2400 nm range

[BoilerUP]

1600lbs payload, 1000nm segment + 100nm alternate fuel, 30°C. Can it do it? What about wet?

Also, can it land there with 1600lb payload & 100nm alternate fuel, on a wet runway, using 80% factored distance?

 

[LegacyDriver]

You told me that as recently as yesterday while I had the pleasure of speaking to you on the phone.

Please. I never said that ever. We were discussing wet footprint going to Hawaii out of Carlsbad, CA and I said, "So what if the 600 can't go there out of your airport? Just stop and get gas. HOWEVER, the 650 probably CAN go to Hawaii from your airport. I don't have any data on it but I'm betting it will do it." I've not run the numbers for either airplane on that scenario so I can only presume/guess: Legacy 600 no, Legacy 650 maybe.

Once again, you are making things up. I just quoted myself saying MTOW BFL is just over 6000' at Sea Level and 100 degrees F. Why would I then claim it has max range out of 4800' at a higher elevation? I never said it. Not once.

Whatever you say. You're beyond insane LD. I have no more desire to go back and forth with you. It's pointless. No matter what facts are provided you argue

I'm glad you're done arguing. Let's see if you are a man of your word and actually do stay quiet now. Your sense of honor and honesty is lacking in this discussion I'm afraid, so I won't count on it.

 

[jonjuan]

BFL obviously changes with weight.

Legacy 600 can depart out of his home airport with a BFL of 4,800' at over 45,000 lbs (MTOW is 49,604, BOW is about 29,500). He just makes up stuff or ignores subtle details because nobody will care or bother to try and catch him on it.

LOL- that's like saying you can drive a golf ball 300 yards.....From the ladies tees.

 

[LegacyDriver]

1600lbs payload, 1000nm segment + 100nm alternate fuel, 30°C. Can it do it? What about wet?

Also, can it land there with 1600lb payload & 100nm alternate fuel, on a wet runway, using 80% factored distance?

I will check. Gotta' borrow a login. Mine isn't working.

My instinct would be yes but who knows? I'm apparently always wrong. Embraer's marketing stuff is showing 4 Pax to go 1000 NM with Reserve you need about 3800' of runway at SL, ISA. 4300' says 2500 NM, again SL, ISA. They say "Takeoff Field Length" and not specifically "Balanced Field Length."

I don't have wet takeoff data available only landing.

 

[LegacyDriver]

LOL- that's like saying you can drive a golf ball 300 yards.....From the ladies tees.

Now *THAT* is funny.

:beer:

 

[LegacyDriver]

1600lbs payload, 1000nm segment + 100nm alternate fuel, 30°C. Can it do it? What about wet?

Also, can it land there with 1600lb payload & 100nm alternate fuel, on a wet runway, using 80% factored distance?

Disregard. I'm still putting the numbers together. Hit submit by accident.

 

[LegacyDriver]

Let's see if this is any better.

Again I am getting this second hand through the phone. I will run the numbers myself for you tomorrow.

Based on today's Conditions a Legacy 600 (again, may be incorrect):

KHXT - KMSP 959 NM
30 Deg C
Max Allowable TOW: 38,815#
BOW: 29,700#
Available Payload (Fuel and Pax): 9,115#
Fuel: 6,855#
(I didn't ask if this included Reserve or was just burn with winds, sorry. Also didn't get a block time. Embraer says 4,950# -- 5,200# including taxi --to go 1,000 NM with 8 PAX at Max Cruise so YMMV.)
Payload Remaining: 2,260#
Pax: 1,600#
Tanker/Reserve: 660#

If the burn number to KMSP is 5,200# chock to chock that leaves you with 2,315# reserve overhead. NBAA IFR Reserve is 1,785#.

However, I could have something screwed up and maybe it doesn't even have a chance of doing it. I will post an updated set of numbers tomorrow when I can input the values myself to give an answer I am 100% secure in, good or bad.

Based on this output the answer might be no. I just don't know what altitude he ran the numbers at, etc.. Bud of mine in a hurry. Sorry. This info is likely all garbage. Probably adds little to the discussion. My apologies.

It is close though. The Legacy 650 would do it for sure.

 

[BoilerUP]

I appreciate you checking that for me LD, especially since you had to go through a 3rd party...thanks.

 

[LegacyDriver]

I appreciate you checking that for me LD, especially since you had to go through a 3rd party...thanks.

Any time, sir. I will try to get better numbers and the other stuff you asked for tomorrow.

Cheers.

 

[Lear70]

Post deleted by request of Original Poster (OP) as a one-time professional courtesy.

Regards,

/mod

 

[LegacyDriver]

KHXD to KMSP, btw. Sorry. Typo.

 

[LegacyDriver]

I hope I didn't screw up any of the numbers transferring them over. Tedious work! LOL


FLIGHTPLAN N7XXXX KHXD TO KMSP E135 M74 /F IFR 03/14/11 ~~ 00
COMPUTED 0254Z FOR ETD 0300Z PROGS 131800Z

WGT IN LBS

TAKEOFF 038913
LAND 033100
PLD 001600
OPNLWT 029700

FUEL / TIME / DIST

KMSP 005613 02:42 1003
RESV 002000 1 : 05
ALTN 000000
HOLD 000000
REQD 007613 03:47
TAXI 000200
XTRA 000000 00 : 00
TOTL 7813 03:47

KHXD DCT IRQ J99 IIU J89 BAE EAU8 KMSP

WIND M043 MXSH 5/BVT AVG WIND 276/065
TAS 423 FL 380 VXV 400


CLIMB SCHED:270/M65
CRUISE SCHED:M74
DESCENT SCHED:M78/300



After running these #s the wind changed and fuel burn went down to 5342 lbs. Mach 0.76 adds 200 lbs. to the burn.

I hope this is what you were looking for. I did not plug in an actual alternate. You asked for one 100 NM away. Guess I'm too tired to think of one at the moment.

Edit In:

KBRD is 99 NM away. No idea lengths etc. just used it for distance. Need 900 lbs to get there. Forty-five minutes Reserve at KBRD is showing up as 1400 lbs which I'm not sure I trust.


KMSP 005342 2:42 1003
ALT KBRD 000900 00 : 22 0099
RSV 0001400 00 : 46


It is tight if you have to miss and go to the ALT. Depends on a lot of factors. Doable yes. Just depends on how close one wishes to shave it. I personally prefer to shoot for 2000 lbs. reserve at the alternate.


Eighty percent landing #s coming later.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Our lowly Falcon will do that trip 25 mins faster at slow cruise of .83, climb at 320, cruise at FL 430....oh.....and burn less gas......and has an extra engine.

Cabin altitude will also be 3900ft.

Push it up to .89 and get there 34mins faster.

270/.74??? and use all that fuel? Why?

 

[LegacyDriver]

Our lowly Falcon will...

And I'm supposed to take your word for it right?

Not that it matters.

 

[gern_blanston]

Our lowly Falcon will do that trip 25 mins faster at slow cruise of .83, climb at 320, cruise at FL 430....oh.....and burn less gas......and has an extra engine.

Cabin altitude will also be 3900ft.

Push it up to .89 and get there 34mins faster.

270/.74??? and use all that fuel? Why?

I love it

 

[Gulfstream 200]

And I'm supposed to take your word for it right?

Not that it matters.

I would hope so?...for I have never lied to my favorite 3rd world pilot!


Or maybe just trust Arinc?...


FORMAT: GS KHXD TO KMSP FA7X M82 /F IFR 03/14/11
COMPUTED 0430Z FOR ETD 1200Z PROGS 140000Z NnotaPOSemb WGTS IN LBS

FUEL TIME DIST ARRIVE TAKEOFF LAND AV PLD OPNLWT
DEST KMSP 005524 02:29 1003 1429Z 43281 37957 000000 036542
ALTN 000000 0000 0000 0000Z
HOLD 000000 0000
RESV 001415 00:45 BIASES:
REQD 006939 03:14 CLB:200 LBS / MIN / %
XTRA 000000 0000 CRZ: / %
TOTL 006939 03:14 DSC:50 LBS / 5 MIN / %

DEP ATIS

DEP ALT SETTINGS:
FLD ELV______ P ALT______ CP ALT______ ADC3______ STBY______


CLEARANCE_________

KHXD DCT IRQ J99 IIU J89 BAE EAU8 KMSP

WIND M028 MXSH 4/IRQ
TAS 467 FL 430 VXV 470



and because G200 is kind, I will save you the painful South American math and give you the rough French numbers:

50KTS more TAS
5-10K ft higher with a far lower cabin (1000ft at FL270, 3900ft at FL410, 6000ft at FL510)
15mins faster
LESS FUEL
ONE EXTRA ENGINE...oh hell, why not?


Also - if we really wanted to get wild and crazy we could carry 26,000lbs of fuel out off Runway 21....and arrive at MSP with 7.5 hrs reserve.

I ran these quick for you, so I didn't make up any alternates, pick anywhere in the USA - it will make it there.

OR...if we were feeling really Brazilian slow we could go LRC and do it in Legacy Mode:


FORMAT: GS KHXD TO KMSP FA7X LRC /F IFR 03/14/11
COMPUTED 0436Z FOR ETD 1200Z PROGS 140000Z Nembisjunk WGTS IN LBS

FUEL TIME DIST ARRIVE TAKEOFF LAND AV PLD OPNLWT

DEST KMSP 005186 02:34 1003 1434Z 42754 37768 000000 036542
ALTN 000000 0000 0000 0000Z
HOLD 000000 0000
RESV 001226 00:45 BIASES:
REQD 006412 03:19 CLB:200 LBS / MIN / %
XTRA 000000 0000 CRZ: / %
TOTL 006412 03:19 DSC:50 LBS / 5 MIN / %

DEP ATIS

DEP ALT SETTINGS:
FLD ELV______ P ALT______ CP ALT______ ADC3______ STBY______


CLEARANCE

KHXD DCT IRQ J99 IIU J89 BAE EAU8 KMSP

WIND M028 MXSH 4/MACES
TAS 450 FL 470



Summary:

Even at LRC of 450TAS (which we never fly) you will get there 10 mins faster and burn 500lbs less fuel in the lowly Falcon that cant perform anywhere near to what the Legacy can....and hell, we dont even have the special high and hot Goodyears on the ole French junk this time of year!...cant wait till summer!


But I know I know...none of this matters.

 

[spxdriver]

Disregard, wrong flight plan posted.

 

[spxdriver]

Generic Legacy flight plan, showing higher fuel burn and several minutes longer enroute.
Computed at .74 as well, and roughly the same wind component.


FLT PLAN: 5807 KHXD/KMSP MACH:M74 A/C: N3XXXX /E135BJ RC 258079
ETD: 14/04.00Z
ORG KHXD DEST KMSP


FUEL TIME CORR TOGWT LDGWT AVG W/C
DEST KMSP 006124 02.51 ------ 038140 032016 M040
RESV 001598 00.45 ------
ALTN 000000 00.00 ------ ALTN NIL DIST 0000 W/C P000
HOLD 000000 00.00 ------
REQD 007722 03.36 ------ BOW 029418 PAYLOAD 001000
EXTRA 000000 00.00 ------
TAXI 000154
TTL AT BO 007876 03.46 ------ RTE MAN

 

[LegacyDriver]

I would hope so?...for I have never lied to my favorite 3rd world pilot!

...

More like your favorite 3rd World Punching Bag.



Looks like you didn't beat me by 38 mins as you boasted but rather 13. Burned more gas to do it as well with fifteen knots less on the nose than my figures. Oh well.

May as well throw Mach .89 up there just for fun.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

More like your favorite 3rd World Punching Bag.



Looks like you didn't beat me by 38 mins as you boasted but rather 13. Burned more gas to do it as well. Go figure. May as well throw Mach .89 up there just for fun.

Is LRC 450 KTAS?

LRC is posted there LD....450KTAS.

Where did it burn more fuel?...never more and hell, almost 500lbs less at the slowest speed ARINC will run us...which is still faster and more efficient than the regional airliner. Maybe someone can post DA2000EX/LX numbers and see what happens with one less engine?...

Falcons may not be my favorite airplanes either LD, but they are efficient and some of them have impressive performance (for the operating $$$)

It is what it is and if it pays the bills thats good....but those EMB numbers are pretty pathetic.