Beechjet 400 question

[CrewDawg]

I heard that there were there were some 400's that were "beefed" up. The outside of the jet was the same as any other 400 but the inside was a whole different story. I was just wondering if anyone knew the differences in the two.

 

[Flying Illini]

Could you be talking about the Hawker 400XP? It's pretty much the same as the beechjet, just a different name. I think it has a 200lb gross weight increase.

Hawker webpage

Flightoptions webpage (more descriptive)

The flight options page has a link on the left side of the page to all of their aircraft...just click on the Beechjet 400A and you can compare it to the Hawker 400XP

 

[Valkyrie]

Before being the Beechjet, it was the Mitsubishi Diamond I, back in 1981.

Then, the Diamond IA with more powerful engines.

The Diamond II rolled out in 1985 with more power again, same year as the Diamond line acquisition by Beech Aircraft Corp.

Beech renamed it the Beechjet 400 and it became 400A in 1989.

Enhancements came again in 1996, with major cabin modifications to obtain reclining seats (i.e. less seats for better confort).

 

[CorpAv8r]

RE: Beechjet 400 question.

The Beechjet 400A has received approval for a gross weight increase:

It was
Ramp: 16,300 lbs
T/O: 16,100 lbs

It can be modified to
Ramp: 16,500 lbs
T/O: 16,300 lbs

It is just a paperwork change - nothing structural.

 

[Astra Guy]

Boy, they keep adding weight and it really takes away from the performance of this aircraft in climb, at least. Hopefully most operators don't have long legs or short runways to deal with.

 

[CorpAv8r]

I agree. The climb performance is lacking, however it is still better than our Diamond. On long legs, we have to step climb. We don't have to worry about short runways (5000 is our shortest), so the extra weight is nice for tankering fuel or carrying an extra person.

The range is our complaint. We are trading the Beechjet for a mid-cabin of some sort with better range within the year. We've been looking at the Hawker 800, Lear 60, Citation VII and the Excel. One of our concerns will be operating out of a 5,300' strip at 1,000MSL on a summer day and each offers different advantages and tradeoffs. At the moment, I think we are leaning toward an Excel (runway & economy).

What model Astra do you operate and how do you like it?

 

[Astra Guy]

Hey Corp8Avr,

We have what is known as the classic...sn 29. It blows almost all of the competition out of the water. We operated a Diamond for 11 years and the Astra is more economical/hour/mile, etc. We have gone nonstop from FTY-SFO and a 1500nm trip it is not breathing hard. True .82 airplane at ISA. We have internalized the maintenance and are on a phase inspection program...every 62.5 hours perform another numbered phase out of 16 to complete the 1000 hour cycle.

Another consideration is acquisition cost. You should be able to buy an SPX, which is better still for around $7MM these days. The only drawback to this airplane is the narrow fuselage. No one has complained however, since it is so reliable and a real workhorse. We fly ours about 450/year.

 

[CorpAv8r]

Ron,

Thanks for the info. I've always heard the Astra's numbers were good. I'm trying to see if we can stretch the Beechjet from GMU-BJC tomorrow. If the winds get much stronger, we'll have to make a pitstop.

The cabin is the only negative I've heard about the Astra. We have the Beechjet because it has probably the best cabin of the light jets. The big boss wants to be able to stand up and be able to go far for good economy. His other main complaint about the Beechjet is the seating arrangement. It has the mid-club setup and is really only comfortable for 3-4 people. Currently our average stage length is only 400-500 miles, so economy is important. We see a big difference in fuel flows between the Diamond and Beechjet trip for trip.

Thanks again for the info.

Dennis

 

[potrack]

Beech 400 jobs??

Any Idea where I can get a listing or info on what corps fly 400A's or may be hiring experienced and typed pilots?

Second question---- BE-400/MU-300 type still good for Hawker 400 right? Just renamed more or less??

 

[Astra Guy]

potrack,

Get your hands on an NBAA Member Directory and it at least will tell you who operates these aircraft as of last fall. In addition get yourself on the www.nbaa.org airmail message board and look for aviation jobs. All types of jobs are posted there all of the time.

Answer to question 2 is that they are all the same type ratings...at least that was the word from a Raytheon pilot in my FSI class last September. If they can lump the 300 and the 400 together then whatever minor changes they make in the XP will not change the type rating.

 

[CorpAv8r]

The Hawker 400XP falls under the same type rating as the MU-300/BE-40 type.

The Raytheon sales guy told me that the new name is nothing more than marketing. Supposedly, it is a reallignment of the aircraft divisions. The jets are marketed under the Hawker/Raytheon name while the King Air/Baron/Bonanza fall under the Beech name. At least, that is what I heard about 6 months ago.