Bombardier New Aircraft

[cosmotheassman]

I've been hearing rumors about Bombardier making a new improved larger Lear 60. Anyone know any details??

 

[Geronimo4497]

I believe I read that it will be announced at NBAA.

 

[bigepilot]

I heard a rumor it was to be larger than the 60 and referred to as the 70. A salesman with bombardier said "there would be no need to buy another hawker again," if that says something about what it will compete against.

 

[banned username 2]

"there would be no need to buy another hawker again"

Was there ever a need to buy a Hawker???

 

[rice]

Was there ever a need to buy a Hawker???

Only if you were coming out of a WSCOD:laugh: . Sorry, I just couldn't resist!!!!

 

[banned username 2]

Only if you were coming out of a WSCOD:laugh:

Oh, valid point!

 

[MajorAv8r]

I hope they put some descent brakes on the "70." I also hope the engineers aren't Bombardier so that it will fly more than three legs with out some mech problem.

 

[ultrarunner]

Geez, if the new plane is much larger than a 60, and has more range, you start getting pretty close to the CL-300.

 

[HawkerF/O]

I heard a rumor it was to be larger than the 60 and referred to as the 70. A salesman with bombardier said "there would be no need to buy another hawker again," if that says something about what it will compete against.

That is unless you need/want customer support. There are a lot of former Bombardier owners flying Gulfstreams, Hawkers, etc because of the headaches that come along with trying to get parts (the right parts), trying to get calls returned, etc. Gulfstream used to be the same way, but they turned things around and should be the standard for other manufactures. With the exception of the CL-30 (Seperate from the rest of Bombardier), Bombardier has a habit of having terrible customer service. If you have to get the folks in Canada involved, be prepared for pure laziness and incompetence. Unless they change that, there will always be a reason to buy another Hawker. My suggestions a few months ago: Let's see if Bombardier was paying attention- http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=723128#post723128

 

[miles otoole]

That is unless you need/want customer support. There are a lot of former Bombardier owners flying Gulfstreams, Hawkers, etc because of the headaches that come along with trying to get parts (the right parts), trying to get calls returned, etc. Gulfstream used to be the same way, but they turned things around and should be the standard for other manufactures. With the exception of the CL-30, Bombardier has a habit of having terrible customer service. If you have to get the folks in Canada involved, be prepared for pure laziness and incompetence. Unless they change that, there is every reason to buy another Hawker.

My CO. has had nothing but headaches from Raytheon with our HS-125and as such placed an order for the LR 60SE, mainly due to bombardier's fairly decent (Iknow, I know) support of the 45s. They "seem to be" turning the corner from soliciting other operators feedback. There are also a lot of former Gulfstream owners flying Bombardier planes.

 

[pilotmiketx]

That is unless you need/want customer support. There are a lot of former Bombardier owners flying Gulfstreams, Hawkers, etc because of the headaches that come along with trying to get parts (the right parts), trying to get calls returned, etc. Gulfstream used to be the same way, but they turned things around and should be the standard for other manufactures. With the exception of the CL-30 (Seperate from the rest of Bombardier), Bombardier has a habit of having terrible customer service. If you have to get the folks in Canada involved, be prepared for pure laziness and incompetence. Unless they change that, there will always be a reason to buy another Hawker. My suggestions a few months ago: Let's see if Bombardier was paying attention- http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=723128#post723128

Have to take a big disagreement with that. With the exception of the original GX, the aircraft are super reliable and support is first class. The 60 is the Corvette of the corporate jets and pretty bulletproof. I'm pretty certain anything new will have carbon brakes and brake by wire. The 300 has been a dream and the new Globals are supposed to have the bugs worked out with spare parts inventory and AOG issues. No complaints with service or support here.

 

[Doug Parker]

If you have to get the folks in Canada involved, be prepared for pure laziness and incompetence.


What do you expect from a bunch of stupid French-Canadians ???

 

[HawkerF/O]

Have to take a big disagreement with that. With the exception of the original GX, the aircraft are super reliable and support is first class. The 60 is the Corvette of the corporate jets and pretty bulletproof. I'm pretty certain anything new will have carbon brakes and brake by wire. The 300 has been a dream and the new Globals are supposed to have the bugs worked out with spare parts inventory and AOG issues. No complaints with service or support here.

I agree that the 60 is a nice airplane, but, like any aircraft, it has its own issues (brakes, high ref speeds, etc). My experience with Bombardier has been on Challengers and they are lost when it comes to supporting 601s. Most 601 parts have to be replaced now with 604 parts cause they just quit making 601 parts. It's a joke. I have a friend who was at the SC in Tuscon with his 601 and he spend days, honestly days, on the phone with Bombardier. Tuscon couldn't fix the problem, so Canada got involved. Finally figured out the problem, and Canada shipped the part. Part shows, it's the wrong part. PArt reshipped and show us next day, exact same wrong part. Storied like that are a dime a dozen. What is really funny is that Bombardier was trying to sel them a Global to replace their 601. After this episode, any Bombardier product was taken off the potential list of perspective aircraft to purchase. Falson or Gulfstream will get their business. Bombardier makes great products. The have a unique niche carved out for their market placement of aircraft, but the service after the sale is what makes their great airplanes worthless. The best aircraft in the world is junk if you can't get the manufacture to stand behind it on your terms, not theirs.

 

[HawkerF/O]

My CO. has had nothing but headaches from Raytheon with our HS-125and as such placed an order for the LR 60SE, mainly due to bombardier's fairly decent (Iknow, I know) support of the 45s. They "seem to be" turning the corner from soliciting other operators feedback. There are also a lot of former Gulfstream owners flying Bombardier planes.

Was it the grounding of the entire LR45 fleet that appealed to your company? I like Bombardiers products, it's the service I can't stand. I have heard some great things about Raytheon in the past few years. Their online parts locator makes things easy. As for former Gulfstream operators flying Bombardier products, you are right. Wal-Mart is one of them. In all fairness, that was before Gulfstreams revamping of support.

 

[GVFlyer]

There are also a lot of former Gulfstream owners flying Bombardier planes.

Only if they have suffered a reversal of fortune and can no longer afford Gulfstreams.

GV

 

[mzaharis]

Only if they have suffered a reversal of fortune and can no longer afford Gulfstreams.

GV

Oh, I'm about to step in it, and I won't be able to scrape it off with a stick, but:

Does anyone know why Larry Ellison switched from a GV to a GEX? He DID have reversal of fortune (50 bil net worth to something like 18 bil), but I don't think that this was the reason.

I'm not trying to get involved in a G vs. B smackdown (I'd be carried out in a stretcher if I was), but I've always been curious, and it seemed germane to this discussion.

 

[GVFlyer]

Oh, I'm about to step in it, and I won't be able to scrape it off with a stick, but:

Does anyone know why Larry Ellison switched from a GV to a GEX? He DID have reversal of fortune (50 bil net worth to something like 18 bil), but I don't think that this was the reason.

I'm not trying to get involved in a G vs. B smackdown (I'd be carried out in a stretcher if I was), but I've always been curious, and it seemed germane to this discussion.

Gulfstream is not discounting their product, Bombardier is, and these guys are just being business men. Gulfstream is sold out through 2008 and a new G550 will cost you $47.9 million with the Premium Package. You can buy a Global Express XRS for millions less and Bombardier will loan you the money to do so. You can be in a Global years before your Gulfstream could be delivered. Bombardier will also give you top dollar on your trade. The price factors as opposed to value factors can sometimes be very compelling to the bean counters - as in the case of Home Despot.

GV

 

[miles otoole]

Gulfstream is not discounting their product, Bombardier is, and these guys are just being business men. Gulfstream is sold out through 2008 and a new G550 will cost you $47.9 million with the Premium Package. You can buy a Global Express XRS for millions less and Bombardier will loan you the money to do so. You can be in a Global years before your Gulfstream could be delivered. Bombardier will also give you top dollar on your trade. The price factors as opposed to value factors can sometimes be very compelling to the bean counters - as in the case of Home Despot.

GV

Premium Package-Is that akin to the Gold Package?
Now, I wonder what the Bombardier canned answer is. I mean, come on G-V, there must be "some" value in having 20% more cabin volume, besides being .05 Mach slower. Anyone know what the backlog happens to be for the G5000?

 

[banned username 2]

Premium Package-Is that akin to the Gold Package?
Now, I wonder what the Bombardier canned answer is. I mean, come on G-V, there must be "some" value in having 20% more cabin volume, besides being .05 Mach slower. Anyone know what the backlog happens to be for the G5000?

Actually the G-550 is only 0.005 Mach slower (not 0.05 slower as you indicated), however Normal Cruise on both is Mach 0.85...

Also the G-550 (1,895 cu ft) has substantially more cabin volume than the G-V, putting it VERY close to the usable cabin volume of the GEX (2,140 cu. ft.)...

The G-550 has about 250 NM more range than the GEX-XRS...

The G-550 has more thrust (30,770 lbs.) than the GEX-XRS (29,500 lbs.)...

The G-550 (91,000 lbs.) is lighter than the GEX-XRS (98,000 lbs.)...

G-550 (.338:1.0) has much better Thrust-to-Weight Ratio than GEX-XRS (.301:1.0)...

G-550 (5,910 ft.) uses less runway (SL, ISA, MGTOW) than the GEX-XRS (6,190 ft.)

G-550 (Honeywell Primus Epic PlaneView) has much more advanced avionics than the GEX-XRS (Honeywell Primus 2000xp)

G-550 does all this on 8.2% less fuel than the GEX-XRS...

but who's counting...

(Geez, I need a drink, I am starting to sound like GVFlyer!!!)

 

[EngineThunder]

The rumor is that they are going to take the Lear 45 wings and brakes and stick them on a 60 fuselage. That was the buzz when I was out at ICT picking up an airplane.

 

[GVFlyer]

Premium Package-Is that akin to the Gold Package?
Now, I wonder what the Bombardier canned answer is. I mean, come on G-V, there must be "some" value in having 20% more cabin volume, besides being .05 Mach slower. Anyone know what the backlog happens to be for the G5000?

The Premium package includes all Pilot, Mechanic, MedAire and Flight Attendant training for 5 years.


The next Gulfstream will have more interior volume than the Global XRS and Fly-By-Wire. By value I meant not only quality, and current technology as opposed to last generation technology found on the Global Express (have you seen the 8" displays on the XRS?, no auto descent mode, no automatic fuel heating, the uncooled EVS - ad infinitum ad naseum) but also retained value, GV's on the pre-owned market are pretty much selling at their original new purchase price. Have you checked the price of a used Global lately?


At any altitude above 37,000 feet the Gulfstream is faster than the Global by virtue of thrust. At any altitude above 43,000 feet the Gulfstream is faster than the Global by virtue of certification.



Let me tell you how the Global Express ended up M 0.005 faster than the GV at some altitudes. During GV development Mmo was determined by a control reversal at Mach 0.955 (rudder Cl Beta went positive, fundamentally if you pushed right rudder at that speed the aircraft will roll left not right). Part 25 requires that Mmo be reduced by M 0.07 from such an aerodynamicaly limiting event or M 0.05 if a "lower margin is determined using a rational analysis that includes the effects of any automatic systems". The Global encountered buffet, a much more serious aerodynamic quality in that it can be destructive or cause departure from controlled flight, at Mach 0.94 and chose to claim they could show “equivalent safety” and so backed Mmo off M0.05 to arrive at a Mmo of M0.89.



As for the rest of it did you miss my post on the "Santulli visits South Carolina" thread? The Gulfstream is just plain safer.

The first reason [the g550 out performs the Global Express XRS] is simple physics - the G550 weights 7.5% less and has 5% more thrust. The Basic Operating Weight for the G550 is 48,000 lbs and it has 30,770 pounds of thrust giving it a basic power loading of 1 pound of thrust for each 1.56 pounds of airplane. The BOW for the Global Express XRS is 51,500 lbs and it has 29,500 pounds of thrust. Thus the Global has 1 pound of thrust pushing 1.75 pounds of Canadian jet. Of course this doesn’t account for some of the trick stuff on the G550 like the Thrust Recovery Outflow Valve which vectors outflow air at up to 10.48 psid for additional thrust or the blunt edged flap trailing edges which reduce drag above M 0.85.

The comparison is worse at max gross take-off weight – the G550 takes off at 91,000 lbs, the Global XRS has less thrust pushing 98,250 lbs at take-off.


Number two and more importantly is Gulfstream's basic design philosophy. Let me explain. The thrust deck or propulsive power (Wpa) available determines the aircraft volume that can be propelled through the air at a given speed. As such, with the same engines, the volume of the GV and the GEX is roughly equivalent. Bombardier spent more of their volume on cabin, Gulfstream spent theirs on wing. The Gulfstream has 1136.6 sq ft of wing, the Global has 1022 sq. ft. The resultant is that the GEX is a high wing loading, point design, buffet limited airplane and the Gulfstream is not. The Global also pays for this large cabin with increased total parasite drag.

Design limit speed on the GV occured when rudder CL beta went positive (fundamentally a control reversal) not because of buffet or flutter. As a matter of fact, serial number 501 went to Mach 1.07 during developmental test. What this means to you is a much more generous height velocity diagram.

For example, in a 63,000 lb G550 at M.080 at 45,000 feet you can perform a 60 degree (2 g) bank without encountering buffet. With the same conditions in the Global you would encounter buffet at 52 degrees or 1.62 g. In a 55,000lb G550, you can still do sustained 45 degree banked turns at 51,000 feet.

Why this is important is that it gives you a huge window between compressibility and stall at altitude. These margins keep you safe if you encounter turbulence and mean that you don't have to descend if it gets hot. No Gulfstream pilot has ever had to look at a buffet chart to see if he could climb. Performance is paramount at Gulfstream.

My biggest personal beef against the Global line is that it is a buffet-limited jet and does not offer the kind of margins found in the Gulfstream GV and it's derivatives. On the G550 there is over a 100 knot window between compressibility and stall at 51,000 feet. Gulfstream has never departed a GV/G550 during development or any other phase of flight. Pete and his test boys had to pull the chute on the Global to regain controlled flight when it pitched-up during FAA required stall testing.

When we did a closed loop handling qualities evaluation of the Global, we got impending indications of an aerodynamic stall prior to shaker and had to knock it off for the test. The Global actually speeds up in a turn at a constant power setting showing that it is aerodynamically operating in the wrong part of the “drag bucket." We could not get the jet to 49,000 feet with only a crew of two and four flight test engineers on board. The area rule design on the Global, while a good idea on fighters, is a design emergency procedure on a transport category jet to reduce excessive drag.

We also found that Max cruise speed was lower than expected. At FL450 and 65,000 lbs, the cruise manual shows the jet should be able to achieve M 0.87+, the Global could only get to M0.865.

During GV altimetry certification we had to fly close formation at various altitudes with a known source. We used the FA-18 for these tests. After completion of the tests at 51,000 feet, the Hornet driver thought he was going to make a run on us. He quickly learned that the FA 18 won’t turn with a Gulfstream at that altitude…and no, we didn’t use “After Fan” (Alternate N1 Control which gives us an additional two-tenths [!] of EPR).

I didn't mention that Bombardier Flight Test in addition to departing controlled flight, managed a gear-up landing and drug a wing tip during certification. Gulfstream runs a non-destructive developmental test program.

After their gear up landing I half way expected to see a Bombardier Press Release touting their test of their Non-Sparking Sked - "A test Gulfstream refuses to do!"

It's also not a widely publised fact that the Global Express barely made it through Canadian Certification because any leading edge contamination materially and adversely affects stall characteristics.

It should tell you something that the Bombardier CEO Paul Tellier resigned, followed closely by the resignation of the President of Bombardier Business Aircraft, Peter Edwards. I know Peter pretty well, he served 20 years at Gulfstream prior to going to Bombardier, and when he's dealt a losing hand, he folds.


GV


PS: Way to go, Falcon Capt!

 

[mzaharis]

I'm in no place to "truth-check" the claims here, but it seemed that Larry Ellison's switch from a G-V to a GEX didn't provide many clear advantages, and may have had some disadvantages. I couldn't figure out why it was worth the effort to switch. GVFlyer listed a couple of possible reasons why, and it could have been that he just wanted those extra 10 inches of cabin space badly enough (and didn't need the maximum range). The decision always baffled me, and that's why I asked.

 

[banned username 2]

PS: Way to go, Falcon Capt!

I'm learnin! I may only have 40 or so hours in the G-V, but I like what I see so far!

 

[broken spoke]

What??!!!

I STILL, after all these years, stand amazed at the ability of those that post on this site to take a question posed by another and completely twist it around to a topic that NOBODY REALLY CARES ABOUT!! Who cares about "who builds a better aircraft?!" C'mon, gents.

Flyboy

 

[banned username 2]

I STILL, after all these years, stand amazed at the ability of those that post on this site to take a question posed by another and completely twist it around to a topic that NOBODY REALLY CARES ABOUT!! Who cares about "who builds a better aircraft?!" C'mon, gents.

Flyboy

I STILL, after all these years, stand amazed at the ability of those that post on this site to respond to a thread by another that THEY REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT!! Why respond if you don't care?!?!?! C'mon, spoke.

 

[semperfido]

keep posting GVFlyer as i also find your posts a helluva lot more interesting than a fsi gnd school. i am learning a lot, which i am sure i will promptly soon forget

 

[AA717driver]

Well, at least now I know I can turn with those F/A-18's up at 510. Now, what do I do when I get on their tails?

Thanks for the info GVflyer. It is appreciated.TC

 

[RTRHD]

Well, I am impressed keep it up V Flyer and Falcon Cpt.

I really need to read more........

 

[GVFlyer]

Well, at least now I know I can turn with those F/A-18's up at 510. Now, what do I do when I get on their tails?

You key the mic and say, "Fox One!" ... wait a short count then say, "Splash One!" Next, find the guy that evening in the MCAS Beaufort Officer's club and see if he wants to talk about it.

GV

 

[rice]

Well, at least now I know I can turn with those F/A-18's up at 510. Now, what do I do when I get on their tails?

Hope and pray that he doesn't go vertical on you and squeeze one off on that pretty G-String of yours:laugh: . So to speak.