Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

Citation 501/stallion

Old 17th Dec 2013, 20:16
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 35
Citation 501/stallion

Anybody got any thoughts good or bad on the Citation 501 (Stallion) with the FJ442A engines, numbers look good to me for our company requirements, purchase price, range, etc. although the airframe is getting a little long in the tooth. Would like to have a few opinions before we get serious about buying something.
Thanks
dasher3 is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2013, 20:30
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,999
The problem buying converted aircraft like that is what is it and how much will the values hold up.

it is a bastard aircraft which is not to the manufacturers specification and hence will always be limited on resale value.

it maybe a great conversion but what is it? No longer a Citation 501 but an old Citation which has had more modern engines fitted and which will no longer meet the certification spec of the original aircraft!

If you buy one dirt cheap and eventually sell dirt cheap then it may give the performance and service you want but from residual value you are better off buying a CJ1 or 2 even if they cost you a tiny more initially!

if you buy an old 501 and convert it will still cost a lot and and you still have an outdated 35 year old airframe IMO you will never see the outlay back

Pace

Last edited by Pace; 18th Dec 2013 at 11:32.
Pace is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2013, 22:40
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 14 days away 14 at home
Posts: 700
In this market buy something decent... Capital cost is minimal and fuel and mx cost is much better than a 501... Makes no sense to buy an aircraft at scrap value that is expensive to maintain...
No RYR for me is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2013, 12:02
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 54
Posts: 2,370
Be very careful in regard of upcoming avionic requirements such as ADSB out, CPDLC etcetc.
His dudeness is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2013, 14:27
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Here & there
Posts: 66
Worth considering that cessna will not be forthcoming with engineering support once this mod has been embodied on an airframe.

Something we fell foul of when we required a repair scheme. Had to find a willing EASA part 21 in that particular case.
orion1210 is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2013, 16:34
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 35
Citation 501/stallion

Ouch
Thank you very much for the info gentlemen or ladies, I think I should be able to present your arguments along with my own confidently now.
The problem I am dealing with is a CEO with a private licence and a big ego who has unfortunately been sold on the idea and is really going to take some convincing otherwise.
dasher3 is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2013, 05:04
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paducah KY
Age: 67
Posts: 14
I don't think the outlook is as bleak as those here seem to believe. Roughly 20% of the 501 fleet has been converted to the FJ44 engines since 2002. These airplanes are flown regularly, so someone obviously sees some utility in owning them.

The converted 501's fill a niche between the VLJ's and the CJ2. The speed and range exceed that of a CJ1 and the Mustang. Until the price of used CJ2's reaches around $2 million, there's nothing else that can touch the converted 501's, as far as operating costs and performance.

There's also a contingent of older owner pilots, who don't want to learn glass, and had just as well stick with their 501's with the retrofitted engines.

I don't know all the euro airspace acronyms spoken of, but I do know there are endless avionics upgrades available that make the 501 compatible with any changes forthcoming in US airspace. Whether that applies internationally or not, I don't know.

As far as the converted airplanes being black sheep, there is what's known as a STC, as I'm sure all posters are aware of. It isn't like some guy's secretly mounting these engines in a hangar somewhere. There are appropriate AFM supplements issued by the STC holder. There's nothing radical going on here, that is going to alter the airplane's safety.

So Cessna won't touch them, but it shouldn't be too hard to find someone to work on an old Citation.

Upgrading engines on existing airframes isn't anything new.

Whether 35 years old, or 5 years old, the pedigree of the individual airplane is more important than age. And most of the 501's on the market have <10,000 hours on them. Most often flown 200 hours a year or so, by private owners.
eelb is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2013, 16:16
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 14 days away 14 at home
Posts: 700
Hi Eelb,

Would agree that if he was an FAA based owner pilot it might be an option. But to operate the aircraft in EASA territory and with the associated mx cost make the aircraft a big no no for me.
No RYR for me is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2013, 17:17
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,999
eelb

I am not disputing the fact that the conversion is good or that there are excellent performance improvements.
On any aircraft costing $100s of thousands or $ millions! residual values have a major impact on the purchase decision as you stand to loose far more than any perceived saving by improved performance or mission capability.
That is the stumbling block as you are taking an aircraft worth maybe $2-300,000 spending a $million plus and you still have an old Citation which is no longer a Citation 1 but What?
If you want to buy such an aircraft let someone else spend the $ s and when they cannot sell for the reasons I have given offer them a third of their outlay only then will it work.

pace
Pace is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 13:13
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paducah KY
Age: 67
Posts: 14
Just curious, do you apply this logic to all engine mod programs, or just the 501 with the FJ44?
eelb is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 14:55
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,999
Just curious, do you apply this logic to all engine mod programs, or just the 501 with the FJ44?
eelb

Sticking with Cessna as an example Blackhawk did a good conversion for the Conquest 1 into a Blackhawk Conquest.
the difference there was that Cessna no longer built a turboprop never mind a Conquest so if you wanted a Cessna Turboprop with more go the BlackHawk had a good reputation.
Not so sure now as the Conquest airframes are over 30 years old.
Cessna make many jet models which are current and use the Williams engines and many of those can be bought at knock down prices.
Sticking williams units onto a 30 yr old airframe is IMO wasted money and you will never see your money back.
not to say that the conversion is not good but the competition in newer models will restrict any resale value.
But its your money or your bosses and if you want to chuck it away? your shot not mine!

Pace
Pace is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 18:51
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: MCO (occasionally)
Posts: 387
Hi Dasher,

Point of order here. Your job isn't to convince the CEO....

Seriously, your job is to put together a powerpoint with three to five aircraft, read it to him, smiling all the while, and then let him decide and write a check.

You'll stay employed much longer.

Cheers!

FR
FrankR is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 23:04
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paducah KY
Age: 67
Posts: 14
To be honest, I probably wouldn't do the conversion today, but 10 years ago it made more sense, when the price gap with a CJ2 was around $3 million. Now that early CJ2's are much closer in price to a converted 501, the CJ2 is more doable.

At the time, I had an original 525 , that couldn't make it to the west coast from the midwest without 2 gas stops. Winds in the winter, and poor hot and high in the summer, where at least 1 stop had to be in the Rockies somewhere. So even with 2 people you couldn't fill the tanks. The Eagle II conversion, with the FJ44's, and additional fuel capacity to 4500 lbs., didn't have this problem. Actually made $400k trading "down".

As for losing money when selling, I only have 1000 hrs on the engines, and the TBO is 4000. It would be foolish to trade it for something else, and losing money on the sale will likely be something my estate can worry about.

I think the day of viewing any light jet as an appreciating asset is over anyway.
eelb is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2014, 10:35
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 14 days away 14 at home
Posts: 700
I think the day of viewing any light jet as an appreciating asset is over anyway.
May I rephrase that:
I think the day of viewing ANY jet as an appreciating asset is over anyway.

No RYR for me is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2014, 21:19
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: ZRH
Age: 57
Posts: 563
Why won't Cessna touch a perfectly legally upgraded 501? Simply because they are miffed that the customer did not chuck up 3 Million for a new plane?

Granted, today a conversion like that is of doubtful value, yet a converted plane which will outperform the newer airplanes at a fraction of the price, I wonder what is so bad about that.

I recall seing a Stallion conversion at a Citation service center not too long ago and the owner was raving about it. He apparently bought it due to range concerns with his Mustang. Sais it operates a sight cheaper and fulfills the mission profile better than the newer jet and he loves that he can fly it SP if he wants to.

What kind of figures do these planes deliver? I hear about 1800 NM @ 350 kts? Would not be too shabby for a plane which normally has problems reaching 1000 NM...
AN2 Driver is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2014, 17:36
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,999
AN2

I do not disagree with what you are saying as some of the conversions are pretty good.
As stated there was a BlackHawk Conquest 1 which was a good conversion and a few years back the values held up pretty well.
that was because Cessna no longer built a turboprop so if you wanted a Cessna Turboprop you bought the bog standard conquest 1 or 2 or needing fresh engines went for the BlackHawk.
Sadly now both the Conquest and earlier citations are what is classified as older generation i.e. around 1980 or 33 years old, with such a mass of CJ 1s 2s 3s etc spending that sort of money to convert an airframe worth $200 k does not make sense anymore.
I can remember taking a potential buyer to see a BlackHawk Conquest in the USA, then the asking price was $1.4 mill but that must have been 15 yrs back

pace
Pace is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 02:26
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paducah KY
Age: 67
Posts: 14
AN2 Driver,

The Stallion is about 10kts faster than the Eagle II, because the Eagle wing mod creates some drag in cruise. The Stallion gains about 300 nm in range over the standard 501, just because of the FJ44's efficiency compared to the JT15. The Eagle's modified wing carries 700 lbs extra fuel, and that's where the 1800 nm range comes from. You have to get to FL410-430 to get that range. At that altitude, 360-380kts, depending on weight and OAT. You can get 400kts out of them in the low 30,000's, but you'll be burning 1100 pph to do it. Not many fly them that low except on shorter trips. Both the Stallion and Eagle II, can go straight to FL430 in about 30 min at MTOW and ISA.
eelb is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.