In actual conditions, the 300 is a .74-.75 airplane all day long, getting to .76-.78 the temps have to be ISA or less.

The 300e is a .78 airplane all day long, getting to .79-.80 isn't as abnormal as the 300 getting to .78, but it takes less than ISA +3 to ISA +5.

And as far as short field performance, I would put the 300/300e up against most any jet with/without TR's - on any DRY runway. Contamination is where the 300 falls down, but contamination kills most jets landing distance anyway.

I will say that the HIGH temps that we have been seeing lately (30 - 35 C) and high airports like EGE, ASE, etc. have been a challenge, but again, that is with any jet.

Brad

I just finished a multileg (10+) trip to South America with my 300, a 300E and a CJ3. We (the other 300 and I) were always 10-30 knots faster than the CJ3. The 300E was a smidge faster than me but only when he pushed his throttles to the "new" 300E max detent. If we both set our N1 at my max detent the speed and fuel burn was, as you would expect, the same. EDIT - Time to climb was also significantly better in the 300. This, more than the cruise speed, contributed to our over block time being 15-30 minutes faster on a 3 hour leg.

If you want to kinda sorta save money and always fly with a family or friend who is a IFR PPL or better, 61.55 them, the nextant 400 is a pretty good bang for the buck, just make sure you get the Garmin panel upgrade and toss the antique and problematic heavy instruments out

https://www.nextantaerospace.com/nextan ... omparison/

Long range cruise is pretty fast and whoops the CJs and even the 300

If only Nextant would have figured out the single pilot on that thing. It would be a perfect plane for my mission.

They tried back when it was a MU300 as i recall, would have been the first single pilot biz jet, didn’t work out with the government so they moved the gear switch to the other side

But yeah, if you get all the beechjet stuff out of them, engines & instruments, it’s a pretty cool airframe

If I was a rich guy who always flew with his wife, I’d get her her IFR PPL and 61.55, she’d be upfront anyways

If I could get a 400 in single pilot, I'd dumped the V and buy one in a heartbeat. This is true JT15D or FJ44 powered. Alas, not to be despite people trying to get that.

I call needing an SIC "chartering the human" because you have inherited all the issues of charter by needing an SIC. Scheduling, sickness, away cost, training, etc. Try and secure an SIC for a week long trip over Christmas and you will know what I mean.

I need a plane that goes when I want and it can't be bogged down by the second human requirement.

Mike C.

I've ran some numbers on 1000NM trips from STL-MIA for clients over the years with CJ2s, CJ3s, Excels comparing to other larger aircraft. The difference was at most 15 minutes comparing to Gulfstreams and Challengers, typically 12 minutes. The CJ4 will do .77 and it is nearly on par with the Phenom 300 in standard conditions, as someone mentioned .80 in the 300E isn't typical, at least not at standard cruising altitudes.

The published time to FL450 in the Phenom 300 is 25 minutes, I've done that in the CJ2+ and the CJ3+ also.

I directly know a company selling their Phenom 300 to replace it with a CJ4, they had a 6 month downtime event waiting for parts, Embraer basically said "too bad", and this wasn't their first significant parts delay either. I know of another local outfit that had a 30+ day delay waiting for parts for their 300.

Phenoms and CJs are both great airplanes, slightly different costs, slightly different missions. Personally, I don't see a need for a CJ5. The CJ4 is plenty capable, and if you need more room the XL series makes the Phenom 300 feel small.

-The Citation Jet Exchange

The cabin is really only knock on cj. I am 6’ and my head hits sidewall in seats until u love them. I swear my mu2 was bigger

Bump the 4 to .80 and give it an apu that can be left unattended.

Bump the 4 to .80 and give it an apu that can be left unattended.

Bump the 4 to .80 and give it an apu that can be left unattended.

I don't understand why a two pilot operation stays with a small cabin size.

If I committed to having two pilots all the time, I would be looking at something with a larger cabin diameter, like a 560XL, Excel, etc, or even a Beech/Hawker 400 would be an improvement.

Mike C.

I don't understand why a two pilot operation stays with a small cabin size.

If I committed to having two pilots all the time, I would be looking at something with a larger cabin diameter, like a 560XL, Excel, etc, or even a Beech/Hawker 400 would be an improvement.

Mike C.

I'm not sure about .80, like Corey said even with the swept wing, that's still a jump.

I am confident there will be a CJ4 with Garmin.

I think Cessna has stretched that 525 as far as it will go, the CJ4 is a huge airplane compared to the straight CJ. The "CJ5: just doesn't have a place, plus they are selling every CJ3+, CJ4, Latitude and Longitude they can build, the XLS+ line will transition to the Assend... they don't even have a place to build a CJ5 if they wanted to.

As I've mentioned before an M3 to replace the CJ2+ (one of the greatest) would be awesome... but same problem, why and where.

I also think the days of single pilot ops of these larger airplanes is numbered. I don't expect the FAA to change anything, but the insurance companies will.

On the new Phenom 300E single pilot insurance was cost prohibitive.

To Corey's point, just about the only CJ3/4's, Phenom 300's, PC-24's that are flown single pilot are owner pilots... and this is actually mostly true for the Citation V/ Ultra as well... when you look at the accident record for the CJ4 and 560, single pilot ops do not fare well.

The reason companies operate CJ3/4's with two pilots instead of Excel / XLS's is because the 525's are a lot cheaper to operate.

Single pilot flying a Citation might be the most dangerous jet flying there is, but it is still hugely safer than single pilot flying a turboprop.

If single pilot ops were banned for jets, the jet safety record would improve, but there would be more dead people overall as owner operators move into turboprops instead. Is the goal to make jets look safer or to save the most lives? This is the sort of big picture thinking the FAA usually lacks.

There have been plenty of terrible 2 pilot jet crashes, too, like the KTEB Lear, and the F70 550 recently (assuming it was two pilot).

I have a second pilot about 75% of my flights these days. They are volunteers flying with me for the experience. Due to my SPE, they are not required crew members. Having an SIC is very nice, but not requiring one is also very nice.


A Beech/Hawker 400 would not seem to be much different than a CJ4 and is definitely an improved cabin, and the op costs per mile would be similar if not cheaper than the CJ4.

Mike C.