Originally Posted by
His dudeness
LDR without factoring C680A from the FPG
2000ft elevation / 0 Wind
MLM 27000 26000 25000 24000 22000 20000 19000lbs
35° C/ 95°F 2,740 2,700 2,630 2,570 2,500 2,350 2,200 2,120 ft
4100/1,67 = 2456 ft - > so anything below 23000lbs ish would be okay even if 135
I have just on e landing with the Latitude, but about 2000 in t he Sovereign who shares the same gear. The Sovereigns numbers are about 200ft LONGER than that of the Latitude, even at the MLM which is 475 lower in the Sov. The longer wings of the Latitude bring the Vref down a little (2-3 knots) and the aircraft has tremendous stopping power. We are homebased at a 3323ft LDA runway and we never had any issue regarding stopping - even at high weights.
If there is a jet that is not a jet in this respect, its the C680 family. I sometimes fly a CJ3 into our homebase - it uses way more runway...
Yes, the Latitude has the same wing as the Sovereign+ which should have comparable landing performance.
One small correction, though: The FAR landing field length (factored) is a dispatch requirement and is typically not as limiting as actual conditions times 1.67. There is a specific supplement for it and it typically works out to about 1.5 times actual distance. This is because (I was told at FSI) Cessna used a slightly steeper approach and a firmer touchdown to come up with the raw landing distance for these numbers (which are not published unfactored) then applied a 1.67 factor but the total number is typically less than 1.67 times the published unfactored numbers. On other Citations this method and the respective AFM supplements was/were called parametric landing data. All this to say: Even more than 23000 pounds would have been ok under part 135. And certainly under part 91/91k there would have been no limit other than the structural MLW.