Bombardier’s Learjet 45XR – Flight Test Report by Graeme Mollison

In the late 1950s, US entrepreneur William (Bill) Lear formed the Swiss American Aviation Corporation (SAAC) with the intention of designing a small private jet capable of operating into and out of small airports around the globe.

Lear and his group of Swiss aircraft design engineers based their design on a Swiss strike fighter, which, in fact, never entered production, transforming the wing and basic airframe design into the SAAC-23 project.

The first flight of the SAAC-23, later renamed the Learjet 23, took place on 7 October 1963.

The series of highly publicised demonstration flights that followed quickly launched the Learjet onto the world stage. Capable of beating the US Air Force’s F-100 Super Sabre in a climb to 10,000 feet, a Lear 23 took off with two pilots and five observers onboard, and climbed to 40,000 feet in just 7 minutes and 21 seconds, setting the first of many records that it would accumulate over the following years.

Priced at US$540,000, the Learjet 23 was the first small jet to enter mass production and more than 100 were sold in the first two years of production.

Although ownership of the Learjet company has changed many times over the years—current owner Bombardier has owned the Learjet Corporation since 1990—the Learjet name defines “brand power” and has become iconic to the extent that to many non-aviators, every business jet is a “Learjet” in the same way that every light piston aircraft is a “Cessna”. Learjet is to the business jet market what Coca Cola is to the soft drink market.

While Learjet’s latest aircraft are vastly different machines from Bill Lear’s first groundbreaking model, they all remain easily identifiable as Learjets. The Learjet 45, from which the subject of this report (the 45XR) and smaller -40 series are derived, was conceived in the mid 1990s under Bombardier’s jurisdiction and was certified in 1997.

Although Bombardier intentionally retained the distinctive Learjet lines, the Learjet 45XR is a “clean sheet” design in which less than a handful of components are unchanged from the earlier Learjets.

The Learjet 45XR is an evolution of the Learjet 45. Payload-range capabilities have been enhanced with increased engine performance and a 454 kg (1000 lb) increase in maximum takeoff weight.

The improved engine performance comes from two 3,500 lb (15.56 kN) Honeywell TFE731-20-BR turbofans, flat rated to ISA +25 (40º C) These significantly reduce balanced field length requirements at higher temperatures and reduce time-to-climb compared to the -45, which was powered by TFE731-20-AR engines. Launching from Aspen, in mountainous Colorado, the XR will also carry its eight passengers around 1,000 nautical miles (1,852 km) further than a standard Learjet 45.

The good news for customers of “standard” Learjet 45s is that Bombardier offers an upgrade package to bring their aircraft up to XR standard and only a software change is required to convert the -AR version of the engine to the -BR.

Learjet 45XR New Zealand Visit

In November, Bombardier and ExecuJet Australia brought Bombardier’s Learjet 45XR demonstration aircraft (appropriately registered N45XR) to New Zealand. Since leaving the factory only three months earlier, this aircraft had already flown 392 hours.

On the day I was invited to fly the aircraft, it had already flown across the Tasman under the control of Bombardier demonstration pilots Christian Barnett and Kerry Swanson. They are two of around 10 pilots employed by the company, which generally has around three Learjet demonstration aircraft operating at any one time.

Pre-flight Inspection

The Learjet 45XR is fitted with an auxiliary power unit (APU) as standard, which means the aircraft’s electrical and environmental systems can be fully powered up without needing a ground power cart, and eliminating any worry about draining the aircraft’s battery. This makes the aircraft completely self-contained at any airport around the world, no matter how primitive the facilities.

Air-conditioning keeps the cabin (and cockpit!) cool during a hot afternoon in Tahiti or warm on a winter’s morning in Queenstown.

The external pre-flight inspection starts at the forward entry door on the aircraft’s port side and moves forward around the nose to inspect the condition of the pitot probe, angle of attack vane and, perhaps less familiar to many, an ice detection probe, which has a feed into the aircraft’s crew alerting system.

The aircraft sits low to the ground, which makes inspection easy, with no stretching required, whilst still making items such as undercarriage and brake wear indicators easy to inspect.

The nosewheel assembly with its chined tyre is one of the few items the 45XR inherits from previous Learjets.

Although the 45XR retains the distinctive Learjet form, its lines are noticeably smoother than its early predecessors.

The wings, which are swept at 13 degrees, feature winglets for drag reduction; winglets first appeared on Learjets in 1977—their first appearance on any production business jet. In the case of the Learjet 45XR, its maximum range of 2,087 nm (four passengers, two crew at ISA with IFR reserves) would be approximately six percent less without them.

On the starboard side of fuselage, below the rather imposing Honeywell turbofan, are the access panels for both the single point refuelling and the hydraulic reservoir.

The Learjet 45XR can hold 2,750 kg (approximately 3,425 litres) of fuel. Pressure refuelling allows the aircraft to be fuelled in around six minutes—with no ladder required—making “tech” stops quick and easy.

A transparent panel allows easy inspection of the hydraulic system’s status without the need to open the panel unless servicing is required.

Two large “delta” fins dominate the underside of the aft fuselage. These improve the aircraft’s stall characteristics and their performance is also such that the aircraft may be dispatched with the yaw damper inoperative.

The baggage hold is accessed via a door under the port engine. Again, this provides easy access from the ground and the opening is large enough to accept most average sized suitcases.

Overall, the walk-around inspection is a very straightforward affair taking no more than ten minutes or so. Everything can be inspected or accessed from ground level; there is no need to carry a stepladder around—even for the more vertically challenged. This further enhances the ability to remain autonomous at some of those airports that the Lear 45XR has the performance to operate from.

Passenger Comfort

Climbing up the entry stairs gave me my first glimpse of the cabin. Dimensionally, it could be said to be small with a height of 1.50 metres and a width at the centreline of 1.56 metres, reducing to 0.94 metres at the floor line. However, these figures are deceiving in that the cabin doesn’t feel as small as the numbers suggest. The floor is flat—it doesn’t use a sunken aisle to “fudge the figures”—and it has a bright, airy feel.

The eight passenger seats, which swivel and recline, are mounted in a double-club formation with plenty of legroom. Four folding executive tables allow work to continue as the aircraft speeds passengers to their next meeting at up to Mach 0.81 (860 km/h) and well above the weather at up to 51,000 feet.

A lavatory is fitted at the rear of the cabin behind a divider and although it wouldn’t be my preferred seat, it is certified as a passenger seat, allowing the 45XR to carry a maximum of nine passengers. Also at the rear of the cabin there is further storage space—accessible during flight—for luggage and jackets.

The Business End

Eventually it was time to strap myself into the business end. I took the left seat, while Kerry took the right and Chris sat at the front of the cabin (for takeoff and landing). I would be lying if I said I wasn’t a little daunted at the thought of just how I was going to manoeuvre my 6 ft+ frame over the centre pedestal and slide between the seat and the control yoke without damaging either the aircraft or myself; however, there is a technique and it probably looked more awkward than it actually was.

Once settled, the seat was comfortable and easily adjustable with “sighting balls” mounted on the centre windscreen pillar to aid in establishing the correct adjustment.

One very wise innovation has been the incorporation of the crew emergency oxygen masks in the seat itself. This means that wherever the seat moves, whether forward or aft, up or down, the mask will always be in exactly the same position in the event of an emergency; a sensible idea in view of the lofty and unforgiving environment in which these jets operate.

My first impression of the instrument panel was that there was a lot crammed into a small space. However, when studied in more detail, it is obvious that the systems and controls are ergonomically laid out and clearly presented. There is no overhead panel; circuit breakers reside along each side wall and essential items are laid out immediately in front of the pilots. I particularly liked the way that electrical and environmental systems were clearly presented in a schematic form, which makes for logical and intuitive interpretation and switching.

Electrically, the Learjet 45XR has what is known as a split-bus system, in which the left engine generator powers the left side and the right engine generator powers the right. A bus-tie allows the APU to power the whole aircraft on the ground.

Should an engine generator fail in the air, the system will automatically load-shed (remove power to non-essential items—the boss’s laptop, for example—to reduce the electrical load on the remaining generator). It will then automatically look at what may have caused the failure. If it decides it is simply a generator failure, it will “re-tie” the bus automatically after a few seconds. If it sees something it doesn’t like (such as a short), it won’t re-tie the bus.

The electrical system is all DC with the exception of the windshield heat, which is AC. An electrically heated windscreen significantly reduces noise in the flight deck compared to one in which the windscreen is heated by engine bleed air.

Bombardier utilises the “dark cockpit” philosophy, by meaning that if there are no lights illuminated, then things are normal—a philosophy widely adopted in modern airliner cockpits.

The Learjet 45XR’s Honeywell Primus 1000 avionics suite includes an Electronic Flight Instrument System (EFIS) and Engine Instrumentation and Crew Alerting System (EICAS). With 332 EICAS alert messages installed, the chances are that if something is not right, it will tell you!

The four easy to read 20.3 cm x 17.8 cm EFIS screens present the crew with primary flight instrumentation, navigation and engine information. The avionics include dual Micro Air Data Computers (MADC), dual Attitude and Heading Reference System, single (dual is optional) Flight Management System (FMS), TCAS and an Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS). The three-axis autopilot has what is known as fail-passive capability, in that any single failure is annunciated but will not interrupt autopilot functions. The Learjet 45XR is certified to Category I minimums.

TCAS targets are not projected on to the MAP display but rather are displayed relative to an aircraft symbol on a separate dedicated display. Personally, I would prefer TCAS targets to be projected onto the MAP display as I find this better for situational awareness.

The only “round dials” on the Learjet 45XR’s panel are the standby flight instruments in the centre of the panel, and two very handy angle-of-attack indicators. Although unlikely, if one were unfortunate enough to find oneself without an airspeed indicator then this would be a very useful instrument. On its graduated scale, 0.40–0.42 equates to best economy/range speed, while 1.0 would be fully stalled. As a rule of thumb, 0.6 in the landing configuration would set one up nicely on a three-degree slope for the approach.

Once it was time to get underway, the aircraft’s performance programme automatically calculated our takeoff performance and displayed the appropriate performance figures on the pilots’ flight displays. Our takeoff weight of 8,260 kg, which included 1,830 kg of fuel, was almost 1,500 kg below the aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight of 9,752 kg. “Flap 8” (8 degrees) would be used for our takeoff and our takeoff distance was calculated at 1,156 metres with a V1 of 107 kt, VR of 114 kt and a V2 of 123 kt.

As I was not familiar with the flight deck layout, Kerry read the Before Start checklist aloud and actioned its items under the watchful eye of Chris, who had positioned himself at the rear of the cockpit. As with most modern aircraft, the checklist is brief. Engine start was simple and quick—set the thrust lever to idle, lift the guarded switch, press the start button and monitor. Acceleration was brisk, and both engines were started and stabilised in less than 90 seconds.

Taxiing from the Air Centre One apron, I got my first taste of the Learjet’s steering and braking system. There is no tiller; steering is achieved through rudder pedal displacement and is speed sensitive—the slower the speed, the more steering is available with a maximum of 60 degrees in either direction. This means that that the aircraft can basically be turned around its own wingtip, making manoeuvring on a congested apron a dream. However, by the time the aircraft reaches 70 knots, steering travel has reduced to just seven degrees of travel in either direction.

Both Kerry and Chris warned that the steering and the brakes would take a little getting used to, and they were right. As is often the case, with manoeuvrability comes sensitivity and there is a definite technique to taxiing the Learjet 45XR smoothly. Because FAR 25 required that there be no hydraulics on the flight deck, the brakes are digital; pushing on the “toe brakes” above each rudder pedal actually depresses a spring, which causes an electronic signal to be sent to the brake control computer—very much “brake-by-wire”. Be warned: the large carbon brakes are powerful and require gentle application on the taxi!

It was a short taxi out towards Runway 23 Left and the aircraft’s runway incursion prevention system sprang into life with an “approaching Runway 23 left” audio warning sounding in our headphones as we neared the holding point. It also issued an “entering runway” warning as we entered the runway to line up for takeoff. This is an excellent feature for operations in poor visibility or at unfamiliar airports.

Once cleared for takeoff, it was a simple matter of releasing the brakes and advancing the thrust levers “three detents” to the takeoff position; the digital electronic engine computers, which have most of the functionality of FADEC, took care of the rest as I concentrated on tracking the runway centreline. Acceleration was brisk and quiet.

As we accelerated through 114 knots, Kerry called, “Rotate.” I eased back on the control column and we were airborne. Pitching to 13-degrees nose up saw the VSI pegged at 4,000 feet/minute as we tracked towards Westpoint; I knew instantly that I was going to like this aeroplane.

Rotation forces were positive without being heavy and the flight controls were crisp with a nice balance and feel. Being used to flying a larger, heavier aircraft, I had an initial tendency to over-control, which was immediately resolved by relaxing my inputs.

As we accelerated to 250 kt and turned right to head north, Air Traffic Control obligingly gave us an unrestricted climb to FL450 (45,000 feet).

The aircraft was such a delight—easily trimmed and stable—and I was enjoying it so much that I had no desire to engage the autopilot.

As we passed FL200 (20,000ft), the rate of climb was still an impressive 3,300 feet per minute at an indicated airspeed of 240 knots.

It was an FAR 25 requirement that the Learjet 45XR be able to fly safely should the ailerons or elevators become jammed. In order to experience such an (unlikely) event, I engaged the roll disconnect lever (red lever attached to the centre of the control yoke), which disconnected my yoke from the ailerons and allowed me to fly the aircraft on spoilers alone. The aircraft noticeably lost its feel, which became more akin to the “feeling” of flying Flight Sim on a home computer. Once a roll was initiated, it required more anticipation and a deliberate opposite control input to stop the bank at the desired angle; however, with purposeful control inputs, the aircraft could still be flown accurately and with little effort.

To prove the system’s effectiveness in combating a jammed aileron, Kerry began rolling in right aileron. I had to counter this by rolling my yoke to the left, which activated the flight spoilers to allow the aircraft to continue flying wings level. The spoilers proved incredibly effective at the task, although it was bizarre to look across to see Kerry’s control yoke tilted 45 degrees to the right, while mine was tilted at a similar angle—but in the opposite direction!

Putting some positive loading on the controls allowed me to reengage the ailerons with my control column and we continued climbing to FL450. Transitioning to Mach number, I maintained the recommended M0.70, which had the angle-of-attack needle indicating 0.4.

Even with the noise cancelling headsets removed, the flight deck was suitably quiet and normal conversation was not a strain.

As we passed FL420, the aircraft was still climbing at 1,000 feet a minute, which is a considerable improvement over the Lear 45. It wasn’t until we passed FL435 that the rate of climb started to falter and as we approached FL450, it was down to 500 feet a minute.

Once level, the aircraft quickly accelerated to M0.81. Our total fuel burn to this point (right from engine start) was a remarkable 388 kg. I had hand-flown the aircraft all the way from takeoff to our cruise altitude and was surprised at how little effort it had required, especially considering my lack of familiarity with the type. It was incredibly stable, yet responsive with lots of what every pilot loves…performance!

Hand-flying an aircraft at high altitude is, more often than not, a fatiguing chore; however, with the Learjet 45XR, I was actually reluctant to relinquish control to “George”. Nevertheless, I engaged the “automatics”—and saw how smoothly the aircraft can really be flown. Having had my inadequacies suitably highlighted, it was time to disengage the autopilot again to further explore just what the aircraft was capable of.

Upon disconnecting the yaw damper, the aircraft remained pleasantly stable; although there was no doubting we were up in the thin atmosphere of 45,000 feet, it remained comfortable to fly with those big “V” delta fins doing a great job.

During a descent to FL410, we allowed the aircraft to accelerate towards an overspeed condition. As the speed approached MMO, the automated audio warning immediately announced, “Overspeed—Overspeed”. This warning continued until we reduced the thrust and rate of descent and eased the aircraft into level flight at FL410.

Decelerating to M0.78, I prepared to carry out some steep turns—turning the trusty flight director off to prevent cheating! Steep turns in the rarefied atmosphere at FL410 are not something pilots would consider attempting in many aircraft, but this is a Learjet 45XR! Entering a 45-degree banked turn to the left, the roll rate was crisp and control positive. I then threw the aircraft into a 45-degree banked turn in the opposite direction, maintaining altitude by nudging the top of the pitch box up to the 5-degree nose-up marker. It required very little power manipulation to maintain speed as the town of Kaitaia spun around the wingtip some 41,000 feet below…astounding!

I dislike using the term “easy” when describing flying an aircraft, as it is all about discipline and continually striving to hone skills; let’s just say that the Learjet 45XR is very flattering of one’s performance.

At our cruise speed of M0.78, our fuel flow at FL410 was just 510 kg/hr (255 kg/hr per engine). Although certified to FL510, it is likely that most Learjet 45XRs will operate around FL450 to FL470, where an average fuel consumption of around 425 kg/hr would be expected.

For flight planning purposes, a good rule of thumb is 690 kg of fuel in the first hour, which includes the climb to cruising altitude. This drops to 490 kg in the second hour and 450 kg per hour over the next two hours. Not bad, considering you are cruising at M0.80 (around 460 kt). High-speed cruise and typical cruise speeds are listed as M0.81. However, this allows little leeway for speed excursions due to turbulence before the overspeed warning will sound, so to avoid unsettling those seated in the cabin, many operators will probably choose to cruise the aircraft at around M0.78.

At its long-range cruise speed of M0.75 (432 kt), the Learjet 45XR will take eight passengers and two crew almost 2,000 nm.

The aircraft’s two engines feed one air conditioning pack and two bleed-air supplies. At our cruising altitude of 41,000 feet, the cabin altitude was a very comfortable 5,800 feet (at its maximum certified ceiling of 51,000 feet, the cabin altitude does not climb above 8,500 feet). To prove that there is no shortage of bleed air in this aeroplane, Kerry turned the left bleed off, and reduced power on the right engine to flight idle—and switched on all anti-ice. Even at flight idle, the right engine provided enough bleed air to operate the anti-icing, and keep the cabin pressurised without even the slightest pressure “bump” (sudden change in cabin pressure)!

Stalling

With our upper air work complete, I requested a descent to an altitude block from FL180 to FL150 in order to carry out some stalls.

Had we programmed it into the autoflight system, a “normal” descent profile would have involved a descent at M0.70 using the system’s VNAV (vertical navigation) mode, in which the FMS calculates a top of descent point and creates a VNAV glide path depending on the rate of descent and altitude restriction selected by the pilot. As we had not built a profile, I opted to use “speed hold” mode instead. With thrust at flight idle, this gave us a descent rate of 3,000 feet per minute. Deploying the speed brake generated a small pitch change and virtually none of the traditional rumble normally associated with speed brake deployment; however, its effect was to almost double the rate of descent to 6,000 ft/min as we increased speed to M0.73. Pushing the nose over further still, the rate of descent reached 9,000 ft/min—still without reaching our MMO (maximum operating Mach number)!

With our “re-entry” almost complete, the speed brakes were stowed and I levelled at FL170 ready for stalling.

Our stalling exercise was carried out in the clean configuration with the thrust at idle and the yaw damper off.

The main thing to remember was that this was a T-tailed aircraft with rear mounted engines—meaning a lot of aft mass—and I was instructed to keep my feet firmly on the floor to avoid any inadvertent rudder inputs.

Stall entry was standard, using the ailerons to keep the wings level and pitch to maintain altitude. The recovery would be standard—lower the nose to unstall the aircraft, apply thrust and use the ailerons to level the wings if required.

The first 60–80 kt washed off fairly quickly but the slippery little jet was slow to decelerate further.

I continued to trim the aircraft until we slowed to 150 kt, at which point it would not be trimmed further and I held back pressure on the yoke to maintain altitude whilst decelerating at the standard one knot per second. As the aircraft decelerated further, the control forces required to maintain altitude increased significantly, partly due to the large delta fins. It would be really difficult to inadvertently find oneself in such a predicament, or as Kerry put it, “You really gotta be not minding the store to be in this situation.”

At 110 knots, the stick shaker activated, accompanied by an automated audio warning, “stall, stall, stall.” The aircraft still remained controllable in roll, which we proved by continuing to fly in this state for around 30 seconds, before reducing speed further until reaching a full stall at approximately 100 kt.

Recovery was instant upon lowering the nose and advancing the thrust; both engines spooled rapidly and evenly. Very little aileron was needed to level the wings and height loss was minimal.

With the stalling exercise complete, we descended to 8,000 feet and levelled off. Bringing the right thrust lever back to idle, I increased the thrust on the left engine. The almost centre-line thrust meant that almost no rudder was required to keep the aircraft in balance and flying straight. Performance-wise, it was obvious an engine failure is virtually a non-event and handling remains superb.

As we headed back towards Auckland, the ATIS reported the cloud as scattered at 1,500 feet and broken at 2,000 feet, with a 30-knot southerly giving us about 12 knots of crosswind. Not demanding, but enough to give me a reasonable impression of how the aircraft would handle the approach and landing phase.

The ILS for Runway 23L was programmed into the FMS, tracking via the EMRAG waypoint. I decided to be conservative and asked Kerry to enter a “hard altitude” at EMRAG, of 3,300 feet. This would ensure that we captured the glide slope from below and gave me a little buffer should I find the aircraft a little difficult to slow. However, my conservatism was not required, as I had no problems managing speed and altitude. This was probably due in part to the aircraft’s low inertia (it is 45,000 kg lighter than I am used to), but also because of the effectiveness of its speed brakes.

Descent profile information provided by the Primus 1000 suite indicated that a descent rate of 1,500 ft/min was required to achieve our programmed path. The Learjet 45XR—typical of jets in this category—does not have an auto-throttle system, so in using the VNAV mode to maintain a descent profile, it is up to the pilots to control thrust in order to maintain the desired speed in the descent, which—thanks to the wonderful “speed stability” of the aircraft—is effortless and requires very little “juggling” of thrust. Our other options would have been to use the continuously updated rate-of-descent information from the FMC to fly the descent using the autopilot’s VS (vertical speed) mode, or hand-fly the aircraft using the VSI.

Our VREF was calculated at 118 knots with no wind “additive” necessary, as the wind was not reported as gusting.

The landing distance required (unfactored) for the dry runway was calculated at 768 metres.

As we approached EMRAG, I slowed the aircraft to 190 knots and called for flap-8 (8 degrees)—the first stage of flap. As air traffic control was squeezing us in behind an Emirates Boeing 777 and ahead of an Air New Zealand Boeing 737, we were asked to maintain 180 knots to a five-mile final. The jet’s flexibility meant that this was not a problem as the “automatics” did a very tidy job of capturing the ILS approach for 23L. I disconnected the autopilot as we descended through 2,200 feet in order to hand-fly the rest of the approach. As we approached our five-mile final, the landing gear was lowered and after slowing to 160 knots, flap-20 was selected, followed by flap-full (40 degrees). With the thrust set at around 60% N1, a stable approach profile could be maintained all the way to the threshold.

The aircraft’s radio altimeter gives automatic calls starting at 50 feet, reducing in 10-foot increments. At 50 feet, the thrust levers are smoothly brought back to idle and the pitch attitude is maintained to touchdown; if one attempts to flare, the Learjet 45XR has a tendency to float, eating up valuable runway.

It must be remembered that the “eye height” from the flight deck of a Boeing 737 is significantly higher than that of a Learjet (for the Boeing 747 drivers…well, it doesn’t even bear thinking about!). So as the “50” and “40” calls came through, I felt quite comfortable; at “30”, I started to get a little nervous and at “20”, the thought that, “This is going to hurt,” became too strong and I began to flare. The 10-foot call came through, but the ground didn’t arrive as expected. Ten feet is quite a long way for a Learjet to “fall” but thankfully—and much to my astonishment—the very forgiving undercarriage soaked up the “impact”.

As we vacated the runway, Chris put his head into the flight deck and asked if I would like to fly a visual circuit. Both Chris and Kerry had already had a long day and I hated to extend it further, but both were very obviously passionate about their product and loved to show it off. “When’s the next time you will get to fly a visual pattern in a brand new Learjet?…I know you want to,” he prodded. Their enthusiasm was contagious—and I didn’t need any convincing!

By now, the cloud base had lowered to 1,500 feet and a rain shower was passing across the Manukau Harbour as we lined up on Runway 23L for the second time, cleared to operate at 1,500 feet or below. The circuit would be flown at 180 knots in a flap-8 configuration with the landing gear retracted.

We programmed an extended centreline as an aid to tracking on the climb out, and entered new “V” speeds for our reduced weight—V1, 106 kt; VR, 109 kt, and V2 119 kt, with flap retraction set at 144 kt—although in this case, we would keep our takeoff setting of flap-8 throughout the circuit.

I advanced the thrust levers three detents to the takeoff position, released the brakes and we surged down the runway.

Rotating to 13 degrees nose up, with a positive rate of climb, it was gear up and within seconds, I was hauling the thrust back and levelling off at 1,000 feet and rolling left into the circuit. Whereas before, we had been flying the aircraft in a more sedate, typically “operational” mode, this was like engaging “sport” mode as we hurtled across the Manukau towards Waiuku, following the tower controller’s instructions to fly a wide circuit and track the southern coastline.

The wide circuit was still not going to be enough to ensure our spacing to position behind a Q300, which was pushing into a 30 kt headwind and was still in cloud on the instrument approach, so I rolled the Lear into a left orbit in the late downwind position. The Learjet 45XR is an absolute handling delight with crisp responsive controls, great stability and generous performance; the excellent visibility from its single pane windscreen is ideal for visual manoeuvring in busy traffic patterns.

Rolling out of the orbit to re-establish on the downwind leg, we soon had the Q300 in sight and slowed to 160 knots. Flap-20 was selected as we passed abeam the threshold, and the landing gear was extended as we rolled into the turn onto base leg. We had no problem slowing to position behind the slow-moving Q300—once again demonstrating the flexibility of the aircraft.

As I turned onto finals, the lack of inertia removed some of the challenge as the brisk southerly wind attempted to push us through the centreline.

My second landing was a decided improvement on the first, while still leaving room for improvement!

The taxi back to Air Centre One was a lot smoother than the taxi out—evidence that I was beginning to come to grips with the Learjet’s steering and powerful brakes.

The APU was started as we cleared the runway, thus ensuring continued operation of the electrical and environmental systems once the engines were shut down. Once the APU had been started, we shut down the left engine; the residual thrust from the remaining engine being easily sufficient to continue taxiing.

With the left engine shut down, the bus-tie automatically closed to ensure power was maintained to all systems. Load-shedding did not occur as the aircraft is smart enough to know when it is on the ground and it isn’t necessary.

Impressions

Many are quick to compare “apples with oranges” when it comes to business jets. The Learjet 45XR is not a Global Express and it doesn’t pretend to be. It is designed for an entirely different mission and perhaps even more importantly, an entirely different budget.

Priced at around US$11 million (with direct operating costs of approximately US$1,600 per flight hour), the Learjet 45XR is designed to carry four to eight passengers (nine at a squeeze) around 2,000 nm, and—requiring minimal ground support—it can operate out of smaller airports.

What does this mean in our region? The Learjet 45XR can comfortably fly non-stop from Auckland to ports on Australia’s east coast. From Melbourne, virtually the entire Australian continent is within its reach, as well as New Guinea and the Solomons.

The aircraft is quick, comfortable and is above the weather for 95% of the time. Payload and fuel flexibility means it is able to “tanker” fuel—fly out to a small airport, land, shut down the left engine, embark or disembark passengers, and depart again without refuelling. That is its forte, not flying long-haul missions across oceans.

From a pilot’s point of view, the Learjet 45XR is a very, very nice aeroplane to operate.

It is safe and rewarding to fly. I spent most of my flight hand-flying the aircraft and found myself quickly becoming comfortable with it; it was not at all fatiguing…important for those long days in the “office”.

Of course one wouldn’t normally be spending one’s day hand-flying an aircraft like this so it is imperative that it be suitably equipped with reliable and intuitive equipment, capable of meeting the demands of today’s complex operating environment. The Learjet 45XR excels in all these areas.

The only unpleasant part of my flight was at the end when I had to give it back to Christian Barnett and Kerry Swanson. Did I want to give it back?…No!

So what’s next? Christian and Kerry told me, “If you liked the ‘45’ then you’ll love the ‘60’!” I can’t wait.

To view the complete article complete with photographs, get your copy of the February 2008 Pacific Wings, which is available in retail stores or by subscription. Subscribe to Pacific Wings and save nearly 20 percent on the retail price and read more great articles and enjoy Pacific Wings’ outstanding aviation photography.