Very Light Jets

by Philip Greenspun, ATP, MEI; updated March 2009

Site Home : Flying : One Article


For the purposes of this article, a "very light jet" is one that weighs less than 10,000 lbs. and costs less than $4 million.

Cessna Mustang

Cessna was one of the last companies to announce a very light jet and the first to deliver a certified VLJ: the Mustang. Seen on the ramp, it doesn't look like a VLJ. It looks like a Cessna Citation. Maybe a CJ1. Unless you see the prancing horse on the side, or were a bizjet expert, you'd never know that it wasn't a standard business jet.

The numbers: NBAA IFR Range 1,150 n.m.; cruise speed 340 knots; full-fuel payload of 800 lbs. Cabin volume of 230 cubic feet is substantially larger than Eclipse's 160 and smaller than the Phenom 100. By the book, the Mustang requires a minimum 3,100' of runway for takeoff (accelerate-lose-engine-stop). The cost is approximately $3 million and they have been coming off the assembly line since December 2006.

I have flown the Mustang for 1.5 hours, including some single-engine work, and flown a Level D Mustang simulator for about 0.8, during which time engines failed and caught on fire. With no formal training, I can't say that I handled the emergencies gracefully, but it was much easier than handling a piston twin with a sick engine. For one thing, in a jet you don't have to identify the failed engine. Just fly the airplane and manipulate both throttles (one power lever per engine instead of three!). When you get up to altitude and the autopilot is engaged, then you can run a checklist, look at the alert messages, and decide if you want to attempt a restart or shut an engine down. An instrument-proficient single-engine piston airplane pilot with 400 hours should not have any trouble transitioning. Going from no jet time to being single pilot-in-command would probably take a trip to Flight Safety, a year with a mentor pilot in the right seat, and then another trip to Flight Safety.

How about comfort? The cockpit is spacious, more so than on some of the bigger Cessna jets, with ample headroom and legroom for a 6' tall pilot. The four seats in the back are arranged in a club configuration. Four adult males would have to negotiate leg and foot positions to avoid knee contact (plan trips of 1.5 hours (500 n.m.) or less with four adults in back, unless they are very close friends). With the typical light jet business passenger load of 2 adults, the plane is very comfortable. The windows are large and positioned just right for a 6' tall adult to look out without craning his or her neck.

Operators so far seem happy with the 100+ Mustangs that have been delivered. At NBAA 2008 a meeting of owners revealed that many have not had a single squawk with the airplane, even after round-the-world flights. How are they selling in this Depression? Not too well. In theory Cessna is taking orders for the end of 2011 at a price of $3.145M. In practice the only Mustangs that sell are for near-term delivery and usually at a discount from the $2.8M 2009 retail price.

Cessna's parent company, Textron, is in deep financial trouble, with the entire company worth only about $1 billion. Credit default swaps on Textron indicate that investors believe the company has roughly a 50 percent risk of going bankrupt within two years.

Also on this site: full review of the Cessna Mustang.

Eclipse 500

Eclipse originated the very light jet category back in the 1990s, announcing that they were going to set the world on fire with a twin-engine jet that cost less than $1 million, cruised for 1800 nautical miles, offered revolutionary improvements in user interface, etc., etc. The very light jet would be delivered in 2003. How did the reality match up to the hype?

In mid-2008, the Eclipse 500 was limping its way to full certification. The avionics were half-finished, very few airplanes were certified for flight into known icing conditions, and the tires needed to be replaced after every 25 landings. The company raised the price for new orders to $2.15 million.

A charter company in our helicopter hangar was operating four Eclipse jets. Most of the time at most one was in flyable condition. Due to the lack of antiskid brakes and the fragility of the tires, the plane could not be operated with confidence on a runway shorter than 5000', i.e., a runway long enough to land a Gulfstream. Real-world IFR range is closer to 700 n.m. than the originally promised 1800 n.m.

The Eclipse is advertised as being very quiet inside and operators report that it is, subjectively. However, the plane measures roughly 4 dB noisier than the Cessna Mustang or CJ3. With the ventilation fans on low in cruise at FL270, cabin and cockpit levels were both 82 dBA. This is about 6 dB quieter than the better piston-powered aircraft.

I have not managed to talk my way onto an Eclipse flight, but have sat in the aircraft. Exterior and interior finishes are excellent. The front seats are very comfortable for a 6' tall pilot (me). The rear portion of the cabin seems smaller than that of a Piper Malibu/Meridian and it was impossible to sit without my knees brushing up against the seat in front. If the plane had 1300 n.m. IFR range, were certified for known ice, and could land on short runways, it might have been a nice four-seat personal airplane. Pilot-owners sit in front, kids or another two adults sit in the back; dog and bags occupy the space that formerly held the middle seats.

In March 2006, I visited the Eclipse factory in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The sales people and pencil pushers were remarkably arrogant, a startling contrast to their relatively humble counterparts at Cessna and Embraer. The employees on the shop floor were not smiling and having fun cooperating, as I've observed at the Diamond factories in London, Ontario and Austria.

The four-seat single-engine Eclipse 400 was announced in mid-2008 for delivery in "late 2011" at a price of 1.35 million June 2008 dollars. The design promised high fuel efficiency, possibly as little as one pound of jet fuel per nautical mile, or just under 10 mpg, a little better than an SUV if you consider that the jet flies point to point and does not sit in traffic jams.

The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in November 2008. All assets were to be sold to a Russian-European group. Customers who had paid deposits of up to 60 percent but never received an airplane would be wiped out. Customers who took delivery of airplanes would have no warranty. That turned out to be an unrealistically rosy scenario. In fact, the company closed up shop in February 2009 and disappeared legally in March 2009. This leaves an orphaned fleet of 259 slightly broken airplanes.

Embraer Phenom 100 and 300

Embraer makes two light jets, the Phenom 100 ($2.85 million) and the Phenom 300 ($6.65 million and beyond the scope of this article). The guys at our airport who fly Gulfstream Twin Commanders turboprops were among the first customers, ordering four planes after sitting in mock-up fuselages at the NBAA convention. The Phenom 100 has a cabin volume of 305 cubic feet, substantially larger than the Mustang. The 100 cruises at 385 knots, faster than the Mustang, with a similar NBAA range given an equivalent payload. The Phenom 100 burns a bit more fuel than the Mustang, but it also cruises faster, so the fuel per mile over the ground is similar.

Bigger cabin, faster cruise, similar fuel burn. Has Embraer rewritten the laws of physics? Not exactly. The wing of the Phenom 100 is a more sophisticated design than that of the Mustang. Sophisticated is good if you want to cruise with low drag. Sophisticated is bad if you want to fly slowly with forgiving handling characteristics. The Phenom requires landing speeds about 5 knots faster than the Mustang and consequently requires about 10 percent more runway.

Deliveries began on December 30, 2008. The handful of owners report being very happy.

Embraer is in serious financial trouble, with credit default swaps implying a 20 percent risk of bankruptcy within the next two years. Embraer is in better shape, however, than most other business jet manufacturers because it has a near monopoly on the regional jet market and significant support from the Brazilian government. The company has also benefitted from the rise in the U.S. dollar, in which it prices its airplanes. Embraer will receive 20 percent more in local currency for each airplane than it expected.

Honda

Honda. NBAA range is 1,180. This is the speed champion at 420 knots (maybe fast enough that ATC would actually allow you to fly on a jet route at the high altitudes necessary to achieve the maximum range). The Honda cabin is approximately the same size as that of the Embraer Phenom 100.

Take-off distance is 3120'; landing in 2500'.

Scheduled for delivery in 2010 at a price of $3.65 million. Honda is a great company, but even great companies have been humbled by the challenges of aircraft certification. Problems usually translate to delays, cost overruns, and a creeping empty weight that reduces payload. High risk due to the innovative design and the fact that Honda has never before made airplanes.

Honda is having some financial trouble. Its partner on the engine, GE, is in terrible shape. The market for new jets could not be worse. Expect deliveries to be delayed.

Piper

Piper is preparing a single-engine jet with a service ceiling of 35,000', in between the capabilities of the twin-engine VLJs and the Diamond and Cirrus jets. The engine is mounted through the tail, which should reduce the chance of foreign object damage.

Cruise speed is 360 knots and range is guaranteed to be at least 1,300 n.m. Piper doesn't say if this is NBAA range, which includes a 100 n.m. flight to the alternative, so it might not be any longer range than the Eclipse, et al. Cabin size seems to be sensible; six seats plus an optional lav opposite the door (Pilatus-style).

The price will be 2.2 million 2006 dollars. Operating costs should be lower than a twin-engine plane. Even prior to the world economy melting down, Piper's financial strength was questionable compared to the competition. Piper has not certified a new airplane since the Malibu in 1984 and has never built a jet. Certifying an airplane requires millions of dollars in capital... and then another pile of millions when the first pile is exhausted. A good rule of thumb in this economy is that an airplane that isn't certified right now is probably never going to be certified.

Diamond

Diamond offers a simplified single-engine jet with a service ceiling of 25,000'. One way to look at this product is as a greatly improved Piper Malibu rather than a scaled-down business jet.

The D-Jet will cruise at 315 knots, carry a total of five people, and operate from 2500' runways. Gross weight is 5,110 lbs. Range, not specified as NBAA, is claimed to be 1,350 n.m., but only if you're willing to slow down to 240 knots. The air intakes are mounted at the inboard leading edges of the wing, which would appear to make them very susceptible to foreign object damage.

The price was $1.38 million (2005 dollars?), but a big increase is expected in 2008, partly due to a switch to a larger variant of the Wiliams turbofan engine. Operating costs should be low. The D-Jet first flew in April 2006 and customer deliveries were planned for mid-2009. With the usual snafus attendant upon aircraft development plus the tough economy, the Diamond Web site isn't making any promises about certification or shipment.

Diamond is not in as bad shape financially as other piston aircraft manufacturers because much of their business is flight training fleets.

Cirrus

In June 2007, Cirrus announced plans for jet that will be similar in capabilities to Diamond's D-Jet, but with additional cabin space, comfort, and seating capacity (up to as many as seven people!). While Diamond is flying actual planes, Cirrus is flying an artist's conception sketch. The drawing shows a V-tail aircraft with the engine mounted in the notch of the V, therefore reducing the potential for foreign object damage. Specifications are speculation at this point, with even Cirrus unsure what the final design will promise. The jet is likely to be pressurized, with a service ceiling of 25,000', and will have an airframe parachute system. One goal was to keep the price at $1 million, which might have been possible had Cirrus's piston business not fallen apart in the fall of 2008. The Cirrus SR20 first flew in March 1995; the first customer took delivery in 1999. It would be remarkable if Cirrus managed to deliver its first jet before 2011.

In response to the Collapse of 2008, Cirrus has eviscerated its piston airplane engineering and production staff, trying to preserve its capital for the jet. The company will need additional capital, however, to get through certification. Cirrus's Kuwaiti and Saudi owners are wealthy, but they've been hit by falling oil prices. Completion of this program is in doubt.

Adam

If bluster, confidence, and promises were enough to assure success, Adam Aircraft would have overtaken Boeing by now. They promised to have the A700 twin-engine jet certified and on the market before Eclipse and Cessna, but were unable even to earn full certification for their much simpler A500 twin-piston. Adam keeps raising the price of the A700. Now it is up to $2.25 million.

One advantage of Adam, if indeed the A700 is ever certified, is a large cabin, comparable to the Embraer Phenom 100. On the other hand, Embraer pushes airliners and business jets out the door every week while Adam issues misleading press releases, e.g., claiming that the A500 was certified when in fact the FAA wouldn't let it fly above 12,000' or at night or in the clouds or... Anyway, as of May 2007, Adam is promising certification and delivery of the A700 in 2008.

June 2008 update: Adam filed for Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy in February 2008. Its assets were purchased by Russian investors in April 2008 and they plan to revive the design.

March 2009 update: Adam disappeared long before the rest of the world economy failed.

Epic

Epic offers turboprop and turbojet experimental (kit) aircraft, to be assembled by customers in its Bend, Oregon factory. At the same time, the company is pushing several similar designs through the Canadian certification process so that they can ultimately sell factory-built airplanes. Many of the numbers sound too good to be true, e.g., the Epic Dynasty turboprop has the same PT6 engine as a TBM-850 or Pilatus PC-12 but is supposed to be much faster (340 knots) and longer range (1900 n.m.). How can they do this? Epic builds the fuselage from composite materials and argues that it can make a more aerodynamic shape.

Their Epic Elite jet sounds even better: supposedly 1700 lbs. of payload can be carried 1600 nautical miles; cruise speed is 410 knots; pressurization of 8.5 psi (cabin altitude of 8,000' at 41,000').

Epic's ambitions would be laughable if not for the following:

More: www.epicaircraft.com

March 2009 update: The Epic Web site contains no updates newer than August 2008. Nothing has been written about Epic in the media.

ATG Javelin

ATG offers a two-seat $3 million military trainer-style jet with swept wings. Cruise speed is 500 knots with a claimed IFR range of 1,000 n.m. The company asked me to become an investor back around 2003. I asked who would buy a two-seat super high performance jet? "Real estate investors going to look at properties," was one reply. I asked how many real estate investors wanted to limit themselves to looking at properties that were near 10,000' runways (the claimed stall speed in landing configuration is 88 knots) and how many real estate investors were former fighter pilots.

What are the issues with becoming a civilian fighter pilot in an ATG Javelin? Runway length is a huge one. You won't have access to most U.S. airports, but only those designed for big or fast jets. The stall speed of the Javelin will likely result in landing speeds and runway length requirements close to those of a Boeing 737. Two-pilot airline crews regularly operate 737s from 6,000' runways, but you would have to ask yourself what your personal minimum should be. For anyone not fresh from the military or the airlines, insurance is unlikely to be available.

Alternative: overhauled L-39 Albatros with fresh avionics for $300,000. You see these Czech-built single-engine military trainers on a lot of ramps out West. Usually a few local rich guys have partnered up on one and they fly it without insurance. Specifications include a stall speed of 91 knots and a "range" of 971 nautical miles (plan on 700 maybe). According to Wikipedia, there were 257 flying in the U.S. in March 2006. You can buy the newer L-59 for under $1 million.

June 2008 update: ATG filed for Chapter 7 (liquidation) bankruptcy, leaving behind debts of close to $100 million and wiping out investors who put in up to $50 million.

Best VLJ to Buy Now to use Now

The Cessna Mustang is the most practical plane to buy right now if you want to use it right now. It has the fewest revolutionary features, sailed smoothly through certification, and therefore will very likely have the fewest groundings due to service bulletins and airworthiness directives. Cessna also has an extensive worldwide service network.

By mid-2009, assuming no major teething problems, the "best overall VLJ" title appears like to pass to the Embraer Phenom 100.

Best VLJ for Short Fields

It would be nice to be one of the founders of Google and own a personal Boeing 767. On the other hand, most airports with a runway long enough for a 767 have commercial airline service. If you want to get off the beaten track and take advantage of all of the small airports dotting the countryside, short-field ability is critical. The very light jets that do best on short fields are those that are very very light and can fly very very slow. The Diamond D-Jet and the Piper Jet should be the short-field champions. The piston Cirrus is not a good short-field performer and airplane companies tend to carry their strengths and weaknesses through to new designs.

Best VLJ for a low-time pilot

You have to work hard to kill yourself in a Diamond piston airplane. They fly so slowly and the stall characteristics are so benign that almost all the Diamonds ever built are still flying. The Diamond DA40 four-seat trainer finally unseated the Cessna 172 as the safest airplane flying. The numbers on the Cirrus will make it sound easy to fly, the marketing will stress the parachute and the idiot-proof nature of the avionics, but chances are that it will rack up the same mediocre safety record as the piston Cirruses.

Among the twin-engine jets, the Cessna and Eclipse will fly the slowest and therefore will probably be the safest.

Best VLJ for a family

If you don't want the natives rioting in the back, you'll need a reasonably spacious cabin. The Embraer Phenom 100 is probably the minimum acceptable size.

Best VLJ to impress clients

If you want a jet that communicates "I am a rich bastard and can afford anything I want", the minimum is probably a Cessna Citation X for $20 million. Which of the VLJs might fool someone into thinking that you're rich? The HondaJet and the Embraer Phenom 100 should have the most "ramp presence".

What about a turboprop?

All of the VLJs share some characteristics: Suppose that we bolt a propeller to a jet engine? What do we end up with? A Pilatus PC-12 that can fly 1,800 n.m., carry 8 fat people, and land comfortably on a 1600' grass or gravel runway. The Pilatus is no bargain, at $3.7 million new, but it has a lot more practical capability. One thing that I don't like about the single-engine turboprops is that they are noisier than jets, especially from the pilots' seats. A more serious problem is the lack of a FADEC. The engine controls on a factory-new turboprop are carried over from the 1960s. Push the throttle full forward on a take-off or a go-around? Your next stop will be at an engine inspection facility where you will be discussing what fraction of $100,000 the overtorque event will cost.

The VLJs will be cheaper to operate in the long run since the latest turbojet engines have many fewer parts than the venerable PT-6 turbines in the standard turboprop.

Training Yourself to Fly a VLJ

What if you have the money to buy a VLJ, but don't know how to fly? How can you prepare yourself to own and operate a VLJ safely? Here are the steps:
  1. Buy a Diamond DA40, hire an instructor, and work for 250 flight hours to an instrument rating. If you don't have an obvious case to deduct the cost of the plane for business, lease it to a flight school for use as an instrument trainer when you're not flying it.
  2. Buy a Cessna 400 to get higher altitude and high performance experience, doing the first 10-20 trips with an instructor.
  3. Get a multi-engine rating in a weekend in a Piper Seminole, then camp out at FlightSafety for their multi-engine "refresher" course in a sim. Additional hours in a piston twin are of no value. (It would be nice if you could get your multi-engine rating in the VLJ, but I don't know any insurable way to do that.)
  4. After you've accumulated at least 500 flight hours and significant real weather experience, buy the VLJ and hire a professional pilot/instructor for the first year of ownership.

Room in the Flight Levels?

Once thousands of new jets have rolled off the assembly line, won't the U.S. Air Traffic Control system fall apart? Will the FAA allow these plodding new jets to clog up the air routes and get in the way of airliners?

First, the VLJs that can go to FL410 will not be in the way of airliners because airliners tend to most efficient in the mid-30s while the VLJs achieve their maximum range up at FL400 and FL410. The VLJs that are limited to FL250 will not be in the way of airliners; the 20s are empty of all but Piper Malibus and the like (we once were cleared direct from Nebraska to Bedford, Massachusetts in the middle of a weekday at FL250).

Second, eventually the FAA will upgrade its software and systems to allow airplanes to fly great circle point-to-point routes. With point-to-point routing, there will be so little enroute congestion that some people have proposed letting the airliners' onboard TCAS systems resolve what few conflicts are likely. A 1996 New York Times article on this idea noted that "the F.A.A. [is] famous for missing deadlines" and, indeed, the agency does not seem to have set itself any deadline for eliminating the 1950s jet route system and accompanying software.

The FAA's last attempt to upgrade its software cost $9 billion, took 20 years, and was entirely scrapped. This is generally regarded as the most expensive civilian software project failure in history.

My Personal Choice

After all of this analysis, what's my personal choice? Many of my flights are just me, a friend, and the dog. On the other hand, I want long range so that getting to California doesn't turn into a three-stop harlequinade. Interior peace and quiet has tremendous value for me, much more so than for most pilots, which rules out turboprops. As the holder of an Airline Transport Pilot certificate with a multi-engine rating, the single-engine planes don't appeal to me as much as they would have when I was fresh out of instrument training. If Cirrus is able to deliver at less than $1 million, I might look harder at the single-engine idea.

For now... the Embraer Phenom 100.

More


Text and photos (if any) Copyright 2007 Philip Greenspun.
philg@mit.edu

Add a comment | Add a link