 1242 Post Likes: +152 Location: Akron, Ohio
Aircraft: C550 - C560
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I sure hope it works out for him. I think if one looks at just the number of man hours required to perform the inspections at an hourly rate, it will exceed the above estimate. Then, one has to add the cost to fix what the inspection finds. Then, there's normal wear and tear replacements. Then, there's other things that are old that have to be fixed. Then....... Buddy you real estate guys are good at making numbers seem plausible and if you’re in doubt, that must be some really fuzzy accounting going on. Gary
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 14 Aug 2018, 21:44 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/24/07 Posts: 1242 Post Likes: +152 Location: Akron, Ohio
Aircraft: C550 - C560
|
|
Pass that Kool aide brother. Gary
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 14 Aug 2018, 22:14 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/17/10 Posts: 211 Post Likes: +40 Location: CA
|
|
Believe me, I'd really like to have one of these 501SP's. I mean crap, for 500 grand and 15 grand/yr in maintenance I can buy the cream of the crop, fly at FL410, and tell everyone "yeah, we took the jet"? Sounds awesome. But, here's what scares me....... Ive spent a fair amount of time on the CJ Pilots assn forums. After researching and reading, calling, and discussing, it seems that at least $1000/hr for up to 200 hrs per year is common. I emphasize "at least". And that is no engine program. And the "surprise" maintenance event can really put a damper on your enthusiasm. Both in terms of cost, but in downtime as well. It's the unknown that has selling prices where they are. And after owning several airplanes over the last 25 years, my gut tells me that the unpleasant is more the norm. Fla
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 14 Aug 2018, 23:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/01/10 Posts: 3435 Post Likes: +2386 Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
|
|
I’ve owned and operated my Mustang for 3.5 years and have developed a pretty good feel for the costs and processes involved in maintaining a jet. Although the Mustang is sort of on the opposite end from a legacy jet, you get a feel for what goes on, nevertheless. I don’t doubt that you can successfully operate a legacy jet on the cheap. However, you need to start with a good airplane that’s in good condition. That puts the odds in your favor. There’s a bunch of shops that work on older Citations, and many parts can be reasonably acquired. As long as nothing major pops up, you can milk a legacy jet for quite a while. The risk is if something major pops up, it can bite hard. When you don’t have an engine program or parts program to lean on, all you have is your own pocket. In the end, your risk is your initial investment. When it’s not a large acquisition price, parts and engine programs don’t make sense. If you blow an engine, you’re either going to look for a used engine or part the plane out. So, as long as you don’t pay too much to buy one, your risk is controlled and well defined.
_________________ Previous A36TN owner
Last edited on 15 Aug 2018, 13:55, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 08:33 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 4946 Post Likes: +4784
Aircraft: G44, C501, C55, R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I’ve owned and operated my Mustang for 3.5 years and have developed a pretty good feel for the costs and processes involved in maintaining a jet. Although the Mustang is sort of on the opposite end from a legacy jet, you get a feel for what goes on, nevertheless. I don’t doubt that you can successfully operate a legacy jet on the cheap. However, you need to start with a good airplane that’s in good condition. That puts the odds in your favor. There’s a bunch of shops that work on older Citations, and many parts can be reasonably acquired. As long as nothing major pops up, you can milk a legacy jet for quite a while. The risk is if something major pops up, it can bite hard. When you don’t have an engine program or parts program to lean on, all you have is your own pocket. In the end, your risk is your initial investment. When it’s not a large acquisition price, parts and engine programs don’t make sense. If you blow an engine, you’re either going to look for a used engine or part the plane out. So, as long as you don’t pay to much to buy one, your risk is controlled and well defined. Well said, perhaps this point has been lost somewhere in this thread. Buy a solid, well loved airframe for approximately the cost of the motors and your non-insured financial risk in the event of a disaster is mitigated. As I said before, used motors trade for about a $100 an hour remaining. There really are no disasters that are lurking in these airframes so I believe a motor grenading is the highest (albeit low chance) financial risk. Avionics are dirt cheap and when I say dirt cheap; I mean practically free. Some of the single avionics failures in my friend's Eclipse and Premier would likely fund the avionics fund for 5 legacy Citations for life. As I said, this is a hobby but in 8 months of ownership, it has been the most reliable, least aggravating and most fun airplane I've had. It's absolutely hassle free at this time; something I've never been able to say for any piston I've owned. In that time frame, I've probably had the Lancair cowling off 5 times doing little annoying things to the motor, messing with mags, changing oil, plugs, chasing oil leaks, etc. The TSIO-550 is far and away more expensive and time consuming to take care of than a 700 hour remaining JT15. I have absolutely zero expectation of my 350 hour Continental making 1000 hours before needing cylinders ($20K?) or making metal ($80k). Even the Searey 914 has required way more maintenance than the Citation in this time frame. I've replaced multiple brackets, broken turbo bolts, ignition modules and just ordered 2 new carbs for its 5 year carb replacement/OH on the 914 ($3K if you take it to the dealer). These light sport motors are just as expensive if not more than a Continental! It's probably more expensive to maintain a 115HP 914 than a JT15. Seaplanes in general are a ton of work maintain.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 09:42 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 4946 Post Likes: +4784
Aircraft: G44, C501, C55, R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It seems to me from reading this thread, the 501SP is a good hobby plane (like Mike says). What my interpretation of hobby plane is most likely aligns with most BTers. You put the effort into tracking parts down, figuring out MX puzzles, etc... The opposite of this could be corporate planes where they just take them to the service center.
When I had my R182 I was heavily involved in MX and finding ways to keep costs down. Isn't that what all of us do to our "hobby" planes?
If I am understanding Mike correctly, you buy a good bird for the price of the motors.
Pretty neato! Aren't 99% of the airplanes on BT mostly hobby airplanes? I'm not really sure why this is any different because it has jet engines. With that said, you probably would be A OK with one of these for serious business travel.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 09:48 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/03/08 Posts: 14529 Post Likes: +22858 Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Aren't 99% of the airplanes on BT mostly hobby airplanes? I'm not really sure why this is any different because it has jet engines. With that said, you probably would be A OK with one of these for serious business travel. I completely agree with this point. People get way too hung up on 1 engine vs 2, turbine vs piston, fabric vs aluminum, whatever. They are all just airplanes.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 09:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/01/14 Posts: 2128 Post Likes: +1607 Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I completely agree with this point. People get way too hung up on 1 engine vs 2, turbine vs piston, fabric vs aluminum, whatever. They are all just airplanes. I agree, after about 100 hours in any of them, an airplane is an airplane. The little ones don’t go as far as the big ones and seem to come back home sooner. The little ones are more fun to fly but it is nice, on a long trip, to be able to walk back to the restroom.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 11:32 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 4946 Post Likes: +4784
Aircraft: G44, C501, C55, R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Aren't 99% of the airplanes on BT mostly hobby airplanes? I'm not really sure why this is any different because it has jet engines. With that said, you probably would be A OK with one of these for serious business travel. I completely agree with this point. People get way too hung up on 1 engine vs 2, turbine vs piston, fabric vs aluminum, whatever. They are all just airplanes.
Yes, a Citation or even a G-650 needs no more justification than a Piper Cub you use to look at dead cows on Sundays. They are all just airplanes and you get what you want because it makes you happy and you can afford it. When it no longer makes you happy or becomes too much of a PITA to support, then you get rid of it. That's something I haven't been able to understand as a reoccurring them in this thread, you don't have to be able to justify whatever you choose to spend your money on to anyone other than yourself and possibly your spouse.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 11:35 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/20/15 Posts: 183 Post Likes: +66 Location: AZ
Aircraft: MU-2 Solitaire
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Tesla math?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 13:59 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/01/10 Posts: 3435 Post Likes: +2386 Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
|
|
Username Protected wrote: They are all just airplanes and you get what you want because it makes you happy and you can afford it. When it no longer makes you happy or becomes too much of a PITA to support, then you get rid of it. That's something I haven't been able to understand as a reoccurring theme in this thread, you don't have to be able to justify whatever you choose to spend your money on to anyone other than yourself and possibly your spouse. Thus, the good old statement, "I spend most of my money on airplanes. The rest I just waste."
_________________ Previous A36TN owner
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 15 Aug 2018, 15:43 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/15/11 Posts: 2388 Post Likes: +1055 Location: Mandan, ND
Aircraft: V35
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Aren't 99% of the airplanes on BT mostly hobby airplanes? I'm not really sure why this is any different because it has jet engines. With that said, you probably would be A OK with one of these for serious business travel. Obviously you have not gotten or read the memo stating all jets are serious business machines that no one has a right to own or fly for pleasure. That same memo states all SE pistons are not for corporate use.Also, whoever came up with the quote "I spend most of my money on airplanes, the rest I just waste..." is pretty damn funny!
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|