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

Agree with Bill on some points(disagree about the brakes, they are wonderful) - Cabin size, cockpit room, panel mounted yoke and air stair are what sold me on the Phenom over the M2. And that was even before I had ventured up off the runway in the M2. That cockpit and seating was not going to work for me in any seating position, unfortunately, as it's a sweet plane on paper otherwise.

The M2 door and stairs also just felt too much like getting into my Meridian and I was looking for an upgrade from that. I think passengers feel like they are getting on a much bigger jet when entering the Phenom because of the stairs and bigger door (and having 9' tall landing gear). And sometimes passenger perception becomes our reality especially when easing their flight concerns flying on a small(smaller than a 737) plane.

The speed and range of the M2 was nice, but for my 640 mile trip it equated to about 10 minutes in flight difference. Who wouldn't like more range like the M2 has for those longer than usual trips, but I'd rather stop than be that uncomfortable. Also the price delta made it an easy decision as the Phenom was (then) $2,000,000 less.

They got the cockpit right in the Mustang, would have been nice if they kept growing that platform instead of building on the 525 framework.

Chip-

Also see some twin jet pilots moving into the SF50. Has a nice safety and social culture, easy to fly and comfy. Within its range payload limitations, it does its job quite well. Cirrus has the formula down for converting hearts and minds. I probably lean more toward the utility side of an airplane, and the SF50 just doesn’t fit some of my critical and some of my bucket list missions, so not right for me. I would guess it should classify as a VLJ. Where else would you classify it? Can’t argue with the fact they are outselling everything.

All the top manufacturers are maxed out in production. Total numbers and who is number one is a bit of red herring. Cessna and Embraer would love to be able to magically deliver more, but production lines don't work that way.

No need to bring back the CJ2+, if your maxed out in production capacity. There is also no need to fill a gap that no one else is competing for.

All the top manufacturers are maxed out in production. Total numbers and who is number one is a bit of red herring. Cessna and Embraer would love to be able to magically deliver more, but production lines don't work that way.

No need to bring back the CJ2+, if your maxed out in production capacity. There is also no need to fill a gap that no one else is competing for.

Chip,
Agree on the ramp presence, door, stairs on the Phenom 100s. Rock solid.
Cabin also a big plus over the Citations.

The big issue for me was runway performance. My last four landings at home base, were at night in the snow. For a Phenom 100, the answer would have been No Go. Similar limitations when hot & wet.

For the life of me I don't know why Embraer does not retrofit the 100 with the same brake material that they use on the 300s. Also, why they don't provide a landing flaps position, not approach, but landing, on the ground, like the M2 has. Those two items should go a long way in improving runway performance on landing.

Demoed the 100 twice, so much wanted to have that plane.
When your home base is KLEB, 5,000' and winter weather... well...

I haven't had those problems. When assigned a STAR that has crossing speeds above my max, I advise ATC of my max transition speed. 90% of the time they'll either tell me to fly normal speed or maintain max forward speed. Not a big deal.

Also, I've never been pinned down other than for normal level offs due to conflicting traffic, and it's usually brief. I fly at FL400 or FL410 often, and it's comfortably above the airline traffic. One key to flying a slower jet is to stay off the jet routes. Using more direct routes eliminates a bunch of traffic.

Bill reminded me also of another plus with the Citations and that is Cessna support which often gets put aside, but they really have it dialed in from everything I gather on forums and talking with owners.

As for the Phenom 100 vs 300 brakes, I wish it was as easy as a compound upgrade, but the P100 brakes are great and more stopping power won't help, it's their ABS logic that is the downfall. It calculates the amount of force allowed based on speed and grip and there's a few beats of a delay when you touch the brakes to when they engage. If you take your feet off the brakes because you don't feel them engaging and then re-engage the timer resets and it takes a few beats for them to engage again. Pilots took this to mean their brakes weren't working and pulled the parking brake lever. In reality they are just on "low" when friction is less than dry pavement, until you get below about 60 and then they seem to really engage.

If it had a lift dump that would probably help. I think the newer 100s have speedbrakes that can deploy on landing but I've heard the help is minimal.

Chip-

I'll second that - I can think of one occasion in 5 years, on a STAR into KAUS, that I was vectored off the arrival for about 3 minutes to let traffic pass, then rejoined. Otherwise no issues whatsoever in the Mustang.

We run 10 airplanes also, and I would agree, especially prior to the run up in purchase prices. However with the insane run up…different story today when you factor in cost of capital for purchase.

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.

Mike C.

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

It would not surprise me at all if a pair of PW615F costs more to the OEM than FJ44-1. All the initial promises about how low cost the PW600 series was going to be to operate have not come true and they turn out to be pretty expensive to maintain due to lack of robustness. PWC has had some warranty expenses that I am sure exceeded their budgets, like burner cans not lasting even one HSI interval. The overhead for a small fleet like the Mustang is also higher.

Meanwhile, Williams has the FJ44 dialed in and gets substantial revenue from their engine programs which can offset some of the OEM cost. Williams could just give the engines away to OEMs just to get the hourly payments.

There is no VLJ market right now. The SF 50 doesn't cut it, Mustang isn't being sold, Eclipse failed, all the other entrants failed (Diamond Jet, Piper Jet, etc). The dream of a small economical personal jet remains unfulfilled. The best you can do it buy a used Mustang right now. Controller has 20 of them, pricing in the $2.0 to $2.8 M range, not exactly cheap and makes it compete with other alternatives like CJs.

Mike C.

1/8th ownership is easily $1M capital outlay, or about $1.2M. That's $80K per year cost of money, plus $640K/year to fly, or $720K.

Clearly I can fly my own Citation V for way less than that.

Mike C.

Can you show a recent example? Give tail number and ate and we can see the flight?

Mike C.

1/8th ownership is easily $1M capital outlay, or about $1.2M. That's $80K per year cost of money, plus $640K/year to fly, or $720K.

Clearly I can fly my own Citation V for way less than that.

Mike C.