VLJ's?

derg

derg

Apparently a "terse" writer
Staff member
Sitting here noshing on a Subway sangwich, browsing the forums, I ask myself:

"Self? Where are the armadas of VLJ's that were going to put us all out of jobs and that any skepticism of them was met with the smug Ayn Rand-like You don't get it because you're not smart like me'?"

Just wondering! :)
 
Yeah...they are sitting on lots waiting to be bought...like all the Chryslers out there. Maybe they should offer 0 % APR for 600 Months AND 1 Mil cash back offer. Oh yeah, and if you lose your job, they will buy it back from you...

That'll work...
 
Apparently designing, certifying and manufacturing an airplane is a little different than making software...who knew?!!!

The guy that owns the company that made my cochlear implants (Alfred Mann) was the largest investor in Eclipse. Vern Rayburn is this generations Jim Bede.
 
Recession Man swooped in and kicked the VLJs asses, saving the day for airline pilots everywhere.
 
Most of my xplane9 hours are in the cirrus jet. I flew with this guy who owned a real estate business who was planning to buy a citation mustang. I wonder if he is still going to go through with it.
 
VLJs are a joke (they should be LLJs for "Laughably Light Jets"), anybody who thinks its a money maker to fly trips less than a couple hundred miles in length burning fuel to boot, is crazy. Piston singles, and light light twins are the key to SATS (and I'm not talking Cirruses, as they cost too much to acquire). A C210 with a backup alternator, known ice, and trend monitoring would make a great machine to do small short runs in. If you've got enough customer, and enough revenue seat miles, trade up to a Chiefton (with the 1,000lbs gross weight increase) and you'll be sitting pretty. Look at how well cape air is doing. They're the largest self-branded regional in the industry.

Pistons are more efficient, cheaper to operate, and for short trips, burn way less gas. Even the caravan can't compete if you're only moving a few people. I was told that the caravan was burning about 40-50gph of jet A, if you only fill the airplane half way up (4-5 people) you might as well take the 210 or the Cherokee and burn 18gph.
 
ppragman said:
VLJs are a joke (they should be LLJs for "Laughably Light Jets"), anybody who thinks its a money maker to fly trips less than a couple hundred miles in length burning fuel to boot, is crazy. Piston singles, and light light twins are the key to SATS (and I'm not talking Cirruses, as they cost too much to acquire). A C210 with a backup alternator, known ice, and trend monitoring would make a great machine to do small short runs in. If you've got enough customer, and enough revenue seat miles, trade up to a Chiefton (with the 1,000lbs gross weight increase) and you'll be sitting pretty. Look at how well cape air is doing. They're the largest self-branded regional in the industry.

Pistons are more efficient, cheaper to operate, and for short trips, burn way less gas. Even the caravan can't compete if you're only moving a few people. I was told that the caravan was burning about 40-50gph of jet A, if you only fill the airplane half way up (4-5 people) you might as well take the 210 or the Cherokee and burn 18gph.
Click to expand...


Aside from the numbers, some people will NOT get in a single, or twin for that matter, piston airplane. Like turboprop paranoia, it's stupid, but so are people and the media.

A jet is a jet.
 
A lot, and I mean A LOT of corporate insurance policies won't allow company employees to fly in single engine airplanes. It is somewhat of an antiquated restriction now with the more reliable piston engine design. The Pilatus, Cirrus, and any TAA single w/ engine monitoring is certainly safer than an poorly maintained old Piper Aztec. But it is what it is, and it is something to consider before starting up your own single engine 135 operation
 
I still wonder why the C337 didn't go over better. Centerline thrust and save fuel when you kill 1 engine @ cruise altitude.
 
texas_pilot said:
I still wonder why the C337 didn't go over better. Centerline thrust and save fuel when you kill 1 engine @ cruise altitude.
Click to expand...

With about 800hrs in the O2A, I doubt anyone would consider shutting down an engine to save fuel. It wasn't exactly a rocket with both running.
 
Doug Taylor said:
Sitting here noshing on a Subway sangwich, browsing the forums, I ask myself:

"Self? Where are the armadas of VLJ's that were going to put us all out of jobs and that any skepticism of them was met with the smug Ayn Rand-like You don't get it because you're not smart like me'?"

Just wondering! :)
Click to expand...
Off the top of my head, some eclipse 500 notes:
Vern and pals didn't realise you can't "update" the final product like you do windows
They never made their performance goals
They never made their cost goals, except on the first firm orders
The companies that bought them couldn't convince the FAA this was actually 135 operations when you are gonna run from EWR or JFK/LGA 20-40 times a day and call it a taxi
Insurance just laughed and laughed and laughed at the pilot program
The tip tanks
actually they fixed that
Tip tanks again
ohh, they fixed it
The pitot tube, again
ohh the fixed-
no we didn't. ohh the tip tanks
ohh god the avionics package won't pass cert, we shouldn't have pissed of avodine
ohh God... can a bunch of Red X's pass
oh God they can't, but I know Bill Gates AND dick cheney....
Ok they still won't pass
we got the tip tanks working and the ---
wait they don't work again?

sorry I digress

Adams Aircraft actually wanted to make a working product... turns out when your done it costs too much. Great designer, hope he gets back into it.

Cessna mustang passed, but I don't know what to call it.. VLJ? eh, if they say so. Also initially when the GNK (GFK? can't remember) windshield was being certed it only could allow 230 knts. apparently that was fixed after I left the biz

Piper was a pipe dream
Diamond is still lost in the woods, last i heard, that could have changed
Embraer did alright, pretty rock solid
Honda got its structures all done, was looking GREAT, and... found a new civic or something to play with.

VLJ's... who knows.
 
Is the Phenom in the VLJ category, or is that simply a single pilot small jet?

Now That's a solid airplane. I'd plop money down for a fleet of those before anything else
 
found it

hondajettyperyh1.jpg
 
TXaviator said:
found it

hondajettyperyh1.jpg
Click to expand...

And it already had the coffee can size exhaust pipes and an oversized rear wing. I guarantee some goon won't be happy and will want something bigger and more hideous looking. Little does he know about all the paperwork involved with such a project
 
We've got a Phenom 100 in house now. Actually I was pretty surprised. It's a much nicer aircraft than the Eclipse, and a very comfortable cabin for four pax. This is one well built aircraft for the size, and it actually is a pretty good size plane. (As a side note, the Cessna Mustang is a pretty solid little plane too.) It'll be interesting to see how the new-airplane-bugs get dealt with as time goes by. We've seen a couple bugs pop up already and we haven't even started using it for charter flights yet but it's on the 135 cert now!).

I think there's a viable niche market for these aircraft, and the companies like Cessna and Embraer who build a good solid product will do well. Eclipse was too pie-in-the-sky and had a small aircraft mentality. From what I saw from the outside they were junk aircraft, I think because the major design decisions were made by accountants, not aerospace engineers. I remember when they first came out with the Eclipse promo they were selling aircraft at a guaranteed price (adjusted thereafter for inflation) of something like $850,000. They were off by a factor of about 3 I think.

(edit to add)
I don't think the Phenom and Mustange are really what the press talks about as VLJ's. Light Jets is closer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top