citation 3 good or bad

Curtly flying a citation 550 looking to move up and noticed price is good on the 3. Just wonder what to beware of. Thanks in advance I fly about 15 hours per month for personal and buisness I have a copilot now

Runway hog, very maintenance intensive, and not supported very well by Cessna. Many parts are hard to come by. They are cheap for a reason.

Yup, the same reason any 30+ year old airplane is cheap. Maintenance and parts.

True, but some airplanes are better supported than others, and the parts supply for some airplanes are better than others. Falcon 50’s and Hawker 800’s are easier to keep running than a Citation 3, simply because there are many more of them out there.

No argument from me there. The Falcon is a great airplane, if a bit expensive on parts and they still build the Hawker which says something.
The Lear 55 was another nice flying airplane, if you had the runway. Adding the delta fins and making it the 55C really helped in the runway and second segment department, but along came the 60…same size wing but 2000 pounds heavier. It is a rocket ship on climb but with approach speeds not far from the space shuttle’s…just kidding…sort of.

I flew a very early Citation III for over 4 years.
Looks nice, stand up cabin, lots of baggage space, trailing link gear, pretty simple checklists and systems.

Only 7200 lbs of fuel means limited range, you have to get high to make it any long distance, it’s certified to 51,000 but we were told it would never make it there unless your empty in back land on fumes. I’ve been up 45,000 a few times when we had to, I don’t think we ever tried for 47,000. Has boosted ailerons, and only electric trims, no manual, has a jack screw pitch control on the stab, the procedure for a jammed stab at high speed is kind of a hand full for landing. Has bleed air over the windshield’s for de-icing, you have to get them on early on the descent or you will fog up big time, especially in FL. The very early APU is junk, especially in the summer, that’s why they changed them to different models.

First time I sat in it I thought I was in a bucket with the yoke ahead and even with my shoulders. I was used to the Hawker where you sit kind of high and the yoke is lower. It’s a finger tip plane, light and sensitive on the controls. I always thought it was squirrely near and on the ground, maybe the VII’s were better, never flew one, but I never looked forward to crosswinds, ever. Had a weird erratic kickback on the rudder peddles while taxiing in a crosswind, never felt that in any other plane. It’s a high speed sprinter with limited range. The wing is made for high altitudes and not so much near the ground.
At the same numbers against the Hawker 700, the 700 will pull about 300-400 lbs more off the ground.