VLJ Accident History

New wiki article: VLJ Accident History. Summary:

• Eclipse incidents have been primarily due to manufacturing and design issues.
  
• Mustang and Phenom incidents have been primarily due to operator error during landing, especially runway overruns.
  

Angel Flight

Yesterday, I flew an Angel Flight patient and her sister from Pittsburgh back home to Boston. This is a great way to give back, and help someone in dire need. It would have been a two leg flight from AGC to Elmira (ELM) and on to Boston. The Mustang could do this in a single leg, at a lower cabin altitude than an unpressurized plane. It was obviously more comfortable for the patient, who needed oxygen even on the ground before departure and could barely walk a block.

ATC is very accommodating to Angel Flights, giving priority routing whenever possible, and even asking if we needed priority movement on the ground at Logan. Perhaps because of the time of year, they were extra helpful yesterday. On the way home, there was a 140 kt tailwind. In the descent, we hit a new ground speed record of 500 kts, burning 500 lbs/hr. All in all, a great feel good day.

From SIC to PIC

I'm in Orlando, FL this week to convert my SIC (Second in Command) C510 Mustang Type Rating to PIC (Pilot in Command). This will not be -S, or single pilot, so I continue to require a second pilot on board, which is appropriate to my current level of experience.

Over a couple of months, I've become quite comfortable with Neil, my current mentor and co-pilot. We have our standard flows and procedures. We even finish each other sentences. My assumption is that the person in the right seat is competent, knowledgeable and a teacher.

In my first simulator session, I was paired with another Flight Safety instructor as co-pilot. In fact, this person will be giving me the checkride on Friday. I assumed that he would also be a teacher. I can't say we worked well as a team. It wasn't always clear who should be pushing which buttons. While in NAV (GPS driven) mode, the procedure was loaded and activated that caused us to wallow around. Altitude callouts were not performed. During maneuvers, he dozed off (so I declared an emergency that my co-pilot died).

Initially, I was frustrated by the lack of teamwork. During the de-brief session, I learned a valuable lesson about leadership in the cockpit. As PIC, you can't assume that the co-pilot will always do the right thing. As the pilot in command, who is ultimately responsible for the safety of the flight, it's my responsibility to use my authority to ensure that we are working as a competent team. Equally important is to backup and verify what the co-pilot is doing.

When I return to flying with Neil, or another effective co-pilot, I will have to step up and verify what the co-pilot is doing. This will be safer for everyone.

It may be the most valuable lesson I learn all week.

Mustang Meets Phenom

I went to LWM yesterday to meet with Ron Gruner to discuss the Mustang Wiki and possible collaboration. Ron runs JetBrief, the current Phenom community site. There's a lot of potential information to share as there is more in common between a Mustang and a Phenom in terms of avionics, engines and procedures, than say between a Mustang and a Citation I. We'll see what comes of the discussions.

In the meantime, it was a spectacular fall day in New England, so we couldn't miss a chance at a photo op with the two planes next to each other. The Mustang is a little closer to the camera which is why it looks a little bigger.

Thanks to Mark Scott of Falcon Air for the picture and hospitality.

Flying the Embraer Phenom 100

It’s been about a year and a half since my factory visit to Embraer in Brazil. Since then, the Phenom 100 has been certified, about 40 have shipped, and I’ve taken delivery of my Cessna Citation Mustang.

Today I finally got the opportunity to fly the real plane, N73DB, the current East Coast demo plane.

Since I’ve flown the Mustang 30 hrs in the last 20 days, I was pretty comfortable with the flows required for a G1000 / P&WC 600 light jet.

Henry Yandle, the Embraer rep was very accommodating as usual. I flew with two Embraer demo pilots. As a last minute addition, my friend Philip, his wife and infant joined us to make a full cabin. With these additional passengers I didn’t attempt to exercise the stick pusher, but did try most of the other maneuvers I wanted although no climb to altitude and cruise.

Pre-flight

The P100 is an easier plane to pre-flight than the Mustang as there are fewer fluid gauges to check. The Mustang requires manually checking the hydraulic pressure, the nitrogen gauges, and the fire bottle gauge. All of this is done automatically for you in the P100. One Mustang annoyance is the oil filter bypass especially on the left engine as it is hard to see without bumping your head. Embraer solved this problem by a physical extension which can be easily determined by touch.

A downside of the P100 is the gear pins that must be added and removed manually. The tow point is also non-standard.

There are three independent pitot static systems, instead of just two on the Mustang.

The door stair is significantly sturdier (and more expensive) than the Mustang. It has a much better ramp presence, although I do imagine it will be hard to maintain.

Cockpit

The Mustang cockpit is more ergonomic and less cluttered than the P100. There are more switches in more places on the P100, like the side panels, and the light panel above the windshield. There is less storage space for cups or paper.

The P100 has the G1000 in a 3 x 12” configuration. The Mustang has the G1000 in a 2 x 10”, plus 15” MFD configuration. The P100 / Prodigy uses more screen real estate with less empty space. For example CAS messages appear on the PFDs. The MFD has gear position and synoptic views which take up more real estate. Between more information and a smaller MFD, I found myself squinting more than in the Mustang.

Embraer has not yet certified Synthetic Vision and Jeppesen Charts (ChartView), both of which have been used in every one of my Mustang flights so far.

Startup and Taxi

Since the P100 has two batteries, startup is typically done by battery, not GPU. The startup is much nicer than the Mustang for several reasons. The FADEC is newer and smarter than the one currently in the Mustang. It has better hot start prevention. There is only a single switch instead of a starter switch and then moving the throttles above the detent to idle. There is a nice schematic view showing actual real-time battery and generator loads, which is filtered on the Mustang.

Several common items on every flight are better automated on the P100. For example, if the Mustang pitot static heat is operated for more than two minutes on the ground, it could damage the AoA indicator. The P100 has an automatic pitot static switch. The beacon is automatic. All in all, as with the pre-flight, a few steps are saved every operation compared to the Mustang.

Taxiing is easy although not quite as easy as the Mustang. The forward view is better although it isn’t as easy to see either wing tip from either pilot location. It takes more power to start rolling, but the rest of taxiing is at ground idle.

The electric brakes were a bit of a disappointment. They are “grabby” with a short travel length. The brakes feel more like a binary on/off switch than a smooth pedal motion. While it is possible to use differential braking and power for a tight turn, the turn radius is not as tight as the Mustang.

As with the Mustang, V speeds must be calculated manually or looked up in a book. With six souls on board, and moderate fuel we were over 10,000 lbs so V1 and Vr were about 10-15 kts more than the Mustang.

Takeoff, Climb and Maneuvers

We departed KBED in rain, ceilings to near minimums and light cross-wind gusts. The plane felt solid and a bit stiffer than the Mustang. The workload was near identical: gear up, autopilot on, reduce from T/O thrust and hope ATC clears you up fast enough. We quickly broke out at 6,000’ and asked for a block of airspace for some airwork.

Northwest of the CON VOR at 8,000’, we did steep turns and slow flight. Since the demo schedule was a bit behind and I would not be immediately trading my Mustang for a P100, we didn’t have as long as I would have liked in the P100.

Steep turns were more challenging than the Mustang but not especially difficult. It was tricky to find just the right pitch until well until into the second turn. In slow flight, the plane was quite stable and responsive, even with 30 degrees of bank. The power needed some adjustments as it was quick to drop below the “donut”.

All in all, the plane was solid, sturdy and a little heavier than the Mustang. The Mustang feels a little more responsive, especially in turns.

As I mentioned earlier, with a very young passenger in the back, I did not attempt the stick pusher and imminent stall. Doing full gentle stalls in the Mustang, without a pusher or shaker, was a major selling point to a low time jet pilot like me.

I tried out the silver painted boots. As you may recall, Embraer painted the boots silver so it would give a “hot wing” look, even though these are really boots not bleed air. Since silver does not contrast as well with ice, a certification engineer had them put this funny looking black circle near the wing tip in order to see icing more easily. The whole thing is silly – the boots should be all black.

Return and approach

ATC gracefully gave us vectors back to KBED for the ILS 11 approach to near minimums. Slowing the plane takes a bit longer than the Mustang. There is no current option for speed brakes. Gear deployment speed is lower so they cannot be easily extended as drag either (Mustang gear can be extended at Vmo). ATC asked to slow first to 190 kts, and then again to 170 kts for spacing and each time required reducing power to idle and then waiting, whereas in the Mustang more options are available.

Adding drag is not purely academic. In the case of an emergency descent, it’s very easy to add drag to the Mustang via gear and speed brakes and get down in a hurry, at more than 8,000’/min. It would be very interesting to see how quickly the P100 can descend in an emergency. Also many large airports require keeping the speed up as late as possible. It would be equally interesting to see how much distance is required to slow from say 160 kt to 100 kt Vref in both aircraft.

When we received our final vector and were cleared for the approach, the P100 in combination with the G1000 and GFC 700 autopilot, did a terrific job to stay stabilized while we were bounced around in shifting winds and light turbulence. We stayed at flaps 2 as flaps 3 and full are not yet available due to a software issue. Apparently, when this software issue is resolved, Embraer recommends adding flaps full after the Final Approach Fix, which is very unusual. Typically, a jet is fully configured for landing at the FAF and then stable all the way down to the Missed Approach Point. When I disconnected the autopilot 100’ above minimums, there was a bit of jumping around but things stabilized quickly.

There is very little flair in the P100 – it lands even flatter than the Mustang. Again, there were no speed brakes to slow us down. With the grabby brakes, I agreed with the demo pilot’s suggestion to hold off on the brakes and roll out using more runway. When I did finally use the brakes, we were too close to the last taxiway (G) and ended up using the full runway length of 7,000’ even though I was right on Vref over the numbers. While we could have braked more aggressively, there’s no doubt the P100 soaks up more runway than the Mustang.

Taxiing back was easy. On the crowded and chaotic Jet Aviation ramp, we were able to fully utilize the minimum turn radius of the P100.

Conclusion

The P100 is a solid competitor to the Mustang. It has better automation and synoptic views making life a little easier for the pilot. It’s faster, harder to slow and less forgiving than the Mustang so a more experienced pilot or crew of two is a better fit. The cabin is better appointed and comfortable than the Mustang, especially with the door stair and rear lav. If you pay more, you get more.

I was not able to evaluate many other aspects of the P100 such as high altitude climb performance, fuel burn in cruise, emergency descent and many other critical aspects, so I feel this is an incomplete picture of a fine aircraft.

Overall, I’m happy with the Mustang for business and personal use and feel that it was the appropriate choice for a first time jet pilot. If I were more experienced, or had paying passengers, and wanted a little extra luxury, the P100 would have been the more appropriate choice.

Mustang Delivery Experience

I picked up my much anticipated Mustang in Wichita, KS on October 5-8, 2009. This was a demo plane that was fully paid for (financially delivered) in March 2009. So for six months, Cessna has had my plane and my money, while paying me a modest monthly fee. Needless to say, I was eager to get back one or the other.

Since I had never taken delivery of a jet before, and was unsure of wear and tear from demo usage, I hired Cyrus Sigari of JetAviva to help with the acceptance. JetAviva is primarily a broker for light jets including Mustang, CJs, and Embraer Phenoms. Cyrus previously worked as and engineer and has a huge amount of experience with all of these light jets, though had never accepted a demo plane prior. We reviewed his very detailed pre-acceptance plan over breakfast that morning and added a few items (0 g maneuver, satphone, etc.)

Most deliveries are performed at the union-free factory in Independence, KS. Cyrus suggested that we take delivery there rather than at the Service Center in Wichita, KS because of higher likelihood of parts availability. Cessna wanted the plane to stay in Wichita where the post-demo refurbishment was done. Given what happened over the next few days, Cessna should have followed Cyrus’s suggestion.

The morning at Cessna started off well enough. Cessna had some kind gifts, including a scale model of the real plane with accurate colors and tail number, leather jacket, etc. This was a very nice gesture but I was ready to get to business with the plane inspection and test flight.

The plane was in immaculate condition. It was so clean, even deep into the wheel wells, that you would never know it had about 300 hours and 400 landings. The appearance was truly factory new.

There were only a few minor squawks, such the torque seals on the gears and tension on the outer door latch. The headliner had a tiny scratch in it and the pilot visor was a little loose. We were ready to go on the test flight.

Cyrus was in the pilot seat. A Cessna test pilot was in the right seat, while I was in back. The test flight proceeded smoothly and again only minor items were found, such as the standby attitude indicator was 3 degrees off pitch compared to the PFDs. Cyrus purposefully does a few 60 degree bank 360 degree turns to load up 2g of force, as his experience has shown that this will shake loose some marginal items. For the same reason, the zero g push over was interesting. In the cabin, we kept everything strapped down while the two tray tables started to levitate.

After the flight, Cyrus and I examined the plane literally from bottom to top, using a creeper to check for any sign of leaks or deformation.

When we returned, we asked for two additional inspections from Cessna. We wanted a full FADEC download history. The FADEC download showed that one engine had had an ITT exceedance soon after manufacture prior to entry in demo service, but was still within tolerance (less than 5 seconds between 830 and 865 dC – it was only for 1 second). Also, since Cessna themselves had not followed P&WC conservative compressor wash schedule during the demo period, I wanted to borescope both engines to check for corrosion.

The borescope turned out to be a huge problem in terms of logistics. Even with all of the Cessna Wichita resources, they could not find a decent borescope as the lone good one was in repair. P&WC’s local representative had a good borescope but insisted that I sign an onerous agreement disavowing them of any responsibility whatsoever. Since this agreement was only between me and P&WC and did not involve any responsibility on Cessna’s part, I refused to sign as Cessna had operational control during the demo period.

The borescope easily cost us ½ day of wasted effort. By the time extensive discussions and meetings occurred, the good Cessna borescope was repaired and we no longer had to wait for P&WC. Fortunately the borescope showed no detectable corrosion but that’s not to say there isn’t any lurking.

Neil Singer, my mentor pilot arrived from Boston and joined us in the waiting game. Neil and I took our Mustang initial training together at Flight Safety Orlando a few months ago.

With the borescope out of the way, we planned for an afternoon departure to Los Angeles to fly Cyrus back home. Taking into account potential fatigue, we set a 4pm wheels up cut off time. Cessna went off to do a final engine run up and check.

The final run up failed. The FADEC has three redundant inputs to determine whether the plane is on the ground or not. One of the three did not agree. After various continuity checks and board swapping, Cessna determined, with P&WC disagreement, that the FADEC was bad. FADECs are highly reliable pieces of equipment and fail very rarely. Consequently, they are not a stock item, even in a large Service Center like Wichita. Had we been in Independence, another would have been easily available at least to swap in and try. So now a FADEC had to be ordered from Michigan and would not arrive until 1pm the following day (Wednesday). This problem caused us to lose yet another day.

Cyrus had to return to Los Angeles, so he flew back commercially on Wednesday. Neil and I waited until the FADEC arrived Wednesday afternoon. Of course when it was swapped out, the problem did not go away. So Cessna spent the evening swapping out boards until a combination of new fuel controllers resolved the issue. Around 11pm Wednesday night we received notification that all the issues were resolved and we would be good to go the next day.

As a precaution, the subsequent overnight shift also re-tested the plane and did additional run ups. They gave their blessing as well.

We planned for a departure Thursday morning. Unfortunately, the weather did not cooperate as there were low ceilings, thunderstorms, and icing up to the top of the clouds around 25,000’.

We started up and did as many ground checks as we could do, while waiting for a final lightning cell to pass over the airport. The engine run up was fine. The FADECs worked well. Everything in plane seemed perfect. With the Mustang RADAR scanning into the clouds, the passage looked clear, so we took off.

Climbing steadily through 15,000’ I shook Neil’s hand and congratulated ourselves on our successful departure out of Wichita, a day and a half late. Unfortunately our satisfaction was short lived.

Climbing through 18,000’, a CABIN DOOR message appeared on the Crew Alerting System. This was just like the training in the simulators at Flight Safety - low ceilings, a new CAS message, and shooting approaches. The checklist action is “Land as soon as possible” so we diverted back to Wichita and our favorite Service Center.

Soon afterwards, another CAS message appeared that both PFDs were on Air Data Computer 2. Though the checklist suggested simply switching back, we did not want to risk losing both ADCs in the clouds.

Air Traffic Control asked we wanted to declare an emergency but this was not necessary, especially as we descended quickly and pressurization was holding well.

The Service Center got right on the problem. When they adjusted the stiff door on Monday, they had put the door out of specification, so the CAS message was valid. It had only manifested at high altitude not during any of the ground checks. The ADC problem was a known G1000 transient issue.

After another set of ground checks, we departed once again. This time, the plane worked flawlessly and a 140 kt tail wind carried us home non-stop in 3:15.

Since then, the plane has been a flawless joy and wonder. It’s been an amazing machine during subsequent trips to Montreal, Teterboro, Las Vegas, and Orlando. I’ve flown it over 30 hours in just this first month.


Thanks to Bill and Charlotte, the Cessna customer service reps who gave their personal best and tried whatever they could to resolve these issues as quickly as possible.

Registration Sticker, not Duct Tape

An update to my post about Duct Tape Destroying a Wing: The plane was being delivered from Independence (KIDP) to Croatia. The Croatian registration sticker, not duct tape, had been placed over the fuel vent. Many countries require the tail number be displayed under the wing as well. In this case, the registration was a similar white color to the wing.

At least this makes it a little easier to understand why the pilots missed the sticker - perhaps they didn't know the plane well enough to know where all the fuel vents were. When they saw the sticker, they probably didn't assume there was a vent hiding underneath it. An official looking sticker is a lot less obvious than a big piece of duct tape.

There does not appear to be an NTSB report yet, but there is one from the FAA. Two months after the incident, the plane was repaired and was apparently delivered to Croatia.

Mustang vs. Phenom 100 Comparison

Here is the definitive Cessna Citation Mustang vs. Embraer Phenom 100 Comparison. There's probably way too much detail. Want a one minute answer? From the first page:

The Mustang is right for you if:

• It will be owner-flown, often single pilot, with part-time, short distance revenue rides.
  
• You are stepping up from something smaller.
  
• Passengers are typically 3 F’s: family, friends, and free-loaders.
  
• Cabin comfort and convenience is not that important. You are willing to spend $3M on a jet yet would be ok with using a bag in a bucket as an emergency lav and having only half the passenger seats able to recline.
  
• Minimal operating expense is important.
  
• You need the comfort of an established, reputable service organization.
  

The P100 is the right for you if:

• It will be mostly professionally flown, with maybe an occasional owner/operator.
  
• You are stepping down from something bigger.
  
• You will get paid to carry people.
  
• Your wife won’t let you buy a jet unless she’s happy – cabin comfort, color/style, and variety of options are very important. You must have a fully enclosed lav even if it is dry chemical.
  
• 5-10% higher acquisition and operating cost won’t break your budget.
  
• You rarely use runways less than 4,000’ long.
  
• You are confident and willing to bet that Embraer will figure out how to service these planes including AOG issues. Once the factory maintenance is in place, you need a high dispatch rate, say greater than 1000 hrs per year.
  

Now read the gory details.

Another Use for Duct Tape - Destroy a Jet's Wing

At Cessna's Independence, KS manufacturing facility, a new Mustang's wing was significantly damaged. How? Someone inadvertently left tape covering the fuel vent on the Mustang wing. The fuel pump is strong enough to suck the aluminum skin right through the metal posts. Whoever started up the plane obviously did not do a sufficient pre-flight.

In searching the NTSB records, I found only one other occurrence (ref: FlightSafety, NTSB):

BA HS 125 Series 700A. Substantial damage. No injuries.

VMC prevailed and an IFR flight had been filed for the morning flight from an airport in the US. The captain said that the airplane was being flown at 4,000' when the flight crew heard a bang and believed that the airplane had struck a bird. They conducted a normal landing at the destination airport.

An inspection revealed that the left-wing fuel tank was compressed, the left wing distorted and the left-wing fuel vent was blocked with duct tape. The left-wing fuel-tank stringers and the left-wing ribs also were damaged. The captain said that the fuel tanks had been repaired and pressure-tested before the flight. After the pressure test, the maintenance technician removed duct tape from the right-wing fuel vent, but the maintenance technician and the flight crew did not observe the duct tape covering the left-wing fuel vent. Because the fuel vent was blocked by tape, air could not enter the fuel tank as the fuel pump began pumping fuel out. The resulting low pressure inside the fuel tank led to the collapse.

The final report said the the probable cause of the accident was "the pilot-in-command's inadequate preflight inspection, which resulted in a flight with a blocked fuel-tank vent." The report said that a contributing factor was the failure of the maintenance personnel to remove the duct tape.

Real World Cross Country in a Cessna Citation Mustang

On Feb 1, 2008, I accompanied Jim, a Senior Cessna Demo Pilot, on his return flight from White Plains, NY (HPN) to Wichita, KS (ICT) in N327CM. This 1116 nm flight overflew some nasty weather including freezing rain, poorly plowed runways and multiple icing layers and included a LOC BC approach to minimums in the snow. There were some great lessons learned in real world flying of the Mustang.

Getting to HPN

I took a Colgan / US Air Saab turboprop from Boston to HPN. It was a clear, sharp contrast as to why passengers vastly prefer jets to turboprops. Everyone had to sit in the back, behind row 6, for weight & balance. The interior felt 50 years old. Even though it was only a 45 minute flight, the plane was very noisy, and full of vibration which made the hop feel significantly longer. We stayed at 8,000’ initially, dropping to 6,000’ for the second half of the flight, on much the same route as I would have had in the Cirrus. We must have been close to 250 KIAS, as my GPS watch was reporting a groundspeed of 290 kts. Conditions were VFR at night. If I was flying in the Cirrus, I would have been very surprised to see a big turboprop that fast and that low. Opposite direction traffic would have converged quite quickly.

I can only imagine the fuel burn in spite of turboprop efficiencies.

Exiting the plane on the left, it was disconcerting to see the right prop still whirling away. I like walking within 50’ of big props only when they are stopped completely, thank you. In this case, the right engine stayed running while passengers disembarked. Even as an aviation geek, it was not a pleasant experience.

Leg 1: White Plains (HPN) to Terre Haute, IN (HUF)

The next day, we left at 8am to avoid freezing rain in the New York area that was forecast to start an hour later. Panorama, the FBO, was unusually slow about getting our fuel and paperwork finalized, while we watched the nasty pink stuff drift in from the southeast.

After executing our checklists and doing final preparation for takeoff, we turned on the Flight Director. One strange aspect of the Mustang avionics is that you turn on the flight director using the Go Around button on the power lever, but turn it off using the FD button on the Garmin 700 autopilot. I don’t really understand the reason why either button could toggle the flight director.

The Westchester 1 departure off of runway 16 has a sharp turn to 320° at 800’. We were IMC before reducing power from takeoff to max climb. I was hand flying while Jim was handling the radios and pushing the occasional button to keep the flight director in sync with NY Departure’s frequent vectors. With two of us and full fuel, the Mustang handled beautifully again.

Keeping the Mustang tucked the flight director command bars required my full attention but was not difficult. FADEC was a huge help through multiple step up transitions. As I got more comfortable, and the radios quieted a bit, I did more of the button pushing until I did everything but the radios by the end of the day.

We picked up some rime ice through the lower altitudes which was handled fine by the boots. The Mustang wing boots leave a thin seam of icing, about a ¼” high and ½” thick along the front most part of the leading edge, probably where there is a gap between the upper and lower boots. There was no discernable difference in flight characteristics.

There was a huge weather system stretching from Indiana to New York, containing plenty of freezing rain, sleet and snow. We were going to fly from one edge of it to the other. The cloud deck was huge – we didn’t break into the clear until 36,000’ on the way up to our cruise altitude of 38,000’. The XM nexrad showed all the colors of the rainbow beneath us – blue, pink, white. This same system had just dumped 7” of snow on St. Louis.

We planned Terre Haute, IN (HUF) as a fuel stop due to long runways, little traffic and inexpensive fuel. Due to low ceilings, the ATIS confirmed our estimate of an ILS 5 with a reasonable 10 kt tailwind on the 9,000’ runway. This would bring us closer to the FBO on rollout so we could have a quick turn.

While descending through 10,000’, with some rime ice building on the wings again, ATC called to switch us to the LOC BC 23 since winds were now gusting to 20kts, still from the southwest. Jim is a very experienced pilot, with as much time as anyone in the Mustang, but he had never done a LOC BC in the real airplane. So we were both busy in a real hurry. I left the GPS navigation on the left side PFD, while Jim viewed the localizer on his right side PFD. The BC, or Backcourse, button on the Garmin autopilot didn’t function quite the way we expected, but we stayed clearly on course according to both navaids. Presetting the bugs for Vref and MDA was very useful. At the TTH VOR, we descended to the MDA and kept an eye out for the runway. Just a couple of miles out we saw at least the VASI so we could continue our descent. The plane seemed a bit fast so I asked Jim when we should deploy the second notch of flaps. With the distraction of the LOC BC, the weather, the unintuitive BC button, we had both forgotten to drop the second notch at the VOR. Less than a mile out, we put in the second notch.

We landed a bit fast nevertheless, which wasn’t a bad idea given the gusting winds. The runway had patchy snow and ice. Braking action was poor, at best fair in spots. Before I knew it, we’d used up 7,000’ of runway even with speed brakes on rollout. I’d been warned that these slippery jet powered gliders can chew up runway in a hurry and this was a clear case in the real world. We could have been harder on the brakes, but we had plenty of runway and didn’t want the brakes to grab too hard on one side coming in and out of so many ice patches. After we slowed, the tower asked for a braking report so Jim dug in and the anti-skid did the job.

At the end of the runway, we prepared to turn off only to be greeted by a 7” snow bank that would have challenged the propeller clearance on the Cirrus. Jim confidently told me to keep the plane moving and we plowed through like a champ. The 9,000’ taxiway had not been cleared so we left groomed cross-country ski tracks in our wake.

Once settled, we did a near record 16 minute turn, including the long taxi and time to break off the ice seam along the leading edge of the boots with our gloves.

HPN-HUF 2.6 hrs, 1.1 actual, LOC BC 23@HUF.

Leg 2: Terre Haute, IN (HUF) to Wichita, KS (ICT)

We were now on the trailing edge of the storm, heading into clear weather over Missouri and Kansas. Before takeoff, we were cleared up to 10,000’ and of course, encountered some more icing along the way.

Since Jim was heading home, we did not take full fuel in HUF. We were now reasonably light, in go fast mode and the performance showed. At FL320, ISA -1, weighing 7320 lbs, we were truing out at 360kts burning 730 lbs / hr. That’s 20 kts faster than promised by Cessna. When ATC let continue our climb, fuel burn decreased.

As I was more comfortable with the plane, and the workload was lower, we had time to play with the more advanced features of the G1000, including Top / Bottom of descent planning, using different VNAV controls of the autopilot, and re-route planning. A number of these items have been described in my Mustang Wish List(+++ add link).

Since Wichita was VMC, I asked to hand fly the ILS 19L to minimums. ATC was cooperative so we were fully configured on the glide slope at 8,000’ well before the outer marker. We shot the approach at 105 kts, slower than I normally do an approach in light IFR in the Cirrus. We also had a 40 kt headwind, lollygagging along at 65 kts over the ground. I had plenty of time to feel how stable the Mustang was at low airspeeds.

Since this was too easy, just as I looked up from the instruments to go visual within the last 500’, the wind had to shift 50° to the left. While it wasn’t at 40 kts anymore, we still had a significant forward slip, just like a single engine piston. I touched down gently on the left wheel first, albeit to the right of centerline. Even though Jim was reassuring again, I just didn’t know how far I could roll to the left and leave plenty of ground clearance. We easily made the turnout from the dry pavement.

HUF-ICT 1.9, 0.2 Actual IMC, 0.1 Simulated IMC, ILS 19L@ICT

Lessons Learned

Every flight I make in the Mustang builds my confidence about being able to handle the transition and master the twin engine jet. When everything goes right, the first and last four minutes of flight are intense. In between is a calm, comforted state that the plane has so much redundancy, reserve and quality of systems. Flying the Cirrus is very active – monitoring the engine parameters continuously, looking for potential landing or parachute sites, thinking of failure conditions. You anticipate something will break – it’s just a matter of time. Flying the Mustang is less unnerving and significantly less taxing. Something may break, but there’s lots of backup and headroom– a failure rarely means an emergency.

Mustang Wish List

Mustang Wish List

The most up to date version of the Wish List can be found at Mustang Wish List.

The Cessna Citation Mustang is a wonderful airplane, especially for a brand new design. I'm sure it, or its derivatives will continue to improve over time. This wish list was created to keep track of potential improvements. It is not a critique of the Mustang, but rather practical feedback to provide to Cessna in order to improve the product for every one's benefit. Thanks to various contributors for your ideas and suggestions.

If you have additional ideas or suggestions, email me at the address listed at the bottom of this page. Let me know if you would like credit for your suggestion.

See also my Mustang Review.

G1000 / Avionics:

1. The G1000 should definitely preset V speeds on the PFD, rather than the manual error-prone process. It has all the necessary information.
2. When entering an airway on a flight plan, the intermediate waypoints are not displayed. When ATC clears you to a later waypoint, the only option is to take out enroute charts and figure out the waypoint manually even though the G1000 knows. Perhaps there could be a manual "Expand / Collapse airway" menu item on the Flight Planning page.
3. There is no way to do any "What If?" route planning. On a plane with two separate 430 or 530s, you can use the second to plan alternates for time, fuel or on-course heading / DTK. There is no way using the G1000.
   
4. VNAV Planning:
1. Show Top of Descent (TOD) distance. Right now, it is shown graphically and by time, not distance.
2. Planning +x / -x miles from a waypoint is less intuitive than the 530/430 VNAV planning where plain English "Before / After" is used.
   
5. The METAR graphical display flags are too large, obscuring too much information when zoomed out.
6. EICAS: have more text available for the messages. There are too many obscure messages to memorize. At least allow highlighting an EICAS message and have a "More..." softkey to get an expanded description or suggested action in case an unfamiliar message appears. Obviously significant messages should be memorized by the pilot.
7. Why does the "Go-around" button turn on the Flight Director, and the Autopilot FD button turn it off? Couldn't either one flip the state of the FD?
8. A little tone or beep crossing 18,000' would be useful.
9. Checklists should be available on the MFD.
   

Cabin / Comfort:

1. Like any modern car, allow cockpit and cabin temperatures to be set by thermostat, rather than manually. The plane has a tendency to get warm during descents.
2. At least a chemical toilet, instead of just a bag. Anyone have a good source moisture absorbing crystals as found in diapers? There have to be some good aftermarket solutions for this already.
   
3. The cabin has too much plastic, like a mid-market American car, rather than the luxury details you'd expect from a private jet.
   

Entertainment / XM Radio.

1. Passengers should be able to view the current XM channel in addition to changing it.
2. Crew should have XM output in the cockpit that is muted automatically by ATC.
3. There should be a external input for an MP3 or DVD audio available in the cabin that would be sent to all cabin headset outputs.
4. Ideally, the XM radio should be detachable for use outside the plane.
   

Public Address:

1. A real intercom should be available between crew and at least one cabin area, as found on some Caravans.
2. The PA button should be a useful cabin announcement via the two cockpit speakers, which are already clearly audible in the cabin. This is worse if passengers are actually using the XM headphone jacks, since there's no way to break in for a PA announcement.

Headphones:

1. Tip power should be sufficient to power other brands of headphones, such as Sennheiser, etc. besides just the Telex.
2. LEMO plugs should be added for Bose or other types of powered headphones.

Mustang Wish List - David Wihl (davidwihl at gmail dot com) - Last update Feb 4, 2008