time requirements for new Very Light Jets?

[aviategw]

I heard that there is/will be a movement to lower the minimums for folks to operate the new Very Light Jets (Cessna Mustang, Honda Jet, Diamond Jet).

I thought I'd heard something like 1000 TT and a CFI certificate would be the minimums...

Any one else have anything on this?

[jknight8907]

I have no info, but I can't imagine being a CFI a requirement. That would put a lot of owner-pilots and even a lot of 'not-owner-pilots' in a bind.

[Doug Taylor]

What are the time requirements to operate a citation, if any?

[liebhabe]

[ QUOTE ]
What are the time requirements to operate a citation, if any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Part 91 - PPL and a type (and instrument rated if you want to realize the benefits of FL180+)

Same will go for the VLJs, Eclipse even talks about it on their website.

Now if we're talking insurance....

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
What are the time requirements to operate a citation, if any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thurman Munson had about 515 TT, about 2 years of total flight experience, and 30 or so hours in the CE-500/501, before he pranged his jet short of the runway at Akron-Canton airport and morting himself in 1979.

[Doug Taylor]

That's what I was thinking.

I can't see an insurance company lowering it's minimums.

Personally, I don't even get the whole VLJ thing. Aren't we more or less recreating the orginal Learjet with updated avionic and more advanced engines?

[Sprint100]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I don't even get the whole VLJ thing. Aren't we more or less recreating the orginal Learjet with updated avionic and more advanced engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't being an entrepreneur and/or inventor these days grand? Take an old product, make a minor cosmetic adjustment, and give it a new name then voila. Here is the newly invented (insert product name here).

[caliginousface]

i dont know how much the original lear jet weighed and dont want to google it and compare it to the upcoming vlj's, but it's the whole air taxi thing attached to it. and frankly, i want to fly for an airtaxi when i'm out of riddle and have some hours behind me.

[Doug Taylor]

Works for Hollywood and the music industry!

But seriously. What did the original Learjet carry, six people?

So add some lighter composites, updated engines, some flat panel displays and some lighter hydraulic/electical systems to take advantage of 2005 technology and we've got a "paradigm shift"?

[slowandlow]

And charge a couple million dollars...it will be genius I tell you!

[liebhabe]

[ QUOTE ]
And charge a couple million dollars...it will be genius I tell you!

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean they aren't $900,000 any more????

That was the genious of the plan. "Look! A jet for less that a million!" -- fast forward -- "So these parts we apparently needed cost a little more than we had budgeted... but hey, it's still cheaper than the Gulfstream."

[Doug Taylor]

We'll call it...a DoogieJET!

DoogieJET, the new paradigm shift in PersonalSizedJets!

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
So add some lighter composites, updated engines, some flat panel displays and some lighter hydraulic/electical systems to take advantage of 2005 technology and we've got a "paradigm shift"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the term "paradigm shift" gets used more on this forum than it does "out there". But obviously the "buzz" is being caused by the significant decrease in acquisition cost and operating cost. It's not just an incremental shift but a pretty good jump all at once. Now we'll just see if they can deliver and if the jets will hold up to line operations.

Took me a while to find "mort" from MikeD's post, but it was in a medical dictionary.

1. The cessation of all vital phenomena without capability of resuscitation, either in animals or plants.

[Doug Taylor]

Considering "Well above average" Joe can't afford a new Baron, is a supposed "VLJ" going to be any more economical? Methinks not.

But maybe, who knows. It reeks of business school 'remarketing' to me.

A good online source for words is Wikipedia but they really didn't have a good definition for the word "frag" which would have been a good substitute for Mike's useage of the 'mort' term.

[SteveC]

[ QUOTE ]
Works for Hollywood and the music industry!

But seriously. What did the original Learjet carry, six people?

So add some lighter composites, updated engines, some flat panel displays and some lighter hydraulic/electical systems to take advantage of 2005 technology and we've got a "paradigm shift"?

[/ QUOTE ]

The hoped for "shift" will only come about if they can get the per-mile cost down to the levels that are being bandied about. Jet speeds and high altitude utility at the same current cost as medium piston twins might just offer enough benefits to make them worthwhile and bring more customers into the fold. If they miss on the cost factors or don't have a high dispatch reliability though, forget it.

edit: sheesh I'm slow today. Really, I didn't copy flyover's post. Really.

[JHines]

[ QUOTE ]
Aren't we more or less recreating the orginal Learjet with updated avionic and more advanced engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but...Its gross weight is only about half that of a LR24, the runway requirements are less, the engines are much simpler and quieter, and the SFC has got to be a lot better than the .96-.97 for the CJ610.

The company has also been pretty hard-headed about keeping costs down and incorporating cost-cutting technology. The airframe is friction welded aluminum, not composite.

I think it adds up to a plane that is going to significantly increase the potential owner base in terms of (1) being able to operate at smaller/noise-sensitive fields, and (2) purchase + operating costs.

My real hope as a lowly piston driver is that they will put significant downwards price pressure on the entire industry, once they demonstrate that aircraft don't have to cost a fortune "just because".

[SteveC]

[ QUOTE ]
Considering "Well above average" Joe can't afford a new Baron, is a supposed "VLJ" going to be any more economical? Methinks not.

But maybe, who knows. It reeks of business school 'remarketing' to me.


[/ QUOTE ]
The "new market", if it comes, won't be in owner-operators. It will be new customers in the chartered flight arena. The people that now drive 300 miles will have a "more viable" (is that a valid term?) alternative that will be economically justifiable. The thought is that the large numbers of middle level business people will now be able to do single day trips at reasonable cost versus the multiple days required to drive.

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
Considering "Well above average" Joe can't afford a new Baron, is a supposed "VLJ" going to be any more economical? Methinks not.

But maybe, who knows. It reeks of business school 'remarketing' to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "paradigm shift" has strictly to do with cost. These are supposed to be much cheaper jets in terms of acquistion and operating cost. I'm not sure how the significance of that could be so hard to grasp. Think of a charter operation being able to buy and operate three jets for what one is costing them now. Operating costs approaching that of a piston twin for a jet.

I'm not saying these are going to be as successful as some believe. There are some reasons to be skeptical of some of the claims. But the reason they are causing so much of a stir is obvious.

This is not repackaging. A new class of jet engine was developed for these airplanes along with new construction techniques. Of course taking advantage of technology leaps is a shift by any definition. The way today's jets, hot off the assembly line in Wichita or wherever, are constructed is hardly different from the first Lear, or the first DC-3 for that matter. So this is a step in a new direction.

But they have to deliver.

[Doug Taylor]

Arizona is hot.

[slowandlow]

[ QUOTE ]
Considering "Well above average" Joe can't afford a new Baron, is a supposed "VLJ" going to be any more economical? Methinks not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well considering you have to be a millionaire to afford a 900 square foot house in the California desert, why can't we all just go out and pick one up.

[Sprint100]

[ QUOTE ]
Arizona is hot.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it is a dry type of hot

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
I heard that there is/will be a movement to lower the minimums for folks to operate the new Very Light Jets

Any one else have anything on this?

[/ QUOTE ]
I just completed a research paper on the very concept.....frankly, they scare the you know what out of me! Minimums for now appear to be 2500 with a Commercial+Instrument. With a pre-screen sim ride then simulator type rating and in depth training to included high altitude and upset training. Then you will receive an equivalent to IOE/SOE.

Luckily the insurance companies are seeking to keep low time pilots (sorry) out of the VLJs.

[BCTAv8r]

Embraer now has the light jet and the very light jet. How original

They look like smaller versions of the Legacy.

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
...is a supposed "VLJ" going to be any more economical? Methinks not.

But maybe, who knows. It reeks of business school 'remarketing' to me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Doug, remarkably, the VLJs will be VERY competitively priced to that of a new Baron. There WILL be Baron pilots in their shiny new VLJ coming soon to a flight level near you....and ME!

There is actually quite a lot difference between the original Lears and the Eclipse (etc..). The Eclipse weighs half of a Lear 23 and almost equal to the weight of a Baron. At $1.3M the Eclipse is half the cost of the Citation Mustang. Throw in a metal fuselage that is all but devoid of rivets, an avionics suite/FMS that remedies problems for you, FADEC controlled engines and side stick conventional controls at the price of a new light twin piston airplane and you DO have a revolutionary airplane.

[ananoman]

[ QUOTE ]
The "paradigm shift" has strictly to do with cost. These are supposed to be much cheaper jets in terms of acquistion and operating cost. I'm not sure how the significance of that could be so hard to grasp.

[/ QUOTE ] A new Baron list for $1.1 million. The Cessna Mustang is supposed to be $2.5 million. Given Cessna's track record, it is a near certainty that they will deliver for this price. Adam is estimating the cost of the A700 at $2.0 million and Eclipse is shooting for around $1.3 million.

This is a big deal. Before this an entry level jet started at over $5 million dollars. In the not too distant future, for about what a Cessna 421 would cost if they still made them, you can buy a jet that will go over 100 KIAS faster. There is also a lot less maintenance on a turbine engine compared to a piston power plant (let alone a geared turbocharged one like in the big twins from the 1980's).

Pilot training and insurance minimums are an issue, but these are all going to be much easier to fly compared to a Baron or other comparable twin. Especially if an engine quits. The same goes for the Adam A-500. It is supposed to have FADEC power plants, and is turbocharged and pressurized, for about 1 million dollars.

If you want to talk 'Paradigm Shift', I think that these new aircraft, along with the composite Cirrus and Lancair and all the fancy new avionics that have recently been introduced qualify. Especially if you look back at aircraft like the 1947 Bonanza, and the Aero Commanders of the 1950's. It makes you realize that for almost 50 years there was very little real progress in light plane design. Sure, tail wheels disappeared, alternators replaced generators, fuel injection replaced a few carburators, and we got 'omni vision' windows in the 172, but all we did was make gradual improvements to what we had already had. The light jets will be a big leap.