Best light to medium jet?

Some questions:

1. Hot & High operations or particularly short field important?

2. Brand new or new to you? If pre-owned an idea on age you would be comfortable with?

3. What level of step up in operating costs from the Lear 35 are you going to be comfortable with?

4. How much luggage with 8 and how far? 1 suitcase each or a big baggage load?

Jeff

 

If cabin room is a priority, how about the Piaggio? I know, not a jet, but very decent performance.

 

Actually wonderful performance against a Citation (not so much against a Lear 35) and with turboprop operating cost. Problem is that 8 pax will not be comfortable - 2+1 people will be sitting side facing directly across from each other and pax #8 will be on the toilet. If that is not a problem then it is a wonderful choice. At full width the cabin is equivalent to a Falcon 20/50.

Jeff

 

planes are very mission ( use ) critical...who made the plane is almost unimportant...if you make a list of your priorities and how it is intended to be used, you should be able to find a good fit just by matching up the specs with needs... no technical knowledge necessary...you already have someone to assist with the better choice once you have narrowed the field.

 

If cabin room is your priority and you want a jet, I think it's an easy choice: either a Hawker 800 or a Citation Excel. If you're willing to spend a little more, a Citation Sovereign would be an even better choice, but at a higher cost of admission.

If you are willing to go with something older (but refurbished), a Falcon 20 with 731s (get the later 5BR version) is also a great airplane.

Heck, for that matter, you could get a Falcon 50 and operate it for around double the Lear 35 operating costs, and cheap to buy in. Fast, 8 people no problem, big baggage, excellent high and hot performance-- the Falcon 50 is really a great airplane. Get one with ProLine 21 and you'd be in good shape-- and you could go anywhere in the world in it, as an added bonus.

 

I agree with the recommendation for Hawker 800 or Citation Excel. The Hawker has been in production for a long time, so there are lots of pilots available and lots of planes to choose from on the used market. I'm not familiar enough with the Falcon 50 to make any recommendations, but in general Falcon is a top notch manufacturer. Regarding the Hawker, there is some discussion on Beechcraft/Hawker filing bankruptcy that you may want to consider. However, even if they do file bankruptcy I'm sure the Hawker line will still remain in production and be supported.

 

What's wrong with a Legacy 600? Very comfortable for 8 people, decent range, and they are currently priced right.

Art

 

A Falcon 50 is a spectacularly capable aircraft. May be more capable and a bigger step up than you are ready to go at this time but they are definately a "no excuse" choice.

As a Hawker alternative to the -800 look at the 1000. They did not make a whole lot but, like the Falcon 50, typically 6 chairs and a 3-place divan. I am not worried about the Chapter 11 filing of Hawker Beechcraft - what is killing the company financially is the production of new aircraft. The are doing fine financially with the in-service support side.

The Galaxy SPX/Gulfstream 100 might be something to look at too. Some configurations will be like the Hawker 800 with 5 chairs and a 3-place divan. It will have the lowest fuel burn of this group because it is smaller inside. Its smaller size is still larger than a Lear 35 though.

A Legacy is going to be a lot newer and with a far bigger acquisition cost.

Jeff

 

Citation 5 is the most bang for the buck out there.

Buy one cheap, Upgrade avionics, paint and interior and you have a brand new 12 seater you can fly single pilot for about $2 million.

 

The Citation V is still the Citation I, II cross section so it may not be "spacious" enough.

Jeff

 

Collins Proline=Avionics suite.

 

Gulfstream = serious wallet drainer for operating costs. Talking $1.5 mil or more per year, no capital cost. And they are now all old and harder and harder to maintain. Personally I love them but their time has passed. Better to get an early G-IV.

Jeff

 

@ Jeff

What do you think of a Falcon 2000 in comparison to a Falcon 50? One engine less to maintain and newer.

 

Falcon 50s are wonderful airplanes-- I've flown them all over the world.

The major issue with 50s are corrosion. You need to make sure that you are getting one which either has been fixed, or doesn't have an issue.

You might consider the 50 that WestStar is offering, with a warranty. It has Proline avionics and the -4 engine upgrade. It's on the expensive side for a 50, but should be good for a long time-- and WestStar is an excellent shop. Of course, you could get a 900B for the same price. A 900B costs the same to operate as a 50, but has a true Gulfstream-class cabin.

Also, keep in mind that a 50 (or any airplane of that class) is not inexpensive to operate. A good mechanic on staff will more than pay for himself. However, you said you could pay double what you spent on the Lear 35, and that should cover a 50, from my experience with both airplanes.

The other airplane that you might consider is a late model Challenger 601. Again, great cabin, decent range, and relatively cheap to buy. If you can swing a 604, that's much better.

 

I'm not Jeff, but I'll answer anyway. 2000 is a great airplane. Cheaper to operate than a 50 and larger cabin. More expensive to buy, however.

If going to places like Aspen in the summer is important, the 50 is much superior. Also, the 50 has a little bit more range. Otherwise, the 2000 is a great airplane.

 

Aomwething I would recommend to get good costing expectation and then ultimately control with the selected aircraft is JSSA "Tip to Tail" coverage. Getting basic ballpark numbers from them for the different aircraft types will be useful. In the end JSSI will make your maintenance side pretty much a fixed constant cost.

With the 50 there is the West Star engine conversion and then there is also the full conversion to EX engines. Of course, budget permitting, one could look at a later 50EX.

As for moving up to a 601 or 900, my opinion is that for most people that might be too big of a jump coming out of a Lear 35. Moving up that much in a single step might be a bit too much of an adjustment. If you start using the aircraft going into Europe (which any of these we are point to can easily do) then they do airway charges based upon max gross weight rating.

Anyone know more about the Hawker 1000? There are a couple available on controller.com They were never as successful in sales as the -800 and eventually killed. It does have the same basic cabin configuration of the Falcon 50 (6 chairs, 3-place divan) and is listed as 3,000 nm range. Is the 1000 a runway hog or has a bad payload range chart? Net Jets is/was an operator.

Jeff

 

I think something that should be mentioned is that if your Lear was being operated by someone who has a fleet of them, the costs will be much lower than the cost of operating an airplane where you don't have a bunch of trained pilots, mechanics, parts inventory, etc.

Many people decide that the Whizzbanger 3000 is just the airplane for them based on features, but neglect to consider spare parts, availability of experienced mechanics, cost of training, etc... If you buddy already operates Hawkers, or Citation Excels, one of those might make more sense even if it's not the perfect airplane on paper.

 

Excellent points. I would add, see if they have charter clients lined up for any particular aircraft that they really would want in their fleet; assumes that the aircraft will be offered for charter.

Jeff