Fixed Costs
- Insurance - $15k (1.8m hull, 5m liability)
- Hangar - $12k
- Mx labor - $15k
- Training - $10k
- Total - $52k / 150 hours = $346 / hour for fixed costs

Variable Costs
- Fuel - $400 / hour (based on block, but this will vary with mission of course)
- PowerAdvantage+ (Engine Programs) - $300 / hour
- Pro Parts (Airframe / Avionics Programs) - $170 / hour
- Total - $870 / hour

$346 fixed + $870 variable = $1,216 total hourly cost @ 150 hours / year = $182k. Add in reserves for upgrades, etc and a budget of $200k / year is pretty much spot on.

Oh, and you still have to buy the stupid thing. However, these figures take into no account the tax benefits. I use my airplane like a work truck, so between what I save on the airlines and the tax savings, the actual financial impact is WAAAAYY less than this, but these are the raw numbers.

I'm going to echo Bryan's post on the Mustang. I'm flying a 2+ right now, but I've been looking back at the mustang with fond memories. The support from CJP and Cessna is hands down the differentiator in my mind. The thing just flies great and is comfortable to sit in as well - especially for the pilot.

Interesting note about what Bryan said regarding the usage at 150 hours per year. These planes, and their maintenance intervals were built using 450 hours a year as the model. I'm toying around with the idea of trying to build a low utilization program for this plane that could extend out some of the inspections. Don't know if we could make it happen, but I've got the right people at SierraTrax that could work this. Bryan - would you like this?

The issue with the mustang - and it is probably with all aircraft, is you always want to go further, higher, and faster. The mustang is also probably one of the easiest Cessna aircraft to buy and sell - the market seems to be pretty liquid.

-Jason

Assuming that the program is half as great as SierraTrax (which I just switched to from Camp), then I would be very interested!

Hi Jason,

Would this be for the 525 series too, or just the 510?

Andrew

Andrew - they would be model specific, but we would try and do it for the 525 (and 525a/b) as well. The mustang fleet, in general, flies less than the 525 fleet, and we track a larger percentage of the Mustang fleet on SierraTrax (just because of the numbers).

Both fleets were designed to be flown a lot more per year than they are. Kind of skews the numbers on what we consider "high time" when looking at a plane. I have mixed feelings - I like having quite a bit of time on components versus the 5 year old airplane that has flown 100 hours a year.

-Jason

I’m flying 200+ hours per year. So a LOT for single pilot and owner operator. But these airplanes were built for so much more. Would be interesting.

On the other hand, I would love to see which docs would be deferred. Part of what I really love about the Mustang is the maintenance schedule is so easy. So who knows.

I’m down for a sounding board if you decide to try it out. HMU on CJP.

Does SierraTrax have anything to do with Sierra industries that used to convert citations in Texas?

Is the Mustang still in production? How many were made?

No, stopped in late 2016 or early 2017
479 units produced

Nope - Originally, we had some of the old SierraCom customers, but none of the personnel, or technology. Sierra Industries was sold to Innova Aerospace.

I'm just a guy that was ticked off at what CAMP was charging me for maintenance tracking and decided to do something about it. We've got a bunch of employees now (including the former lead for Team Mustang - Chris Webber) and happy customers. I try not to think how much it cost me to save $5k... Kind of like operating costs.

-Jason

No real arguments but i will correct one very minor point - G1000 NXI is available for the Phenom 100 now; $60K for three screens and the FMS panel. The Phenom 300 with G1000 will be able to upgrade shortly.

In my experience the P100 is consistently faster then the Mustang. I have been on quite a few trips and we always land 10-20 minutes earlier.

Last comment - I am the one who said FL410 isn't very useful. If you really add up the per minute variable cost of your jet including parts programs, engine time, etc. you will find that FL410 is not economical. By my 'fat finger math' I figure 20-30lb of fuel = 1 minute of flight time. If FL360 gets me there in 60 minutes and FL380 gets me there in 65 minutes I need to save at least 100-150lbs of fuel to cover the burn-rate of the 5 minutes of flight time. There are times then FL410 is the difference of a fuel stop but I find that to be very rare. The vast majority of my flights are between FL350-FL390 as that is the sweet spot.

Glad to hear that NXI is available for the 100! It's a great upgrade that I've really enjoyed. Agreed, the 100 is always faster. It's just not enough to make a difference in the grand scheme of things. But as I said, bragging rights go to the 100 on that...

I agree with your point about 410 for normal operations. But there are plenty of times where you really need to be at 410 in order to get max range on these jets.

Wow. A normal, on topic, well thought out thread with respectful discourse. What is happening to Beechtalk? We should go into an election year to stoke the fires of controversy

For some unknown reason the thread wasn’t highjacked by the armchair quarterbacks.

Hi Sam,

One of the things I did as I was shopping was to go get a type rating in both of the airplanes I was considering (legacy citations and CJs). This is an expensive way to make a decision but I got a lot out of it. Training is always good, I knew I'd likely need one of these type ratings and I didn't want to make a mistake with my purchase. You'll never really understand an airplane until you know you are going to get tested on it.

BTW - I have a number of extra CJ/CJ1 manuals from training and I'd be glad to give you one if you send me your address.

Bryan’s analysis is spot on. Very well put. Regarding FL410, I find two situations where it makes the most sense, and they involve flight time, atmospheric temperature and winds. If you’re trying to maximize range or minimize fuel for a flight beyond two hours, you look at FL410 first when planning. However, if temps get higher than ISA+2, you’re probably going to go no higher than FL390 instead. However, there are times even on shorter flights where temps are down into ISA- at FL410 and you can get close to maximizing TAS and use less fuel. In addition to temps, the change in winds can make a difference as well. So, while I agree that FL410 is mostly used for long range, sometimes it works well for other flights as well.