02 Dec 2025, 09:43 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap?  Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 11:17 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 05/06/10
Posts: 1503
Post Likes: +845
Location: KMBO Brandon, MS
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The Falcon 50 comes to mind. Similar size, speed and range....and you can get one vintage 90’s in the 2 to 3 million price range.
it’s a little slower, but better range (I think) and the cabin size might be a touch bigger? Probably better reliability from the stories I’ve heard. 50's rock....... and we all know THREE engines are better than two..... 
And no sweating 2nd segment climb limitations.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap? Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 12:28 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/09
Posts: 5193
Post Likes: +3038
Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: After I'd heard bad things about Netjets experience operating the X, i.e., that while customers liked them, that they were was maintenance intensive and didn't have great dispatch reliability,
I was surprised that XO Jet built their business around the X, and they seemed to make it work. Just need in house maintenance to work on them when not flying.
_________________
Allen
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap? Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 12:55 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 04/28/12
Posts: 4976
Post Likes: +3598
Location: Kansas City, KS (KLXT)
Aircraft: 1972 Duke A60
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The Falcon 50 comes to mind. Similar size, speed and range....and you can get one vintage 90’s in the 2 to 3 million price range.
it’s a little slower, but better range (I think) and the cabin size might be a touch bigger? Probably better reliability from the stories I’ve heard. 50's rock....... and we all know THREE engines are better than two.....
Then there's the Lockheed Jetstar...when only 4 engines will do.
_________________
CFII/MEI
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap? Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 12:59 |
|
 |
|
|
Joined: 09/11/09
Posts: 6223
Post Likes: +5556
Company: Middle of the country company
Location: Tulsa, Ok
Aircraft: Rebooting.......
|
|
Username Protected wrote: 50's rock....... and we all know THREE engines are better than two..... Then there's the Lockheed Jetstar...when only 4 engines will do.
Touche...... 
_________________
Three things tell the truth:
Little kids
Drunks
Yoga pants
Actually, four things.....
Cycling kit..
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap? Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 13:07 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/10/10
Posts: 415
Post Likes: +116
Aircraft: 787/737/CL30/BE90-20
|
|
Username Protected wrote: After I'd heard bad things about Netjets experience operating the X, i.e., that while customers liked them, that they were was maintenance intensive and didn't have great dispatch reliability,
I was surprised that XO Jet built their business around the X, and they seemed to make it work. Just need in house maintenance to work on them when not flying.
XO actually outsources all maintenance now. Fleet is roughly 2/3 CX, 1/3 Challenger 300.
The Challenger 300 is an amazing airplane. 6'1" cabin height, 8-9 seats, and an espresso machine. Go to FL450, and she'll do .79 @ 240 GPH.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap? Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 17:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/13
Posts: 426
Post Likes: +260
Location: KFTW-Fort Worth Meacham
Aircraft: C208B, AL18-115
|
|
|
There was a private BAE-146 in the hangar next to me. I learned that BAE stands for "bring another engine." I think the owners flew it less that 150 hours per year (maybe closer to 100 hours). They replaced it with a 737.
I think they like room to spread out. Sorry, major drift from Citation X pricing....
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: So why is this Citation X cheap? Posted: 05 Dec 2017, 22:56 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/08/10
Posts: 713
Post Likes: +219
Location: 45G - Brighton, MI.
Aircraft: V35A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It's a great airplane and as said before sexy as hell! Those engines!!
Having said that, I wouldn't call it a Ferrari...
More like a Lamborghini... Countach that is.
Big boy toy with big boy bills. Good point. No argument here! The founder of Lamborghini was once asked to compare his cars to Ferrari. His reply was would you rather have a prancing horse on your hood or a raging bull? 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
