Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Citation X Info

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

FlexNoMore

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2002
Posts
6
Looking at adding a "X" to current fleet. Have heard all the sales talk and praise. Looking for any insight offered about life in,around and with the "X".

Thanks.......FNM
 
Several guys I know that fly it call it the "fastest thing between service centers"....if that tells you anything. :D
 
Which number are you looking at. Early model numbers have some serious problems. Plus they have to carry balast fuel.
 
If we do acquire an "X" it willl be a new aircraft acquisition, aircraft will be based overseas, I have prevously heard unkind things about the "X's" reliability.

Interested in range at LRC vs high mach cruise, what is LRC mach number, never hear anyone talk about that number. Are 3000 NM legs real at LRC Westbound as well as Eastbound.

Thanks or the help.....FNM
 
LRC .... in a X? I though guys bought those for speed. Wanna go 3000 nm every day then a Falcon 50EX would be a great ticket. Nicer more quite cabin as well. Less MX issues as well.

I know, boss wants to go fast, right? ,) :)
 
I fly a LJ-60 with a guy who is a "X" captian as well, and he said there really isn't a LRC, you just go higher for a better fuel burn. Don't know if that really helps.
 
Shamus said:
I fly a LJ-60 with a guy who is a "X" captian as well, and he said there really isn't a LRC, you just go higher for a better fuel burn. Don't know if that really helps.

And what if the jet stream hitting him in the face is higher?
 
LRC is about .80 to .82

Plan on about 6hrs and then landing with about 3000lbs in the tanks. You can go farther if you want. I like to land with 2000lbs in the tanks. 3000 just makes me smile.

Problem with a falcon 50 is LRC is like .74 or .75.

3000 every day. probably not going to happen. I do know a guy that runs a X from south america to MIA twice a month.

He starts out at 470 then drifts up to 490 or 510. 8.5hrs in the seat.
 
Long range cruise is .82, don't know the fuel burn numbers off the top of my head. We regularly do a 2600 NM leg, it's also South america to the US so really no wind issues on that route. It's a six hour flight sometimes as low as 5.5. Higher is better in this airplane. 430, 450, 470 are the regular altitudes. You won't do 92 at those altitudes though, more like 88 or 490 KTAS. LRC is about 460 KTAS if I remeber correctly. At 450 and 88 you'll see about 800 pph per side. 3000 miles against a 100 jet probably wouldn't work too well. It has an NBAA 3400 mile range but that is NBAA perfect numbers crap. If you fly it on a route (like in South america) where you can descend when you want, it may be possible, but a falcon 900 or a 50 EX may fit the bill better. Ours has been pretty dependable lately. Most maintenance issues involve false CAS messages( there are like 300+ messages you can get). Occasionaly the only way to clear them is to completely depower the airplane and start over. It needs a CTL-ALT-DEL on the panel. Mechanically agreat airplane but more computerized than it needs to be.
 
You Should consider tha Chalenger300 and the Gulfstream G200, the roomier cabin will be a high value item on 3000 nm trips, but consider a longer range a/p if you're routes winds may no help some times (a Da2000/2000EX or a Gulf G-350 or a Challenger 604).
 

Latest resources

Back
Top