hi ad did u get to sa

On many flights Blink are MORE expensive than most CJ1's etc... The Mustang isn't as good as a CJ1, therefore why would anyone want to pay more....for less?

I guess the start up capital is running out, and there is no desire from investors to keep pouring water into the blink spounge.

They have successfully got some people to charter, that otherwise wouldn't have done so, but when the client see's the CJ's they're parked next to in Cannes or Geneva and finds out its the same or maybe less cost.........:ugh:

Flynow....post later.....

Where have you been....keep up boy!

Aircraft at Blackbushe
 

Does it not stand to reason that if you've had two to three aircraft almost permanently on the ground at Blackbushe for near on the last two years, perhaps three now, it's time to get rid of a couple at least? Another winter looming and those birds will just get covered in snow and ice for another season not going anywhere.

Avioactive....good point well made and all that, but, if you were in the position of having aircraft underutilised picking multiple bases to spread your markets would be the right thing to do....exactly what Blink have done.

If they are offloading excess supply, and marketing the hell out of the concept whilst doing the smart thing of multi-basing, It is for the good of the company......so, whilst the concept of a huge fleet of VLJ's is probably not likely in this, or any economic situation, they are adapting as they learn and while that may sound really patronising, it's not as patronising as the press releases that told us how they had invented an industry that we have all spent 20 years working in.

I think we all have suspicions that the concept does not work on the scale that was originally designed due to the scaleability (sp) of certain departments within a bespoke service product, but credit where credit is due, their business decisions are unflawed (except, obviously the one where they signed up to 45 mustangs and told all the brokers they don't need them).

PB

LOL thanks Phil. That is a classic :D

Quite right Mr B. Surely they must have realised that this might raise a few eyebrows within an already very established and potentially over subscribed market?
A company round my way have developed the blink principle on surface transport...... they're called Ali's cabs. If only I'd have thought of this. Phil, why do we keep missing the boat?..........Urika!!!, lets sail boats between Dover and Calais and allow lorries and cars on board. This time next year Rodney....

London Executive Aviation selling off December 2010 delivery position . . .

2010 CESSNA CITATION MUSTANG Jet Aircraft For Sale At Controller.com

Maybe Ambeo will be next to move their's on when the Phenom arrives :cool:

Blink vs LEA
 

The main difference between LEA and Blink is that LEA is a well established charter operator who did not claim to change the world but just that the Mustang is an aircraft that moves some Kingair Customers to Jets. As far as I know most of the LEA aircraft are privately owned... and the orderbook is less than 45 :8

Here from 2008 :ok:

On paper specs maybe - but I have heard that performance is nowhere near the specs, particularly landing performance.

Think LEA just received there first Phenom 100 G-CGNP a few days ago, serial number 50000146

-NP is a Legacy 500, not a Phenom :)

Not on G-INFO it isn't...EMB500 is the CAA's way of saying it's a Phenom 100. Is this owned by LEA or managed?

In fact, the L500 hasn't even flown yet...

Then I stand corrected... :oh:

edit/ Ah, I see... wake up at the back! :p :O

Having sat in one last week, I cant help but be really impressed with the Phenom. Its a big little jet and anybody who picks a mustang over it (notwithstanding the extra $400k) is nuts.

Regarding this "extra" performace are we not gettting confused with pre first flight pledges against certified data. I'd like to think that what the book says is exactly what it will do, no more no less, it would be unusual for the manufacturer to put 2000 hrs on a pair of test frames and not spot a little extra performace that operators have found having put a couple of hundred hours on them. I doubt the FAA/EASA would allow a 5% innaccuracy good or bad in the data

Its also not unusual for FADEC engines to give a little extra thrust at ISA + 1 or +2 as opposed to the ISA figures which are commonly quoted beefing up the rumours that its better than book.

5% seems a little too good to be true from testing to line flying, but from design to certification would seem a little more believable

2 mins on google found this

Great aircraft by all accounts, whatever the story with the performance

Is it an idea to make a seperate Embraer 100 vs Mustang thread?

Back on topic: how many are still advertised as being for sale?

Mustang "toilet"
 

Highflight420, you wrote that people are actually using the toilet in the Mustang. Well, these must have been some serious emergencies then.

Do you have any special fitments in the Blink jets to provide more privacy? I can hardly imagine any passenger (especially female ones) taking a leak (or worse) just behind the FO's seat, in full view from the passenger cabin.

I'd seriously be interested in how a commercial operator handles this problem.

There is a curtain between the cockpit and the cabin and another that goes around the toilet itself - its not ideal but many passengers, male and female have used ours at Ambeo without problems. We always suggested to passengers they use the toilet at the FBO before flight.

Mustang
 

Thanks for your reply. I would have expected the high-end clientele using such air transport services to be more picky about the toilet issue.
It was one of the things which I thought would make running a commercial service using Mustangs difficult. Interesting ...