I think you'd get max range with 4 on board an bags. More than that and you start having to leave fuel behind.

"4 in back" means 4+1 pilot?

I had an offer from the Phenom guys to fly a 100 with 6 on board from Miami to NYC. I questioned whether it could do this and they said "yes, absolutely". I couldn't make the trip but supposedly they did it. Someone here with the Phenom 100 will answer.

I think you'd get max range with 4 on board an bags. More than that and you start having to leave fuel behind.

"4 in back" means 4+1 pilot?

I had an offer from the Phenom guys to fly a 100 with 6 on board from Miami to NYC. I questioned whether it could do this and they said "yes, absolutely". I couldn't make the trip but supposedly they did it. Someone here with the Phenom 100 will answer.

Philip is that a run you have ever made? Asking because in the Miami area they are going to hold you down for some time and landing in NYC area they do the same. Can you land with 800lbs flying a departure procedure then a star with first 50 and last 50 at 10,000'?

We are fortunate most of our flying takes off and lands at a more rural midwestern local. Our Florida trips also we seem to be able to climb unrestricted from south FL easily on the west side. Reviewing data I might be able to see the 100 doing what I want it to do. Thanks Chip for the info. I'd have a few tweaks for you to consider adding on the TBM side.

Even though the TBM can make a trip of 949 NM into an avg 65kt headwind and land with an hours fuel, all approx., the reality is sitting for 4.5+ hours is not ideal or on my or my wife's list of things to do frequently. We'd rather stop. So if I'm stopping why not faster. Perhaps we don't have to stop if I have more speed, we are going to look at the P100 more closely.

Talking of alternates the TBM or any TP opens up a bunch more alternates than the VLJs, if the weather is bad.

Range is the best way to shorten a long flight. Unless you want to triple your purchase price or operating costs.

The VLJs just don't work, but they look cool as hell!

After a year or so of flying in the Commander my family really appreciate the non-stop legs.

Long range is a great speed modification.

[quote="Anthony PigliacampoQuestion for the TBM guys - can the 850 do 1300nm with reserves at high speed cruise? I have been told the only the only way to get that range is to pull the power way back and go 260ish on the cruise (PC12 speeds).[/quote]


My airplane has 281 gallons of usable fuel.
The book says at max gross weight, climb to 280 at 160 KIAS covers 60 miles and burns 22.1. gallons at ISA. Cruise at 322 TAS and 62.4 GPH is reasonable given my limited experience. Descent at 1500 fpm takes 17.5 gallons and covers 89 miles. So, cruise would take 3.57 hours and 223 gallons. That's a total fuel required 263 gallons under ideal conditions with no allowance for taxi fuel and no reserve.

In "normal" cruise speed drops to 317 and fuel burn to 59.7 and time goes to 3.363 and fuel burn at 59.7 is 256. So, you still can't make it.

In "long range cruise" speed is 243 KTAS, fuel burn is 41.8 gph, cruise time is 4.73 hours and total fuel burn is 237, so even with only 42 gallons allotted to reserves you'd not make it unless you fueled at the end of the runway.

Service ceiling.

Robert

Those are pretty good numbers. But, it is still a single power plant.

The fuel burn included flying the "typical flight plan" from FLTPLAN that included a SID and STAR. I have not made the trip from Miami but I have from Charleston but obviously that is closer. I would consider Miami to NYC to be a maximum distance trip and I personally would only do it non-stop when the weather is going to be VFR. As for a restrictive climb/decent the fuel burn can be somewhat mitigated by pulling the throttle way back but as you know jets suck down low.

Actually, they work quite well. I'm not the only one that is happy with their Mustang.

Clint,
I agree. The Mustang is a great platform. I came from a TBM 700C2. I liked the TBM, but I love the Mustang. Basically the same range as the TBM. 1000 nm. Two engines, external baggage, larger cabin, faster, FL410.

I agree. 1000nm in the Mustang is a piece of cake. I've gone further, but rarely have the need. If you need a range greater than 1,000, you need something that will go 2,000. Not much difference otherwise.

I'm considering the Mustang for several of the same reasons Clint mentioned - acquisition price being one of them. Plus a big factor is pilot workload - I want to move down in complexity. While I'm sure the TBM is easier than my Conquest I keep reading how simple the Mustang is to operate. Much more so than CJ's and the like. It was designed in the VLJ era explicitly for the owner pilot. I don't hear that about the Phenom.

Been spec'ing the M600. It will do 1300 nm at normal cruise (260 KTAS) with an hour reserve. Not sure you need NBAA range very often, unless there is some really widespread LIFR, since the TP can essentially land at almost any named airport in the US should your destination not be landable. A long time in the plane, but that range opens up a lot of city pairs, and weather flexibility. Million less than a TBM.

I fly from KIKK to KAPF (Naples, Fl) quite often. It's about 960 miles. I have never had to stop for fuel in the TBM. It looks like a stretch for both the mustang and phenom 100. I have also flown from Boston (KBED) to KAPF nonstop several times that's close to 1100 miles. Jets look cool.......they are expensive and if I have to make a fuel stop I didn't gain anything.