Oh please don't turn this into another cost of capital thread...

Chip-

Yeah, let's keep the thread on its intended purpose, creating a random topic for Chip McClure to espouse expert sounding opinions to drum up clients for his business.

Mike C.

As a Textron shareholder, I'm glad you're not in charge of running their business. Development cost is a real cost, and it has to be overcome...

Neither. Fractionals would be better. That's less than 100 hours a year. For the cost of capital/opportunity cost, time spent to be a competent and current pilot, potential AOG events, etc. it's not worth the effort, unless you enjoy the effort.

Mike C has laid out the case for how great and cheap it is to run legacy model jets. My opinion and I will let Mike opine for himself; he enjoys the job (even if it's frustrating at times) of managing a legacy aircraft.

All of Mike's arguments are pandering to a crowd of passionate pilots, who are willing to trade what is really valuable time, for the enjoyment of having 2nd job maintaining their aircraft.

Forgive me if I take your proclamations of what things cost with skepticism given recent statements refuted with actual evidence.
Mike C.

Yeah, let's keep the thread on its intended purpose, creating a random topic for Chip McClure to espouse expert sounding opinions to drum up clients for his business.

Mike C.

Have you priced that out? Including the dead head costs, and the scheduling problems?

A 25 hour NetJets lease is $10,000 per hour, 3 year contract, $250K for 25 hours, their smallest plane, Phenom 300.

I would take me at least 100 hours per year to duplicate my airplane usage, and that assumes no dead head hours.

So that's $1M/year.

I am WAY winning on flying my own Citation V over that! Not even close!

They also have blackout dates.

If you want to frax/charter, go ahead, but it isn't the same experience as having your own.

Mike C.

Piaggio will eventually be bought, support will improve and they will put a garmin panel in it with autoland. It will fill the cj2 void

Flame away.

Half fuel burn, bigger cabin and better handling.
Support is fixable. New owner will do that to sell more planes. Cost fits nicely between m2 and cj3 etc.

Have you priced that out? Including the dead head costs, and the scheduling problems?

A 25 hour NetJets lease is $10,000 per hour, 3 year contract, $250K for 25 hours, their smallest plane, Phenom 300.

I would take me at least 100 hours per year to duplicate my airplane usage, and that assumes no dead head hours.

So that's $1M/year.

I am WAY winning on flying my own Citation V over that! Not even close!

They also have blackout dates.

If you want to frax/charter, go ahead, but it isn't the same experience as having your own.

Mike C.

+1

I am confused, is the SF 50 not a jet? You say it's not a VLJ, what is it then? According to NBAA a VLJ is any jet with a gross weight under 10,000 lbs.

Yeah, it can't fly in the high FL's and has to slog it's way through the weather, but sure sounds like a jet when I hear take off. It's what, 10-20 knots slower than a Mustang?

SF 50 not a sustainable design? All I know is that Cirrus sold 90 of their non jets last year. More than any other VLJ or turboprop. From what I see they have over 400 jets on US registry alone. Whether you like them or not, they have a market of buyers that values it's capabilities.

And Cessna should be happy they have them. They are opening jet travel to a set of user who can then be sold on moving up into the Citation line. Citation Max is a classic example.

https://privatejetcardcomparisons.com/n ... rquis-jet/

"Jet cards start at 25 hours with the entry-level Embraer Phenom 300. 25-hour leases start at $10,205 per hour based on a 3-year contract. "


Still not going to be cheaper.


Still not going to be cheaper.


I was leaving KMCO Signature and there was a family of 6 who had to wait 3 days for a replacement plane from their frax service. It isn't as immediate as they claim it will be, especially in these times of higher demand.


More money to have priority.


None of them have a better safety record than I do.


Show us the math, then.

Mike C.

It is a turboprop in capability and performance.

I believe the FAA even treats it as such in the ATC system as far as not putting it on turbojet only arrivals.


Yes, they are, I am sure, since the SF 50 doesn't actually deliver the true personal jet experience. A few 100 knot headwind days in weather will make that clear.

Mike C.

I manage and fly 10 aircraft, 8 of which are Citations. I just bid for a contract and compared it to their current (March 2023) 1/8th share fractional proposal. 100 hours in a P300 amounted to $640,000, or $6,400/hr. For the CJ2+, full ownership, 100 hours of flight time, fixed costs, management fees, maintenance and part time pilots (EVERYTHING) come in approx. 50% of their number. It's a no brainer.

-Citation Jet Exchange

M2 has it all over the Phenom 100 in all but two areas; 1) Cabin space, 2) Avionics/Systems integration.

Phenom 100 cabin in great in its class.
Phenom 100, like the Mustang a clean-sheet design systems well integrated.
Those are the only two advantages that it has over the M2.

From a performance perspective, the M2 has it all over the Phenom.
I wanted badly to like & buy a Phenom 100, but could not get beyond the issues.


The Phenom 100 is under-powered.
The Phenom 100 has boots instead of a hot wing for de-ice.
The Phenom 100 has far worse runway performance than the M2. I go in and out of 5,000' runways in my most common city pairs. On a hot day, Phenom 100 cannot do it. With snow on the runway, forget about it.
The Phenom 100 has the funky brake by wire system, but old-fashioned steel brakes vs ceramic. I could go on.

The M2 has bettter performance
Runway, Hot & high runway, contaminated runway, one engine inop, etc.

The Phenom 300 however, has excellent performance numbers. It has a great cabin. Systems well integrated. Yes, it has the funky brake by wire system, but with the brakes it has, (not sure if ceramic or carbon fiber) stops very well even on wet & contaminated. Phenom 300 can hold its own performance wise with the Citation line and it has a better cabin.

Look at the numbers. In 2022, Textron 33 Citatoin M2s, Embraer sold 7 Phenom 100EVs. But then go up the ladder, in 2022 Embraer sold 59 Phenom 300/300Es. Textron sold 58 CJ3+ and CJ4s. At the bottom of the Citation line, Textron outsells Embraer almost 5:1. At the top of the Citation line Textron & Embraer are at parity. The 300 is a good airplane, great performance, great cabin, brakes a bit funky but they will work as advertised.