CL300 Sets speed record

[GVFlyer]

is there a website that has records for routes listed? Can you submit a record attempt on your own? What makes it official?

Gulfstream uses the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale which is the ratifying authority. The National Aeronautic Association can be used but they must submit their findings to the FAI.

For a record attempt there are forms for each of the two authorities which must be completed and the involved towers must be included in the planning. It is the towers that log your take-off and landing times for the NAA/FAI.

GV

 

[mzaharis]

is there a website that has records for routes listed? Can you submit a record attempt on your own? What makes it official?

http://www.fai.org

I believe that the NAA is a "member" association of the FAI.

 

[NJA Capt]

Yep, it was 4:52. Let's see a X try that.

Well, since you asked.
Yes, the X CAN takeoff from CRQ and fly the same mission with 8 pax and bags, and about 50 kts faster (zero wind) and land 1000# over reserve fuel.

What Bombardier didn't disclose is the pax weight (are we talking 8 highschool cheerleaders or 8 NFL linebackers?) Baggage wt, etc. Also, did they use mph/sm instead of nm/kts?

Their ave ground speed was only 497 kts. The X's avg TAS is 525 kts.

Let's see the CL300 beat the X's record from SAN-CHS in 2:55

 

[NJA Capt]

How much gas can a X take out of 4600' runway with 8 pax?

About 10500# (total 13000#)

Also omitted was the temp/winds....Anyway,

The C750 t/o distance at sea level/ISA varies between 3470' to 5140'

 

[GVFlyer]

Well, since you asked.
Yes, the X CAN takeoff from CRQ and fly the same mission with 8 pax and bags, and about 50 kts faster (zero wind) and land 1000# over reserve fuel.

What Bombardier didn't disclose is the pax weight (are we talking 8 highschool cheerleaders or 8 NFL linebackers?) Baggage wt, etc. Also, did they use mph/sm instead of nm/kts?

Their ave ground speed was only 497 kts. The X's avg TAS is 525 kts.

Let's see the CL300 beat the X's record from SAN-CHS in 2:55

You're exactly, right. If you get everything in the press release in the same terms and adjust for winds you find that they flew 2358 nautical miles at an average still air speed of 450.3 knots.

GV

 

[cforst513]

Well, since you asked.
Yes, the X CAN takeoff from CRQ and fly the same mission with 8 pax and bags, and about 50 kts faster (zero wind) and land 1000# over reserve fuel.

What Bombardier didn't disclose is the pax weight (are we talking 8 highschool cheerleaders or 8 NFL linebackers?) Baggage wt, etc. Also, did they use mph/sm instead of nm/kts?

Their ave ground speed was only 497 kts. The X's avg TAS is 525 kts.

Let's see the CL300 beat the X's record from SAN-CHS in 2:55

i think someone should slap some SR-71 Blackbird engines on the CL300 and see how long it takes to go from Cali to Maine....

 

[FraxJockey]

O.k.

I stand corrected. Of course you would have to fly fast because not many could stand to be in the cabin for too much longer. Just kidding... On a serious note, what cruise speed are we talking about? and at what altitude? They did .83 at F410 the whole way. They didn't go to F450 and take advantage of any additional winds or temps. The pax load I believe was with 4 adults and 4 kids and their bags. The point here is I am sure the X can do it as you stated , but at what speed? They landed with over 3000# of fuel...in real world terms thats about 1:45 of "extra" fuel. Where the CL300 pulls ahead is the DOC...and the acquisition costs are less ($18 million a copy for a CL300) I am not a salesman so don't ask me any figures just clarifying things up. We have been getting X and Hawker owners come over from Netjets but I imagine we have been losing some as well so its a neutral point.

 

[miles otoole]

It looks like the cabin is what, about 50- 60% LARGER in the 300? If that's the case, why the F%*& would anyone consider a X?

 

[ultrarunner]

...snip..They did .83 at F410 the whole way. They didn't go to F450 and take advantage of any additional winds or temps....

That's because:

#1. Winds would likely be LESS at 450

#2. TAS would be LESS

#3. Temps would likely be the SAME.

They were at the 'best case' altitude.

It's all about marketing. All the stuff they published is exactly true at the exact moment they did it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Smart folks see it for what it is. Those less smart don't know any better or differenty.

 

[NJA Capt]

On a serious note, what cruise speed are we talking about? and at what altitude? They did .83 at F410 the whole way.

The flight planner I used only had .86 and .92 settings. I used .86 @ 410 ISA

The pax load I believe was with 4 adults and 4 kids and their bags. The point here is I am sure the X can do it as you stated , but at what speed? They landed with over 3000# of fuel...in real world terms thats about 1:45 of "extra" fuel.

Using 4 adults/4 kids, I think the CX would run max cruise the whole way. The flight planning guide shows 2400nm and 11000# fuel (including taxi, clmb,desc, IFR resv at FL410 with (5) 200# pax.
Sounds like they are pretty closely matched (aside from max speed )