The biggest "deal" now in Citations is the SII, the S550.

Compared to the 501SP, it flies a lot faster and goes a lot further in range, but doesn't cost that much more. It has the superior wing that both flies slower (shorter runway usage) and faster (higher cruise speeds) than the 501SP, that wing is what is on the V.

There are two downsides. One, it requires the SPE for single pilot operations which takes 500 hours turbine time to get into, turboprop time counts. Two, it has the TKS wing anti icing system which is a bit odd and byzantine.

The SPE is really not terribly much more work to maintain than the standard crew training. I just did my SPE recurrent in 2 days, one day ground school, one day flying, two flights. There really wasn't any extra effort to keep the SPE over a standard 61.58 recurrent. The sim folks add a day to their recurrent programs for the SPE generally.

The TKS wing system has some advantages. There are no boots to take care of, or have linemen damage with fuel hoses, and it doesn't rob engine power when in icing conditions.

You get the Citation II size cabin, FL430, 400 knot cruise speeds, and a huge fuel tank (5800 lbs). You also get TRs with short landing distances.

The SII is a bit under powered, so takeoff distances are not super short. Max weight, 0 MSL, ISA, no wind is 3240 ft, 300 ft longer than the 501SP. But that's not fair since the SII can go so much further, you can reduce the fuel load to do the same mission and the takeoff distances improve quite a bit. At 14,000 lbs, only 1100 lbs less fuel, the SII is 2800 ft, now beating the 501SP at max. You can go further in the SII down 1100 lbs in fuel than the 501SP at full tanks.

Due to the more efficient wing, the SII can fly higher and faster and will burn no more fuel than the 501SP on the same mission. Headwinds don't have as much impact on the SII as they do on the 501SP.

There are Williams converted versions of both the 501SP and SII. You lose the LUMP option (Textron won't do it for these airplanes), you have to pay the ever increasing Williams engine tax, and you lose the TRs. That's a lot of negatives in my book.

Mike C.

Do you have the performance chart for the sii vs the 501?

Takeoff and landing data, 0 MSL:

501SP:

S550:

Click on them to get higher resolution results.

Mike C.

Cruise numbers. it is fair to give the S550 more altitude since it can get there. Essentially, the S550 is as efficient as the 501SP but going faster, higher, farther, and can carry more.

Click on images for higher res versions.

501SP at FL370:

S550 at FL390:

Mike C.

BTW, the higher speed of the S550 is more significant than it appears once you consider the effect of headwinds. With a 100 knot headwind, which WILL happen with some regularity. Now the S550 is actually more efficient than the 501SP.

For example, in a 100 knot headwind, and flying both planes at the same ground speed:

501SP: 10,500 lbs, 244 knots GS, 29.3 nm/100 lbs fuel.

S550: 13,000 lbs, 244 knots GS, 31.3 nm/100 lbs fuel.

501SP was at max thrust, S550 pulled back to match (~99% N1). Weights adjusted to be about the same net result, 1350 lbs under max for 501SP, 2100 lbs under max for S550.

If you push S550 to max thrust, then 385 KTAS (285 knots GS), 29.1 nm/100 lbs.

You buy a fast airplane for the headwind days, not the tailwind days. You spend most of your time in headwinds.

Mike C.

Interesting planes for sure. I believe that there were only 7 Williams powered S550's made.

I had someone tell me 18 conversions were made of the S550 with FJ44. Most are Sierra, a few are Clifford conversions.

Here is my list I have compiled over the years which is short of 18, it may be inaccurate or wrong in places and I have not kept it up the last 5 years.

N371CD (appears in Clifford promo with winglets, now an SR22, don't know SN)

S550-0005, N123FF JT15 with no TRs? FA tracks suggest FJ44 equipped.

S550-0011, T7-IGO, N25GZ (Israel? Parted out?)

S550-0018, N614JK (San Antonio, TX)

S550-0027, N740JM, N112BR (Sedona, AZ), N4HK, C-GSSK

S550-0029, C-FBDS, C-GMMT, N257JC (Clifford)

S550-0041, N767G, exported to South Africa, N74LM (West Columbia, SC) N311G, crashed May 22, 2019 near Indianapolis.

S550-0046, N63RS (Jackson, WY), N198ST

S550-0056, N52FT (Concord, MA)

S550-0104, N224KC (Hazelhurst, GA)

S550-0115, N724JK N92JC N92JT C-GWBF N520RP (San Angelo, TX)

S550-0144, N840JH, C-FSRX, N543SC (Waterloo, NE), VQ-BFT (exported to Canada) (super heavy!!!!)(Clifford?)

S550-0148 N550WE, M-BULL (Stockholm, Sweden?) (Clifford)

S550-0155, N550DL (Wilmington, DE), N155GB (Clifford)

I test flew S550-0027 in 2019 and made an offer on it, but it got turned down. It had an annoying engine whine that my test passengers complained about, and that may be typical of the FJ44 conversions based on my conversation with Sierra at the time. In retrospect, I'm glad I ended up in a V and not an FJ44 SII, but Vs are expensive right now.

An SII with FJ44 is about 2400 nm range airplane, about the longest you can get and still operate single pilot (with SPE).
The TKS, lack of LUMP, and FJ44 tax are the big negatives.

Mike C.

My 81 with -42s has over 900 lbs of payload when the tanks are full. From home, that fuel load will get me anywhere in the lower 48 nonstop.That range comes from going high, which requires a B200 (higher cabin pressure vs straight 200,) -42 engines (standard on the B200 but common upgrades on the 200s,) and winglets.

If I just fill the mains, I have almost 2000 lbs of payload. That range takes me to most places in the west (Seattle depends on winds) and a good chunk of the eastern US nonstop.

Newer B260s can carry the pilot and a toothbrush with full fuel. The payload is very dependent on the model year.

My wing is just short of 60’. Parking and taxiing can be an issue at very small airports, so I make sure to plan ahead and I have a detailed taxi and parking plan before I depart. Tire pressure with the HFG is in the 60s so grass is no issue at all.

I do like the Raisbeck wing at slower speeds and I like the runway numbers I get with it.

For trips in the 1000-1500 nm range the B200 is faster than the 501 when the 501 requires a stop.

Isn't that amazing? The older airplanes have more utility because of that.


Wow, that is a lot bigger than I would have thought.

I'm at 52 ft with a 15,900 max gross weight.


No doubt. Range is a speed.

Mike C.

There were quite a few complaints about the S550 TKS system. One was the complexity of the TKS system, due to FAA certification requirements, and the other was due to passengers leaning against or brushing on the leading edges when wearing business suits.

There are way too many pumps, circuit boards, sensors, wires, etc, in the system. Debugging it can be hard. Spare parts are rare. But it can be made to work reliably.


I consider this a feature, those suit types should NOT be touching the airplane or leaning on it, TKS or boots! Boots, by the way, will leave black rubbery marks, too.

Something that SII owners need to do is periodically run the system, ice or not, for at least 4 minuets every month. There are parts of it that will dry out and plug up if it isn't run periodically. This leads to expensive repairs when panels don't work. Many owners and operators don't know this despite it being in the manual. The lack of periodic operation causes many of the problems.

I think with reasonable care, the TKS system on the SII can give very good service and it does have some advantages, like no boot care or replacement, better aerodynamics, no engine power loss.

The fact it has a bad reputation means you can buy the plane cheaper. I would definitely make sure all panels work on the prebuy, though.

The SII is a heck of a value right now. A TKS equipped mini V. The V is better, obviously, but for 2X the price?

Mike C.

This thread is why BT can be awesome! So much good info here, it's amazing.

Thanks Mike, I'll take a look at that. I have 950hrs in the Westwind and PIC type rated in it but 20 years not jet current and maybe 150-200hrs of that is PIC the rest was SIC. My ATP check ride was in the Flight Safety Westwind SIM Wilmington DE. 50 yrs old now and Kingair 2000+ hrs PIC single pilot so hopefully that would work with insurance and SPE.

I'm fine with Boots. I clean and wax them myself. No suits in this group so we don't worry about black scuffs or any scuffs for that matter. Working machines.

I'm not really keen on TKS but if needed would take it. Northeast ice is common but we don't go if severe.
Is the S550 tire footprint/size similar to the others? My hangar door is 60' by 18'.

Yes losing the reversers with the Williams is not ideal. I'd rather have them if needed.
How have the companies been to deal with Pratt Vs Williams. I've not really dealt with Pratt on the PT6 only shops like Prime. Last engine program I was involved with was the MSP Gold on the Westwind Garretts.

Jim that is interesting on your B200. Every one I flew was well over 8000 lbs empty. But they were 1990s two tube Collins EFIS airplanes. Does yours have a G1000 or some other type of panel mod to lighten it up? Lockers or just the Raisbeck inboard leading edges? We do get the dreaded 100knot headwind headed to FL several times each year. So stop would probably be needed. Loads are not too bad with usually myself and 2-3 pax. 800-810 lbs of People. Light baggage maybe 45-60 lbs typically. There are a couple trips each year with 6 onboard and bags. I stop for fuel. Usually JNX for CAA fuel.

I'd like to find something newer than 40 years old but it seems like useful load just goes away.
And Definitely a plain 300 with no winglets so it fit in my hangar is another option to get their faster.

The biggest "deal" now in Citations is the SII, the S550.

Compared to the 501SP, it flies a lot faster and goes a lot further in range, but doesn't cost that much more. It has the superior wing that both flies slower (shorter runway usage) and faster (higher cruise speeds) than the 501SP, that wing is what is on the V.

There are two downsides. One, it requires the SPE for single pilot operations which takes 500 hours turbine time to get into, turboprop time counts. Two, it has the TKS wing anti icing system which is a bit odd and byzantine.

The SPE is really not terribly much more work to maintain than the standard crew training. I just did my SPE recurrent in 2 days, one day ground school, one day flying, two flights. There really wasn't any extra effort to keep the SPE over a standard 61.58 recurrent. The sim folks add a day to their recurrent programs for the SPE generally.

The TKS wing system has some advantages. There are no boots to take care of, or have linemen damage with fuel hoses, and it doesn't rob engine power when in icing conditions.

You get the Citation II size cabin, FL430, 400 knot cruise speeds, and a huge fuel tank (5800 lbs). You also get TRs with short landing distances.

The SII is a bit under powered, so takeoff distances are not super short. Max weight, 0 MSL, ISA, no wind is 3240 ft, 300 ft longer than the 501SP. But that's not fair since the SII can go so much further, you can reduce the fuel load to do the same mission and the takeoff distances improve quite a bit. At 14,000 lbs, only 1100 lbs less fuel, the SII is 2800 ft, now beating the 501SP at max. You can go further in the SII down 1100 lbs in fuel than the 501SP at full tanks.

Due to the more efficient wing, the SII can fly higher and faster and will burn no more fuel than the 501SP on the same mission. Headwinds don't have as much impact on the SII as they do on the 501SP.

There are Williams converted versions of both the 501SP and SII. You lose the LUMP option (Textron won't do it for these airplanes), you have to pay the ever increasing Williams engine tax, and you lose the TRs. That's a lot of negatives in my book.

Mike C.

I'm over 8000 lbs, but just barely. I have seen two under 8000 lbs with more spartan interiors. My panel is dual G600s and a center 750 - definitely a light setup. No lockers, just Raisbeck gold stuff. I would definitely like lockers, but I put a higher priority on performance rather than convenience when shopping for the plane.

I have seen 100kt headwinds during planning, but I often find it more fuel efficient (and faster!) to drop lower into the 50-60 kt headwind range. I can remember only one part of one flight where I actually had a 100 kt headwind component, and it was less than an hour. The turboprops aren't as efficient as the pistons down low, but they're more efficient than the jets.

My typical last leg returning westbound is 1400 nm, and I've made it nonstop several times in the summer between FL 200 and 260.