DA50 vs. CE750

[Diesel]

The only good thing about the X were the wings that were built by boeining. The rest was built by cessna and that should scare the Sh!t out of you.

Go with a Falcon. The french take pride in their work.

 

[CapnVegetto]

Thanks for all the responses guys. I've already mentioned a Hawker or XL to him, but the XL is too slow for his tastes, and he's heard bad things about Hawker maintenence and speed, and he doesn't want anything to do with 'em. He's an ex navy fighter pilot, so he knows a bit about flying, but he doesn't know anything about corporate airplanes. He just knows he wants a large cabin that goes fast in that price range. Basically, he's looking to drop $10 to $15 mil in a tax write off, so he doesn't have to pay capital gains. I don't know all the details, I don't work for the guy, even. I'm just advising, buddy to buddy.

I appreciate everything!

 

[some_dude]

If he's concerned about the financial merits, he should really look into the Sovereign. He could get a new one for that price, and operate it much less expensively than the other two.

If he wants to fly it himself, he should look at the Falcon. If "going fast" is important for his ego, than the X is the right choice.

Thanks for all the responses guys. I've already mentioned a Hawker or XL to him, but the XL is too slow for his tastes, and he's heard bad things about Hawker maintenence and speed, and he doesn't want anything to do with 'em. He's an ex navy fighter pilot, so he knows a bit about flying, but he doesn't know anything about corporate airplanes. He just knows he wants a large cabin that goes fast in that price range. Basically, he's looking to drop $10 to $15 mil in a tax write off, so he doesn't have to pay capital gains. I don't know all the details, I don't work for the guy, even. I'm just advising, buddy to buddy.

I appreciate everything!

 

[Silver Wings]

The only good thing about the X were the wings that were built by boeining. The rest was built by cessna and that should scare the Sh!t out of you.

Go with a Falcon. The french take pride in their work.

Clearly Diesel hasn't spent any time in France. Most of the time they are on strike !

 

[Kingairrick]

the citation x's wing had to be re-drawn on Falcon's software (Catia)before it would meet the numbers they needed.

 

[NJA Capt]

In reality, the difference would be about 3 minutes extra flight time per hour ... Hardly noticable to anyone.
JetPilot500

Pretty accurate data JP500. Just for grins, I typed the following info into the CX's FMZ.

All conditions are:
0 wind
ISA
1000' MSL airport
FL400
810nm leg
4 pax
TO fuel 7000#
Accl/stop: 3962'

Max cruise: 1:42
Fuel burn: 6100#

.84 = 1:48
Fuel burn 5600#

 

[ocpistolpete]

just talked to a cl604 driver, he said the 300 doc are more than a 604 because of engine reserves...new engine

peter

 

[westwind driver]

LR-60. It's got good payload, good speed, and reasonable DOC's. And there are some good late model ones available.

Poke around here to compare planes:

<http://www.corporatejetsales.com/reports/jetcom3.htm>

Problem with the LR60 is it's field performance at heavy weights. Most of the runways corporate jets operate from are 5000 to 7000 feet in length. The 60 has pretty high Ref speeds and takeoff speeds when it gets warm, or high, or a combination of the above.

Carrying 5 people with bags and fuel in the 60 during the summer puts you right up on the edge of your runway performance numbers with the above mentioned runways.

For range, short field performance, cabin and baggage volume I would suggest looking into the Cessna Citation Sovereign (C680) or Gulfstream G150 (considering new aircraft)

If you're looking at used, I would suggest the Falcon 50 with the -3D or -40 engine mod. A Falcon 50 operator I know has told me they leave central Tennessee, fly to Southern California, buy 75 gals of fuel and return home. He said while maintenance is a bit more costly than other aircraft in the same class/category, reliability is top notch and product support is pretty good.

As for a Citation X (C750); I have talked with too many Netjets pilots who tell me their aircraft are hangar queens, and on any given day only around 50% of the C750 fleet (somewhere around 60 or 70) is operational and ready to fly. One pilot, a training captain on the X, showed me the fleet status one day on his PDA. 46% of the Citation X fleet that day was grounded and unavailable due to mechanical problems.

He later told a Gulfstream Sales Director that the Citation X has been plagued with maintenance issues since day 1, and a lot of NetJets' Citation X pilots joke about the airplane, saying "The Citation X; It's the fastest thing between service centers."

Lots of options out there, but my top picks would be G150, C680 and FA50.

 

[CapnVegetto]

Anybody noticed any 'new airplane bugs' in the CE-680?

 

[Senior_Citizen]

For range, short field performance, cabin and baggage volume I would suggest looking into the Cessna Citation Sovereign (C680) or Gulfstream G150 (considering new aircraft)
...
...
...
As for a Citation X (C750); I have talked with too many Netjets pilots who tell me their aircraft are hangar queens, and on any given day only around 50% of the C750 fleet (somewhere around 60 or 70) is operational and ready to fly. One pilot, a training captain on the X, showed me the fleet status one day on his PDA. 46% of the Citation X fleet that day was grounded and unavailable due to mechanical problems.
...
...
...
Lots of options out there, but my top picks would be G150, C680 and FA50.

Be careful considering the G150, we also operate from short-hot-high (7500'@3000'SL Caribbean) airfields, and no Israeli-Gulfstream (G100-150-200) has enough T.O. performance with our useful load requirements (4-6 people, plus 600+lb baggage).

Also about the Ce750 (X), the models built from 2002 are very improved, in performance and reliability, after consider any option you must contract an good professional advisor service, the latest number about the mean dispatch rate of the C.X fleet data we known was about 98%, the same numbers (+-) are for the G100 and G200.

I (in your place) will consider the G100(vfy runaway performance), Ce650(XLS) ,the G150(vfy runaway performance), Ce680(Sovereign) and the Ce750 (X -models built from 2002-now).

 

[FraxJockey]

CL 300 Engine DOC

The DOC on the HTF7000 of the CL300 may be slightly higher, but that is because there is ZERO overhaul times. Inspect and go until something is found. Went in for a full routine boroscope inspection and it took 5 hours (3 to let the engines cool down). The engine is so derated that the manufacturer is willing to almost warranty it forever.

Comparing the CL30 to an RJ is like comparing the CE550 to the new Soverign. Totally different generation (in design and avionics). Bottom line is that it will and is holding its value. If it is a temporary purchase for a future trade in, it is deffinately worth a look.

Just my $.02

 

[PGH STEEL]

I fly the CE750 18-20 days a mo and dont have a bad thing to say about it.
1== It's fast
2== Load up and go to FL450
3== Climb @ .85 up high
4== FF 1750 pph at max cruse
5== Lot's of bag space
6== East to west no prob
7== Our X would be in MX all the time to if we made 27k a year!!!!

Just my .02
I love that thing

 

[westwind driver]

7== Our X would be in MX all the time to if we made 27k a year!!!!

Just my .02

I love that
I'm not at all trying to bash the X, just passing along info that was given to me. I don't assume to ever be right, nor do I take other peoples thoughts as the golden rule.

Others have said post 2002 serial numbers have the kinks worked out. But, having heard both ends I still suggest to the purchaser to contact an aviation consulting firm or the manufacturers directly to get the facts on each make/model of aircraft he/she is interested in.

Overall the X sounds like a great plane if you wanna go fast.
For now I'm more than happy flying Westwinds, and am looking forward to stepping up into the G150.

 

[Snakum]

For now I'm more than happy flying Westwinds, and am looking forward to stepping up into the G150

On that note ... I just wanted to mention that I finally got to poke my big-a$$ noggin inside a WestWind II a couple days ago. I had no idea they were as large and roomy as they are. And very nicely appointed, as well. The WWII I peeked at was sporting what I'd call, for lack of a better/more well-informed descriptor, "Gulfstream Class" interior. I mean this thing was niiiiiice.



Minhberg

 

[Valkyrie]

Is your guy going to fly it?
If so, I suggest a Falcon 50 to you, even used so DOC won't hurt too much...
IMHO it has definitely better handling qualities, the extra safety of a third engine, good looking, and even looks like a 900!

 

[Diesel]

Hey it's not 27k that makes the X break. It's the plane I flew last week that was run for 48hrs straight. From one crew to another to another back to me. Never powered it down.

I flew one 47hrs last week and it didn't break one bit. I think the older planes work better than the middle of the line ones. Everything has been replaced at least once and they've worked out all the bugs.

The really new ones work well too. It's the serial numbers that they swapped from single to dual electrical which are goofy.

 

[buttercup]

I fly the CE750 18-20 days a mo and dont have a bad thing to say about it.
1== It's fast
2== Load up and go to FL450
3== Climb @ .85 up high
4== FF 1750 pph at max cruse
5== Lot's of bag space
6== East to west no prob
7== Our X would be in MX all the time to if we made 27k a year!!!!

Just my .02
I love that thing

With a full boat of people number 6 has to be done at LRC!