Both similar to CJ4, which is SP.

How does high Vref lead to SP overload? By the time your are down to Vref, there's nothing to do, you are on final and you land.

I'll note that the two most recent accidents dealing with approach/landing in jets involved two crew: Akron Hawker 700, Teterboro Lear. SP planes don't seem to be falling out of the sky on approaches.

So the theory "high Vref means SP overload" seems busted, not base in actual fact.

Mike C.

Both similar to CJ4, which is SP.

How does high Vref lead to SP overload? By the time your are down to Vref, there's nothing to do, you are on final and you land.

I'll note that the two most recent accidents dealing with approach/landing in jets involved two crew: Akron Hawker 700, Teterboro Lear. SP planes don't seem to be falling out of the sky on approaches.

So the theory "high Vref means SP overload" seems busted, not base in actual fact.

Mike C.

I think I kicked the ant hill a little bit with my question reviving the thread - sorry, not my intent. I was coming from the thought that it's too bad the Beech Jet (XPR, Nextant, et al) is 2 crew versus single pilot as many of its competition (EMB300, big CJ's) are single pilot.

The BJ is a compelling airplane on performance and price the more I look at it, it's just too bad that it might get passed over in the selection process on account of a required 2nd pilot. I know from recent past experience it could be an issue for potential owners when looking at acquiring or upgrading airplanes, ie, costs for care and feeding another mouth. (We eat a lot on the road, let's be honest.)

Insurance will certainly be a huge factor in this and as far as a SP Beech Jet it may be a dead issue anyway. Honestly, I could go either way on the SP argument. I've flown the Lear 35 where I wish I would have been single pilot because the second guy was absolutely no help, and also up to my eyeballs in the King Air wishing for a second pair of hands. "It depends."

The TEB Lear accident is sobering. Same with these latest SP jet/SETP incapacitation events. Best solution might be to clone Aubie P and pull a copy out of the hangar locker whenever we may need him. Just a little insurance? What do you think AP? I won't buy the A model, but maybe serial number 100?

Good input everybody, thanks.

CJ

The Barn

Unless there is some control or systems issue that a single pilot can’t solve, I still can’t see why a beechjet can’t be single pilot and a phenom can. New panel and engine in BJ and it’s damn similar to a p300.

My experience in a Honda jet was it was a Lot easier to fly than mu2 Bc u do nothing with engines and avionics are simple. The speed difference is negligible. We all go 250 or less down low. I fly down the pipe at 120. We train faster for single engine work. It’s the same, as Mark said, you get used it.

What other systems are complex on a beechjet where a failure would be worse than a similar failure on a embraer or citation? From what I can tell, it’s systems are darn similar to mu2s, which are insanely robust and straightforward.

Again, only talking about the reengined re paneled ones.

I vaguely recall someone on BT posting at some point that there was an edge case performance range on BJ that required force beyond what one person could muster. If that was the case, that could be a problem.

I think that was talk about the electric trim system. If it fails, it is very hard to fly the plane and trim it. But isn't there a back up for it? Unless maybe there is a possible common point of failure that would also take out the backup?

I've analyzed it both ways. If you're paying for one pilot the second one's expense (or the first one if you are an owner pilot) is a rounding error in the whole scheme of things.

I've analyzed it both ways. If you're paying for one pilot the second one's expense (or the first one if you are an owner pilot) is a rounding error in the whole scheme of things.

Most whom can afford this lifestyle already deal with other human beings that deal with other human beings in life with life. Very few get here but on the "backs" of others so really another rounding error. Not always true, but for those of us whom build companies old fashioned way, it's not really a big deal. And I'll deal with pilots any day over dealing with legal or IT. I don't recall a single meeting with pilots that made my blood boil. I don't recall a single meeting with legal or IT that didn't.

Most whom can afford this lifestyle already deal with other human beings that deal with other human beings in life with life. Very few get here but on the "backs" of others so really another rounding error. Not always true, but for those of us whom build companies old fashioned way, it's not really a big deal. And I'll deal with pilots any day over dealing with legal or IT. I don't recall a single meeting with pilots that made my blood boil. I don't recall a single meeting with legal or IT that didn't.

There is your problem: contractors.

There is your problem: contractors. To me it was always a euphemism for unhireable, useful, but not long term.

There is your problem: contractors.

Bill Lear's idea of the Lear 23 being certified for single pilot didn't go very far, and for good reason.

If we are being honest, a 421 requires two pilots far more than a BeechJet. If something goes wrong in a 421, that requires a lot from the sole pilot to manage. And things go wrong in a 421 way more often than they do in a BJ.

The second pilot is all about cost. Two pilots are required because the FAA deems the cost is supportable by the operators flying a BJ, not because the plane is inherently too difficult for a single pilot.

This is also why the lowest cost jet, the Citation, was the first and only to get an SPE. Indeed, Cessna's original argument was focused on cost. See attached 4050 exemption, the granddaddy of them all that started the SPE concept. It is interesting to read the reasons put forth in the SPE in the context of the time.

While cost of a second human is a big deal despite those calling it a rounding error (I wonder how many of them have actually had to pay for or schedule an SIC), it is loss of use. If you have to charter a human to fly in your airplane, you've lost the greatest feature of personal aviation by being encumbered with something you have to schedule, pay for, feed, house, and otherwise deal with. It is like attaching an expensive and unreliable piece of equipment to your airplane that you don't really need.

Mike C.