Evaluating the Falcon 50

[Heavy Set]

My boss is considering buying an older model Falcon 50 as an addition to our fleet (couple of older Lears - can you see a trend...). Falcon 50EX is not likely considering the price point (I have seen some price estimates) and we are now in the very early stage of looking at older models.

I realize the cabin is not so big but the boss is fixating on the supposed 3-engine safety. We may do limited travel to Europe and Hawaii and the extra engine makes a difference in his mind. Personally, I am hoping we can find one with EFIS, nice FMS, etc. so that it is not so dated.

For those of you who fly or have flown older FA50s (not the EX version), what do you like and dislike about the aircraft? How do you like the performance vs. what you have flown in the past? Is it comfortable up front - how long before your legs lose circulation? Any examples of its versatility in terms of range and performance?

Thanks for any input. Again, we are in the very early stages of looking at the FA50. Personally, I would prefer it to the Lear I currently fly.

 

[falconpilot]

The 50 is a great aircraft.. Ours has the upgraded engines so it performs really well... For example.. I came back to MSY from TEB lastnight.. I went strait to FL380 sat there for about 45 min and went to FL450. I had the fuel flows back to a little less than 1800lbs and a hour and we were doing .80-.81 mach. BFLs are better than any airplane in its class, and it will do about 3000nm. We took it to Russia a couple of weeks ago, and came back from Moscow with 2 stops. Keflavik, and then Bangor for customs. Its not to cramped up from to me at all, but Im not very tall either. Operating cost are reasonable and comparable with everything else out there in its class. We're looking for a 900 so ours may be up for sale for the right price. PM me for detailed info..

 

[rice]

You won't find a better domestic airplane out there. That said the cabin is a bit tight for a transcon unless you go with 4 or less pax. Anything under 4 hours and its fine. Perf. wise it'll do anything you'd ever want it to do with ease except cruise above FL 410. Do yourself a favor and either get one cheap and bring it up to date or find one thats had all the necessary work (can you say P-RNAV) done to it. I know there are many older 50's out there with the GNS-XLS boat anchors and old type INS's still in them. That's not gonna work in the EU soon and it won't be long before its required in the US.

 

[johnsonrod]

I suppose you could always buy an older FA50 (with complete analog cockpit) and then install a more advanced system like the ProLine later...

 

[Lead Sled]

I suppose you could always buy an older FA50 (with complete analog cockpit) and then install a more advanced system like the ProLine later...

We just did that very thing. Ours has the Proline 21 and the DEECs. It's an amazing airplane for what we have invested. FWIW, the Proline 21 seems to be the wave of the future - over 10% of the "straight 50" fleet either has it installed or is schedule to receive it.

LS

 

[johnsonrod]

What's the average range of a Falcon 50 with 3-4 pax and normal baggage? Can it easily make LA to Hawaii in "normal" winds?

 

[Lead Sled]

What's the average range of a Falcon 50 with 3-4 pax and normal baggage? Can it easily make LA to Hawaii in "normal" winds?

The 50 is a pretty remarkable airplane. We can fill every seat in the house, top off the tanks, load all of the baggage they could carry and we're still around 1000 lbs under maximum takeoff weight. Give us a 5,000' runway (at SL) and we're good for Hawaii practically any given day of the year.

LS

 

[Kingairrick]

I would say I agree with all of the above, and second the crappy cruise above FL400. Also, climb can suck in the high 20s until you switch over to Mach at FL320.
That being said, our normal op for the 50 is Florida to SFO, at all time of the year. We've never had to stop for fuel, always fly at .80 or faster. I'm 5'11 and 210, cockpit is fine for me. I've done 6:20 without getting up to stretch or pee.

 

[falconpilot]

Are you guys flying 50s with the 3D engines?? I cruise ours above 41 all the time and still do .80+ and true around 445 at FL450... Now Im not saying that Im doing that topped off or anything, but like I said before, I came back from TEB with 4 pax full baggage and 9500 lbs of fuel and went straight to FL380 then to FL450. I was probably about 29,000lbs when I went to FL450 and I think it does really well... I was pretty impressed with the performance of this 50.. I came from the 900B and the 50EX so I was expecting that the straight 50 was going to be a pig. And granted I did some contract work on one that didn't have the 3D engines, and it was a pig... So that being said, if you go looking for a 50, find one with the eng upgrade...

 

[Lead Sled]

Are you guys flying 50s with the 3D engines?? I cruise ours above 41 all the time and still do .80+ and true around 445 at FL450... Now Im not saying that Im doing that topped off or anything, but like I said before, I came back from TEB with 4 pax full baggage and 9500 lbs of fuel and went straight to FL380 then to FL450. I was probably about 29,000lbs when I went to FL450 and I think it does really well... I was pretty impressed with the performance of this 50.. I came from the 900B and the 50EX so I was expecting that the straight 50 was going to be a pig. And granted I did some contract work on one that didn't have the 3D engines, and it was a pig... So that being said, if you go looking for a 50, find one with the eng upgrade...

You're probably using temperature to set power and ignoring the N1 cruise charts. FWIW, it's not something that we do. The -Ds use the same power charts as the -Cs.

LS