I'm at the NBAA looking at the Phenom 100. It's a certified personal jet. A lot of bang for the buck.

If you take "sex appeal" out of the equation, it's not even close to the "bang for the buck" of a TN Bonanza.
I posted this in another thread and then thought I'd start a new one with this information so we can all feel better about ourselves.

Of all the VLJ's, the Phenom 100 gives the most bang for the buck.

These mini jets gotta get high to work. The Phenom 100 must climb DIRECTLY to 41,000 feet and stay there to get the quoted range out of them.

1200-1300 fpm climb AT 200IAS. 104 gallons to climb to 35000'. 117 GPH in cruise gives you 330TAS. 40 minutes to climb to 41,000'. That's slow.

So, I swear to god, people buy these things because they look kick ass. It's all about "looks". I get that. Putting all my friends on a Phenom 100 looks waaaaay cooler than putting them on a Bonanza. I'm just either too "poor" or too "analytical" to justify it. Still trying to come to terms with that concept.

The PC12 costs double to acquire and less than half to operate but gives you stellar performance in terms of range and useful load over the mini jets. I guess that's why the PC12 seems to hold it's value and the reason you can buy a 2008 Phenom for $1 million less than a 2009.

I NEED TO STOP THINKING SO MUCH!!

Jason, to your point about comparing VLJs to our airplanes I was talking with an Eclipse owner last week and he mentioned that he can make it from Tucson to Omaha with a good tailwind. I didn't have the heart to tell him that my "little" airplane can make the same trip non-stop and then another 300 NM.

But will it run LOP?

Dude: 2 words - PC-12 - period.

Yeah,

I ruled that Eclipse out a long time ago.

I suppose I'm saying that if you're going to go the VLJ route, the Embraer seem to be the best product. I've been looking at all of them out here.

Second best would be a used CJ1. Which, is a VLJ at all but can be had a VLJ prices and single pilot certified.

Why do "pretty airplanes" not perform?

I wonder whether the folks who buy the Embraer now will be happy after the plane evolves. Odds are, they are going to up the engine thrust and fuel capacity 2-3 years into the model run to make it a more balanced package, the first generation owners will see the value of their birds drop.



A local owner of a Citation 500 SP longwing said 2 years ago that the Mustang doesn't do anything that his bird won't do (at 1/3 of the capital investment, roughly similar rotable cost and a bit higher fuel expense).

AS a former Malibu driver, what do you think about the jet props and/or meridians. Normally, I am not a fan of a converted airplane like the jetprop, but there are close to 250 out there now, which is more than some certificated airplanes. Both the meridian and jetprop can do 260+ knots at the mid-thirties fuel burn. Granted you don't want to, but you can also fly them lower if the winds make sense, which is something you cannot do in a twin turboprop (cheaply) or in a jet.

The PC-12 is a beast, but if you are looking for similar capacities as a 58 or 36, the meridian/jetprop seems to make sense.

Plus, you can get the jetprops now in the 600s used.

I know, I know we all hate piper around here, and aside from the malibu I agree...

Don't kill me...

:-)

-jason

No experience, but an interest in those birds.

The criticisms of the jetprop revolve around the fact that you basically cruise in the yellow arc and that unless you know that there is no 50fpm turbulence ahead, you are pretty close to the margin. The Meridian has different (stronger) tailfeathers than the Malibu, assuming that the people at Piper are not complete idiots, there may be a reason for that.

The Meridian otoh is quite payload limited and people report recurring problems with the engine installation such as oil-pump malfunctions and exhaust corrosion. Don't know how much that is simply former piston drivers not being used to spending 'turbine money' and how much of it is truly a problem with the aircraft itself. Also, there have been recurring issues with the engine mounts and instability of the forward landing gear (related to some of the runway excursions).

So, while the Meridians and Jetprops are 1 mil less than the TBMs and 1.5mil less than a PC12, there is some reason to believe that this is reflective of the value you are getting.

If you are interested in the Jet prop/Meridian, I would join the MMOPA. Good folks over there and there is a lively debate on which is better. From memory only, the Meridian has more uncommanded exits off the runway due to the nose gear not being maintained to specs and the magnesium inlets (or something on the engine) on the turbine corrode and cost a lot to fix. The Jetprop inlet is aluminum. There are strong supporters of the Jetprop and strong supporters of the Meridian but I don't think anyone can deny that the Meridian has had some teething issues.

Try http://www.mmopa.org/ if you are serious about these planes.

I went to the static display this afternoon.

I studied the Meridien, TBM850 and the Pilatus to the point I couldn't stand it anymore.

The Meridien is a nice little package. 260TAS Cruise is really nice. Honestly, it's negligibly smaller than the TBM. The TBM 850 is NOT a large airplane. The sales guys for the Meridien really downplayed the useful load problems. So, I don't know what to think. The fit and finish were not where I want them to be for a $2 million airplane. I'd rock one though. I like the speed.

The TBM 850 was nice. Fast as hell and pretty much the same fuel burn as the Pilatus. They're a squeeze to get in and out of though. Of course, no worse than getting in and out of a Bonanza.

The Pilatus, if you are going to buy for the long term is the most bang for the buck. They're slower but they're huge. Tons of room. Comfortable. I don't mind going a little slower to have all that capability. They're expensive but they seem to hold they're value very well. The Pilatus is a hard machine to beat unless you are retired and just you and the wife all the time.

I just don't think it will cost much more to operate a Pilatus compared to a TBM.

Fun thread, Thanks J. In my opinion the Pilatus has really done damage to King Air market share, I wish Beech would pull their head out of the sand and just a hang a big turbine on a 200 and get back in the fight.

What is the status on the HondaJet? Did they have a booth?

-MO

No, Hondjet didn't have a booth, they had about an acre of floor space! In the center was THE HondaJet. Way cool.

I spent about 30 minutes working the G3000 cockpit that was at the HondaJet display. Way cool also.

Jason, why no mention of the Mustang? Seems like a worthy competitor to the 100. Did I see you sitting in the TBM850 today about 3:30?

I saw this and expected to hear that Jason had slapped down the Platinum Visa...

My take on the Meridian is that it has a very limited mission, although that works for some buyers. You need to commonly fly 350-900 NM trips (with very light loads on the longer range) and pressurization has to be worth a real premium to you....or it's going to be a bad fit.

If many of your trips are shorter than 350NM, the Meridian doesn't provide enough gain. If the trips are longer that 900NM, the Meridian doesn't have enough range.

Operation costs should fall in the area of $100,000.00-$125,000.00/yr plus the aquisition costs.

Lol,

How does the Honda Jet fit in performance wise? Looks pretty funny with the engines on those stanchions but I guess there are good reasons to do it that way.

Are they producing their own engines or is this standard PW or Williams hardware .

I like my Accord, I wonder whether they would take a trade