Falcons and Mid to Large Jets

[capt_zman]

Here's an update of where the boss is now. We just came back from an across the pond trip to Ireland and Italy in an 800XP. On the way home from Cork, boss is seriously disappointed about having to stop in KEF for fuel, then to Gander. I think the Hawker now has a useful life expectancy in the company of around 3 months.

So here's a couple of questions for those in the know:

1. How does the 2000 compare to the 900 for long haul trips (Cabin, operating costs, etc)?

2. Have seen the operating cost of the 2000 vs. the others, but have heard rumors the 2000 is much more difficult to maintain than the other competitors (parts availability, service, etc).

3. What about the Challenger 300? How does this new airplane compare to the others?

4. We are fairly limited to operating out of a 5000' strip, I know the 50 and 900 can do this pretty easily, but what about the others (domestically) ?

5. Can a G4, 300 or a 2000 realistically operate out of 5000 and get to Ireland?

Thanks for the info.

Z-

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Most seem to agree that the 2000 is really NOT an Intl' airplane..2 engines and no RAT...

As far as the 900 goes, coming home from Ireland....where are you keeping it? NYC or eastward? You should be OK. much further dont rule out a stop in Bangor possibly..

Is the boss OK with one fuel stop still? or was he/she just looking to ditch the BIKF stop?


If it was my $$ (of course its not!) I would go with a GIVsp over a Falcon ANYDAY. Falcons are reliable, but they are underpowered and the cabin is MUCH nicer on the GIV. One ride in each to Ireland and the boss would never pick the Falcon. Just an opinion....I enjoy flying the Falcon, but it needs 4 or 5 engines to push this pig around...3 doesn't cut it!

I also know a few operators who fly GIV/GV out of 5000' in NY area to London often - but I dont know their temp limits.

Here's an idea. Have the boss pony up the dough for a GV or a Global Express and never worry about the fuel thing again - heck, you might not even have to refuel in Ireland!!!..
Think of the fuel savings by tankering your own gas!!

Good Luck, hope you get a new ride!

 

[G4G5]

I fly a G4 routinly out of HPN to Europe.

Can it be done from a 5k strip. Yes. Would I suggest it. No.

Does your boss like to travel with customers and familiy members? Full fuel, full pax, in the summer time would be difficult. What's the departing field elev?

Don't get me wrong, it's do able. I would suggest calling the chief pilot at Key Air located in Oxford CT. They are a 135 operator that operates G3,4&5's. KOXC is a 5000 foot, single runway.

Let's be honest the G4 has plenty of power so Takeoff is not really the issue.
I believe the reason most folks choose the Falcons for short field operations is their lower landing Ref speeds. The 900 has an inboard slat, where the 2000 does not. While I have never flown the 900, I can't imagine that the ref speeds can get any lower then the 2000.
Again lets be honest, the Falcons need less runway for landing. This is their biggest advantage over the G's.

My suggestion would be to find an older 900b that's on MSP. You should be able to find one that would be in the ball park of what a descent used 2000 would cost. Try to remember that the 900's first came out around '88 and the the 2000's are a decade newer. If you can find a low time well maintained 900. You probably have found your aircraft.

 

[JetPilot500]

Falcons are reliable, but they are underpowered and the cabin is MUCH nicer on the GIV. One ride in each to Ireland and the boss would never pick the Falcon. Just an opinion....

I would disagree with that comment. I've flown both the G-IV and the 900, and I think the cabin in the 900 is much more comfortable. It's wider than the G-IV which reduces the feelings of clausterphobia especially on the longer haul.

The 900 has an inboard slat, where the 2000 does not. While I have never flown the 900, I can't imagine that the ref speeds can get any lower then the 2000.

I have no idea what the ref speeds are in the 2000, but 112 is
fairly typical in the 900EX I fly (we also have a fairly heavy bird and SOP's have us landing with about 1.7+ hours of fuel - 3000#).

My suggestion would be to find an older 900c that's on MSP.

I assume you were referring to a 900B. I would agree with that suggestion. The 900B is a lot of airplane for the money right now, and it will be great on your 5,000' runway compared to a Gulfstream (I fly a 900EX out of a 5000' strip). If you had more runway, I'd say look at the Challengers, but with only 5000', forgetaboutit.

Good Luck,
JetPilot500

 

[Valkyrie]

Try to remember that the 900's first came out around '88 and the the 2000's are a decade newer. If you can find a low time well maintained 900. You probably have found your aircraft.

First 900 built in 1985 and first 2000 in 1993.

I don't think that Falcon 50EX and 900EX are under-powered.

I think the 50EX is a good choice for a 800XP replacement if you are flying to Europe occasionally.

 

[G4G5]

1985 sounds a bit early for the 900. I was an A&P tech on s/n21 and we did not get it from Little Rock until 1989.

1993 sounds about right for the 2000. I flew s/n19 and I know we had it on the line by 1993.

I did mean 900b not c, thanks.

 

[Valkyrie]

The 900 prototype first flew on 21 September 1984, and first deliveries of the type began in December 1986.

French Air Force 900s, s/n 002 and 004, were built in 1985 and 1986.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

We fly a falcon 900EX from 5500 FT in NY state to London, Hamburg, and Venice non stop either way no problem. Australia with stopping in CA, HI, FIJI. Has 10 hours no at .82. Corning comes back to ELM from Hono not stop all the time. 4400 miles.

 

[TXDA2000]

2000

We operate 2000 sn 164.

Europe is in the future, hopefully far into the future.

We are located in West Texas (MAF) and operate within the state for 75% of our trips.

We go to Kona, HI once a year. One stop in SBA, land in Hawaii with plenty of fuel after 6.3 hours. Somehow we always manage to have a more than forecast headwind westbound, and no wind coming home. The last two years we non-stopped MAF. This year 6.8 hours. Landed with solid day VFR, 1800 lbs. And yes it was day VFR!

The O2 wet footprint is not an issue with the optional large O2 bottle.

Domestically we operate out of 4000 ft minimum.

With full pax and bags, and landing fuel ref is 113. With no pax and 1500 lbs of fuel ref is 108. The 2000 with common fuel and pax loads is 6000-8000 lbs lighter than the 900, hence the reason inboard slats where omitted.

We upgraded from a 20 and burn nearly the same fuel on comparable trips. A contract FO we use flys an 800XP and is shocked at how little fuel we use. 2000-2200 first hour, 1600-1800 second.

It can be piq climbing through the twenties. This is due to the FADEC fuel schedule. Commonly known as the "Bucket" Fuel flow is reduced here to make range numbers. Fly FalconJets profile and their numbers work. Gross weight to 410 in 21 mins. I think we can make 410 up to ISA +10.

As for maintenance, for us it has been a dream. A check to A check with little or no issues. I can't really comment on parts, we haven't needed any. I think we are far enough down the line that early problems have been worked out.

As far as lack of a RAT, I have no experience with them. Didn't think I really needed one on a Falcon. APU lights at FL350 as advertised. Forget about windmilling airstarts. It is such an impossibility you don't actually train for them in the sim.

Cabin is comfortable and VERY quiet. With 10 pax and all their junk it can get filled up, though. Baggage is not an issue, more space than the 900 or Challenger. I've only climbed around in a 300, it will get small real quick.

I'll look it up, but Ireland out of 5000 feet is doable, but not in all situations.

Dan

 

[capt_zman]

Good info, thanks for the help. Fortunately, a 2000 was at our home base the other day and the chief pilot took the boss through the airplane. He seemed to like it, but basically had the same questions I'm posting here.

I'm in the process of putting a report together with all of the aircraft that can operate out of 5000' and do Europe (Ireland) non-stop and make it home non-stop >85% of the time. Right now the list is short,

1. G4 and G4SP
2. Falcon 2000 and 900b (cabin of a 50 does not meet reqs).
3. Challenger 300

It seems all are in the 13-18 mil range, which ko's the 2000ex, 900ex, GV and Global.

Working on the gulfstreams now, and the tentative numbers I got today from an actual operator of a IV, was 5000' at 30 deg and could fly for 5.5 hours. At 15 deg, add another 2000 lbs of fuel for 6.2 hours, which would be feasible for Ireland.

Any Gulfstream or Falcon drivers want to comment on the above? Also, anyone with any real world numbers on the 300?

Also, any info on insurance, time in type reqs, etc.

Again, thanks for all of the helpful replies.

 

[falconpilot]

i think that g200 hit the nail on the head for the most part. Im pretty falcon bias though. I fly a 900B and love it. However, you can pretty much count on the 900B to be about a 9 hr airplane. Roughly 3800 to 4000 nm. Runway performance is great. The GV and the Global definately have it beat on endurance, but your also talking about a $20 million difference in money. I think that the cabin volume of the 900 is larger than the GV as well. Not sure how the maintenace cost compares for the two airplanes. The fuel burn for the 900 isn't bad either. I usually plan 3000 the first hour and 2000 after that, but I've had it at FL430 and had the fuel down to about 1800, and still doing mach .81 to .82. Overall its a great airplane.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

Falcon 50EX

You might want to consider the Falcon 50 EX as well.

 

[capt_zman]

Looks like the GIV vs. the 604. I have no idea why a 900 isn't in the mix.

Also, have a nice airplane comparison spreadsheet with all 1Q/04 numbers on it if anyone is interested.

Z-

 

[G100driver]

1993 sounds about right for the 2000. I flew s/n19 and I know we had it on the line by 1993.

I hate be a total nit-pick, but the 2000 did not come on line until 1995.

 

[G4G5]

I just did trip to Luton last week.

Departed HPN. Temp 27c. full fuel, 3 pax's. Runway required 5600'

 

[Computer Geek]

604 numbers

Using todays winds avg- (230@75) - 4 pax and luggage

Dublin - KKPN - Required Fuel 19300 (with NBAA reserves)

Ultranav T/O data - Max TO weight - 48200
TO Distance - 6033
Speeds 136 / 140 / 147

KOXC - Dublin - (just for the 5000' strip numbers) Required Fuel - 15800 (with NBAA reserves)
Max TO weight - 43374
TO Distance - 4999
Speeds - 128 / 132 / 141

Typical BOW is around 26000- 27500 depending on config.

CG

 

[capt_zman]

Doing the math for the 604 out of 5000' looks like:

Max TO Weight - 43374
BOW (worst case) - 27500
Usable = 15874 lbs for fuel, pax and bags.

If required fuel for today is 15800, that doesn't leave much for pax and bags. So it looks like finding a 604 with a BOW in the 26000 - 26750 area is where you need to be.

As for the GIV to Luton, 27 deg and full fuel using 5600' of runway is impressive. The numbers I got from the AFM the other day says that I can depart 5000' at 30 deg and go for 3200 nm. If we reduce temps to 15 deg, we can go for 3400-3500 nm which is deep into Europe.

Thanks for all the good real world info.

Z-