banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 21:19 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 13:40 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 01/31/09
Posts: 5233
Post Likes: +3026
Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
Username Protected wrote:
Phenom 100 v Mustang ?


Consider the source:

Attachment:
2018-11-21_1239.png


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
Allen


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 14:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/01/10
Posts: 3435
Post Likes: +2388
Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
Allen,

The published data for the Mustang can be confusing. Their max payload of 1200# doesn't include a 200# pilot. So, they're saying it's 1400#. The max zero fuel weight is 6750#. My empty weight is 5378# which leaves 1372 for payload. I use 1350 considering misc. stored weight onboard.

Their performance charts are significantly understated. I always exceed book values for performance. For example, Monday in level cruise at FL380 at ISA-5, my TAS was 353kts at 7500#. CESNAV calculates 341kts for the same conditions. I'm typically 10-12kts faster than book in virtually all conditions.

_________________
Previous A36TN owner


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 15:39 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 01/31/09
Posts: 5233
Post Likes: +3026
Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
Username Protected wrote:
Their performance charts are significantly understated. I always exceed book values for performance. For example, Monday in level cruise at FL380 at ISA-5, my TAS was 353kts at 7500#. CESNAV calculates 341kts for the same conditions. I'm typically 10-12kts faster than book in virtually all conditions.


All of Cessna's performance numbers assume ISA, zero wind, unless stated differently. Your ISA -5 gave you better TAS. At ISA you would likely will be close to book.

Cessna Mustang performance numbers are conservative and the 510 does seem to beat them by a few knots. That is better than the reverse for buyers.

In the early days of CJ's there were some that did not make book speeds and buyers complained to Cessna and looked for compensation. I think Cessna said published performance numbers are +/- 5%. Now Cessna seems to ensure they are conservative and buyers are happy that their aircraft meets or exceeds book performance.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
Allen


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 17:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/01/10
Posts: 3435
Post Likes: +2388
Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
Username Protected wrote:
All of Cessna's performance numbers assume ISA, zero wind, unless stated differently. Your ISA -5 gave you better TAS. At ISA you would likely will be close to book.


Nope. I'm always 10-12kts faster, regardless. I used the ISA-5 example because it was my most recent flight. The comparison was actual at ISA-5 compared to book (CESNAV) at ISA-5. Even at ISA or ISA+ I'll still be faster.

_________________
Previous A36TN owner


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 18:27 
Offline



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 6717
Post Likes: +7255
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
Username Protected wrote:
As to faster that's debatable dependent on mission (which I note you qualified your statement with). The Mustang's legs are shorter than the TBM, particularly loaded up, and probably some of the King Airs. That means its slower if you have trips that exceed its range.

If you go outside the Mustang's range, yes the TBM wins handily.


Better can't be stated categorically either. I considered a Mustang carefully before buying a TBM and for my missions it wasn't better. Range and payload didn't push me that way. Mustang was certainly less expensive to acquire. Seating comfort in cabin was perhaps marginally better. My potty in the TBM is equivalent to the Mustang in functionality and privacy (the new TBM pot is better than Mustang). I'll give the Mustang the plus in service availability, two engines and - it's a jet. Oh, and there is more ability to get over weather. [/quote]

[/quote] Better is what you said, quieter, over weather and service.

[/quote]
Going and getting a type rating in the 510 is enormously expensive in time and treasure if you don't end up buying one. Recommending that as great investigative strategy isn't sound in my opinion. If one were committed to buying a 525 series but unsure of model it might make more sense.[/quote]

I look at it differently, buying one and realizing it's the wrong airplane is expensive in both time and treasure... plus maybe embarrassment!
[/quote]

Please know that I love the TBM, we are acquiring one for a great client right now. It's all about mission, if the Mustang does yours... it's great. BUT, the King Air and TBM are both more capable airplanes and the Malibu Jet Prop / Meridian is cheaper to operate than any of them.
_________________
It’s a brave new world, one where most have forgotten the old ways.


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 20:10 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/01/10
Posts: 3435
Post Likes: +2388
Location: Roseburg, Oregon
Aircraft: Citation Mustang
I agree with Chip. It's all about the mission requirement. Match the best plane to the mission and you'll be happy.

_________________
Previous A36TN owner


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 01:34 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 06/17/14
Posts: 4894
Post Likes: +1862
Location: KJYO
Aircraft: C-182, GA-7
I have an extra keyboard with a working caps lock and a working shift key that I could send you if you pay for Shipping. Granted, it costs more to ship it than Best Buy sells them for!


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 02:35 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 12/26/17
Posts: 141
Post Likes: +74
Username Protected wrote:
Please know that I love the TBM, we are acquiring one for a great client right now. It's all about mission, if the Mustang does yours... it's great. BUT, the King Air and TBM are both more capable airplanes and the Malibu Jet Prop / Meridian is cheaper to operate than any of them.

Chip - I have owned both Mustang, TBM and fly King Airs (E90 F90 and B200) regularly.

To say the latter are categorically more capable is simply not true. It is true in some respects but not all.

For example the Mustang is a much more capable weather aircraft than TBM or King Air - climbs better / faster and goes way higher.

Mustang is faster than TBM or King Air - Climb and Cruise.

Mustang kills the TBM in luggage space (more than double the space and weight) and in many cases it beats the King Airs. Cabin altitude is generally lower in the Mustang (Mustang will maintain SL cabin to over 21,000'). Mustang cabin is larger than TBM, King Air wins the cabin space contest.

Wing loading is higher in the Mustang than the TBM much better ride. King Airs ride good, not sure about the wing loading but am guessing higher in Mustang.

Mustang is the only one with trailing link gear.

No prist requirement in the Mustang.

Deice fluids I - IV are approved for use on the Mustang (only Type I on TBM, not sure about KA).

Cockpit entry / exit is much easier in the Mustang than TBM or King Air.

If all 3 planes were there and available I would never choose the TBM over the Mustang and only time I would choose the KA is if I needed more than 6 seats.

I know the TBM and the King Air have some advantages, but so does the Mustang in many areas.


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 11:00 
Offline



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 6717
Post Likes: +7255
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
Username Protected wrote:
Please know that I love the TBM, we are acquiring one for a great client right now. It's all about mission, if the Mustang does yours... it's great. BUT, the King Air and TBM are both more capable airplanes and the Malibu Jet Prop / Meridian is cheaper to operate than any of them.

Chip - I have owned both Mustang, TBM and fly King Airs (E90 F90 and B200) regularly.

To say the latter are categorically more capable is simply not true. It is true in some respects but not all.

For example the Mustang is a much more capable weather aircraft than TBM or King Air - climbs better / faster and goes way higher.

Mustang is faster than TBM or King Air - Climb and Cruise.

Mustang kills the TBM in luggage space (more than double the space and weight) and in many cases it beats the King Airs. Cabin altitude is generally lower in the Mustang (Mustang will maintain SL cabin to over 21,000'). Mustang cabin is larger than TBM, King Air wins the cabin space contest.

Wing loading is higher in the Mustang than the TBM much better ride. King Airs ride good, not sure about the wing loading but am guessing higher in Mustang.

Mustang is the only one with trailing link gear.

No prist requirement in the Mustang.

Deice fluids I - IV are approved for use on the Mustang (only Type I on TBM, not sure about KA).

Cockpit entry / exit is much easier in the Mustang than TBM or King Air.

If all 3 planes were there and available I would never choose the TBM over the Mustang and only time I would choose the KA is if I needed more than 6 seats.

I know the TBM and the King Air have some advantages, but so does the Mustang in many areas.


I agree, that was basically the point that if the Mustang fits your mission it really shines, including all the reasons you mentioned.

Then Tony pointed out some areas where the TBM is better, so when I said the King Air and TBM are “more capable” I was referring to Tony’s points and acknowleding that the turboprops are overall more capable (utility)

Most folks have their biases, pilots like whatever they fly, owners like what they bought (lots of thought went into the purchase decision) and sales people are the most biased because they have to sell their product against the competition. I’m a little different because I’m biased towards buyers but not airplanes. It is very common for me to walk folks through the decision process to buy a TBM... or a King Air... or a Mustang... in some cases they call us wanting to purchase a King Air 90 and we end up acquiring a CJ1 instead. It really doesn’t matter to me which aircraft we buy, what matters is giving our buyer as much accurate information as possible to make an informed decision.

I really enjoy not being biased towards a particular brand or model and being open to whatever works best for the client. It’s very different than selling airplanes and trying to sway someone into whatever you are selling.

I know I always end up sounding like a commercial for Jet Acquisitions and I’m sorry! I do love what I do and I say all of this just to explain that even though it’s unusual, I really do like the TBM... the Mustang... the King Air... the Meridian... and we don’t even do Meridian acquisitions!

I’m simply not biased, they all have their strengths, what matters is that the buyer acquires the airplane that is best for their mission and not what they were talked into by an enthusiastic sales person.
_________________
It’s a brave new world, one where most have forgotten the old ways.


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 11:01 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/16/10
Posts: 2031
Post Likes: +886
Location: Wisconsin
Aircraft: CJ4, AmphibBeaver
A CJ with G1000 does everything a mustang does. It does it a little faster with more room and with more flexibility. DOC’s are in the +- $1200/hr range. We flew from southern Wisconsin yesterday to Eleuthera Bahamas with a fuel stop in Fort Pierce. First leg 1006 miles 2.9 hrs, second leg 255 miles .8 hrs, for a total of 3.7 hrs. Total Fuel burn was #3250 lbs for an avarage burn of 878 lbs per hour.

At $4.00 gallon for fuel that’s $520. Williams get around $140 per hour for $280. If you’re on Proparts add in about $240 per hour. That’s $1040 an hour converted to exhaust. Throw in a $200 for labor and there you have it.

If you’re going to buy a type rating, the 525s is the one you want. You can fly legally every CJ in the 525 series. The 510 Mustang is it for the 510s type.

I considered the 510 before getting the CJ. The CJ represented a more compelling case for me with the space, along with a bit better performance and flexibility. I also liked the hot wing. The G1000 CJ is a bit of an oddity amongst CJ’s, but it’s an awesome system for the airplane.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 12:17 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 937
Post Likes: +620
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
What does the bottom end of the Mustang market look like these days? $1.5M?

_________________
----Still emotionally attached to my Baron----


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 12:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17512
Post Likes: +21030
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
When I looked at the Mustang compared to the King Air and Citation II, what was great and terrible was the Williams engines/program. The engines are very efficient compared to the legacy Citation, but one must over haul them at TBO. Also, their engine maintenance programs seems to be excellent for Williams. Of course, Part 91 need not over haul at TBO for P&W legacy engines. It can really make a difference in selling price for a run out Mustang. I see a run out Mustang on Controller now for a very low price.

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Last edited on 23 Nov 2018, 11:47, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 15:48 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 01/31/09
Posts: 5233
Post Likes: +3026
Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
Username Protected wrote:
What does the bottom end of the Mustang market look like these days? $1.5M?


With or without an engine program?

From https://www.jetaviva.com/market-reports ... 092018.php

Attachment:
2018-11-22_1447.png


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
Allen


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 18:05 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 2252
Post Likes: +2214
Location: Queretaro / Woodlands
Aircraft: C525 BE40 D1K Waco
Username Protected wrote:
A CJ with G1000 does everything a mustang does. It does it a little faster with more room and with more flexibility. DOC’s are in the +- $1200/hr range. We flew from southern Wisconsin yesterday to Eleuthera Bahamas with a fuel stop in Fort Pierce. First leg 1006 miles 2.9 hrs, second leg 255 miles .8 hrs, for a total of 3.7 hrs. Total Fuel burn was #3250 lbs for an avarage burn of 878 lbs per hour.

At $4.00 gallon for fuel that’s $520. Williams get around $140 per hour for $280. If you’re on Proparts add in about $240 per hour. That’s $1040 an hour converted to exhaust. Throw in a $200 for labor and there you have it.

If you’re going to buy a type rating, the 525s is the one you want. You can fly legally every CJ in the 525 series. The 510 Mustang is it for the 510s type.

I considered the 510 before getting the CJ. The CJ represented a more compelling case for me with the space, along with a bit better performance and flexibility. I also liked the hot wing. The G1000 CJ is a bit of an oddity amongst CJ’s, but it’s an awesome system for the airplane.

+1 Brent

Nice panel BTW...


Top

 Post subject: Re: MUSTANGS
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 20:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 937
Post Likes: +620
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
Question: Is it a mistake to buy a Mustang that is not on an engine program? Is it similar to buying an airplane with missing logs or major damage history?

_________________
----Still emotionally attached to my Baron----


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next




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

Jump to:  

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

.blackwell-85x50.png.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.Marsh.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.