Avantair Experiencing Unrivaled Growth - Press Release

[Paradoxus]

I suppose so. Cheerfully retracted.

 

[Praetorian]

I don't think its dishonest at all to put it in the fractional light jet category.

The Avanti has a cabin that is longer, wider, and taller than any light jet currently in fractional use; its cabin is actually taller and wider than all Citations including the Excel, Sovereign, and X.

The Avanti's cruise speed is faster than the Citation Bravo that CitationAir still uses, and the CJ1 Flight Options used to operate. Over a 600nm segment, Business & Commercial Aviation's Purchase Planning Handbook says the Avanti II arrives just 10 minutes later than a CJ3, but burns 27% less fuel. Or 13 minutes behind an Encore+, having burned 36% less fuel.

While I agree that there's a substantial delta between the Avanti II and "the top-performing light jets", when you look at the total picture I believe it quite accurate to put it in the Light Jet category...especially when comparing it to other fractional airframes.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=penis envy

Come on man, it's about what you get paid not what you fly. You guys really have nothing to be ashamed of, except for that overly cheerful co-pilot

 

[BeenThereDoneIt]

I"d certainly say the P-180 out-performs other turboprops, such as the King Air line.

 

[Paradoxus]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=penis envy

Come on man, it's about what you get paid not what you fly. You guys really have nothing to be ashamed of, except for that overly cheerful co-pilot

That's really what it all comes down to.

 

[BoilerUP]

I don't work for Avantair.

 

[Paradoxus]

I don't work for Avantair.

...yet

 

[BeenThereDoneIt]

Yet? Are you saying the recession isn't over?????????

 

[jonjuan]

The Avanti has a cabin that is longer, wider, and taller than any light jet currently in fractional use; its cabin is actually taller and wider than all Citations including the Excel, Sovereign, and X.

Are you sure about the length thing or are you lying as you did when you met your wife? It's still 30 mins longer between pbi-teb versus a 40 or bj. 3 feet is a big deal, but then again, you wouldn't know.

 

[BoilerUP]

Yup, I'm sure about the Avanti (cabin length 17.5') being longer than its light jet fractional competitors the CJ3 (15.7'), Beechjet (15.5'), and Encore (17.3').

The Lear 40XR (17.7') and 45XR (19.8') are have longer cabins which admittedly are in the "light jet class"...but to be honest I didn't consider them because their 21k+ lb MTOW puts them into midsize jet category.

My bad about omitting Flex's "super lights"...but then again most women want girth over length

 

[johnsonrod]

I don't think its dishonest at all to put it in the fractional light jet category.

The Avanti has a cabin that is longer, wider, and taller than any light jet currently in fractional use; its cabin is actually taller and wider than all Citations including the Excel, Sovereign, and X.

The Avanti's cruise speed is faster than the Citation Bravo that CitationAir still uses, and the CJ1 Flight Options used to operate. Over a 600nm segment, Business & Commercial Aviation's Purchase Planning Handbook says the Avanti II arrives just 10 minutes later than a CJ3, but burns 27% less fuel. Or 13 minutes behind an Encore+, having burned 36% less fuel.

While I agree that there's a substantial delta between the Avanti II and "the top-performing light jets", when you look at the total picture I believe it quite accurate to put it in the Light Jet category...especially when comparing it to other fractional airframes.

This is all semantics and marketing BS. When I see an Avanti on the ramp I don't automatically say, "wow, check out that jet!" It ain't a jet. We can all see the props. I don't see jet engines. It might be compared to aircraft in the "light jet category" but it ain't a jet. We can agree to disagree. Regardless, it looks like a great performer and a fun airplane to fly...

 

[kf4amu]

Perhaps the customers care. Does that matter to you? I think people know the difference between prop engines and jet engines.

Customers only care because they have been spoonfed a myth that jet aircraft are safer/faster/more comfortable/better than turboprop plane.

If they knew the advantages turboprops have over turbofan aircraft, they A. wouldnt care what pushes it, or B. would prefer a turboprop on shorter segments

Unfortunately most of what customers hear is the advantages of turbofan over turboprop instead of the other way around.

 

[jonjuan]

Customers only care because they have been spoonfed a myth that jet aircraft are safer/faster/more comfortable/better than turboprop plane.

If they knew the advantages turboprops have over turbofan aircraft, they A. wouldnt care what pushes it, or B. would prefer a turboprop on shorter segments

Unfortunately most of what customers hear is the advantages of turbofan over turboprop instead of the other way around.

Unfortunately, many turboprop customers have been told that the speeds are the same and all other flight characteristics are the same such as climb performance, altitude capabilities, speeds at altitudes, ability to go above weather, etc when in fact, the turboprop has some significant limitations when compared to a decent jet.

 

[wacoflyr]

Unfortunately, many turboprop customers have been told that the speeds are the same and all other flight characteristics are the same such as climb performance, altitude capabilities, speeds at altitudes, ability to go above weather, etc when in fact, the turboprop has some significant limitations when compared to a decent jet.

In general, I enjoy your posts. Love the avatar. However, the P180 goes to 410, which seems high to me. That does get us above most weather. I don't think anybody on these boards has claimed more than about 380 true for a realistic cruise. Of course it is slower than a pure jet. But the fuel flows are usually around 600-700 pounds an hour up there, and the cabin simply is bigger than anything in the light jet class. Yes, we are a bit of a speed bump, but we compete in the same market as light jets, so the Piaggio gets compared with them.

 

[gunfyter]

Yes, we are a bit of a speed bump, but we compete in the same market as light jets, so the Piaggio gets compared with them.

I think it competes in both markets ... people looking at light jets and people looking at other turbo-props.

BTW ... if I remember correctly the Pro-Pilot salary surveys always listed the Citation X in large cabin category while listing the Falcon 2000 in mid-size.

????:laugh:

 

[imacdog]

I thought the X was in the large pilot ego size?

 

[Geronimo4497]

Just did PBI-BED today in 3+30 with the majority of the flight at FL390. Fuel burn was 2200lbs. Not too bad for a screw job.

Looking at flightaware there was a Citation 560 that did it in 3+10. Not too big a difference and I am sure our passengers enjoyed the cabin a lot more.

 

[Helmsalee]

Hey, they are turbines. Turbine = jet. Nuf said.

 

[Paradoxus]

Hey, they are turbines. Turbine = jet. Nuf said.

No, no...I'll agree that its all largely irrelevant when it comes to pay and QOL, but let's not exceed the bounds of reason here. Let's call a spade a spade.

 

[mainiac]

Just did PBI-BED today in 3+30 with the majority of the flight at FL390. Fuel burn was 2200lbs. Not too bad for a screw job.

Looking at flightaware there was a Citation 560 that did it in 3+10. Not too big a difference and I am sure our passengers enjoyed the cabin a lot more.

Quebec City to St Pete today 3:53.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/VNR150

Fuel Burn 2270 lbs.

 

[Paradoxus]

Quebec City to St Pete today 3:53.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/VNR150

Fuel Burn 2270 lbs.

Way, way too long in that kooked-up komposite kockpit.