Need input from Challenger folks....

[Captain4242]

Are there major differences between the 604 and 300? Is this 1 type rating or two different ones? Would you mind giving me a small list of things you like and dislike about each?
Grazie!

 

[BoilerUP]

The 604 and 300 are very different airplanes with separate type ratings.

 

[guido411]

A small list of thing we don't like about Challengers?

1.) There's not one parked in our hangar.

Sorry (not really) about the worthless reply. Biggest compaint I hear about Challengers is their support. The 604 crowd loves the cabin, tall and wide. The 300 folks really rave about the runway numbers and the fact they haven't lost nearly the value of most other airplanes its size and smaller.

 

[Rick James]

Can't comment on the 300 other than the ramp presence. The 604 is a great airplane for a wide range of missions. It's not a Global or a G-Ride, but the price isn't either. We can do the west coast to most of all Europe along with South America with 1 tech stop. The cockpit is very comfortable for longer legs.

The downsides IMO of the 604 are the anemic performance relative to other modern biz jets. I would love to get above 410 and climb in the tracks at .80. Additionally, the 604 doesn't have the looks of a G-Plane, Global, or 300 but I don't have a hard time dealing with that.

 

[StarHustler]

I fly the 300 and the owner likes it so much he is buying another. Having flown the Hawker 800 and G3 previous, about the best way that I can describe the 300 is that it has the performance of a G3 with the economics of a Hawker. Now, that might be a little simplistic but the point is that our fuel consumption in the low 40's is the same that I burned in the Hawker in the high 30's and I get into/out of runways that I never dreamed of in the Hawker either. Everytime dispatch calls me about a trip asking if I can do it, the answer (after using APG) is "heck yes". I can do coast to coast regardless of winds and non-stop Northeast US to Western Europe as well (however, I do fault it for NOT having INS's). It has also been exceptionally reliable.

As stated before, it is a completly different airplane than the 604 and I personally believe that Bombardier did a disservice by calling it a "Challenger'. It's original name was the "Continental" and they should have stuck with that to avoid any confusion with it's older and larger sibling (kind of like calling the BeechJet a Hawker 400 like they are doing now).

Like I said, I don't know anything about a 604 (or any 600 series Challenger) but I will say that Bombardier did such a good job with the 300 that there seems to be quite a bit of overlap between the two -not always a good thing from a manufacturer perspective.

 

[LJ45]

It's original name was the "Continental" and they should have stuck with that to avoid any confusion with it's older and larger sibling (kind of like calling the BeechJet a Hawker 400 like they are doing now).

.

except you could not use that on the radio when checking in, "Continental N123XX", controller would think you are Continental airlines.

You would think a company like Ducan would come up with a STC to add INS.

 

[thatpilotguy]

I will echo everything StarHustler said. We have operated a 300 for 5 years now. I didn't have any large or mid-size cabin experience prior to getting into the 300 but it does it's job and does it well. It has been very reliable and in 5 years we have had 1 AOG, which was resolved prior to our scheduled departure. Dealing with Bombardier has driven our Chief Pilot and DOM crazy at times and I would question the fit and finish of the paint and interior. When the G250 is out and in customers hands I forsee an update to the 300 which will have to include many of the things that the 250 will have and the 300 is missing. You have to remember that the 300 was never design to be utilized as it is today. Bombardier (sort sighted or not) intended it to be a "Continental" type airplane. It does need IRU's or INS's...which have been on a couple of test aircraft recently but I have not heard the status on that recently. We are still waiting to hear when LPV approaches will be available as well as the cost to upgrade (a little late in the game there I think.) There are very few operators that have anything bad to say about the 300...I know pilots like to complain and we can find the short commings faster than anyone, but the list is much shorter on this airplane than on any other I have flown. One stat that was given to me way back when was...the top 5 failure items on the 300 don't add up to the number 1 failure item on the Lear 45. I'm not if that's a great example of reliability or not...but it does hold true for us. If you have specific performance questions, feel free to PM me.

 

[StarHustler]

LJ45 -Good point

ThatPilotGuy - You made some excellent points that I did not speak about but should have. The 300 has somewhat of a 'cheap' type interior and ours has already had to have the wood warrantied by Bombardier (word is, that they used less expensive materials to keep the cost down). Also, Bombardier is not very good to deal as mentioned, better than Hawker was but not nearly as good as Gulfstream. Lastly, your 100% correct, the aircraft's initial mission was NOT to traverse the Atlantic the way it does now but was to go Coast to Coast non stop. It's just so darn capable that it has "mission creep" and does it well (somewhat to the Chagrin of Bombardier Sales reps trying to sell you a 604). It is a highly 'electrical' type of plane, so many times if you get a fault on the ground, shut it down, disconnect the batteries and 'reboot' -fault dissapears! Like Majic! LOL

Anyway, I'm a fan of it. I will say that although not difficult, crosswind landings are not nearly as easy as they were in a Hawker 800, LOL.

 

[SheGaveMeClap]

Lots of rumors floating around about a 300XR- another 3,000 (+/-) lb of fuel, increased gross weight, dual IRS, additional pack, additional outflow valve, and a plug in the fuselage to extend the cabin. Everything the 300 needs to be a great international airplane. It'll put the 604/605 model out of business.

Ours has been great and extremely reliable.

 

[BoilerUP]

What would another 3000lb buy the CL300 in additional range, maybe 500-600nm?

 

[SheGaveMeClap]

By our third hour we are down to 1500-1600 pph, so that would buy another 1.5-2.0 of flight time. I would say 700-900 nm at 460 kt TAS.

 

[JJET44]

Lots of rumors floating around about a 300XR- another 3,000 (+/-) lb of fuel, increased gross weight, dual IRS, additional pack, additional outflow valve, and a plug in the fuselage to extend the cabin. Everything the 300 needs to be a great international airplane. It'll put the 604/605 model out of business.

Ours has been great and extremely reliable.

Heard the same thing from the folks at Bombardier DFW

 

[StarHustler]

I heard that as well at Simuflite up in MMU, I think if it happens, it will do well however, I think it will Kill the 604/605 also....not sure if Bombardier really wants to do that but hey, Im just a pilot so what do I know..lol.

 

[JJET44]

I heard that as well at Simuflite up in MMU, I think if it happens, it will do well however, I think it will Kill the 604/605 also....not sure if Bombardier really wants to do that but hey, Im just a pilot so what do I know..lol.

That's their plan. The 605 line will cease and the 300XR will be the bridge between the Lear 85 and the Global line. This is after the Lear 85 and the new Global 8000's are out or so I've been told.

 

[jet2work]

I'm gettin hypoxic

In a CL300 - Six hours at cruise with a 7900 cabin (at FL450). Sounds like fun. They need a second pack and to up the Delta P. Either that or they need to make a therapeutic O2 mask standard equipment.

Not sure what kind of cabin the 605 holds. I know that the Global is pretty decent.

 

[SheGaveMeClap]

I'd imagine when you're stuck at 37,000-39,000 feet for eight hours in a 605, the cabin is fairly low. I'd take a 7,500' cabin in a CL300 above the weather and the winds any day of the week.

 

[jet2work]

Of course I'm always wearing a mask at that altitude so it doesn't matter what I fly.

I was just thinking of the pax.:crying:

 

[Bleeds On]

Anyone have the latest on the 300 rumor mill? Looks like we're taking a January delivery now and kinda hoping we'll end up with a few improvements in the process. Only thing i know is brushless DCMP's are imminent. Would like to see a paper blessing for more ramp weight. They're making the BOW on these new ones pretty heavy.

 

[SheGaveMeClap]

Bombardier keeps saying there will be new DCMPs produced soon, but the manufacturer isn't helping the process. This was briefly discussed at the last Advisory Committee Meeting, but there are no updates. Bombardier has been promising new DCMPs for a couple of years, nothing yet, doubt there's anything in the works. They'll have to outfit 350+ Challenger 300s with new DCMPs, I doubt they're in a hurry to spend that kind of money.

Increased ramp weight would be great. I've not heard anything in the rumor mill about a higher ramp/takeoff weight in the works.

I'd be curious to hear what information Bombardier gives you about your airplane in January- anything new and improved......

 

[TMMT]

I'd be curious to hear what information Bombardier gives you about your airplane in January- anything new and improved......

Probably the same info they gave us 20 months ago when we got ours...

Oh, its coming!