I just got back from doing a high altitude chamber training event with TBMOPA at the Southern Aeromedical Instituted in Melbourne, Fla. I got there early on Friday so scheduled a meeting at Embraer to take a look at the Phenom 100. I'm dredging up this old thread to share some of what I saw.

Greeted at the front door by three people, including a nice young lady who apparently opens the door and gives you gifts when you leave, I spent some time sitting in the P100 mockup and asking questions of my hosts before we took a look at a new P100 in the delivery bay getting ready for its new owner.

Approaching the mock up (and the plane) the air stair makes an impression. Entering the cabin the mockup had a nice small refreshment center. While not huge it could certainly hold a lot of stuff - way more than my TBM's drawer. It's easier to get into the cockpit than a lot of planes (like CJ's) in my opinion. The mockup has the "old" G1000 system in it which looks terrific and is well laid out ergonomically. The G3000 in the actual airplane makes the G1000 look really old. The displays are much sharper. My host swears it's not a problem to use all the touch screens in turbulence but with two GTN 750's I know better.

The cockpit has excellent visibility of everything except the right wing (can't see it at all from the pilot seat). But the seat has limited rearward travel, and although the rudder pedals adjust, I found that my legs have about a 90 degree bend. Worse, the seat back has almost no recline because of the bulkhead. I was told the bulkhead can't be removed. The yoke coming out of the panel gives a lot of room in front of you. Overall the cockpit isn't bad, and I suppose I could take it for a couple of hours at a wack, but 2-3 more inches of seat travel would be nice.

The cabin is very nice. No offense to the Mustang owners but there is no comparison. No cheap plastic bits, the seats all recline to some degree (and move into the aisle and swivel), the windows are quite large and the lighting is excellent. (As an aside - what was Cessna thinking? A $3.5 million dollar airplane with cheaper fake wood cup holders, not to mention cabinetry and potty, than a mid level Hyundai. For some reason every time I think about the Mustang I think of that and wonder where else they cut corners.
Stupid in my view).

Sitting in the P100 cabin when you look hard you realize you're in an itty bitty tube but they've done a nice job with it. It would be very comfortable for 2 people back there going the distance, and perhaps 3 if they were related or all dating each other. The potty closet is well done. No curtain to pass unsettling noises through here - and no doing your business in front of everyone else either! But it's not an externally serviced lav and I'd be very nervous carrying the effluent through that tiny cabin...

Overall it's quite nice and better than the M2 or Mustang in my opinion. It's a whole different experience than the TBM obviously. More like a larger Mercedes sedan compared to a Panamera.

Embraer has a large set of facilities at Melbourne and they have clearly invested a large amount of money there. The delivery facility is very impressive. Cirrus could learn something and their's is nice. What I'm now waiting for is a list of service facilities. I don't think they are competitive with Cessna yet...no mobile service for example.

They are sending me flight profiles for some of my longer flights (as has Cessna) but I'm betting that everything that has been said in this thread already won't be bested by much. I don't see how it goes 1100 into the wind and gets there a whole lot faster than my TBM with a stop. But, still, it has 2 engines and is a jet...

Coming home today at 30k crossing a front, in the tops looking at blue sky less than a thousand feet above me, bouncing around, unable to get 31 and not able to accept 32, a jet was very appealing...

I've flown a Mustang and was very impressed from the cockpit but having compared the back end, and the stats, if I had to pick between the two there is no contest: Phenom. But I'm not sure there is enough there to get me out of my TBM 850 either.

Tony - thanks for the writeup. I have about a 100 hrs in my new-to-me Phenom 100 (2009) and spent the last year researching Phenoms, so will add some additional feedback.



Between factory and authorized service centers, they have a large mobile team. In fact the EEC Enhanced Parts Plan includes mobile AOG support anywhere in the country at no additional fee.

Here is a map of the factory service centers (http://www.embraerexecutivejets.com/en- ... twork.aspx). As with Cessna there are lots of non-factory maintenance shops as well.

Dang Tony. That didn’t take long. What once was probably seemed to you like the top of the Aviation food chain now becomes a stepping point.

I certainly understand the allure of a Phenom. They are gorgeous inside and out. All-in, what do you feel the cost delta is owning a used Phenom 100 vs a Mustang (apples to apples)?

I can weigh in on this as I compared the two planes extensively recently.

1) The acquisition cost was $250k more than a similar used Mustang.

2) Parts and Engine programs:

For 150 hrs a year, on the P100 EEC Standard costs $36,000 and ESP Gold $44,000 (~$80,000).

Comparing similar programs for the Mustang, ProParts costs $24,000 and PA+ $40,000 (~$64,000).

The P100 has one drawback with its 10 year landing gear overhaul at $115,000 (not covered by the parts program), so the actual delta is closer to $36k.

3) MX Inspections and Fuel Burn were substantially similar.

For me the better G1000 integration and fit and finish of the P100 was worth it.

Lots of great information there Marcus! I remember you from EJOPA. Welcome to Beechtalk and thanks for the information.

I thought I'd dig this up for an up-date :

The Phenom 100 is still in production whilst the Mustang was shelved 8 years ago...

At any rate, I surveyed 3, +12 year old Phenom 100s and I am very impressed with the overall build quality and reliability .

Consider this: Out of the 3 Phenoms surveyed, average age 14 years and 6,000H FT , 1 had zero repairs and the other two had just 1 very minor repair each.

Just routine Mx and consumables and that's it. Period. Amazing.


PS: Quik back-of-envelope calc: $5M spent on Gold programs over the 6K FT, no way that the real cost was even HALF that

Michael Chartier: Since you haven't responded to my PMs and emails, maybe you will respond here.

Do you plan to pay me for the autopilot and shipping that I provided to you? It was $3,250 total.

Michael Chartier: Since you haven't responded to my PMs and emails, maybe you will respond here.

Do you plan to pay me for the autopilot and shipping that I provided to you? It was $3,250 total.

Michael Chartier: Since you haven't responded to my PMs and emails, maybe you will respond here.

Do you plan to pay me for the autopilot and shipping that I provided to you? It was $3,250 total.

I think using these forum boards to dun someone is despicable. You have no idea the circumstances behind this so leave this is private between two parties. In other words, get a room guys.

Giving everyone the benefit of the doubt, I would suspect there is something else going on here. Obviously, if Michael was ghosting a fellow Beechtalker he wouldn’t brazenly come here and start posting on an old thread.

And of he did Geoff would be understandingly upset.

Now that it is public, let’s hope it is a simple misunderstanding and will be resolved quickly.

Over the past three years I have tried all other means to contact Michael to no avail - PMs, email, telephone calls. To state the obvious, I have been hesitant to post anything in public and have been patient.

For background: Michael was working on a 340 in November 2021 and needed a replacement autopilot ASAP. He contacted me and I had a unit overhauled by Bob Weber. We agreed on a price, he asked that I ship it ASAP and he would pay me for the AP and shipping. The plane was repaired and Michael was happy with the autopilot. He initially wanted to pay with an electronic transfer and I asked for a check. There isn't any more to the story than that.

Geoff

Back on topic, I have 18 months with a Mustang, coming from a Meridian.

I went through a lot of this same analysis in terms of TBM vs Phenom vs Mustang.

Two things ultimately brought me to the Mustang. Runway performance and Textron's 1-Call program. I'm based at a field with a 4200' ungrooved runway. Any ice on the Embraer meant diversion to a 9000' runway. That is not an insignificant consideration for those of us flying through the winter in North America.

I would also reflect that hot/high and cold are serious considerations for Mustang. Potential buyers should email foreflight for a trial subscription for their runway analysis tool.

On the maintenance side, I've had to use 1-Call once in 18 months for an AOG situation (Gen control unit failure), and I am supremely satisfied with the AOG support from Textron.

Now in terms of scheduled MX, it has been a mixed bag. Wichita completely mishandled my aircraft during a visit for an intermittent low fuel pressure fault. I regret not using a consultant to oversee the visit. They will cover their fee, and more. By contrast, I recently went to GSO for a radar upgrade and it all went smoothly.

All maintenance visits seem to be a mixed bag these days.

I second the use of a consultant, these shops are doing such a poor job that they’ve created a cottage industry.

We use Shawn Blackmon for our Citation prebuys, he’s a good guy and a fellow Beechtalker.

Looked hard at both the Phenom 100 and Mustang before going M2.

Phenom 100 cabin is head & shoulders above both the Mustang and the M2.
Systems integration also very nice. It is a clean sheet design, not a 30 year old platform with upgraded avionics.

Phenom will get there faster than a Mustang.

Phenom 100 is still in production.

Where the Phenom lags is in runway performance. We routinely go in and out of airports with 5,000' runways. Home base is 5,000' and most common city pair is 5,000'. Phenom is a no go if hot & wet or if any snow, slush contamination. In New England this is a problem. But can also be a problem down south on hot days when runway is wet.

Mustang is a clean sheet. Great bang for the buck both from a capital and operating perspective. Owners love it. But out of production.

With both platforms there will be some challenge in finding typed pilots for maintenance drop offs, sharing the load on long, multi-stop trips, etc. Just not as many pilots typed in 510 or Phenom 100 as in other platforms like the 525.

If it is runway performance, economy and bang for the buck Mustang. If cabin comfort, speed and "in production matter", and runway performance at or below 5,000' not a big deal, then Phenom.