Best Exec Jet for the Job - Help!

[DaviiB]

Hi All,

I'm doing a bit of research for a friend who's boss is looking into acquiring a used aircraft. It's still just talk at the moment, but I was hoping to get some opinions on various aircraft types for the following mission profile:

Base: Caribbean (humid + salty air). Hangared
Pax count: 6-8, Most, if not all male, relatively light luggage on most flights
Lav: Required
Stand up cabin: Nice, but not essential
Typical trips: Shortest - 200nm, Longest - 1300-1500nm (probably more longer flights than shorter)
Trip Frequency: 2 to 3 flights per week
Typical runway length: over 6,000ft

Any thoughts on what aircraft might fit the bill? I was thinking:

Citation Excel/XLS - Can't make the longer flights?
Learjet 45 - DOA?
Hawker 800XP - Maintenance support?
Hawker 1000 - same as above?
Older CL300?
Older Sovereign?

Does anyone have experience with the above types and / or anything else I may have missed?

Thanks!
DB

[winkwink]

Don't touch the 45. Cramped cabin for your payload and the most uncomfortable pilot seats EVER.

[dboy]

I agree with the previous poster. Seats are horrible in the cockpit and giving me pain in the back. Cabin itself is also small. If comfort is your goal, don't touch the Learjet. I heard that citation xls has a good cabin but range is indeed smaller. Is the Citation X perhaps an option?

[Above The Clouds]

More importantly what is his budget, it may open up more opportunities.

[DaviiB]

Thanks for the info so far!

I figured the 45 would be a no-go.

They haven't gotten too far into discussing acquisition costs as yet. More important to them right now is figuring out what type would get the job done consistently, and not be a huge pain to maintain, or crazy expensive to operate. Once we find the right tool(s) for the job, they'll look at costs to pick one up. No point in buying a cheaper aircraft if it doesn't do what you need it to.

The Citation X is nice to look at, but I get the impression that unless the only thing you're interested in is speed, there's not much point to acquiring one. Am I mistaken?

DB

[x933]

CL601 is probably not a bad match for that flying profile. Falcon 50 if you feel the need for three engines and can accept a smaller cabin. CL604 if the age of both of those put you off (a little bit overkill though). All can be had for less than $6m.

Hawkers are pretty much bullet proof and would be an ideal match were it not for the fact that with 8 people it's a bit of a squash. Falcon 50 and CL30 gives you 6 individual seats rather than 5, making the sofa mildly more tolerable for long flights.

[Booglebox]

Learjet 60?

[McDoo]

Learjet 60?
For eight male pax?.......

[McDoo]

The Sovereign would look ideal on paper in terms of cabin size and range but don't even think of putting one into a humid maritime environment - the corrosion proofing simply isn't up to it.

You are right about the 800XP, the rear divan makes the longer flights very uncomfortable for 8 pax - other than that it would be a very affordable option, just make sure you get one that has had a recent E/F&G check.

CL30 sounds ideal to me, fits all your requirements and is a fairly simple machine to maintain.

Happy shopping :)

McD

[Above The Clouds]

Falcon 900 Dx Ex Lx or Falcon 2000 both will exceed everything you have listed, both have excellent short field, hot and high capability and of course the 900 will give you that 3 engine safety.

[McDoo]

Falcon 900 Dx Ex Lx or Falcon 2000 both will exceed everything you have listed, both have excellent short field, hot and high capability and of course the 900 will give you that 3 engine safety.

Agreed, and the high MLW of the Falcons could come in handy if doing multiple sectors around Caribbean islands. Trouble is, the purchase budget has just gone through the roof
if they were originally looking at XL/Hawker/LJ45 type acquisition costs.
2000/900 would be nice though ;)

[Pace]

dave

As you get bigger aircraft you talk old which makes me suspect that the budget is not high ?
This is often the problem with non aviation company directors they look at something and all great until you talk acquisition and running costs. Bigger and old means high running and maintenance costs

You mention that a stand up cabin is not needed so if the budget is low as I suspect and they could keep to 7 PAX with light luggage a Citation 5 Ultra has the range, low purchase and running costs and short field capability

But that is bottom of the pile if they just want a workhorse at minimum cost and can knock off one PAX
Lear 45 mentioned is horrendously expensive to operate

Pace

[DaviiB]

Regarding the comment on their budget. Right now, we're trying to narrow down the list to aircraft that will get the job done reliably. My mentioning older aircraft is due to my thinking the Supermids are a little too much airplane for what they're trying to do, and the only justification to get one would be a comparable purchase price (and not-extravagant operating costs...which is why we're not talking about the Falcon 20 :) ). It's a buyer's market right now isn't it?

I was looking at the Ultra actually, but can it make 1,300nm (likely into a bit of a headwind) with 7 on board? I've spoken to an Ultra pilot and he mentioned to me that they have to start looking really closely at anything over 1,000nm with a full boat (7 pax). How about the Citation VI or VII?

The Falcons are wayyy too much airplane for this IMO. I have access to a few....love them....wish they'd kept going in the midsize market, as we might have something to talk about then. Most of the runways in the Caribbean are 8,000+ feet. I don't see runway performance being an issue with any jet we look at, even in hot + wet conditions.

Just for giggles, how far can you get with 7pax on a Lear 60?

General wisdom is to purchase something that will do 80% of your required missions, then charter for the last 20%, but there's not really anything in the area to charter, so charter costs will be really high to get a larger / longer range aircraft out of Florida (positioning to the opposite end of the Caribbean).

I think the 800XP might be the one to beat on this. They may have to suck it up when taking 8 pax, but it seems to be a pretty big leap to the CL300 (which I think is quite a bit more airplane than they need).

Thoughts?

DB

[space-shuttle-driver]

i) What's your budget? If 7m or above, then go for the CL300. It will fulfil all the specifications given by yourself, and the DOCs are comparable to the Hawker.

ii) your 2-3 trips/weeks with the given stage lengths means that the airplane will fly around 300h/year, right. You'll want to have some sort of dispatch reliability then, right? As you are in the Caribbean, what brand's service center is within your reach? Chose accordingly!

[Proline21]

How about a new Embraer Phenom 300 or an used Embraer Legacy 600?

[Pace]

Dave 1000 miles?? You would have to have pretty awful headwinds for that in a Five Ultra. It should do 15000 nm with reserves in reasonable winds

They're real workhorses," he said. "They have the right combination of load, range, speed and short-field capabilities."

From Middle America, the airplane can hit either coast, most of the time without taking on fuel. The Ultra's maximum cruising speed is close to 430 knots. At maximum weights, it can take off in less than 3,200 feet and land and stop in less than 2,200. It will climb to 45,000 feet at a blistering 4,100 feet per minute and carry two pilots and six passengers 1,960 nautical miles (no wind) and a full load
of eight passengers somewhat shorter distances. (An advertised ninth seat is the belted potty. If you've been reading my articles, you know I believe aircraft marketers are overreaching when they claim that those or other varieties of padded shelves are real seats.)

IMO the range quoted above is optimistic long range but work on 1500 nm

[733driver]

I would strongly advise against doing 3 hour trips with 7 pax in a light jet (Citation Ultra, Phenom 300 or similar) on a regular basis. It really is not pleasant. And right on the limit of what they can do.

The minimum should be a mid size, and it needs to be long enough to be comfortable with more than 6 pax.

Better yet: I guess a Falcon 2000 Classic can be had for 5 or 6 million these days? Haven't checked, though.

[Above The Clouds]

Really this is a pretty pointless exercise without more detail and thats up to the poster to add?

Agree with Pace without more info everyone is wasting their time.

Sounds to me a bit like a shoestring operation looking for the biggest cheapest aircraft that will ultimately cost a fortune in maintenance, especially the older Citation VI and VII not to mention limited simulator facilities. One minute we discussing stand up cabins then Citation Ultra's :confused:

[Pace]

733driver

Agreed but the poster said stand up cabin not required and bigger jets would have to be older which means crippling running costs so he really needs to indicate what sort of purchase budget they have as well as what running costs they will stomach
The Ultra on his typical 1300 to 1500 NM legs will comfortably do that and will carry those PAX with as he said light luggage albeit not in the greatest comfort compared to a Midsize but then they can pick one up for lass than $2million and get low running costs and 6000 feet is comfortable at grosse. If they are happy to pay $8 to 9 million great look at midsize but I doubt it )) beggars cannot be choosers.
3 trips a week of 3000 nm round trip and running costs on older midsize jets will be horrendous

Pace

[Above The Clouds]

He also said a LAV is required, from memory the 500 Citation series have a Lav that is serviced via the cabin and not externally, after 7-8 pax on a 1000nm + flight ? no thanks, external servicing definitely a requirement.

[Pace]

ATC

I know of a nice converted A320 which can be had for a song with only 8 of them and lowish fuel it will go in there :E

Only joking but really need his purchase budget and especially with those three trips a week running/fuel costs will be a major factor as well as maintenance

pace

[LGW Vulture]

A shoestring operation?

Getting your mission profile analysed online by a group of people who might be more knowledgeable about skateboards - then you've probably hit the nail on the head. :rolleyes::ugh:

[wanabee777]

Check this out:

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/November/16/Hourly-operating-costs-of-45-jets-compared?CMP=ADV:1

[Above The Clouds]

LGW
Getting your mission profile analysed online by a group of people who might be more knowledgeable about skateboards - then you've probably hit the nail on the head.:rolleyes::ugh:


Incase you hadn't noticed its also a rumour network :rolleyes:

[Pace]

Getting your mission profile analysed online by a group of people who might be more knowledgeable about skateboards - then you've probably hit the nail on the head.

A mission profile also includes your purchase budget and running budget to achieve that mission neither which have been forthcoming.

So I wonder who the Skateboard refers too :E The poster or people trying to give advice on incomplete detail?
I am thinking of renting some hours on a cirrus to do some SEP again after flying jets exclusively. I would love my own personal CJ1 but cannot afford it :{
So I think a starting point is what can they afford? and what aircraft can complete that mission within the price they can afford ? There is no point in promoting jets which cost $7 to $10 Million to purchase and $4 to $5 thousand an hour to run if their budget is $2 million to purchase and $1700 an hour to run? They will both complete the mission albeit the one with far less comfort

So if the poster said they want to pay $2 million but may go up to $4 million for the right aircraft and want to budget for X in running costs at least we have something to work on ? at present no clue $1 2 5 10 20 million ? no clue

Pace

[His dudeness]

Vulture, have a read.

http://www.flightsafetyaustralia.com/2015/11/shot-down-in-flames-the-dangers-of-the-blame-game/

But you knew that already, right ?

[redsnail]

His dudeness
Great article, thank you. :ok:

[DaviiB]

Thanks for the help so far!

wanabee777 - Thanks for that info. I already have fairly detailed operating cost and annual budget breakdowns for the aircraft on the list. It's interesting to compare the AOPA numbers with what I have.

For the others who are looking for budget numbers.....well I didn't give a budget because it has nothing to do with the question I asked. Perhaps I should have been more clear, but I am looking for opinions on aircraft from an operational standpoint, not financial (obviously within reason). We already have access to the numbers.

I'm looking for information on:
- How the aircraft might stand up in a humid/salty environment (thanks McDoo for your note on the Sovereign's corrosion)
- Realistic range with full payload (which is not as easy to to find as we all know brochure numbers are optimistic)...will it make 1500nm every time with 8 guys on board?...how about with 7?
- General reliability for regular use
- Whether parts / service will be a nightmare (e.g. How's maintenance on a Hawker these days?)
- Any other boogymen in the closet

Rest assured, nobody will be dropping any cash before calling in the professionals, but as an exploratory exercise.... I figured I could start by asking some of the folks who operate them day-in day-out. Financials aside, the pilots should know a thing or two about the capabilities and flaws of their ships no?

Thanks

[Pace]

Dave

You are talking 3000 NM round trips 3 times a week ? thats 7 hrs roughly per trip so to be simple lets say 20 hrs a week or a massive 1000 hrs a year
lets be really optimistic as you mentioned some shorter 200 nm jumps and say 700 hrs a year at $4000 an hour your trips will cost you £2.8 million PA for a decent midsize jet and between 6 to 10 million purchase price

The very uncomfortable Citation ultra!!! longer trips because its slower so work 750 PA or $1.2 mill costs and $2 mill outlay

Of course if you are flying into 100 KT headwinds the Ultra won't get there in one and you may have to splash and dash somewhere (done it many times flying a 550) but some PAX like to stretch their legs and get a coffee but add 1 hour to the trip time but it won't happen that much

So it still comes down to what the business can justify for the returns by using the jet
I stress before anyone pulls the above to pieces very rough figures

Pace

[DaviiB]

Thanks for that Pace.

For argument's sake....Let's assume the utilization gets pulled back to a more realistic 300-500 hours per year. 2-3 trips per week was a bit of an overreach I think.

DB

[imriozer]

Double club Hawker

[His dudeness]

I do fly Sovereigns and that is a very capable airplane, 8 Pax plus luggage 1500 nauticals is a no brainer, one would be able to tanker fuel if so desired. (ones dest cheap, other expensive...)

Corrosion...there are some Sovs here in Europe that suffer badly from Corrosion, others don´t. Cessna says, thats due to the environment friendly deicing stuff we use in Europe. No issues on ours but for the Gear that was partly corroded on the inside (Shocks!) after 8 years. Airplane has been checked and then sprayed with CorBan, seems to work fine.

Still there is a Phase 42, corrosion check every 6 months.

Every airplane will suffer from humid and salty plus warm air.

The Hawker I hear is a full seat, full tank airplane capable of going 2300-2500nm and there are plenty around.

One thing not to underestimate if you operate where you say you want to: aircondition. Works pretty well on the Sov after 2 SBs.

[x933]

Hawker 800XP or Hawker 1000 is probably all the aircraft you will ever need. Fleet is well supported too - because they built them for years, mainly.

Should be able to get a good one for $3-4m, and i'd be suprised if you didn't get a good lump of that back in 2 years when you realise that the three people that consistently get saddled with the sofa have started to put on a few pounds and are whining that it's not comfortable :E

[Amadis of Gaul]

I'm probably crazy to even suggest it, but there is currently on Controller.com a corporate 737-200ADV with only 7,500TT for $2.5M, so you can probably pick it up for $2 or even a tad less. That's a lot of money left over for operating costs, and support should not be a problem....

[HawkerBeech1]

Stay away from the Hawker 1000. Although it does have extra baggage in the back...you wont be making 2-3 trips a week with any reliability. Dispatch reliability is significantly less than the 800XP.

It also has a few "problem areas" regarding Mx and parts that the 800XP does not have.

[ewe.lander]

If it had slightly longer legs I'd say a DO328-300, big, stand-up cabin, several FAA examples in VIP fit, but over 1300nm struggling. It's cheap ( very cheap for size and capability), with excellent P&W motors, but supporting it in the Caribbean might be a challenge, and sadly long out of production. Shame though!

[B200Drvr]

Hawker 850 or 900 would be better.

[WTON]

Go for for the Hawker 900XP, that you might have at reasonable rate.


Good luck

[Commuter0815]

Reliable? Go for a CL850(CRJ200). Hard to kill this things as they are used to line operations. Much less downtime then a CL6XX or CL300.

As well very cheap to get this days. Range usually easy 1500NM, if you get one for LR ops with the tail tanks then realistic 2500NM(3000 NM in the shiny Bombardier brochure).

6000ft runways no problem , especially no high airports(which could bring a problem)in the caribean.

Other advantages - HUGE cargo hold, often even 2 toilts(1 fwd, 1 aft)
cheap to get(if you think you get a global cabin for peanuts). Pilot training easy(sims everywhere) and cheap.

Disadvantage: No slats, approach speeds up to 140kts at max landing weight(21205kg) or even a touch higher with 21319kg.

[Pratt X 3]

May I suggest the Gulfstream G200? Plenty of cabin room for 8 males, nice lav, and even though you mentioned relatively light luggage, the baggage compartment can fit almost anything you can throw at it (easily fits golf clubs and baggage for 8-10 people). Purchase prices are very reasonable and will become more so when the former NetJets G200's start hitting the market. Those aircraft will be higher time but fully refurbished and upgraded by Gulfstream, who has great product support.
Sure, those who haven't flown the plane will laugh at the notion of de-ice boots on a jet (which actually work great and don't affect climb performance like hot wings do on some aircraft) or the less than stellar runway performance (which wouldn't be much of an issue for your planned sea level, 6000+ foot runways at mid-weight even in hot temperatures). Gulfstream did address the shortcomings when they designed the G280; making a good airplane even better. G200 owners and passengers love the cabin (which is within an inch or two in height and width of the big Gulfstreams taking the dropped aisle into account) and it shows as the only major change with the G280 cabin was the addition of walk-through baggage compartment access.
Where the G200 really shines is the operating costs. It practically invented the super-midsized category, with a large aircraft cabin and mid-size aircraft fuel burn. The G200 will burn almost the same fuel as the Hawkers but with a much more comfortable cabin, especially with 8 guys. Plus a full size galley and no belted potty seat as there is room for 8-10 passengers in the cabin.

[Booglebox]

Just for giggles, how far can you get with 7pax on a Lear 60?

About 1500NM with comfortable reserves in still air.