Can someone familiar with the Citation V Ultra give me a run down of the good, the bad and anything else.

Someone that is looking was asking me about either a Proline 21 King Air 200, one of the ones made since 2004 or 2005, or a late 90s Ultra because relatively speaking they're at the same price. I'm familiar with the 200, just know nothing about the V.

And just out of curiosity, really how are the landings on the II and V? Is it impossible (as some publications seemingly put it) to land it nicely? I mean are there ways to trick it? Come in fast and flat, stall it on, land nosewheel first or something to make it land nice. Aircraft dealers and consultants rave about the Ultra but pilots say it lands bad... I was wondering if that was really the case.

 

I think all straight-wing citations make lousy landings because they dont have a trailing-link landing gear. It doesnt matter how softly you put it down, it is still going to feel like you hit hard, and without any struts. Hopefully someone else can chime in with some info for you...

 

Actually, the 560 Encore and 560 Excel versions do have Trailing link and as such land very nicely. The Ultra is basically a Citation V, upgraded with EFIS and The 5D version of the JT-15 Engine. It still has the wing boots...you don't loose them until you get into the Encore. I have never flown the Ultra, but fly the Encore now (which is just a suped up Ultra with bigger engines, hot wings, trailing links, etc) and have flown a Citation II. The II has the older style Straight Strut gear like the Ultra, and they are more difficult to land soft consistantly however not difficult to land comfortably once you get the feel.

Cessna Citation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Its easy to land the II well, IF you keep a little power in lower than 50' and are able to "fly it on", holding the AOA right at L/D to touchdown. Trying to land it like a "real" jet, however, won't result in trips to a chiropractor...just damage to one's pride and ego. I think its very similar to the last 10-15' above touchdown for a CRJ-200 in that you want the nose *just* off the runway to make for smooth 'rollers'.

The Ultra is a good performer, much better than the straight II, but it probably won't be cheaper to operate (especially on short trips) than the KA200. With that said, you can probably buy a decent Ultra for well under $3M these days.

Simple systems, a wide support network, and an efficient airplane for the capabilities it provides...lots of people bag on Citations but they are GREAT airplanes!

 

Been flying an Ultra for a year now. Landing it is a hit and miss thing, but it seems that the harder the landing the better it is(?) In my opinion very economical from a jet standpoint. I probably get about 1500 lbs for the first hr, and then 1200 there after. Good short field performance, great baggage, but it's all unpressurized. It has a MMO of .75, but typical speeds are .68 to .72 for most trips. It can climb directly to the high 30's fully loaded which is great. Our Ultra is not RNAV 1 capable so that hinders us going into high density areas on the SID's and STAR's. It's has the Primus 1000 avionics package, which in my opinion is not that great. Any pilot should be able to easily out fly this system. Hope this helps.

Side note, anyone here ever heard of a Citation SIII, not the SII?

 

I have over 2,300 hours in the U Boat, and I just love that airplane, even though I've moved on to bigger things. The Ultra is a very flexible aircraft and quite dependable. Ref speeds at light weights in the low to mid 90kt range can provide landing distances of less than 2500 feet.

With some practice, a smooth landing can be made using the AOA indexer as a reference. The Primus 1000 system is better than steam gauges for sure. The autopilot will not intercept a localizer very precisely above 200 kts and it pitch oscillates on the glideslope above 170 kts.

The nose gear system has some weaknesses. Nosewheel shimmy and knocking sounds reappear after maintenance has rebuilt the whole system. We knicknamed it the 4 million dollar shopping cart.

Fuel burns usually are 1550 first hour and 1100 after that. FL410 and 400 saw the Ultra alot. After an hour we go to FL430 westbound.

You will enjoy this airplane!!

CC

 

Good to know and I appreciate the insight. I was going to recommend the Ultra just because they wanted to do charter with the thing and it'll do a lot better than a King Air 200 with most brokers, but, the honest truth is this owner never actually pulls the trigger.

Glad I don't work for him.

 

We just bought an Ultra (SN 324, 1995 model,replacement for Lear 35) and I just got back from initial training at FSI. My comments are that it does land a bit hard if you pull the power at 50' like most jets. The Primus 1000 is pretty intuitive and not that complex. Coming from a Universal UNS-1 I didnt like the GNS-XL FMS at first but its getting a little more tolerable. Some data that you would expect is not there and it takes a little bit of wierd button pushing to figure stuff out. Never had to turn avionics off in a jet with a GPU start but Captain/ sim instructor emphasize that you do this. I do not know why. Autopilot works good in all modes, havent tried intercepting the localizer at 200 kts. Wish you could have the autopilot fly a VNAV solution that you put in the FMS but it wont. I like having the external baggage instead of hauling it through the cabin like a Lear. Simple systems (manual trim wheels for all three trim axes for example, electric also for pitch) and slow Vref speeds make it a very good entry level jet.

 

....................