NetJets is being selective about who can get the card. There are, limited to no, leases or fractional shares right now. They don't have enough planes. They really want you to buy on lease or fractional to guarantee future cash flow on a very expensive asset they have to buy and manage. But again, no planes to sell. From what I heard from a fellow pilot in the industry, NetJets is picking up every 3rd-4th Phenom Embraer is making (Don't know how true, but could believe it).

Cards from NetJets isn't a bad value if that's all you can get. For many, consistency of service and availability is important when you are dropping $10k+ an hour.

Go look at the reviews and financials of Wheels Up. The more customers they bring on, the faster their burn rate - check their financials, you'll see. My speculation is Wheels Up is out of cash and reorganizing -maybe out of business (hope not), within a year.

The only reason why the bullet train in California was brought up for votes was for the "Government" in power at the time to make huge profits... All those people made a killing with real-estate and eminent domain. The voted budget was blown over and over, and those thieves got richer and richer. With no possibility of this train ever be built.
All the companies that are designing this are all on the take. It is insane...
And the funny thing is that we mock the rest of the world for their tradition of political bribes.... When we made an art here in the US...

Hopefully that means one of their fleet of CitX will be available to buy...

Trains are even more political than airports.

If it cost $1B to lay a track for a high-speed rail, it would cost another $19B to pay everyone off with their hand out.

The reason rail is not pursued in the USA so much is buying all the right-of-ways, even through governmental methods, would be difficult, expensive and take many, many years to accomplish.

That and the nation is so large, geographically, that aviation makes more sense. A couple of miles of runway will take you anywhere on the planet. A couple of miles of railway or highway, only takes you to the next neighborhood.

this is a great concept and makes perfect sense however the project has one fatal flaw in the US

NIMBY

not in my back yard. the US public does not want it bad enough to force owners to give up their land or accept the necessary disturbance next to their land. .

the US freeway system could not be built now. . Europe with its tradition of Rail and China where the government does what it wants and people cannot object are able to do these highspeed rail projects and put them in without having public objection.

NIMBY is going to seriously hamper the necessary infrastructure build out to go renewable in the US also.



I'm actually in the TGV as I write this and the average speed is 310KPH .

Compared to Airline travel, when you factor in 90 minutes to board and 30 minutes to de-plane & collect baggage, average is 2 Hours for the 1st Mile . Thus a short run of say 500km is at least 1 hour, block. Airlines are only faster than bullet trains for runs of over 1,000km ( 620 statute miles) and that's in a perfect world. (BTW, the french TGV IS capable of speeds of over 570 kph !)

In practice, the trains are far more punctual than airlines could ever dream of, so that needs to be factored in as well.

As to the "enormous capital investment" : The World's Richest Country can't afford it ? You can't be serious ! For reference, the State of California has a GPD that is just about equal to France, yet zero high speed trains in service ! (BTW: San Diego - LA - San Jose - San Francisco is the perfect match for a bullet train service)

Did you know that the Chinese have already implemented over 5,800 miles !
From Wiki: "China has the world's largest network with 9,356 km (5,813 mi) of High-Speed Rail track. It also includes the world's longest line from Beijing to Guangzhou of 2,298 km (1,428 mi)."

The problem in the US is SYSTEMIC : Nobody wants to pool their money (pay taxes) to fund it so you're stuck with a fragmented & archaic infrastructure, much the same as Public Health in the US, but I digress.

PS: Full disclosure - I'm was born & raised in SoCal

It would be interesting to see how many people make this trip often enough to benefit from it. As with all things, there is an opportunity cost. As much as we would like to have all the cool things like bullet trains, free health care, free college, and ultra clean power somebody has to pay for it. People don’t work for free. Doctors, nurses, engineers, truck drivers….everybody needs to be able to get food and other things they need. They can’t work for free. Maybe there is some other way to design our economic system, but I don’t see it.

Everyone wants to talk about the benefits enjoyed by other countries, but no one wants to talk about the cost or trade-offs.

As one poster pointed out, bullet trains are nice, but even California has a bigger economy than most European countries.

If we don’t start addressing the China problem, we’ll have more to concern ourselves with than competing with them on bullet train building.

I read those as separate and free-standing statements. Deregulation = lower prices = an improvement. Unstated cause = Less crashes = improvement

Net Jets and the like don’t have cards, leases, or shares available in the light jet spectrum right now. The renewal prices on those that are being given the option to renew, I have heard, are upwards of 50% higher than pre pandemic.

Lots of people that started flying private, don’t want to go back to carriers. Their options are: 1. Pay more for card (if even available) 2. Go into a lease or fractional (again limited availability) 3. Buy their own plane, hire a management company and hope depreciation and maintenance is less than a fractional.

The memo is: Not enough availability with the fractionals, lets go see if we can get our own jet and realize some economies of ownership.

I had no idea Wheels Up flies Citations too. In my area, all I’ve ever seen were KA350s. Do they do like a leaseback with others as owners or something for their fleet? It looks awfully diverse for an operation to compete with Netjets.

Tim, your response about older jets, they do make sense to some people and only to a certain extent. The fuel burn on some older planes would make a newer plane more financially feasible. Sometimes parts availability is the issue. You can bet that a well cared for Citation 501 (Tarver Special) will be far more manageable than a Lear from the same era, and burn far less fuel making it more appealing than something else.

What are the advantages of high speed rail over air travel? We already have a great, albeit dwindling aviation infrastructure. Air travel provides flexibility in many ways: equipment, destination, etc, and therefore is robust. High speed rail is the antithesis of flexibility and therefore fragile. High speed rail is for nations without adequate airports. We've already crossed that Rubicon. California's attempt at high speed rail has been a textbook example of political class grift. To my fellow voters, no more please.

no doubt more to run per hour but factoring I the capital not spend, lot less hours per year flown and except for when it is down for maintenance it is always available to you.

maybe not a fair comparison but people buy old barons and 310s rather than a new DA62 that burns a lot less fuel and likely less maintenance cost especially while under warranty. But at the end of the day that old Baron/310 gets the job done with less money tied up.

According to Wikipedia the IAI Westwind is no slouch cruising at 436 Knots. it does say to do that it takes 1600 pounds an hour to do that. How much fuel does a brand new jet burn at the same speed same cabin size?

What is a Tarver Special?

see my comments in caps

The only reason why the bullet train in California was brought up for votes was for the "Government" in power at the time to make huge profits... ACTUALLY, IT WAS BROUGHT UP FOR VOTE BASED ON INACCURATE ASSUMPTIONS FOR SCOPE, COST, SCHEDULE, AND COST TO RIDE. IF THOSE ASSUMPTIONS HAD BEEN ACCURATE, IT WOULD HAVE MADE SENSE BUT THEY WERE BOGUS. All those people made a killing with real-estate and eminent domain. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN TWO VERY LONG HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINES (ABOUT 150 MILES EACH) AND EMINENT DOMAIN CAN BE USED CORRECTLY BUT SOMEONE WILL ALWAYS BE UPSET. The voted budget was blown over and over THE BUDGET WAS BOGUS, NOT SURE WHY THE ESTIMATORS, PROJECT MANAGERS, CONSULTANTS, AND ENGINEERS DON'T COME CLEAN ON THIS and those thieves got richer and richer. AS IN ALL EXPENSIVE ENDEAVORS, SOMEONE NEEDS TO CONDUCT OVERSIGHT, WE SHOULD ASK THEM. With no possibility of this train ever be built. IT COULD BE BUILT BUT PROBABLY NEED TO SCRAP THE EXISTING PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM AND BRING IN SOME PROVEN PROFESSIONALS.
All the companies that are designing this are all on the take. AGAIN, WHERE IS THE OVERSIGHT, VOTERS SHOULD BE DEMANDING TO TALK TO THEM It is insane...
And the funny thing is that we mock the rest of the world for their tradition of political bribes.... When we made an art here in the US...

Yes! Part 135 (Charter) vs Part 91 is definitely different. One of the biggest ones is that overhauls are required for 135 but not 91. On an older Citation for example, the engines require a hot section inspection every 1,750 hours and overhaul at 3,500. Overhauls are very expensive. As a Part 91 operator, I do not have to do overhauls. I can just do an HSI every 1,750 hours and fly. Also, Textron offers Low Utilization Maintenance Programs for <150 hours/year. This greatly lengthens the major inspection intervals.

There is definitely a sweet spot wrt to age as aircraft become uneconomical for 135 operators but 91 operators can keep flying them.

For your Westwind comparison, a CJ4 cruises at 425 on 1,040 lbs/hr. So the Westwind burns an extra 100 gals/hr over the CJ4.

As for "Tarver Special" see this thread: viewtopic.php?f=49&t=146315

Yes! Part 135 (Charter) vs Part 91 is definitely different. One of the biggest ones is that overhauls are required for 135 but not 91.