Interesting that Trump isn’t using N-reg. I would have thought N-reg would have been the best register for a bizjet of that size.
I think his 757 is Nreg, his 727 wasn’t (isn’t?).
The Jet Star is really fascinating. Refreshing. Didn’t know that bird so far.
mh wrote:
The Jet Star is really fascinating. Refreshing. Didn’t know that bird so far.
You could still see – and hear – them around Europe in the 1990ies. Another brilliant design of “Kelly” Johnson (P-38, F104, SR71, ….). Elvis Presley had one. And Auric Goldfinger (I am sure you saw it there, even if the pilots created some distraction to the viewer 
). Even the German government had one or two of them as their “air force one”.
Goldfinger’s plane:
Goldfinger’s pilots:
The later version “JetStar II” replaced the single-spool turbojet with turbofan engines. Even the Americans became noise-sensitive around the 1990ies…
There is currently one for sale at the price of a Cirrus. Or 1/5 of a Honda Jet. And who wants a Honda Jet anyway when he can have this instead:
http://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/list?Manu=LOCKHEED&Mdltxt=JETSTAR+II&mdlx=Contains&Cond=All&SortOrder=15&scf=False&CTRY=&ST=
Never saw that movie, sorry. But it looks more like a plane for Adam, than for me :-)
what_next wrote:
The way the engines are mounted on the Honda Jet
It’s going to induce an interesting pitch down moment when applying TO/GA power. Is the jet compensated through fly-by-wire? Otherwise it could make things very interesting on a go-around in IMC, or at night…
Archie wrote:
It’s going to induce an interesting pitch down moment when applying TO/GA power.
No different from tail mounted engines in that respect. The height of the engines above the centre of gravity is more or less the same. Anyway, a pitch down moment when applying large amounts of power is beneficial. The opposite happens with underslung engines and there have been quite a few accidents and incidents with loss of control due to excessive pitch attitudes during an all-engine go-around.
Archie wrote:
Is the jet compensated through fly-by-wire?
There is no fly-by-wire in that Honda jet!
I would second the under slung engine pitch power problem, a go-around from an auto land in the B737 is an interesting situation, the auto land trims the aircraft nose up just before landing, if the auto land quits for some reason, the autopilot disconnects and as you apply the power for the go-around you get a second dose of nose up……………… It requires a lot of force on the stick to keep the nose from rising way too far while your thumb is pressed hard on the pitch trim to try to restore some sort of order to the situation.
As for the James Bond Jetstar I very much regret that I did not get a glance at the aircraft ( or pussy galore ) when the filming was going on at RAF Northolt, I spent so much time as a kid in the 60’s looking through the wire at Northolt in surprised I missed it. This was Bond’s first visit to Notholt the second being the Bede BD9 that was flown through the hangar with a 90 degree roll to escape the closing hangar doors ! With Pinewood film studios just three miles up the road all sorts of interesting stuff turned up at Northolt at that time.
The JetStar II interestingly enough has the TFE731 engines and when it comes to turbofans, that’s probably the easiest and cheapest ones to maintain. But, at 400gal/hr, it’s a little saucy. A better choice in that segment would be a Westwind II. Same engines, but only two of them to feed, great range and built tough. At 170gal/hr, not too bad. They can do about 2500nm. They’re giving them away these days because they’re gotten old and people don’t like the looks of them. But there’s nothing wrong with the planes. And almost no calendar items, which is great for the private user who only flies a couple hundred hours a year.
Found this Jet Star sitting in a corner of Toulouse Blagnac airport today. It looks abandoned.
There used to be a YAK 40 three holer abandoned on the west side of Milano Linate for years and years, now finally gone. Apparently they are good STOL aircraft, relatively speaking.
