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

Falcon 50 vs Citation X

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
91k and 135, why? Its more efficient to fly the X fast if thats what your getting at.

I've been told by multiple Part 91 operators that they fly the X somewhat slower than fractionals do; just interested to see if that was accurate or not.
 
They aren't doing themselves, or the owners, any favors by flying the X slow... Maybe immediate savings in some fuel, but in the long run it will be much more expensive to fly it slow, ie engine overhaul, hourly required mx, ect. Don't have a clue what 91 operators do though...
 
Errr.... mind my ignorance, but does the X have the range to get 'across the pond'? I'm talking the Atlantic..... Say, JFK-LHR....?

Yes -- haven't you been paying attention to this thread? It has the range for Europe and Hawaii.
 
Errr.... mind my ignorance, but does the X have the range to get 'across the pond'? I'm talking the Atlantic..... Say, JFK-LHR....?

No, the X cannot do a crossing from NYC to London.

Book range is 3070nm @ 0.82M LRC with max fuel, 1200lb payload and a 200nm NBAA alternate.

Bangor-Luton would require a tailwind, but from Gander it can reach a good chunk of western Europe.
 
At .82 you will go deaf within the year in a Falcon 50... Very loud at .80 and above.

.78 and you are looking at 1600#

LB
 
A little off topic, but I was in LFPB a couple of weeks ago and saw a X with winglets. How common is that? Is that how they're coming out of the box now?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top