I have always liked the CJ. I think a lot of my bias is because it's the first jet I ever flew in, and I have an emotional attachment to that moment over 20 years ago.

That being said, I also know that emotions should not rule decisions, facts/stats/numbers should.

If you had the money to afford either a single engine CJ or an Embraer Phenom, or any other single pilot jet, which would you choose?

I'd pick the Phenom because it has two engines.

Mike C.

I can't say I have ever seen a single engine Citation Jet.

The Phenom has a bigger cabin, an air stir door, is faster, better avionics, more baggage room, good range, and a better CG loading envelope. They are harder to come by and are more expensive than the CJ, generally.

The CJ is more fuel efficient and will climb better (and the Phenom is a climber).

They both both have great t/o and landing numbers.

Brad

The Phenom training costs, both initial and recurrent are about 3x the CJ.

Phenom has expensive landing gear overhaul requirements, CJ's are on condition.

I have 200 hours in the Phenom 100, it's a tight cockpit at 6'2, my knees rested on the dash. The CJ isn't much better, but I don't have to deal with that.

100s made of the CJ's, 1000s when you factor in all the 525s. Parts, maintenance, pilots etc much more abundant than the Phenom.

-Citation Jet Exchange / Gateway Jets

The CJ ecosystem is larger with more selection. This is true for training (as indicated above), but also for parts, service, mods, STCs, etc.

The main weakness with the Phenom seems to be brakes. They have been problematic. Perhaps this has been corrected with SBs and fixes, but something to check into.

The PW617F engine is part of the PW600 series (PW610F on Eclipse, PW615F on Mustang). They have had some issues with burner cans and much higher than promised hot section costs. The CJ is the FJ44 which has been reliable. I think both engines suffer fairly expensive engine programs, Williams TAP running about $400/hour for a pair, and PW617F might be less, but not a lot less. Engine programs might be as expensive as fuel per hour, or close to it now, which is significant.

My particular decision process led me to the Citation V and me having an SPE. The V is faster, higher, longer range, and carries more than any of the above choices. It is cheaper to get, too. It does burn more fuel, but not as much more on a trip basis as I had originally expected due to higher speeds and altitudes. This is particularly true if you ask it to do the mission profile of a CJ (lower cabin load, shorter range) which means it is light and climbs to high altitude very fast.

Mike C.

Williams tap blue for a CJ is $316/hr combined. $350/hr for CJ2 and CJ3.

Our mustang is $320/hr

-Citation Jet Exchange

Before anyone relies on those prices, get a quote from Williams for the specific engine serial numbers under consideration. Those numbers are better than I see reported on CJP, and new owner contracts don't necessarily get what the old owner was paying.

There are various gotchas that can hide in these deals, one of which are plans that reduces payments early in the engine life for larger payments later. Getting a precise quote will tell you the exact terms you will get, will check engine status (fully paid up or not), and any amendments or adjustments that may affect your payments.

Also, note that if an engine EVER goes off program, the value of all prior payments is lost. To put it back on program requires paying for all engine hours from zero to present day.

For older CJs, the total sum of payments on the engine program could exceed the value of the entire airplane. For example, 150 hour minimum, $400/hour in today's dollars, is $1.86M for a 1991 CJ. That's assuming you flew only the minimum every year.

Basically, you are renting your plane from Williams, and if you don't pay, your plane is worth basically zero.

Mike C.

My friend who manages a phenom 100 Said his 10 year inspection bill is going to be around $500,000. There’s nothing like this that exists on any Citation.

The CJ ecosystem is larger with more selection. This is true for training (as indicated above), but also for parts, service, mods, STCs, etc.

The main weakness with the Phenom seems to be brakes. They have been problematic. Perhaps this has been corrected with SBs and fixes, but something to check into.

The PW617F engine is part of the PW600 series (PW610F on Eclipse, PW615F on Mustang). They have had some issues with burner cans and much higher than promised hot section costs. The CJ is the FJ44 which has been reliable. I think both engines suffer fairly expensive engine programs, Williams TAP running about $400/hour for a pair, and PW617F might be less, but not a lot less. Engine programs might be as expensive as fuel per hour, or close to it now, which is significant.

My particular decision process led me to the Citation V and me having an SPE. The V is faster, higher, longer range, and carries more than any of the above choices. It is cheaper to get, too. It does burn more fuel, but not as much more on a trip basis as I had originally expected due to higher speeds and altitudes. This is particularly true if you ask it to do the mission profile of a CJ (lower cabin load, shorter range) which means it is light and climbs to high altitude very fast.

Mike C.

I have not heard of or seen any variation with Williams prices. There are different levels of tap coverage of course. All of ours are on the highest level, and same prices across the board. The 2+ and 3+ program prices are identical, as are both CJs.

1995 CJ
1997 CJ
2005 CJ2
2006 CJ2+
2016 m2
2019 CJ3+

Then for pw:
2014 mustang
2000 Excel

-Citation Jet Exchange

As far as the brakes on the 300, they are they best I’ve ever used (4 type ratings, several jets flown) - once you get to BCU 10, which has been out for several years.

In buying a 300, brakes would not be a concern at all.

Brad

There is something more in play here, the last I saw the gear inspection/overhaul on a 100 and 300 is estimated at $80-$100k. 500k has a lot of other items included.

Brad

That’s not an accurate representation Mike. Additionally, I’ve only seen $400k bills on CJ landing gear, never EMB. The Phenom, in general, is extremely robust as you’d expect from a clean sheet design from an airline engineering company. 800 hour inspection intervals, unprecedented.

I have the 525S, EMB500 and 505 types. We fly, maintain, and manage all of them. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.