2400 nm range

[spxdriver]

Looks like the Legacy is coming in at 2:40 and 6,700 lbs when flown at max cruise thrust...

 

[LegacyDriver]

Max cruise thrust.

If you want a better cabin comparison, the 900EX is coming in at 2:34 and 5,322 lbs of fuel.

What speed is that though?


900 has smaller cabin than the Legacy and even less baggage space than the 2000.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

This is a hypothetical situation where airplanes with slats have a decided advantage--namely a short field. Falcons are good at flying slow.

Or at flying fast?...MMO/VMO is .90/370

Real world numbers on this flight would be:

2410ft t/o distance
320 climb
.85 cruise
320-350 descent
104 Ref
1990ft landing distance

I also know a GLEX/G5/550 etc would have very similar numbers, as would any larger business jet....(like the Legacy?)

 

[LegacyDriver]

Looks like the Legacy is coming in at 2:40 and 6,700 lbs when flown at max cruise thrust...

ARINC shows Legacy max speed burns and time enroute of:

6,204 2:32 high speed climb.
5,931 2:36 with schedule climb.
-38 Avg Wind.

 

[spxdriver]

What speed is that though?


900 has smaller cabin than the Legacy and even less baggage space than the 2000.

MCT - 464 knots. Sounds like .80-.81.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

I hear ya. I won't say pathetic. Because the 2000 isn't really that much better--and considering size it is worse.

The Embraer likes more runway than the Falcons do. There's no getting around that with Flaps 9 as a limit for takeoff.

But again, 4,300' is quite an extreme example IMHO and does not play to the EMB's strengths. It does play to Falcon's.

May as well throw Gulfstream, Cessna, Hawker, etc. numbers up there while we are at it. LOL

The back peddling begins....the cabin software mods limit, the flaps limit, etc...

Short field performance, speed, comfort, efficiency...yes LD those are all very extreme examples of what is desired in a business jet?..lol.

What are the EMB's strengths again?.....its cheap, noisy, disposable, and easy for kids to land in crosswinds in Cleveland? Its a solid regional airliner. You are very correct. Nothing wrong with that.

Anyhow...

Is it safe to assume this should about wrap-up our quarterly Flightinfo "yeehaw Legacy rules dude!!" Torrets episode?

 

[LegacyDriver]

The back peddling begins....the cabin software mods limit, the flaps limit, etc...

Backpeddling? I've always said the same things. I stand by them. The EMBRAER is a SOLID airplane.

Short field performance, speed, comfort, efficiency...yes LD those are all very extreme examples of what is desired in a business jet?..lol.

It is comfortable and it is efficient. Burns the same fuel as a Falcon 50EX and is far FAR larger. Low DOCs, ease of MX, and a good MEL.

What are the EMB's strengths again?.....

Cabin size, affordability, redundancy, safety, reliability, baggage area, etc.. The people I know who actually write the checks say there's no comparision on operational expense: EMB wins hands down.

The 650 now adds extended range, reduced sound levels, increased performance, etc.

Its a solid regional airliner. You are very correct. Nothing wrong with that.

Which makes it overbuilt for the Corporate world where people are used to dealing with broken tinkertoy airplanes.


If going 4000NM out of a 4000' runway is your game then spend the extra $20 MILLION and buy a Falcon. Or just save that money and land on a longer piece of pavement.

 

[spxdriver]

LD: Have you ever heard the expression "quit while you're ahead?" You may have never been ahead, but you can still quit, you know.

It is comfortable and it is efficient. Burns the same fuel as a Falcon 50EX and is far FAR larger. Low DOCs, ease of MX, and a good MEL.

If the Falcon 50 has "low DOCs," then so does the Legacy. If it doesn't, then neither does the Legacy. C&D has them within $50/hour of each other.

You say that the Legacy doesn't break, etc. If that's so, why do you harp on the fact that it has a good MEL? BTW -- in the last seven years, I think that I've had to MEL something once. The number of times that I couldn't MEL something? Once as well. It was due to a failed starter/generator, and delayed us all of two hours.

Cabin size, affordability, redundancy, safety, reliability, baggage area, etc.. The people I know who actually write the checks say there's no comparision on operational expense: EMB wins hands down.

Cabin size -- For comparison, let's stick to the large cabin Falcons. The cabins of the 900EX, 7X, and Legacy are all within 150 cubic feet of each other.

Affordability -- Mid 2000's Legacy's are going for the very low $10m range, or below. So as far as acquisition cost, yes, the Legacy wins. That said, the DOC's of each aircraft are within $150 of each other, so I'd have to say that as far as operating the aircraft, it's a draw.

Redundancy, I cannot say much about, as I am not familiar enough with the redundancy offered by the Legacy. They're all Part 25 aircraft, so to a certain extent, the redundancy has to be similar.

Reliability -- You talk like corporate jets break all the time. The reality is, they don't. In my career, I've had one aircraft break that resulted in an extra night stay. Fact of the matter is, just this week I saw a Legacy be AOG with a flap problem. The airplane that used to be based in the hangar next door was broken at least three times that I know of. Using those stats, and the dispatch reliability numbers published, the Legacy is less reliable than other corporate jets, not more.

Which makes it overbuilt for the Corporate world where people are used to dealing with broken tinkertoy airplanes.

Again, corporate aircraft don't break the way that you claim that they do. Regional aircraft, airline aircraft, etc. that's a different story. I think I've rode the airlines about ten times in the last five years. Of those times, I've had two delays that I can recall due to a mechanical issue. In that same period, I've had zero delays while on corporate aircraft. These stats don't support your statements indicating that corporate jets are unreliable.

If going 4000NM out of a 4000' runway is your game then spend the extra $20 MILLION and buy a Falcon. Or just save that money and land on a longer piece of pavement.

People don't buy jets to land at an airport far away from where they want to go. They buy them in part to save time, and one of the ways that's done is by landing at the closest airport possible. When the closest airport to where the passengers are going isn't usable by the airplane, that partially defeats one of the reasons that airplanes are owned by individuals and companies in the first place.

LD, the reality is, you have a limited amount of corporate experience, and most of it being in very mediocre to below average jobs (opinion based on how you've described them; I have no personal knowledge of any companies that you've worked for). You have formulated opinions based on your limited, mediocre jobs that simply are not in line with reality. To me, your love for the Legacy is bizarre. The only thing that I can think of is that you simply don't know better...

 

[con-pilot]

This argument of my aircraft is better than yours, is not only not realistic, it is not logical as well.

The best aircraft is the one that provides the highest salary and the best QOL.

Rather simple really.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

This argument of my aircraft is better than yours, is not only not realistic, it is not logical as well.

The best aircraft is the one that provides the highest salary and the best QOL.

Rather simple really.

I didn't think we were talking pay, but were talking aircraft performance?

But in reality performance tends to go along with the cost of the aircraft?....more expensive usually happen to pay better?....and often better QOL?

yes, rather simple (and quite logical)

Dont get me wrong, I'm sure people will chime in about their buddy making 400K/yr flying a King Air or their "big airplane big suitcase" reason for flying a 42K/yr part 135 beechjet 36 days a month...

Its the internet man, go along with the insanity!...

 

[con-pilot]

I didn't think we were talking pay, but were talking aircraft performance?

But in reality performance tends to go along with the cost of the aircraft?....more expensive usually happen to pay better?....and often better QOL?

yes, rather simple (and quite logical)

Dont get me wrong, I'm sure people will chime in about their buddy making 400K/yr flying a King Air or their "big airplane big suitcase" reason for flying a 42K/yr part 135 beechjet 36 days a month...

Its the internet man, go along with the insanity!...

Well one of the aircraft I loved flying was the Jetstar 731, but it was for the government, the pay was okay, the QOL sucked and to be honest, the performance of the Jetstar kind of sucked as well.

I got over my first Corvette as well, the idea that one aircraft is the most perfect aircraft, much superior than all others, even those that highly out class it is, in my opinion, juvenile at best.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Well one of the aircraft I loved flying was the Jetstar 731, but it was for the government, the pay was okay, the QOL sucked and to be honest, the performance of the Jetstar kind of sucked as well.

I got over my first Corvette as well, the idea that one aircraft is the most perfect aircraft, much superior than all others, even those that highly out class it is, in my opinion, juvenile at best.

What's a Jetstar?

 

[jonjuan]

What's a Jetstar?

I think that little plane in the movie "Cliffhanger" flown by the chick pilot that crashed it.

 

[njcapt]

What's a Jetstar?

It's what Pu$$y Galore flew in Goldfinger. Rather, she walked around in the back a lot and made the other chick fly.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

It's what Pu$$y Galore flew in Goldfinger. Rather, she walked around in the back a lot and made the other chick fly.

So pu$$ys fly Jetstars?......I thought they flew Legacys?

Damn!....now I'm confused.