LEARJET 60 - flight and service experience

[nuficek]

Hi,
our company is looking for a suitable Biz Jet for private operation. We chosen Learjet 60 as the best candidate for our needs. Can anybody post any flight or service experience with this aircraft, please? (Like known issues and bugs, prices...etc.)

I'll be glad for any information.

[LGW Vulture]

Clearly the words, Residual Value were not included in your assessment.

[cldrvr]

Hope they chucked in a tarmacing machine, the 60 uses runway like it is going out of fashion. Every time I see one taxi by or park next to it, I am amazed by the shopping trolley wheels. It has a nice cabin, just too bad you can't really go anywhere, especially when it is raining.

They are cheap to buy, less then half of a comparable airframe, there is a reason for that. Like everything else in life, you get what you pay for.

Buyers of used 60's buy them on price and price alone, if you were looking for an allround halfway decent cabin sized aircraft, any digging into the 60 would quickly discount it as a choice.

If you or whoever is consulting you on the purchase process would look a bit deeper then the pretty pictures you find on the web, you would quickly find its shortcomings, run a mile and go shop for a decent airframe.

[nuficek]

If you have this opinion you must have any reson for that. So what type in this class can you recomended? We compared Citation VII and Hawker 800XP yet. But I would like still to know the reason for bad 60's review.

[B200Drvr]

Nuficek
If you looked at the Hawker 800XPi or 850XP it should have been a no brainer. The Lear 60 cannot compete apart from speed and altitude, everything else its trumped by the Hawker. The Hawker is a very good reliable aircraft, and if you know how to play tetris you can fit a fair amount of luggage in it.

[LGW Vulture]

Why was the G150 not considered? Gulfstream have mostly ironed out their issues with the old IAI overhang - so I would have thought this an obvious candidate.

[cldrvr]

You are obviously looking at price point, or else you wouldn't contemplate the 60 or VII. Forget about pretty pictures you find on the web, you first need to pinpoint your mission profile, then find the aircraft that suits that profile. You either pay for it now or pay for it later, earlier models are cheaper to buy, but will cost you more over time. Only a spreadsheet based on your hours and trips can answer that question for you.

Do you really need the cabin size of a VII? Could you get away with a smaller cabin, the pax sit down for most of the flight. You also need to consider the part of the world you are in, what are the maintenance providers like. There is a reason you don't see many 60's on AOC's in Europe, with the landing factors you just can't go anywhere, especially when it rains.

What kind of flights will you mainly perform? Business? Pleasure? Will they bring loads of kids or luggage. What sized airports will you use? What is your average trip length? What is your average loading, etc. All these questions can be put into a spreadsheet and the obvious airplane will come out at the bottom of it.

A G150 is a great airplane, but based on your choices so far will probably be outside of your budget.

You should seriously think about getting a professional to help you in the process, the cost of that will pay for itself many times over.

Just don't think that buying the biggest sized cabin for your budget is the way to go. A cheaper and older aircraft if you don't fly a lot of hours a year may well bet he way the go, if you plan on flying lots of hours and smaller sectors to smaller airports, then a newer smaller model may be the best choice. Only you can answer that question based on your requirements.

Keep in mind that as soon as the owners have their first aircraft, they will quickly change the mission profile and either use it a lot more for trips that you hadn't planned for, or if you get it wrong will quickly realise that they can't use it as they bought the worng airrcraft and are stuck with a lemon. Buying the right aircraft for current and future use is not as easy as it first seeems. Just make sure you buy one based on the numbers and not on cabin size and purchase price alone.

When one of my principals first went shopping for an airplane, he wanted a 5/550, once we ran the numbers it made a heck of a lot more sense to buy a 604 and charter a 550 for the occasional trips requiring one. We are now looking for a replacement and once again the 550 is coming up but the mission profile hasn't changed significantly to warrant one, so we probably end up with a 605 this time around. Our research and number crunching will give us the obvious choice to go for. Cabin comforts and size obviously play a minor part in that decision process.

Forget about getting the "most" airplane for your budget, get the right one based on your requirements.

[LGW Vulture]

A lot of sense spoken there cldrvr. I always say, its not about getting the cheapest aircraft, its about getting the right aircraft at the right price. Let that be the mantra.

[nuficek]

It makes sense of course. New owner requires big stand up cabin, full toilet, proper range and good variable hourly cost. The aircraft will be operated from Europe and mostly to the East but not a little part of flights will be in one hour range in Europe. So logicaly we looked for an aircraft in Moscow range. We are thinking about 2003 and newer aircrafts. In the beginning it will be mostly operated privately and later in AOC. Our goal is 400 to 600 hours per year. Learjet 60 meets all our expectations. G150 is better choice of course. But I really think that it's out of our budget. Sometimes we have to make a compromise. So that's the reason why I'm asking here for real experience. It's the best review.

[cldrvr]

On the face of it, without knowing all of the details, you have 3 obvious choices, the 60, an Excel or a 800XP. The 60 is the quicker of the 3, but also burns the most amount of fuel if you fly it hard, the Excel has less of a "ramp presence" then the other 2, but is a well proven airframe, especially in Europe and has good residual value and is easy to charter. The Hawker is the heaviest of the 3, cost a bit more to buy, but will carry a greater load on a longer distance. Per seat, the Hawker and 60 are similar in operating cost and the Hawker has better residual value so over time it may actually be the cheaper option. The cabin of the Hawker is the biggest of the 3 and flying 600 hours a year, may well be worth the investment. The only downside of the Hawker is the lack of luggage space, but the 60 isn't that much bigger. Dollar for dollar the Hawker based on 600 hours a year and 4 year ownership will be cheaper then the 60, and you don't have to wait for it to stop raining.....

The 60 does have brake issues and if you decide to put the aircraft on an AOC, contaminated runway data is atrocious, the XR got an extra disc and is a lot better but then you are in Hawker territory again.

You really need to punch all the numbers in a spreadsheet and see what comes out at the end. 400-600 hours a year is definitely the right amount of hours to be thinking about your own plane.

Where are you going to base it and what are the maintenance providers like? At least you are looking at roughly the right size of airframe for 600 hours a year and the operating area you are considering.

If you don't have the exact breakdowns for each type you are considering, get a report from Conklin and deDecker, well worth the money. IF you are serious about putting the aircraft on an AOC, call around to operators that curently use your chosen types and talk with all of them, with the prospect of getting an aircraft on an AOC, they will all bend over backwards and help you out. Also see if you can get a hold of all the AFM's somewhere to get your numbers right.

Lots of questions to answer.

[jetopa]

@ cldrvr:

You should seriously think about getting a professional to help you in the process, the cost of that will pay for itself many times over.

... and make sure that she/he is independent of any airframer or operator!

[nuficek]

Thank you for your reply. We already have Conklin and deDecker but it doesn't say pilot and operator experience. Your advice is exactly what we missed in our puzzle. The aircraft will be operated from middle east Germany and as I said half and half in Europe range and to the East. So XLS is out due to its range. G150 would be good choice but I'm afraid it's out of our budget. Hawker is a little bit expensive for variable cost than L60 and G150. So in 600 hours per year it can cost a lot. There is no more choices I guess.

[elvis82]

I was flying a new LR60XR sn 305 (or so) in 2008 and we were almost instantly AOG! Burst tire, pressuarization problem, smoke in the cabin as consequence of installing some valve in the wing opposite as it should have been, ... I am 3 years out and the operation could improve, but double check with operators reliability of the aircraft!

[His dudeness]

Have a look at the Sovereign. Prices have dropped a lot.

Good range (2300nm with 200nm altn with headwinds) , very, very good runway performance ( T/O, 2nd segment & LDG), Climbs like a homesick angel, good speed (up to .80, mid thirties youŽll see 450-460KTAS), very quiet cabin, ramp appeal is good. Already chapter 4, which will be a factor in Europe soon.
Very big heated baggage compartment and compared to a Hawker you donŽt need to haul a ton of TKS around if youŽre on a longer trip in winter.

Fuel efficiency is not the strongest point of the Sov when you do the shorter trips...I guess thats not so different to the others mentioned. I do have limited experience with the III & VII, from a MX standpoint I would take them off the equation, they are expensive kites to operate.

[nuficek]

The Sovereign is too expensive. In this price range is better G150 I guess. Faster, longer range and cheaper for hourly variable cost.

[jetopa]

@ nuficek:

You read the shortcomings of the LJ60 but your budgetary constraints may limit your choices, as you said. So you might just end up with exact this airplane.

The good news for you may be, that there are numerous people in Germany who have quite a lot of experience in operating this airplane (not me!). And there are operators and maintenance facilities which can tell you a lot about it.

Are you on an AOC or do you intend to operate it yourself?

PM me, I'm sure I can send you a few names and numbers.

[His dudeness]

The Sovereign is too expensive

Fair enough. Not being a Cessna salesman I wonder have you thought about leasing one? Or another airplane? Lease it for a year, that could give you an idea how much aviation really costs over here (your profile says your based in Canada, have you been here/seen the costs? - we operate a lot into Russia, Ukraine, Kasachstan, Aserbaidjan etc. and fees around the airplane are a MAJOR point on the balance sheet.) I have made the calculations for my company and have nailed everything BUT these things (wasnŽt told where the jet would go mainly, so...)

Apologies if you do know these things already, just wanted to point them out...

[epsum]

As a pilot of AOC operated LJ60s, many of the written shortcomings arent really issue in our type of operations (avg flight time per leg 2h, 600-800hrs / year).

Brakes: all of our lj60s (5 of them), the oldest is from 2004 have 3 disc brakes, which doing quite OK job.

Runways. Basically we dont operate less than 5000ft long rwys. Less than that, you must do some serious calculations and be very conservative for the contigency plans. (Usual factored LD are between 4000-5000ft). When raining or contaminated you could have end up to 7000ft required /factored length. No problem in Europe (its always some proper airport nearby).

When 60 is properly maintained, it does not have worse dispatch reliability than any competitor.

But. When flying in conqested airspace the freedom to choose levels 410/430 or if you are brave enough 450, then you can fly over weather or fly more direct routes.

One of our customers, who flies usually 1200nm legs (and occasional 1800nm ones) tried the Sov, G150 and CL300s and 605s decided to buy 60. In his words, best compromise for price(flight and maintenance wise) and size of cabin and range.

For pilots view - if you like to be in cold cabin in winter(external heater is required for warming up) and hot in summer(aircon not so effective, if temperatures are more than +30C) on ground only, some occasional snags(nosewheel steering, anti-skid, generators), and have good maintenance team for backup, its quite ok aircraft to have.

[nuficek]

I still think the Learjet 60 will be the best candidate for our needs and our budget. One more thing bothers me. I'm not sure if it's possible to fly Munich - Dubai non-stop (or similar origin destination). I guess not. Does anybody have experience with it? I think Hawker 800XP can fly it but it's pretty slow and more expensive than 60's.

[muntisk]

HS vs LR60

i Have flown both, and speed are same for both planes, LR60 less range, high app speeds, longer RNWY needs, quite useless APU(low heating and cooling) Bombardier products are more expensive comparing with Hawker from maintenance point of view. Bag compartment 3 times smaller on LR. With Hawker you can go with full fuel and full cabin with max range , on LR60 full cabin you can not take maximum fuel restricted by TO weight, so 1800Nm max with long range power. Moscow-Dubai illegal route for AOC.