Falcon 2000EX VS Challenger 604

[G4G5]

So I guess you're implying that Gulfstreams are ETOPS ready?

QUOTE]

It has nothing to do with ETOPS. Name me one part 121 carrier that crosses the Pond with an aircraft that does not have some form of a back up electrical system. If the FAA won't let you and I purchase a ticket on an aircraft without one what does that tell you?

 

[2000flyer]

On the 2000EX I have three engine driven and one electrical standby hydraulic pumps. For me to lose all four would mean having a dual engine failure, complete electrical failure, loss of APU and loss of two aircraft batteries. In this case, I'm pretty well doomed anyway and a RAT wouldn't help me in the least. My guess given the same scenario in your G5 would results in the exact same outcome...a long, silent glide to the swimming pool. Either way, an event I doubt neither you nor I would ever see.

Should I have a leak in the system, it is designed to trap enough fluid so the standby pump can run crucial items. If, for some reason, I lose total hydraulic fluid, again...a RAT would do me no good with the hydraulics.

Should I lose the electrical system or a component, the hydraulic pumps are still operating. All I've lost, for hydraulic purposes, is gear control lever (still able to extend manually) and flap control. I still have flight controls and thrust reversers. Do I need a RAT?

You are correct in your statement about Dassault not wanting the 2000 to compete with the 900. But it's not because the 900 has three engines. It's because the 900 is their flagship, aka their most expensive seller. Why shoot yourself in the foot? Had Dassault left the original 900 fuel quantity in the 2000 (and had the 2000 had the thrust to carry that much more fuel) it would have waved as it passed the 900 stopping for gas.

The 2000EX fuel, full tanks, is 16,730# and 7000# thrust engines. A strong and well deserved increase for this great aircraft.

Regards,
2000Flyer

I completely agree that backup systems are great. But do I need a backup to the backup backup system?

 

[Groundpounder]

Actually, I'd be a little more worried about fire......in the galley, cabin or in baggage compartment. A couple of fire extingushiers just aren't going to do the job.

Thats kind of funny, my boss was complaining today about how there were too many fire extingushers on the brand new CL-604 they just got. There are two 12 lbs ones in the back, and a smaller one in the cockpit. Considering they cross the pond all the time, I don't see how there could be too many when they are over the middle of the cold north atlantic and they start smelling smoke.

 

[fokkerjet]

QUOTE]

It has nothing to do with ETOPS. Name me one part 121 carrier that crosses the Pond with an aircraft that does not have some form of a back up electrical system. If the FAA won't let you and I purchase a ticket on an aircraft without one what does that tell you?[/QUOTE]
Well it kind of does.........two engine aircraft have different challenges than a three or four engine aircraft. What's the "back up system" on the B737?

 

[G4G5]

Well it kind of does.........two engine aircraft have different challenges than a three or four engine aircraft. What's the "back up system" on the B737?

Which airline is flying 737's across the pond?

 

[da90drivr]

Depends which pond.....I think Aloha is flying 737s to Hawaii from the West Coast

 

[fokkerjet]

Well it kind of does.........two engine aircraft have different challenges than a three or four engine aircraft. What's the "back up system" on the B737?

Which airline is flying 737's across the pond?

Aloha, Continental, Executive Jet, or any other BBJ operator.

 

[G4G5]

Depends which pond.....I think Aloha is flying 737s to Hawaii from the West Coast

That is an ETOPS certified 737, does anyone know if it has a RAT?

 

[G4G5]

Depends which pond.....I think Aloha is flying 737s to Hawaii from the West Coast

That is an ETOPS certified 737. Does anyone know if it has a RAT

 

[G4G5]

Aloha, Continental, Executive Jet, or any other BBJ operator.

On which routes are Continental and Aloha or any other 121 flying 737's across the Atlantic, or do you know of a different Pond?

 

[fokkerjet]

That is an ETOPS certified 737, does anyone know if it has a RAT?

Wait a minute.....you just told me that ETOPS doesn't matter!

How about the Pacific Ocean!

 

[G4G5]

On the 2000EX I have three engine driven and one electrical standby hydraulic pumps.

Does the 2000 Ex have a 3rd engine generator or are you refering to the APU, did they add one (not trying to be funny, trying to educate myself?
How does the stby hyd pump a source on electricity ( I was not trying to get into a total system redundancy comarison)?

For me to lose all four would mean having a dual engine failure, complete electrical failure, loss of APU and loss of two aircraft batteries. In this case, I'm pretty well doomed anyway and a RAT wouldn't help me in the least.

A Dual Gen failure requires you to take that ONE bat and have a min of 22v remaining to start the APU, by the time you get to that point on the checklist ( dark over the pond, reading a check list with a flash light trying to start a cold soaked APU, you better be quick because 22v in the sim comes up pretty quickly, while trying to declare an emergency on the tracks). On the G4/5 or 604 the back up electric system just kicked on automaticly, and I am reading a checklist with lights. What about a bus failure? it's my understanding that on the 2000 you can lose the bus's and then have the same problem?


You are correct in your statement about Dassault not wanting the 2000 to compete with the 900. But it's not because the 900 has three engines. It's because the 900 is their flagship, aka their most expensive seller. Why shoot yourself in the foot? Had Dassault left the original 900 fuel quantity in the 2000 (and had the 2000 had the thrust to carry that much more fuel) it would have waved as it passed the 900 stopping for gas.

Not exactly, the F50 was still in production, with the 50ex on the drawing board when the 2000 was designed. Dassault was still trying to market the 50 as the intl aircraft over the 2000. According to the sales men I spoke to, Dassault did not want to lose market share on the 50 so they designed the 2000 as G2 CL600 replacement.

I completely agree that backup systems are great. But do I need a backup to the backup backup system?

Apparently Boeing, Airbus, Gulfstream, Bombardier and even Dasault (with the 3 engine aircraft) feel that it is a good idea[/QUOTE]

Have a nice day

 

[G4G5]

Wait a minute.....you just told me that ETOPS doesn't matter!

No you wait a minute, I NEVER used the word ETOPS, you brought it up. What I said was:
"If the FAA won't let the traveling public cross the pond on an aircraft without a back up system what does that tell you? No 121 carrier crosses the POND (refering to the Atlantic) without one."
I am specificly refering to back up electrical systems ( the whole thread has been about the lack of one on the 2000) and you started us on the ETOPS certification tangent discussion. Which is a whole lot more involved then just having an aircraft with a RAt or an HMU

How about the Pacific Ocean!

Ok and the Pacific. Name me ONE commercial airline that fly's INTERNATIONALLY with the 737? Name me ONE Commercial airline that flys a two engine aircraft INTERNATIONALLY( Pacific or Atlantic) that does not have a back up electrical system?

I am missing your point, are you saying that you would feel comfortable flying across the pond in an aircraft without a back up electrical system? Because the last time I check there were NO international commercial flights in any airframes that do not have one.

Have a nice day

 

[501261]

On which routes are Continental and Aloha or any other 121 flying 737's across the Atlantic, or do you know of a different Pond?

Lufthansa flight 408 (EDDL-EWR) and 409 (EWR-EDDL) are operated by Privatair on an Airbus A319.

Aloha flies the 737-700 from SNA to HNL.

 

[G4G5]

When they built the 2000 that was correct. Dassault knew that it had to compete with the the G-200 CL-604 and the to some extent the the G-IV, hence the development of the 2000EX. . One does not build a 3800nm range airplane to fly from TEB to the West Coast.

So what you are saying is when they built the 2000 that was the case, no back up system was acceptable because they didn't want to compete with their own product line. But now just because they added more gas it's OK and the aircraft is now an international aircraft?

3800 nm does not mean over water. People fly North to South, people tanker and ferry fuel to save money. Heck people even like to fly a trans cons in the winter time and not have to look at the low fuel lights.

As far as the APU goes, I have lit it cold soaked .... worked just fine.
Guranteed?

UOTE]