Pilots helping pilots

View over 100 airline profilesAdd to Google



Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Corporate
Register FAQ Advertising Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Corporate Corporate operators

 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums

    Already registered? Login above

OR
 
To take advantage of all the site's features, become a member of
the largest community of airline pilots in the U.S. and beyond.

The advertising to the left will not show if you are a registered user.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-25-2013, 09:45 AM   #21 (permalink)
Citation style!
 
BoilerUP's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: CJ2+ PIC
Posts: 4,183
Default

Capital cost is high on a Phenom 100 (relative to others), but as far as jets go the operating cost is fairly low and that tends to be what kills operators.

They think the acquisition cost delta on an older plane will buy their gas & pay their maintenance, but when those big bills start rolling in their eyes get VERY big.
__________________
"Fat pilots carry less payload." - R.M. Grundman
BoilerUP is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
Old 01-25-2013, 10:37 AM   #22 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 410
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourpaw View Post
Well, talked to him this morning and he still seems pretty dead set on the Phenom 100. His thoughts are get one brand new ~3.5m and claim 50% depreciation on taxes so he feels as if he got it for 1/2.


I'm still skeptical. This is a new flight department, straight into a multi million dollar jet seems risky.
For that price range I would spring for a CJ2/+. I fly a CJ and the plane never breaks. We launch on very short notice all the time and rarely have maintenance issues. From what I've heard support on the Embraers is not great. Passengers like the 100s because of the enclosed lav which is just a curtain on the CJs but from what I've heard the 100s are louder and less comfortable.
Systemized is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 10:37 PM   #23 (permalink)
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Position: moving along
Posts: 53
Default

How about an MU-2? Great bang for the buck
jbt1407 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2013, 06:04 AM   #24 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Bucking Bar's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Flight Test & Work Around Engineering Field Representative
Posts: 7,548
Default

Here is a tool that we use at the early stages of our corporate aircraft acquisition searches:

https://www.conklindd.com/CDALibrary/ACCostSummary.aspx

Good suggestions on this thread.

The original poster did not explain much about his needs. What is his usual trip length? Cargo ever important? Usually full, or empty? If the Cirrus is working for them, but they need more room, comfort and range, why not throw a executive configured Cessna Caravan into consideration? Without the cargo pod the short fuselage aircraft is a 175 to 190 knot machine and it will carry a Phenom inside (almost).

If I needed to go fast for that price, I'd grab one of the last Sabre 65's built and zip along at nearly 100 knots faster than the Phenom in worlds more comfort and capability. If speed were not an issue, I'd stretch out in a Caravan. Other than "sex appeal" I have not seen a "light jet" that impresses me, although they certainly are improving. Frankly, I'd rather have a Pilatus.

Can't go wrong with a King Air and easy to sell if you decide you want something else.

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 01-26-2013 at 06:16 AM.
Bucking Bar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 07:55 AM   #25 (permalink)
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: CFI,II,MEI Sr22 Be36
Posts: 37
Default

Looks like the company is leaning towards a c90GTX. New cost is 3.8 retail. Seems to fit the mission a little bit better.
Fourpaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 08:51 AM   #26 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
yawdamp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 108
Default

Shocked no one mentioned the PC12. Comfort of a 200, with the convenience of a lav, and built like a truck. It is only 15-20 kts slower (than 700B) with a ton more MGTW. I have 1500+ hrs on the TBM 300+ hrs on the PC. The PC is hands down a better all around people/cargo mover. Our MX guys disliked the TBM, especially the brakes. They love the PC - they compared it to the likes of a twin otter we had years ago.
yawdamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 10:22 AM   #27 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
UnderOveur's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Holding over Macho Grande
Posts: 588
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yawdamp View Post
Shocked no one mentioned the PC12.
Beloved by every single owner that has one. I even know one who is in the final stages of buying a King Air but absolutely will NOT part with his Pilatus, he loves it so much.

What it lacks in speed it more than makes up for in roominess, payload, and distance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeloDrvr View Post
What kind of airports do you frequent?
The PC-12 is an especially good choice if planning on flying into unimproved/dirt strips (like the principal's ranch, for instance).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourpaw View Post
Preferable two engines

Thoughts?
Perhaps speed is the #1 concern here. Not enough info to go on.
UnderOveur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 01:41 PM   #28 (permalink)
Line Holder
 
VIIPILOT's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: CE-750, CE-650, CE-500 Left Seat/Right Seat
Posts: 38
Default

Ce-650-III.

Last edited by VIIPILOT; 03-05-2013 at 01:42 PM. Reason: M
VIIPILOT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 06:34 PM   #29 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 1,334
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yawdamp View Post
Shocked no one mentioned the PC12. Comfort of a 200, with the convenience of a lav, and built like a truck. It is only 15-20 kts slower (than 700B) with a ton more MGTW. I have 1500+ hrs on the TBM 300+ hrs on the PC. The PC is hands down a better all around people/cargo mover. Our MX guys disliked the TBM, especially the brakes. They love the PC - they compared it to the likes of a twin otter we had years ago.
Those tend to be a little pricier than the OPs price range.
JamesNoBrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 03:15 PM   #30 (permalink)
On Reserve
 
jarretk's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Lear 31A FO
Posts: 11
Default

Ill throw the Lear 31A into the conversation. You can find them for 1 million and up and IMHO its a much better choice than the Beech Jet. I have had 2 pilots, 7 passengers, bags for a 4 day trip, and full fuel and gone 930nm. The range and the baggage compartment (inside the aircraft behind the aft bench seat) are the only con's of the 31A that I have noticed. And I think it looks much better on a ramp than the Phenom
jarretk is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Skywest Pilot tries to steal plane ovrtake92 Regional 75 07-17-2012 08:40 PM
Russian Sukhoi plane missing on test flight Jack Bauer Safety 25 05-17-2012 05:58 AM
He's living on a jet plane vagabond Hangar Talk 0 04-14-2007 09:15 AM
Small plane nearly took off on short runway Nov. 9 miker1369 Major 4 11-24-2006 12:55 AM
Smart (SAFEE) plane /Fox News 08/14/06 JesseSW Hangar Talk 3 08-18-2006 10:04 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:20 PM.


vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2012 Internet Brands, Inc.