AeroPlus wrote:
And yes, I do fly regularly to Courchevel in winter time and can’t land there with a jet, but can with the TBM850 or PC12.
What about this? Not saying its safe or for everyone though.
jet takeoff at courchevel!
Yes it has been announced they won’t sell any more – they haven’t been pushing much for over a year. Not so much M2 has cannabilised it but they want to focus on the M2. I think they are great baby Citations. They have still sold nearly 500.
Sorry to necropost, but just heard that the Mustang will be discontinued. The M2 kind of cannibalized it. The type rating that was specific to it, and not shared, probably didn’t help the final sales. Good news is that the Mustangs are great value these days, and probably will become even better. The P&W 615 engines will in the long run cost less than the FJ44’s that the others have (Williams engines can only be overhauled by factory and they hold you to a very expensive engine program). Good little aircraft the Mustang, it seems. Would you agree @JasonC ?
I’ve heard the ESP Gold engine program is around $230/hr for the Mustang, which puts possible operating costs quite low. Burning 80gal/hr at let’s say $3.5, would be another $280/hr. And let’s say maintenance adds up to about another $200/hr and this thing can probably be run for $710/hr at the low end. Not bad for a little jet.
If I wasn't certain that I could accelerate to one knot below V1, abort and then stop before the fence at the end of the runway, I'm not sure that I would be happy operating from that runway.
So you never fly single engine?
However EASA is now proposing to force the balanced runway for all jets even on private ops, which would wipe out jet ops at (according to AOPA) close to 1000 airports in Europe.
Not balanced field, but you need to apply landing factors, in this case 1.67 times the distance. In some countries this is regulated already by national rules, such as in Sweden. This means I can't fly into Shoreham legally with the CJ1, while I know for a fact that they operate quite frequently there, and even have the CJ4 as visitors now and then.
The greatest reduction in safety is to limit the options to a pilot, where to fly, when to fly, how to fly and more importantly, when to land and where to land. I'd like to see this approach applied to cars.
"You may only drive here between 9 and 10 every other sunday unless it's a holiday in which case you may only drive if your car is blue. If it is metallic blue then other rules apply, see our website for information..."
Taking the price as well into consideration, I get a feeling that flying the TBM850 or a Meridian is cheaper than a Jet? It is just a 'gut feeling'? And yes, I do fly regularly to Courchevel in winter time and can't land there with a jet, but can with the TBM850 or PC12.
If I wasn't certain that I could accelerate to one knot below V1, abort and then stop before the fence at the end of the runway, I'm not sure that I would be happy operating from that runway.
This is one of the few EASA rules which makes absolute sense to me.
This is not an EASA rule! What Peter meant by "balanced field length" is actually "factored field length" (i.e. applying a safety factor to the landing distance stated in the AFM) and was introduced by JAA over ten years ago. Balanced field length is a technique for calculating V1 on takeoff and has been in use worldwide for many decades. BTW: takeoff distances are not being factored, neither by JAA not by EASA.
Aren't there other factors in favour of turboprops e.g. no need for a balanced runway calculation even on an AOC operation?
If I wasn't certain that I could accelerate to one knot below V1, abort and then stop before the fence at the end of the runway, I'm not sure that I would be happy operating from that runway.
This is one of the few EASA rules which makes absolute sense to me.
But the single engine tuboprops mentioned above can not operate commercially in this part of the World anyway, at least not under IFR.
That restriction is about to fall, there are already AOCs operating on exemptions in Switzerland and Finland. It's quite sad as the best SETs are European products: TBM850 and PC12. Once this restriction goes away, the price of things like Cheyennes will plummet.
Aren't there other factors in favour of turboprops e.g. no need for a balanced runway calculation even on an AOC operation?
Propeller driven aircraft must also apply a reduction factor to the runway length for commercial operations. Only the factor is different: 60% for a jet and 70% for props. But the single engine tuboprops mentioned above can not operate commercially in this part of the World anyway, at least not under IFR.
The only advantage of a turboprop, fuel efficiency aside, I can think of is that on some airports there are no night flying resrtictions (e.g. at my home base).
