Corporate aircraft performance vs. similar sized aircraft

[aa73]

Just curious as to how these aircraft compare to other commercial aircraft of similar size.

Example: Most Gulfstreams/Canadiars/Falcons are not much larger than your average CRJ/ERJ... in fact I have difficulty telling the difference when they fly over my house here near IAD (however once I see the paint scheme it's easy to tell.) But it seems like the these aircraft outperform the the RJs in just about every area. Bigger engines? Bigger wing? or just having half the passengers makes it perform better?

Also, I just jumpseated on a CRJ 200 and was pretty impressed with all the EFIS going on in there. Similar setup in most corporate jets or do they have more?

Signed, a round dial "airline cousin" pilot
73

 

[BoilerUP]

Compared to regional airliners, business jets tend to have better aerodynamics/wing design better thrust/weight ratios.

The best apples-to-apples example I can find is this: the CRJ-200 is basically a stretched Challenger 604. They've got the same engines and same thrust output, but the much shorter 604's max weight is about 10,000lb less.

The CRJs avionics (Collins Pro Line 4) were top-line when the CRJ-100 was introduced in the early 90s, but are now antiquated compared to current production business jets and even most single-engine piston aircraft.

 

[aa73]

Thanks Boiler, I was starting to think it was a dumb question.

We just started getting the Flat Panel displays on the 75/76, and everyone here is oohing and aahing... it's similar to what biz jets had in the early 90s. Some folks who have flown corporate just laugh and shake their heads.

Re: thrust/weight ratios and such... that's what I thought. Comparing the G650 to a CRJ700, for example.. they are both about the same size, but quite different in performance, although one wouldn't think so judging by their size similarity.

 

[BoilerUP]

G650 is dimensionally similar but much heavier than any CRJ; its MTOW is 99,600lbs compared to the CRJ-700LR's MTOW of 77,000lbs and the 900LR's MTOW of 84,500lbs.

 

[aa73]

Thanks Boiler as well as the 2 conversations we're having on both boards.

 

[Rick James]

The best apples-to-apples example I can find is this: the CRJ-200 is basically a stretched Challenger 604. They've got the same engines and same thrust output, but the much shorter 604's max weight is about 10,000lb less.

The MTOW of the CRJ-200 is 58,200?

 

[BoilerUP]

The MTOW of the CRJ-200 is 58,200?

No, its 53,000lbs...its possible I the data I found online for the CL604 was incorrect.

Regardless, the 604 has the same thrust to carry less weight than the CR2.

 

[Rick James]

No, its 53,000lbs...its possible I the data I found online for the CL604 was incorrect.

It's a little more than possible you're incorrect.

Bottom line is simply because these airplanes may be close, dimensionally, they are not the same. It's like comparing a C-17 to a 777-200. They are both made by Boeing, weigh close to the same, but have a drastically different missions.

 

[BoilerUP]

Wouldn't be the first time I was incorrect about something, and I can admit that.

I appreciate the gentle correction; after this stunning revelation that the CRL-200 and CL604 have drastically different missions I'm now quote certain their numerous design & system similarities are little more than mere coincidence.

 

[AA717driver]

aa73--I describe the G550 as "a 777 crammed into an airframe the size of a DC-9". (And, yes, for the anal retentive out there, I know it's a generalization...)

The 550 has all of the redundancies built into long haul twin airliners. APU will start up at altitude, it has an HDG (That's an HMG to everyone but AA pilots...) I just never felt exposed when doing a Pacific crossing due to all the redundancy.

TC

 

[aa73]

Thanks TC... So that explains why all Gulfstream drivers are so cool?

BTW.. How is the cockpit compared to other bizjets? I imagine it's probably pretty spacious considering the length of some of those flights it does.

 

[AA717driver]

Thanks TC... So that explains why all Gulfstream drivers are so cool?

BTW.. How is the cockpit compared to other bizjets? I imagine it's probably pretty spacious considering the length of some of those flights it does.

No, Gulfstream pilots are EXTREMELY well endowed. THAT is why we get all the chicks.

The cockpit on the GV/550/450 is good sized but, coming from an MD80, you would feel cramped. There is a small box for manuals and stuff between the seats and sidewalls but no room for a satchel, let alone a kitbag.

The leg room is great. (Quite a change from the GIV which was tight for me at 5'10" and has to be really cramped for the 6 footer's and up.) With three guys working an Asia trip on a 550, you kind of resemble the cast of 'Das Boot' up front and that's with an aft galley.

It's a great flying airplane and will do whatever you ask of it--climbs great, comes down like a rock when you need it and is easy to land (I'm evidence of that!). Lovely machine.

TC

 

[LXApilot]

Don't let these Gulfstreams and Globals impress you too much. While they are beautiful, expensive and capable aircraft they really aren't anything more than an RJ. Global Express is just a CL-70 with a few changes. The ERJ-145 is about the same size as a G-V. Thing is these long range business jets are hauling 5 passengers and 9 hours of fuel whereas the RJ's are hauling 50-70 passengers and have 3 hours of gas. Because these airplanes are built for ocean crossings they seem like they've got a lot of performance when they are just flying TEB-YYZ with 3 passengers.
That's a little tongue n'cheek but you catch my drift. Now if you want to see airplanes that truly have incredible performance look at the 777-200IGW or the 757-200 with the PW engines.
Those airplanes can really haul the mail. Literally.
These barbie jets we fly in the corporate world look pretty small and puny when parked next to even the ERJ-170.
That should set all the Gulfstream guys on-fire.

 

[LXApilot]

I will say that the corporate guys have some incredible avionics in their jets. (Falcon 7X has the collins pro line fusion, Global Express XRS has the honeywell primus epic, Gulfstream 450's and 550's have the Epic with Plane View).. pretty amazing stuff. Makes the 777 or the A340 look antiquated.
But if I were in charge we'd all be back flying "round dials" and straight pipes. You know- when you actually had to be a pilot to fly an airplane.

 

[BoilerUP]

The EASy avionics in newer Falcons is a derivative of Honeywell EPIC just like Gulfstream's PlaneView. Older Globals have Honeywell Primus 2000 avionics, with new production Globals getting Pro Line Fusion ("Global Vision") sometime in the future.

Global Express is just a CL-70 with a few changes.

Just a few minor details like different avionics, different engine, vastly different wing & empennage, much higher speeds & operating altitudes, and a max takeoff weight that's more than 20k lbs higher than the -700LR.

Other than that, the CR7 and the GLEX are the same airplane.

 

[LXApilot]

BoilerUP... I'm a big fan of the Global Express' and I've seen them do some amazing things. (Like a takeoff roll of about 3000' and climbing an an insane rate after wheels up from a 6000' runway at 7900' field elevation. They had 9 passengers and fuel to fly from Colorado to New York with reserves and alternate). The airplanes BR-710 engines are amazing to read about (and look at) not to mention that wing which is the sexiest wing out there on any airplane (In my humble opinion). But the truth is us corporate guys just need to admit that our airplanes are just toys in comparison... no matter how high or fast we can fly.

 

[BoilerUP]

But the truth is us corporate guys just need to admit that our airplanes are just toys in comparison... no matter how high or fast we can fly.

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. Size? Weight? Sure ain't performance...especially comparing performance at MTOW.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

BoilerUP... I'm a big fan of the Global Express' and I've seen them do some amazing things. (Like a takeoff roll of about 3000' and climbing an an insane rate after wheels up from a 6000' runway at 7900' field elevation. They had 9 passengers and fuel to fly from Colorado to New York with reserves and alternate). The airplanes BR-710 engines are amazing to read about (and look at) not to mention that wing which is the sexiest wing out there on any airplane (In my humble opinion). But the truth is us corporate guys just need to admit that our airplanes are just toys in comparison... no matter how high or fast we can fly.

All that wow crap wears off pretty quick....a sexy wing dosen't get you off when you are 9000 miles away from your wife or girlfriend. It's also is jam packed full of fuel and does 13hr legs that make your a$$ sore. Sorry, but IMO airplanes are just not "sexy" in the least.

As far as admitting corporate jets are "toys"...put all the drama and kidding aside and the VAST majority of corporate guys I know really don't care what they fly (OK, besides the hardcore retarded Grummanese community)

After about age 25 most normally adjusted people (pilots?...) are just looking for a good paycheck, predicted time off with family, and to be working for/with good people.

 

[LXApilot]

Gulfstream 200, let me say one thing... I agree.

 

[LJ45]

G200 is the man on FI. Always to the point and right 99.9 % of the time iii