28 Oct 2025, 14:34 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 00:48 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/22/11 Posts: 1145 Post Likes: +932
Aircraft: Baron 58P
|
|
Username Protected wrote:
Edit: Mike, you may have met him at D10 sometime after this. He was there a while before finishing his career in Florida. The name sounds familiar. I was at D10 from 2000-2023 on the control room floor the whole time. I knew faces and talked to all of them from time to time, but there were only a few I got to know more than just their initials.
_________________ BE-300 CL-600 CL-604 BBD-700 G280
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 00:53 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20716 Post Likes: +26146 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Quite a few jets are doing good to make 500fpm in the low to mid 40’s especially if it’s ISA+. I have no idea how the X does, but I know there’s a bit of variance between different versions. You'd think wit those big engines, it would shoot right up there. But, no, it doesn't. FL430 at max gross ISA is the best the original 750 can do, above that needs a step climb. The X+ version can go to FL470 at ISA. If you want to go to FL510, older model, max weight, ISA, it takes 434 minutes (over 7 hours), 3405 nm of distance, and 12,744 lbs of fuel. I surmise people don't go up there very often. Just goes to show you that up there, the air is very thin and no engine is truly big enough. I routinely fly at FL400/410 and it seems enticing to fly higher to get out of some headwinds. But now I realize I'm not doing that much worse than some much larger airplanes. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 05:09 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/30/09 Posts: 1015 Post Likes: +820
|
|
|
Mike - I’m not sure where you are getting your numbers, but I can say they aren’t accurate.
I have been to 510 in a 2000 model X a handful of times and it didn’t take near that long.
One time leaving the service center in Wichita in a straight X on a test flight full of fuel with crew, two engineers and test equipment in the back. The route was ICT over New Orleans, over key west, over jax, to pxv, back to ict. We were at 510 for 75% of a 5ish hour flight.
Being up to about 470 was ok, 490 was squishy, 510 was like balancing on the head of a pin.
Brad
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 09:32 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20716 Post Likes: +26146 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Mike - I’m not sure where you are getting your numbers, but I can say they aren’t accurate. They came from the Cessna manual. Attachment: c750-climb-chart.png To FL510, ISA, max weight, 434 minutes, 3405 nm, 12,744 lbs, 102 FPM climb at the end. From the OM for SN 0001 to 0172. I don't think the numbers change much for the next SN range. Quote: I have been to 510 in a 2000 model X a handful of times and it didn’t take near that long. Did you start at max weight? Was it ISA? Mike C.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 10:39 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/22/11 Posts: 1145 Post Likes: +932
Aircraft: Baron 58P
|
|
Username Protected wrote: They came from the Cessna manual.
To which I would add that I wouldn’t consider anything much less than 300fpm an acceptable climb rate with two engines. It’s not a good situation to be out of mojo at TOC. Even if the book says you can do it, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
_________________ BE-300 CL-600 CL-604 BBD-700 G280
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 12:07 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20716 Post Likes: +26146 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: To which I would add that I wouldn’t consider anything much less than 300fpm an acceptable climb rate with two engines. It’s not a good situation to be out of mojo at TOC. Even if the book says you can do it, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Additionally, once you reach TOC at 100 FPM, the time it takes to accelerate back to cruise speed can be very long, like 10-15 minutes. It takes a long time to get that speed back once you lose it. if you "overclimb", then you end up slow and your fuel economy would have been better staying lower and going faster. A key thing is to look at your AOA. If that starts getting over 0.3, it is going to get slow. I like to stay under 0.25 if I can. Also, if there is any turbulence at all, you don't want to be very high on the edge. A good downdraft could mean you can't maintain altitude, and it means you will slow down at the very least. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 20:56 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/30/09 Posts: 1015 Post Likes: +820
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Did you start at max weight? Was it ISA?
Mike C.
It was years ago, so I have no idea as to ISA, but we would have been really close to gross weight in the examples. Again, those charts make no sense because the X (I flew SN 127) only held 13000 # of fuel topped. I see the charts, they don't agree with my real world experience at all but I can't fully explain the why  . Part of it can be explained away by the lower left of the chart - the wind effect portion but not enough for the difference I saw actually operating the airplane. They do look about right for what I saw through 430 or 430, but from there they make no sense. If you are at 430 @ ISA in 22 minutes, and the chart says you are sill climbing at 288 FPM, but then it says going from 430 to 450 take another 54 (81 - 27) minutes via a step climb, something doesn't add up. I will see if I can find my old books and see if I can find the difference. Brad
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 23:22 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/15/17 Posts: 1173 Post Likes: +607 Company: Cessna (retired)
|
|
|
The highest I ever was on a Citatition X was FL470 to witness a hot fuel climb test. We quit there because the fuel was cooling faster than the airplane was climbing, rendering further climb non-critical.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 28 Apr 2025, 23:41 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/21/08 Posts: 938 Post Likes: +574 Location: Townsville (YBTL), Australia
|
|
I know the feeling - had the V35B to FL200 once! Took 30 min and 50nm to get there!
_________________ Lee Fitzpatrick (aka Forkie!)
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 29 Apr 2025, 08:42 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/24/13 Posts: 10138 Post Likes: +4830 Company: Aviation Tools / CCX Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Take them up until you reach dual flame-out Seriously? I've been around Lears from 1977 until the 20 series went away. Many test flights to altitude. I've never had a crew so irresponsible. What kind of idiots did you hang out with?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation 650 to FL500 Posted: 29 Apr 2025, 13:14 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/24/13 Posts: 10138 Post Likes: +4830 Company: Aviation Tools / CCX Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Two of the most experienced Lear guys in the world.
Doesn’t mean that they aren’t idiots.
But, we prefer “Cowboys”
Good news for you is that they’re both old now so you don’t have to worry about them reading this and showing up on your doorstep. who's stalking now? I probably worked on their autopilots. Are you referring to the "maximum altitude acceleration and surge margin check" for the -6 engines? That was something mandated after overhaul or some engine work. I don't think it was done the way you describe though.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|