Learjet 60 Maintenance Manual

30.08.2018admin0 Comments
Learjet 60 Maintenance Manual Rating: 9,6/10 5286reviews

download free netcut alternative

Learjet 60 Maintenance Library. Component Maintenance Manual with Illustrated Parts List. Learjet Model 60 Brazilian Supplement. ApplianceSaft America Inc. 40678-4 Meggitt Aircraft Braking Jet Braking, Jet Wheels AirframeLearjet Corp. 60, 60XR EnginePratt & Whitney Canada PW305A.

Learjet 60 Maintenance Manual

Learjet 60: Errors in Maintenance Manual Procedures There are a few errors in the Learjet 60 Maintenance Manual in the procedures of complying with the Functional Test of the Cabin Pressure Warning System on Learjet 60 models 60-002 thru 60-096, modified per SB 60-21-12 & 60-097 & Sub. Correct Procedures Verified as correct through Learjet Tech Pubs on SQ1109-047-60 • Page 211, 1.

(3) (b) should read: 'Connect a second pitot-static test set vacuum source to the cabin sense port (labeled Pc) on the CPC and the cabin sense port (labeled Pc) on the integrated cabin pressure indicator.' • Page 211, between 1.

Learjet 60 Maintenance ManualLearjet 60 Maintenance Manual

(3) (d) and (e), should tell you to pull the Squat Switch C/B. • Page 212, (4)(a) and (5)(a) should be swapped. • (4)(a) should read: 'Disconnect the second pitot-static test set static source from the atmosphere sense port of the integrated cabin pressure indicator. Keep the pitot-static test set connected to the cabin sense port of the integrated cabin pressure indicator.' • (5)(a) should read: 'Disconnect the pitot-static test set vacuum source from the cabin sense port of the integrated cabin pressure indicator and connect to the atmospheric sense port of the integrated cabin pressure indicator.'

• Page 213, (6)(d) should read: 'Connect the No. 2 pitot-static tester vacuum source to the cabin sense port of the cabin pressure indicator.' • Page 214 (7)(f) should read: 'Disconnect the No. 2 pitot-static tester from the cabin sense port fitting in the cabin pressure controller and the cabin port of the cabin pressure indicator.'

Hope they chucked in a tarmacing machine, the 60 uses runway like it is going out of fashion. Every time I see one taxi by or park next to it, I am amazed by the shopping trolley wheels. 2008 Cadillac Cts Service Manual. It has a nice cabin, just too bad you can't really go anywhere, especially when it is raining. They are cheap to buy, less then half of a comparable airframe, there is a reason for that. Like everything else in life, you get what you pay for. Buyers of used 60's buy them on price and price alone, if you were looking for an allround halfway decent cabin sized aircraft, any digging into the 60 would quickly discount it as a choice.

If you or whoever is consulting you on the purchase process would look a bit deeper then the pretty pictures you find on the web, you would quickly find its shortcomings, run a mile and go shop for a decent airframe. You are obviously looking at price point, or else you wouldn't contemplate the 60 or VII.

Forget about pretty pictures you find on the web, you first need to pinpoint your mission profile, then find the aircraft that suits that profile. You either pay for it now or pay for it later, earlier models are cheaper to buy, but will cost you more over time. Only a spreadsheet based on your hours and trips can answer that question for you. Do you really need the cabin size of a VII? Could you get away with a smaller cabin, the pax sit down for most of the flight. You also need to consider the part of the world you are in, what are the maintenance providers like.

There is a reason you don't see many 60's on AOC's in Europe, with the landing factors you just can't go anywhere, especially when it rains. What kind of flights will you mainly perform? Will they bring loads of kids or luggage. What sized airports will you use? What is your average trip length? What is your average loading, etc.

All these questions can be put into a spreadsheet and the obvious airplane will come out at the bottom of it. A G150 is a great airplane, but based on your choices so far will probably be outside of your budget. You should seriously think about getting a professional to help you in the process, the cost of that will pay for itself many times over. Just don't think that buying the biggest sized cabin for your budget is the way to go. A cheaper and older aircraft if you don't fly a lot of hours a year may well bet he way the go, if you plan on flying lots of hours and smaller sectors to smaller airports, then a newer smaller model may be the best choice.

Only you can answer that question based on your requirements. Keep in mind that as soon as the owners have their first aircraft, they will quickly change the mission profile and either use it a lot more for trips that you hadn't planned for, or if you get it wrong will quickly realise that they can't use it as they bought the worng airrcraft and are stuck with a lemon. Buying the right aircraft for current and future use is not as easy as it first seeems. Just make sure you buy one based on the numbers and not on cabin size and purchase price alone. When one of my principals first went shopping for an airplane, he wanted a 5/550, once we ran the numbers it made a heck of a lot more sense to buy a 604 and charter a 550 for the occasional trips requiring one.

We are now looking for a replacement and once again the 550 is coming up but the mission profile hasn't changed significantly to warrant one, so we probably end up with a 605 this time around. Our research and number crunching will give us the obvious choice to go for. Cabin comforts and size obviously play a minor part in that decision process. Forget about getting the 'most' airplane for your budget, get the right one based on your requirements. It makes sense of course.

New owner requires big stand up cabin, full toilet, proper range and good variable hourly cost. The aircraft will be operated from Europe and mostly to the East but not a little part of flights will be in one hour range in Europe. So logicaly we looked for an aircraft in Moscow range. Kenmore Serger Instruction Manual on this page. We are thinking about 2003 and newer aircrafts. In the beginning it will be mostly operated privately and later in AOC. Our goal is 400 to 600 hours per year.

Learjet 60 meets all our expectations. G150 is better choice of course. But I really think that it's out of our budget. Sometimes we have to make a compromise. So that's the reason why I'm asking here for real experience.

It's the best review. On the face of it, without knowing all of the details, you have 3 obvious choices, the 60, an Excel or a 800XP. The 60 is the quicker of the 3, but also burns the most amount of fuel if you fly it hard, the Excel has less of a 'ramp presence' then the other 2, but is a well proven airframe, especially in Europe and has good residual value and is easy to charter. The Hawker is the heaviest of the 3, cost a bit more to buy, but will carry a greater load on a longer distance.

Per seat, the Hawker and 60 are similar in operating cost and the Hawker has better residual value so over time it may actually be the cheaper option. The cabin of the Hawker is the biggest of the 3 and flying 600 hours a year, may well be worth the investment. The only downside of the Hawker is the lack of luggage space, but the 60 isn't that much bigger. Dollar for dollar the Hawker based on 600 hours a year and 4 year ownership will be cheaper then the 60, and you don't have to wait for it to stop raining. The 60 does have brake issues and if you decide to put the aircraft on an AOC, contaminated runway data is atrocious, the XR got an extra disc and is a lot better but then you are in Hawker territory again. You really need to punch all the numbers in a spreadsheet and see what comes out at the end.

400-600 hours a year is definitely the right amount of hours to be thinking about your own plane. Where are you going to base it and what are the maintenance providers like? At least you are looking at roughly the right size of airframe for 600 hours a year and the operating area you are considering. If you don't have the exact breakdowns for each type you are considering, get a report from Conklin and deDecker, well worth the money. IF you are serious about putting the aircraft on an AOC, call around to operators that curently use your chosen types and talk with all of them, with the prospect of getting an aircraft on an AOC, they will all bend over backwards and help you out. Also see if you can get a hold of all the AFM's somewhere to get your numbers right. Lots of questions to answer.

Thank you for your reply. We already have Conklin and deDecker but it doesn't say pilot and operator experience. Your advice is exactly what we missed in our puzzle.

The aircraft will be operated from middle east Germany and as I said half and half in Europe range and to the East. So XLS is out due to its range. G150 would be good choice but I'm afraid it's out of our budget. Hawker is a little bit expensive for variable cost than L60 and G150. So in 600 hours per year it can cost a lot. There is no more choices I guess. Have a look at the Sovereign.