Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

F2TH performance

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
The other issue is the lack of system redundancy. We NEVER took it to Europe. Unlike a Challenger that has a RAT or a Gulfstream that has an ABEX (hyd driven generator) the 2000 has NOTHING! They even went as far as only putting in one battery. We never took it to Hawaii either, I believe the older ones had an O2 wet foot print problem on that leg.

Flown the 2000EX all around the world (thus lots of water) I have yet to have both generators fail AND the APU fail as well. Not sure what the issue is here.
 
6+58? Was it at FL470 Mach .70?

Mach .75. I think we ended up at FL450. 5 pax. We also were very weight conscious when we completed the airframe new. Smaller galley, seats spread out, no cabin partition door, etc. Our BOW is 22,700, rather low for a classic. Some are 1000 lbs heavier. That helps!

If I recall correctly, flight plan called for +3 wind.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top