Falcon 7X in Aviation Week

[mzaharis]

For you Falcon Fans:

Just checked Aviation Week's subscription website to see this week's AvLeak online. Falcon 7X test program was the cover story. Sorry - I think you need a subscription to read it. Pretty straightforward stuff, but the interesting tidbit is:

"These aircraft features add new elements to the test campaign. Moreover, for Dassault, it is the first time in many years an entirely new aircraft is being put through its paces, notes Falcon test pilot Philippe Deleume. The Falcon 900 and Falcon 2000 were all based on the basic Falcon 50 design. "

"Like that Falcon 50, the 7X--its wing, in particular--is seen as the foundation of the aircraft's next generation. Once 7X development activity starts winding down, serious work on the next member of the family will ramp up. The launch of the new 7X won't take place this year, Dassault officials suggest."

50 replacement next? (Maybe Senior Citizen had it right all along with his 5X talk).

GVFlyer - you may find this article particularly interesting, as a test pilot.

 

[G100driver]

Nope, replacement for the 2000.

Next aircraft with the 7X wing will have 2 engines. So says my source at Dassault. With that said, however, that is still several years away.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

The "5X", isn't really a new A/C is ontly a marketing trick is a 7X with less fuel, will reaplace the 900EX, for a replacement of the Da2000EX a lot of development is required to build a twin engined 7X, as the G350 and G450, in the case of the G350 & G450, both A/C has the same certification (or at least some test done on the G450 are used to fullfill the G350 cert), but the G350 is an amendament for the Fuel Tank modification, and few other items deleted fron the G450 basic certificate.

 

[G100driver]

Where did you pull that one out of???

It is all about the wing ... not marketing. The 900, 2000 and 50 all have the same wing.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

Where did you pull that one out of???

It is all about the wing ... not marketing. The 900, 2000 and 50 all have the same wing.

Falcon 50EX & 50's wing Area:46.8 sq m (metrics units)

Falcon 2000EX & 2000's wing area: 49 sq m

Falcon 900EX & DX & C & B 's wing areas 49 sq m

Where you read about these three planes share the wing?, its obvious the 50EX's wing has les area then the 2000/900 wing, but also the 2000EX wing is different only have 2 leading edge slats, the 900's wing has four, Did you know that?

About the Twin-Engined derivate of the 7X, why it will come much later than the "5X"?, its only numbers ($$), to develop a twin engined derivate, Dassault need to create a new tail for the plane (they are eliminating the n2 engine), also to meet the minimal field perfomance expectations they need to put more powerful engines or make a large reduction in the T.O. weigth, it means new engines or much lower range or a very large runaway. In the other hand a "derated" 7x, doesn't require more development than the new fuel system (so it cost much less), also the new plane will take advantage of it's "twin" service experience, that is the lesson learned by our (the engineers) from the economists.

Did you know that the new 7x will cost to produce less than the current 900EX (excluding development costs), that's because the impact of the CATIA system, the 7x has much less parts than any other bizjet built by Dassault.

You must to consider your sources...

The Question about the wing is obvious if you flew on both planes, also if you see boot on the same ramp from the tower.

 

[G100driver]

I am not going to tell my source as it not approriate on a public forum, but I can assure that it is valid.

However the comment about the wing is the design, not the dementions. The wing platform is the same on all 3 aircraft. Heck for that matter, all the Falcon wings are based on the original DA-20 design with with very little deviation. The 7X is the 1st "new" wing that Dassault has desinged for corporate aviation in 45 years.

Anytime you change the weight, # of engines, ect you will have to spend $$. Dassault is not going to save any more or less money by replacing the 900 vs the 2000. The twin vs tri jet aruement is not valid.

BTW did you realize that the "foot print" of the 900 vs the 2000 are identical (minus the tail height). There is very little difference between the 50 - 900 - 2000 series falcons (except the obvious). Dassault, like Gufstream, does not re-invent the wheel everytime they create a new type of A/C.

 

[Kingairrick]

Where you read about these three planes share the wing?, its obvious the 50EX's wing has les area then the 2000/900 wing, but also the 2000EX wing is different only have 2 leading edge slats, the 900's wing has four, Did you know that?


The Question about the wing is obvious if you flew on both planes, also if you see boot on the same ramp from the tower.

Wrong. The 900 and 50 only have 2 slat panels per side. 900 does not have 4. Before you question my source, I have both sitting outside my office door (50 and 900EX.)

I just re-read your post. The 2000's inboard slats are fixed. Otherwise, same wing. BTW, slats and flaps are control surfaces, not wings.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

You may need new Eye Glasses Sir.

Wrong. The 900 and 50 only have 2 slat panels per side. 900 does not have 4. Before you question my source, I have both sitting outside my office door (50 and 900EX.)

http://www.falconjet.com/aircraft/falcon_philosophy_systems.jsp

I'm not examined both planes, but when we was seeking our new plane, we received vaste detailed data about the Da50EX, Da900EX/DX, Da7x, G350, G450, GL5000, 'm based on what I read, but if you doubt, see by your self with the previous link.

I am not going to tell my source as it not approriate on a public forum, but I can assure that it is valid.

However the comment about the wing is the design, not the dementions. The wing platform is the same on all 3 aircraft.

The Facts are: Isn't the same shape, the AirFlow is different, no sir, the design wasn't scaled to create the 900's wing. This is only a legend, no a technical fact, just see the drawings of both wings, is cleary different, yes the Da50's wing is the same on the Da20, the 7x wing is a radical new design, but this doesn't means that all other wings are the same, each wing must be optimized for its work.

That's is true for the A320 family (excpt. A318), the wing in all the series is exactly the same, bolt by bolt, Boing does somthing very similar with the 737, but they optimizes the internal structure for the respective a/c weight.

The Wing on the Citation X is scaled down (in shape) from the B747-300's wing.

My source also is Confidential about the Da7x and the "Da5X", first we would see a "5X" (7X derated) than the twin engined derivate of the 7X, if Dassault decide to build it (would take 5 years to be necessary).

The 2000EX faces less competence than the 900EX (G450/GL5000), to have a winner in the 900EX category Dassault needs a new plane or a update on the Wing and the Engines of the 900EX (very difficult due the tri-engine configuration), the cheaper option for Dassault is the derated 7X ("5X"), cost less to build than the 900Ex and also cost less to develop than a new 900's derivate.

 

[gern_blanston]

Senior, you're pretty funny to read. The '50 wing is a bit different from the '20. QUITE a bit different. As different from the '20 as the 7X is from the current '50, '900, and '2000 wing (which ARE all basically the same, other than the obvious slat configuration.)
I find a 300 hour 'flight department advisor' arguing about Falcons with a bunch of experienced Falcon pilots to be a pretty humorous situation.

 

[Kingairrick]

My glasses are fine. The four they are talking about in that spec sheet are 1 inboard and 1 outboard panel per side, as I stated in the earlier post. The 2000 has the same wing with the inboard panels fixed in place.
I fly the 900 every week. Trust me, it's 2 per side. Read your book some more, or better yet, look at a picture. You seem to spend lots of time here for a guy who bought a G550 last week.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

You seem to spend lots of time here for a guy who bought a G550 last week.

This site is addictive, also I'm on vacation.

PD. Was a G450.

 

[Corona]

I find a 300 hour 'flight department advisor' arguing about Falcons with a bunch of experienced Falcon pilots to be a pretty humorous situation.

He doesn't have 300 hrs. He's got 308! Even 308+++!

Man, gb, I don't think you realize what experience those extra 8-10 hours bring...

C

 

[Senior_Citizen]

Hey, Every body can write whatever they want as it's current position, I saw suppossed "Drivers" with 5000+ hour, that doesn't know the danger of pulling back an a/c on the ramp using the TR, so its useless to discuss the experience or the autority of some guy based on what they annonimously post as they supossed profile.

I'm not interested to impress to no body, I don't have the "Super-Pilot" disease.

I retrieve some valuable data form this forum when we was looking to select a new A/C, but also some of the things I read was a waste. Some times I don't understand how a F.O. or a Captain has enough time to write 8 or more postings daily? they don't fly? or they use the EFB and the Sat. Datalink on board to give us they "knowledge"...

 

[semperfido]

Some times I don't understand how a F.O. or a Captain has enough time to write 8 or more postings daily? they don't fly?.

as little as possible.....that is the beauty of this job.

 

[gern_blanston]

as little as possible.....that is the beauty of this job.

Oooooh Yeah!



[url=http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=175]Notes on the 50/900 wing[/url]



.

 

[Corona]

I'm not interested to impress to no body...

Mission accomplished!!!

Signed,

Super Pilot C

 

[Senior_Citizen]

Lol