B&CA Legacy Operator Report

LegacyDriver

Moving Target
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Posts
1,696
Total Time
Enough
It figures this issue would get lost in the mail.

Does anyone have a copy of this from the online B&CA site they would be willing to post?

Many thanks.
 

BoilerUP

Citation style...
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Posts
5,311
Total Time
1500+
Not to be a smartass, but you can probably find a copy of it at an FBO.
 

LegacyDriver

Moving Target
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Posts
1,696
Total Time
Enough
You mean to say that you did not write that article????

Sounds like it might have validated everything I espoused about the airplane over the last 5+ years.

Good to know.

"A prophet is not without honor except in his own home(town)."
 

masedogg19

Banned
I bless the rains.......
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Posts
386
Total Time
2600+
I don't recall you talking about how it's not fast enough and can't fly high enough.....
 

LegacyDriver

Moving Target
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Posts
1,696
Total Time
Enough
Thanks for the link.

A few others send their thanks along with mine.
 

hydroflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Posts
254
Total Time
1+
What I got out of the article is you can get a plane that has large cabin length, with less width and height (even with a dropped floor) than a Gulfstream but more baggage space, for a midsize aircraft price and range. It has the cruise speeds of a Citation (402 KTAS), can't climb that high (41,000 with a mod), has a low max differential pressure (8,000 foot cabin at FL410), and the avionics are severely outdated (unable WAAS or RNP approaches) that will require Embraer to eventually address with a significant update. All of this plus a noisy cabin and cockpit. They never did give any examples of runway performance numbers. What is a "relatively short runway" and how far can you go off of it? It does sound reliable and easy to fix.

Overall it sounds like a great airplane for a charter company that needs to offer the large cabin impression for a low price or a company that needs to move a lot of people around in a shuttle type operation. For long-range international flying that the true large-cabin business jets are designed for, it doesn't seem to compete well.
 

LegacyDriver

Moving Target
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Posts
1,696
Total Time
Enough
What I got out of the article is you can get a plane that has large cabin length, with less width and height (even with a dropped floor) than a Gulfstream but more baggage space, for a midsize aircraft price and range. It has the cruise speeds of a Citation (402 KTAS),
In operational reality the cruise speed is higher than cited in the article. We used to do coast to coast into the wind at .795M until fuel got really pricey and we never had range issues. As the article correctly notes, the published performance numbers are conservative. The airplane exceeds them by a fair margin.


can't climb that high (41,000 with a mod),

The mod is ONLY for the first 35 or so built. Everything built from roughly s/n 854 (or 939) on--I forget the exact plane but I did fly it--comes FROM THE FACTORY with FL410 capability.

has a low max differential pressure (8,000 foot cabin at FL410), and the avionics are severely outdated (unable WAAS or RNP approaches) that will require Embraer to eventually address with a significant update. All of this plus a noisy cabin and cockpit.
The airplanes that equate to "Legacy 600" models are light years quieter than the older models due to soundproofing improvements (and the VGs above the cockpit "hump"). The guys complaining about noise in the article own early S/N airplanes that were indeed loud above .76M. EVEN ON THESE, if you close the doors (cockpit,galley, and lav) the thing is MUCH quieter. Most operators fly with the cockpit door open and that makes the older models significantly louder in the cockpit and galley.

The avionics can use some upgrades, but I haven't had any issues with it. I find it hard to believe that a little "reprogramming" couldn't fix these complaints...

They never did give any examples of runway performance numbers. What is a "relatively short runway" and how far can you go off of it?
Runway length required for a max weight, max range takeoff from sea level at roughly 100 degrees F is just under 6000'.

It does sound reliable and easy to fix.
Absolutely bulletproof. A tank.

Overall it sounds like a great airplane for a charter company that needs to offer the large cabin impression for a low price or a company that needs to move a lot of people around in a shuttle type operation. For long-range international flying that the true large-cabin business jets are designed for, it doesn't seem to compete well.

If what you do is mostly CONUS, Hawaii, and East Coast to London, or bouncing around Europe or the Mid-East it competes handily. If I'm bouncing all over the world I like to know my jet will absolutely work and that if something's busted I can defer and keep going. That 99.9% reliability thing is for real on this bird.

If one needs more than 3450NM range...and if price isn't an issue and reliability isn't an issue...then one should buy a Global, Falcon, or G-String.
 
Last edited:
Top