28 Mar 2024, 20:13 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 14:03 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/17/13 Posts: 6322 Post Likes: +5521 Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: There are ways in which the JT15D might be cheaper than the FJ44. One, as a part 91 operator, I can do HSI and not OH, so that extends the life of the engine at much reduced rate per hour. Two, I can buy used engines when a major event comes up instead of OH mine. Three, Williams could, at any time, jack FJ44 prices through the roof and I have no recourse (though Pratt can do the same for JT15D parts). Four, if I get engines with significant time remaining, then I never face a major event and I fly for 10+ years that way. When it is time to sell, who knows what the market value will be for the airplane, it could be less than all the payments I would have made to Williams, so I could end up being better off not on program and selling the plane for scrap. .
Yes, but it seems there is a much better second hand infrastructure for the Pratt. You can probably get your hands on an abundance of yellow tagged parts, exchanges, overhauls etc and have any shop do the work. On a FJ44 is there a second hand parts market? And even if there is, Williams are the only ones who can do the work and they probably have a vested interest in you buying a new part from them rather than replacing or overhauling anything... Just a guess.
_________________ Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 14:04 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23613 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Quote: V Ultra Have you flown it? My entire Citation experience can be put in a thimble. I flew the Simcom C550 simulator on one flight from takeoff to CAT I minimums. Pretty easy to fly actually. I had a ride (not in front) in an S550+FJ44 to FL430. About ~1 hour. I had a ride (right seat, never touched the controls) in a 501SP+FJ44 to FL410. About ~1 hour. That's it. I've not even seen an Ultra much less had a ride in one. The Ultra is the most recent contender in my analysis. Despite larger engines (JT15D-5D) and heavier weights (16,500 lbs), it is surprisingly quite good on fuel per the book. The reason seems to be a combination of ability to get to FL450 without a step climb (even ISA+10), and the fact the JT15D-5D is a somewhat more efficient engine than the JT15D-5A on the V, or the JT15D-4B on the S550. Here are some numbers from a theoretical zero wind 1000 nm trip in four candidate airplanes using MCT: S550: 3.3 hours, 3200 lbs fuel, $2204 for af/eng, $1671 fuel, $3875. S550+FJ44: 2.7 hours, 2386 lbs fuel, $1917 af/eng, $1246 fuel, $3163. 560: 3.2 hours, 3300 lbs fuel, $2138 af/eng, $1724 fuel, $3862. 560 Ultra: 2.8 hours, 3300 lbs fuel, $1870 af/eng, $1724 fuel, $3594. Assumptions: airframe maintenance is $400/hour, FJ44 is on Williams program ($310/hour), JT15D engines all cost $268/hour in HSI/OH, cabin load of 1000 lbs, reserve at end of flight 1000 lbs fuel. The Ultra is the cheapest JT15D plane to fly on the mission due to being so much faster and using less airframe time. The S550+FJ44 is the cheapest due to being both fast and thrifty on fuel use. There are a lot of potential problems in my analysis. The JT15D engines don't have the protections the Williams program has, so not quite apples to apples. The Ultra probably costs more per hour to maintain, being bigger and heavier, and having ancient CRT style PFD/MFD displays. The Ultra will cost more in insurance most likely. But the Ultra is a lot newer (10-12 years typically over an S550), so perhaps saves money on maintenance. The "book" numbers could be way out of line. One thing I do like about the JT15D airplanes is that they have thrust reversers. The lack of TRs on the FJ44 means runway lengths explode in wet, snow, ice conditions. They don't seem to get as bad with TR credit. I did have quite a shock, though, when I saw this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFbBvhZjBHEThe fuel flow (at 1:29 mark) is 3260 pph, 480 gph, 8 gallons per minute. Wow. Yeah, I know it doesn't stay long at lower altitudes, but I am still mentally trying to process that data point. Another video, at FL370: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-CvodkmYak422 KTAS, 1330 pph, 198 gph. The book (OM) says, at ISA, 15,000 lbs, 422 KTAS, 1437 pph, so that seems pretty good given I don't know the temps and weights. At FL450, the books says 377 KTAS, 942 pph, 141 gph, at 15,000 lbs. As the weight drops, improves to 404 KTAS, 974 pph, 145 gph, at 13,000 lbs. So flying high really cuts down the fuel flow. Quote: I can't see how the rest of the list could survive. The main issue with the Ultra is that it is, at best, a 1750 nm range plane and that won't cut it for going non stop to the west coast from here (1650 nm). The only airplane in the list that will do it reliably is the S550+FJ44, 2300 nm range. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 14:14 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/09 Posts: 5233 Post Likes: +3026 Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: That's what I was wondering. Isn't it the V Ultra that climbs like a rocketship? Especially when it is light. CJ2+/CJ3/CJ4 can all climb at 3000 - 5000 fpm when light from SL.
_________________ Allen
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 14:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/09 Posts: 5233 Post Likes: +3026 Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: At FL450, the books says 377 KTAS, 942 pph, 141 gph, at 15,000 lbs. As the weight drops, improves to 404 KTAS, 974 pph, 145 gph, at 13,000 lbs. So flying high really cuts down the fuel flow.
CJ2+/CJ3 will do 400 kts @ FL450 on 700 pph, 104 gph. Thats the efficiency difference of the FJ44.
_________________ Allen
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 16:11 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/29/13 Posts: 13578 Post Likes: +10962 Company: Easy Ice, LLC Location: Marquette, Michigan; Scottsdale, AZ, Telluride
Aircraft: C510,C185,C310,R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Should we film the experience? Anyone have a camera with a suction cup mount I can borrow? Mike does.
_________________ Mark Hangen Deputy Minister of Ice (aka FlyingIceperson) Power of the Turbine "Jet Elite"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 16:43 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4573 Post Likes: +3298
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
Been mentioned often but since it is not a memory item what is the 560 Ultra set up as in terms of crew? Two crew unless pilot has a SP exemption?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 16:51 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23613 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: CJ2+/CJ3 will do 400 kts @ FL450 on 700 pph, 104 gph. Looking at the CJ3 book, it says at MCT: FL450, 12,000 lbs, 384 KTAS, 718 pph, 107 gph. So your numbers are better than book by a meaningful amount. Range for a CJ3 at MCT seems to be about 2000 nm, so some range more than an Ultra, but less than an S550+FJ44. The problem is that an Ultra is ~$1M, a CJ3 is ~$3.5M, which makes them too expensive for my situation at this time. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 16:56 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23613 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: what is the 560 Ultra set up as in terms of crew? Two crew unless pilot has a SP exemption? Correct. Only single pilot out of the box legacy Citations are 501SP and 551 (weight limited 550). Some number of others (500, 550, S550, 560, 560 Ultra, 560 Encore, 560 Encore+) can be flown SP in the US (and select other countries) with a single pilot exemption (SPE). Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 17:03 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/29/13 Posts: 13578 Post Likes: +10962 Company: Easy Ice, LLC Location: Marquette, Michigan; Scottsdale, AZ, Telluride
Aircraft: C510,C185,C310,R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: CJ2+/CJ3 will do 400 kts @ FL450 on 700 pph, 104 gph. Looking at the CJ3 book, it says at MCT: FL450, 12,000 lbs, 384 KTAS, 718 pph, 107 gph. So your numbers are better than book by a meaningful amount. Range for a CJ3 at MCT seems to be about 2000 nm, so some range more than an Ultra, but less than an S550+FJ44. The problem is that an Ultra is ~$1M, a CJ3 is ~$3.5M, which makes them too expensive for my situation at this time. Mike C.
Figure $1.5 mil for a decent Ultra
_________________ Mark Hangen Deputy Minister of Ice (aka FlyingIceperson) Power of the Turbine "Jet Elite"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 17:25 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23613 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Terrific analysis, thanks. I learned a few things I probably should have known. There's more where that came from, but it would fill pages... Quote: I COMPLETELY understand the pull of the westbound nonstop. I flew to the west coast 5 times in my MU2 last year (3 times to KBFI, 1 to KHWD, 1 to KHND). I probably lost some valuable business due to being not willing to go more often. Despite this being only 5 trips, it was over 30% of my flight time last year. Right now, it takes basically all day to get out there. I have to stop once, maybe twice, depending on winds in my MU2 which has ~1200 nm still air range. I have to stop once the way back every time, though in theory the right winds could allow a non stop. That also takes all day because you lose 2 hours for time change. The net effect is about 8 to 10 hours going out, 6 to 7 coming back. The airlines are not much better, it turns out, so I still fly myself. I am often carrying lots of equipment, materials, and stuff that would have to be shipped or simply can't go by airline. If I had, say, an S550+FJ44, it would almost always go non stop both ways. The times would change to 4 to 5.5 hours west, 3 to 4 hours east. That's a huge change, particularly if you are taking employees with you as I do often. The hour in the jet will be less tiring than an hour in the turboprop, too. The impact on my business will be the reduced time and tiring of the jet, plus more willingness to go and provide my services out west. Going non stop west in winds is such a hard mission that only one airplane is viable, the S550+FJ44. But it comes with compromises. Very little useful load when full fuel (~600 lbs). TKS system seems to be annoying to most. Planes are now well over 30 years old. A compromise is non stop east with one stop west. That opens up lots of other planes. 560, 560 Ultra, 501SP+FJ44, and so forth. If I have to stop each way, then I might as well buy a 441 and not have a jet. Quote: As a lifelong sales guy, I will be fascinated to evaluate the involuntary pull that emotion has on this transaction, on a guy with your analytical skills. This is a very numbers driven purchase based on a very specific mission. My emotion will be when I fly non stop the first time and it works (or doesn't). Quote: This assumes you'll test drive one, and I believe you will. I've already flown in two candidate airplanes for sale, an S550+FJ44, and a 501SP+FJ44. The S550 was noisy, my test passengers complained about it very specifically. Even had a sound analysis done and it was fan N1 noise from the engines, both of them. The 510SP was very quiet. Can't really say why the two airplanes were so different. Weirdly, the flat floor of the 501SP seemed better than the drop aisle of the S550. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 17:31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23613 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Figure $1.5 mil for a decent Ultra Probably. Controller prices range from $850K to $1.9M. Lots of them for sale, 26, which gives you choice. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 501sp Posted: 23 Apr 2018, 18:33 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/09 Posts: 5233 Post Likes: +3026 Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Looking at the CJ3 book, it says at MCT:
FL450, 12,000 lbs, 384 KTAS, 718 pph, 107 gph.
So your numbers are better than book by a meaningful amount.
Range for a CJ3 at MCT seems to be about 2000 nm, so some range more than an Ultra, but less than an S550+FJ44.
The problem is that an Ultra is ~$1M, a CJ3 is ~$3.5M, which makes them too expensive for my situation at this time.
Mike C. Book at FL450 is pretty conservative. Many planes beat the book up there.
_________________ Allen
|
|
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
|
|
|
|