Mike: I don't think we ever planed that range in the Citation II or V I flew. The II was 1,000 to 1,200 (the later pushing it) with decent winds and reasonable reserves. The V a bit farther, but I never planned that distance. Normal would be 1,000 to 1,100 in the II and 200 more in the V from my experience. POH shows more is cases, but we didn't find that worked well. Of course, we always wanted to be on the ground most aggressive case with at least 300 to 400 a side VFR weather and a close alternate. No way in IFR with reserves.
Maybe some others with time in these birds have different experiences. Of course, we always ran normal power, not long range cruise.

I'll add in the II we always planned low to mid 30s. We'd frequently not get mid 30s in the II because of airline traffic. If we did get up there, we'd be moved at some point. In the V higher. One flight at FL430 which would give better range.

You are missing one large constituency here. I bet the majority of turboprop owners are small to medium-size business owners who buy the plane as a business asset and pay with company funds.

You know, I am still waiting for Uncle Sam to "pay" me a single dollar. So far they are just taking 50% of my hard-earned money every year. If I buy a plane and use it for business, they might take only 45%. That's not paying me, that's robbing me a little less.

That explains the range you achieved.

If you want far, you have to go high. Once you get above about FL380, tends to be very little airliner traffic up there as well.

The II and V are going to be pushing it for 1500 nm, but the book says it can be done. Flight planning chart on the V says 1650 nm range with 1000 lbs reserve, takeoff at MGTOW, zero wind, FL450 cruise, max cruise thrust. Throttle back to long range cruise, says about 1750 nm under same conditions.

Mike C.

Yeah, I'd be thrilled to spend a million spacebucks on a work table.

You know, I am still waiting for Uncle Sam to "pay" me a single dollar. So far they are just taking 50% of my hard-earned money every year. If I buy a plane and use it for business, they might take only 45%. That's not paying me, that's robbing me a little less.

As far as OP, my situation is the poster child for low cost reliable TP ownership. I welcome anyone interested to come visit and go flying with me. In 200 hours I have never had a failure or issue that impeded a flight. I have had 1 unexpected engine issue that was resolved in under a week for under $10k. I get 260kts plus under 60gph in a climate controlled pressurized spacious environment at FL240. No one on BT has posted anything that comes close at least not that I have seen. I’ve changed the minds of at least 3 pilots who had negative thoughts about the MU2 including my dad after simply walking around and flying a few times. I wish more prospective buyers would consider these planes. There’s nothing that compares for value, speed and efficiency.

I’ve gotta come check out your MU2 one of these days (if you don’t mind a drooler). I’ve never seen the inside of one and am curious.

That explains the range you achieved.

If you want far, you have to go high. Once you get above about FL380, tends to be very little airliner traffic up there as well.

The II and V are going to be pushing it for 1500 nm, but the book says it can be done. Flight planning chart on the V says 1650 nm range with 1000 lbs reserve, takeoff at MGTOW, zero wind, FL450 cruise, max cruise thrust. Throttle back to long range cruise, says about 1750 nm under same conditions.

Mike C.

Dave,

Thanks for the “real”world numbers. Really helps plugging those in vs POH boastings.

Thanks Chuck. I shoulda put something in there about temps. Obviously, in Summer in the south performance wasn't as good as when at ISA or below. Most of my family trips were in Summer in the south. Of course, one had more options in the jet than the TP. My simple analysis is on an 800 mile trip, the Citation II saved an hour and took 100 more gallons of fuel. If time is important, and one needs more options, the jet makes sense. For those of using it for personal trips, one can spend an additional hour in the air and be greener :-)

Those "POH boastings" are real numbers if you use them correctly.

For example, flying a Citation II at FL310 at MCT results in the manual saying 1030 nm range, which matches what Dave said pretty well.

Mike C.

Bring it.

>Have you looked at your last two years of travel and plotted out how many of these 1000nm vs 300nm trips you have done in the Aerostar ?

I've only had the airplane 11 months. 3 of those months were spent in the avionics shop....
So for trips so far this year

We have the milk run San Diego to the Bay area to visit my son and daughter in law.
(385nm) Used to go to KSQL, with Travel Air, runway too short for 601P so now go to KHWD

Trips this year 56 hours in the 182 To the east coast, bahamas, and around.
(The Avionics on the Aerostar were not done) Probably 7500nm total.

A couple of short hops to vegas....
Two trips to Idaho(725 and 690)
One to Denver, (720)
One to the KCEC (635 )
One To Sedona (293)

This does not count the 182 trips to the Desert or Breezy Trips to Catalina...

750 miles is about the limit for the 601P as I'm presently flying it. I Have not managed to get it to run smoothly LOP, been told its possible, but not there yet...

Its been a very frustrating year with slow avionics upgrade, numerous oil leaks accesories, A/C problems/ Heater Problems, sticky outflow valve... just lots on anoying squacks to work through....

Things like last winter worked on getting ht erheater reliable.....
It worked great on the last flight I needed it... then needed A/C and AC was not working reliably...... so worked on A/C until A/C no longer need this fall, and heaters is now not working again ....

I have no legitimate business use for the airplane so its all personal expense.
If I had a legitimate business need I'd probably have a TP or light Jet already.

Pretty sure the OP wasn't considering singles.