The BAC 1-11 was not a DC-9 wanna be... it first flew a couple years before the DC-9, but they were contemporaries. I flew in one several times Montreal-Boston, etc. Allegheny Airlines, IIRC.
the plane ( assumed to be a 111 ) Flynt was using was painted black with triangular windows, (already out of commercial favor at the time) saw him in his wheel chair with entourage in the FBO, the image he and his group conveyed was less than complimentary... we had the same next stop, he arrived after we got there, leaving the impression it was slow or in extreme economy mode
Ok, Im trying to find out the plane between the 111 and GII but........... An article from People magazine in 1983 said that they (LF and His late wife) bought a Jetstar from the estate of Elvis. IIRC, they painted it 'centerfold pink'. Porn Publisher Larry Flynt Beats Drugs but Remains Unashamedly Hooked on Sleaze : People.com Last known location was Roswell NM and un restored. Apparently Elvis owned two Jetstars and one was sold in 1977 (the now pink one below) and the blue and white one at Graceland. Fly Like A King! No, Not John And Martha... | Aero-News Network Edit: My buddy said it was a Jet Commander (Westwind) and I confirmed it from this article in the Washington Post. 'Air controllers all over the country recognize Flynt's $2.2 million, Israeli-built Jet Commander. They call it the Pink Panther or the Pepto-Bismol plane. Flynt named it DREAMS DIE FIRST, the title of the new Harold Robbins novel about a publisher who finds success by breaking the bounds of good taste in the girlie magazine biz. Flynt chose the plane's color mindful of the origin of his fortune; in his trade, running explicit photos of genitalia is called "going pink." The jet's interior is teak and suede, with a telephone, bar, and bathroom. At about $700 an hour to operate, with a cruising altitude of about 40,000 feet, it beats taking the bus.'
the plane on the ramp was a DC-9 look alike, in size as well ( small commercial) ... I have flown and owned the Jetstar, Saberliner and Jet Commander...
Every BAC 1-11 that I flew on had vertical oval, almost round windows. They are very slightly smaller than the DC-9.
Possibly an 1123, which was sort of halfway between a Jet Commander (1121) and a Westwind (1124). 1123 was more or less an 1124 with CJ-610 engines, and a bit of a pig (to be polite).
Thats unfortunate. When my buddy and I flew together from 2011 to 2013 we gave out shirts, hats, DVD's to anyone who asked. It was a fun job for us and it showed in our persona. It was a tightrope in a sense...we fully understood that some people may not like the boss and kept vigilant, but once he was in the car and off the property, hookers an booze for everyone! Kidding, but in reality we had a blast and I would have stayed if the money was better.
Thanks for the comments guys. I love the early 2+1 big window Lear 23-24's This sounds like I need to find a 24D or E with hushkits on. Annual maint cost est with 2-300 hrs/yr? I have no clue, assume 40-50k? Hef had the black DC9, but I've never seen a 111 in black. Jet Commanders were pretty cool. Westwinds had TFE-731's at some point??
Any Westwind you see today will have TFE-731s. There is no hush kit for the Jet Commander, and I think the 1123s all went to the scrapper long ago. A Lear 24 is the wrong airplane to fly 2-300 hours per year. If you want to fly that much, you want a 31 or a 35. The fuel burn on a 24 will be about 225 gallons/hour (more on short trips). A 31 has a much nicer cabin and will go further on around 180 gallons/hour. Furthermore, a 24 is a 40 year old airplane. If you get one which hasn't been taken care of and operated regularly, it's going to break. A lot. This is why you want to buy the best one on the market. It's been 20 years since I was directly involved in operating one, but I'm going to guess you might get away with $40-50k in maintenance alone, assuming nothing breaks (ha!), and you don't end up due for any major inspections that year. Then there's hangar, insurance, crew, etc. The good news is that the CJ610 is a reliable engine (other than the occasional high altitude flame out). If you only want to fly 50-100 hours per year, then I think the 24 might be a reasonable choice. The cost of acquisition is really low, and with minimal flying the fuel cost won't be so bad. Oh, who am I kidding? On any practical level, a 35 is a better airplane for not much more money. However, it's not as fun to fly.
If I were shopping for a small, older, jet I would look at Falcons. A 10 or 100 can be had very reasonably. Be sure the gear inspection has been done and you have a really well engineered rocket with fuel efficient 731 motors. I've been very impressed each time I've flown one. They do have to be maintained, but they are much, much, nicer airplanes than the early Lears.
