Flying to Hawaii

[LegacyDriver]

.....

 

[LegacyDriver]

So the two Gulfstream crashes this week were intentional?

 

[LegacyDriver]

So the two Gulfstream crashes this week were intentional? I'm sure that's news to the crews.

 

[bigD]

A company can certify a jet below what it would qualify for folks.

Okay, but WHY would it do that? Of course going faster will burn more fuel, but why not leave that decision up to the pilots? Just because you can fly at max cruise doesn't mean you have to. I must be missing something obvious here.

 

[Lead Sled]

Just because you can fly at max cruise doesn't mean you have to. I must be missing something obvious here.

Yeah, you're probably missing something here. Max cruise is typically the cheapest way to operate most business jets.

'Sled

 

[capt_zman]

Why is operating at max cruise the cheapest way to operate an jet? Everytime I plug the numbers for a trip into Universal or GDC, mid range cruise is always cheaper (DOC) than high speed. As for flight time reduction, I would think that they would be offset by other variables. Maybe I'm missing something too.

 

[G100driver]

Yes, I know, but I feel a social responsibility to help educate the junior birdmen in our aviation community, so I stick with you.

GV

You gotta love this guy!

 

[Dumbledore]

D'oh! He gets the BS flag - AGAIN!

3) Reliability - the Legacy is the most reliable jet in the world and if you think otherwise you are a complete fool! This is a 99.5 percent dispatch rate unadjusted! (Not Cessna or Gulfstream BS reliability where 80 is 99.5). In four years and over 2000 cycles I have aborted ZERO missions.

Overlooking any of the other claims you make here, that one about four years is simply a LIE. Please see the following link for a little history on the airplane you claim to know so well.

http://www.teterboro-online.com/news/news03/indigo3.shtml

The problem here, just in case you don't want to check it out, is that the airplane was certified in Dec. of 2001. Soooooo, adding four years (with you starting out as the certification test pilot turned corporate weenie) makes the correct anniversary date 12/05. We're not there unless I've missed a thing or two.

Next, we have this:

I have also never gone to 410 but I know the plane can do it by looking at my diff. At 390 I am nowhere near 8.3 psid. Obviously EMB felt the added pressure would not raise the doc of the airplane.

Is your employer aware that you're this stupid??????? You can go higher because the pressurization isn't maxed out?? Really! Is that all there is to it? Is that all I need to be thinking about?!?

You know what? You sound really dangerous to me. We just had a CRJ crew find out why there are maximum weight for cruise altitude charts. They died trying to fix the consequences of their ignorance. I sincerely hope that you'll go out on an educational LOA and learn a few things about the job you do. You're clearly not qualified to be in the seat you're in.

Just so we're clear, I want to reiterate what I am saying - You are LYING about your experience in the airplane. You are probably LYING about plenty of other things. It is also obvious that you have some serious misconceptions about some fundamental issues related to high performance flight operations.

I am arguing with morons it is clear.

Look in the mirror sir. There you will see what you have so arrogantly called the rest of us.

 

[LegacyDriver]

No lying here at all. As stated earlier in this thread, I also have ERJ experience. I had no aborts in that aircraft. I have had none in the Legacy.

As for my ignorance of pressurization, perhaps it is you who is ignorant. If we want to take this tube above 410 (to sat, 430) at the 410 cabin alt we need to go to 8.5 diff. The Legacy and RJ do not operate at max diff until 410 which is why we got the 410 capability so quickly (the plane is over-engineered for its original mission in nearly every area).



My point is simply that the tube is strong enough (and the engines strong enough for that matter) to do it. How the wing reacts is outside my ability to say--i don't own a fluid dynamics lab.

See the Legacy Bashfest thread for more. I am done on this thread.

 

[GVFlyer]

Here's the real deal-breaker: How many bizjet pilots out there have to wear David Clarks cause the COCKPIT IS SO **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**ED NOISY? (shouting because LD is probably deaf from the wind noise)

BTW, the other night, we took 5:40 and burned 14k in gas to go from EWR to LAX with 120 kt headwinds till we got to ALS. We had to slow down to M.83 so we could climb to FL470 over MCI. This thing is a beast! TC

You must have been heavy or have a heavy completion, TC. I was flying a G550 with a 48,000 pound BOW and 4 pax yesterday and had no problem cruising at M 0.85 @ FL470 and M 0.84 @ FL490 and tankering 10,000 pounds of fuel into destination.

It is a beast!

GV

 

[GVFlyer]

Question: if the Legacy has been tested for a higher max diff, or at speeds beyond .92, why would the company intentionally set the limitations so much lower?

The short answer is, "Embraer wouldn't, no manufacturer would."

Part 25, Airworthiness Standards, Transport Category Aircraft requires manufacturers to define the edges of the operating envelope:

c) The controllability, stability, trim, and stalling characteristics of the airplane must be shown for each altitude up to the maximum expected in operation.

Many of the tests require the manufaturer to rise to meeting the required standards. One of the tests that has been challenging for some airframers and is always entertaining to perform is for determining VD:

b) Design dive speed, VD ...
(1) From an initial condition of stabilized flight at VC / MC, the airplane is upset, flown for 20 seconds along a flight path 7.5° below the initial path, and then pulled up at a load factor of 1.5g (0.5g acceleration increment).

Even Gulfstream had difficulty in one of the trim tests when certifying the GV. The regulation calls for," One pound of centering force for each six knots of displacement from a trimed condition." In one obscure corner of the operating envelope for operations in the landing configuration, where a rational pilot would never find himself, the GV couldn't overcome the hysteresis to meet this standard. Subsequently, Gulfstream had to add elevator downweight springs to the flight controls. This was really a shame because prior to this modification to meet Part 25 standards, the GV had the control harmony of a fighter.

LegacyDriver was correct in stating that the Legacy encountered early Mach effects, buffet and buzz prior to encountering elevator flutter. Such effects are characteristic of flight controls that are not hydraulically boosted . I participated in the certification and military conformity of the C-21 Learjet. It also had unboosted flight controls. Mach Crit for the 39'6" wing was at M 0.75. At that speed you could see the shock wave form up on the wing's upper surface. Mmo was M 0.81. At altitude, at M 0.825-0.83 a shock wave would form up on the ailerons which could not offer hydraulic resistance for stability and they would buzz and cause control wheel snatching. If you went faster or rolled into a turn, Mach buffet would occur followed by a pronounced rumble. On the GV, even when it was inadvertently flown to Mach 1.07, there was no buzz, no buffet, no rumble and no roll off.

Going fast in airplanes is a critical science. The following is a synopsis of what happened to a well known member of SETP during devlopmental test for the Sino-Swearingen SJ-30-2:

Before the test flight, a mission briefing was conducted via conference call between the San Antonio-based personnel and the telemetry van personnel in Rock Springs, Texas. During the briefing, the project’s flutter consultant (a DER) noted that he had, during previous discussions, advised that for the purpose of flutter testing, if Beeler (left) ran out of aileron or elevator trim, the tests could still be completed, even if the pilot had to hold aileron/elevator force to steady the airplane. He further stated, however, that continuation of the testing would never override the pilot’s decision as to whether the control forces were unacceptable or hazardous.

SJ30-2 N138BF, S/N 002, departed for the second flutter test on an IFR flight plan–in VMC–from San Antonio International Airport at 9:11 a.m. on April 26. The airplane climbed to 39,000 feet and set up for a shallow dive to accelerate to the Mach 0.884 (indicated) test point. When the airplane reached indicated Mach 0.875, Beeler called “Mark” on the radio to duplicate the previous day’s test point. Beeler then initiated a single pulse input to the elevator.

After checking the telemetry strips, the consultant then gave Beeler the go-ahead for a single pulse to the aileron, followed by another “Go” for a single pulse to the rudder. Telemetry van personnel noted that all the modes excited were “well damped.” Telemetry van personnel also reported that after the pulses were completed, Beeler said the uncommanded roll to the left–which had been experienced on the previous flight–did not occur. There was also no mention of a rumble. In addition, the chase-plane pilots confirmed that there were no mechanical anomalies evident on the airplane.

Beeler subsequently began to set up the SJ30-2 for the dive to reach Mach 0.884. Discussions between Beeler and telemetry van personnel indicated that this test point might be the last one of the mission due to fuel concerns, especially for the chase airplane.

Following telemetry lock, the airplane began a shallow dive. According to most of the participating personnel, before reaching the test point of indicated Mach 0.884, Beeler said that he had put in full trim and couldn’t let go. At indicated Mach 0.884, he called “Mark.” Each control surface was again pulsed, and the responses were again “well damped.”

After the final pulse, Beeler was cleared to the next test point, indicated Mach 0.894, but Beeler responded that the airplane was rolling to the right, and he couldn’t stop it. Telemetry was lost about 20 seconds later. The chase pilot called “get out” twice to Beeler, but he said that he couldn’t get out, that there were too many g’s. This was his last transmission. The airplane was at about 30,000 feet at this time and appeared to be in a shallow right bank, according to the chase-plane pilot.

Walls in the T-38 saw the SJ30-2’s nose to be “a little low,” and in an approximately 30-degree right bank after reaching Mach 0.884. A few seconds later, the test airplane entered a “barrel roll-type maneuver” to the right, then continued to roll, and increased its dive angle until it hit the ground at about 10 a.m. No parts were seen separating from the airframe as it descended. The chase airplane was not close enough for its crew to see the SJ30-2’s control positions.

When Walls saw the initial roll, his first thought was, “What did he do that for?” Then he saw that the airplane “came around and made another barrel roll. It was not around a point like an aileron roll; and it was not real fast; it looked lazy.”

The telemetry van was receiving reference system airspeed. One of the telemetry personnel said that as the accident sequence approached, the airplane’s airspeed readout was consistently between Mach 0.881 and 0.882. He subsequently noted that he did not believe the airplane exceeded Mach 0.882 before the telemetry signal was lost. (The airplane had achieved its planned Mmo of Mach 0.83 late last year without any reported anomalies.)


It is now known that the Williams-Rolls FJ44-2A-twinjet had problems on its first flight in the same series on the previous day. That flight was curtailed after the airplane encountered an uncommanded roll to the left and a possible encounter with Mach buffet.

This occured in an airplane designed to go M 0.83; not the Legacy's design limit speed of M 0.80.


GV







.

 

[westwind driver]

If I were YOU, I would not either ......

G100driver,

just admit it man, you, like me, are NOT a gulfstream pilot

Once a Bagel Bomber, always a Bagel Bomber... But hey, at least Gulfstream was nice enough to recognize the Astra. The Westwind community stands on it's own.

happy contrails

 

[G100driver]

G100driver,

just admit it man, you, like me, are NOT a gulfstream pilot

Once a Bagel Bomber, always a Bagel Bomber... But hey, at least Gulfstream was nice enough to recognize the Astra. The Westwind community stands on it's own.

happy contrails

Nor do I have strong desire to be one. Life is good in my sub-standard (sarcasm) Falcon 2000 right now.

I will never forget my roots though.

 

[bigD]

Wow, thanks GVFlyer for the info!

 

[GVFlyer]

Wow, thanks GVFlyer for the info!

You're welcome. A better way than the technical discussions we've been enjoying on this board to get a true understanding of the Embraer WSCOD is to go on a courtesy Embraer plant tour in Sao Jose dos Campos. For those of us who are used to seeing computer miling and computer directed automatic riveting machines, it is like steping back in history to watch a little guy in coveralls daubing sealant onto a fuselage section with a putty knife prior to joining it to another section, then hand bucking the rivets to join the sections.

GV

 

[SkyGirl]

... it is like steping back in history to watch a little guy in coveralls daubing sealant onto a fuselage section with a putty knife...

GV

If the little guy is wearing a shirt and shoes with his coveralls, it's a modern Brazilian plant.

 

[GEXDriver]

Wsod

You are making fun of PDA-induced typos? Ha!

You also denegrate the 14 aurplanes sold since 2002. Would Gulfstream have faired better with its G-I post-9/11 ? ? ? I doubt it. Embraer has done very well to introduce a new airplane into a crowded market it did not exist in previously.

What does this sentence mean? G-I, huh??? Gulfstream hasn't sold a G-I since the sixties. All of the manufacturers of real business jets: Bombardier, Gulfstream and Falcon have sold a lot more than 14 airplanes since 9/11. Aren't they selling airplanes in the same market?

 

[SkyGirl]

BTW we never reduced cabin space for baggage in the Legacy. Anyone who compares the any 145 series airplane cockpit unfavorably to any Canadair cockpit (the CRJ 700 is their best and it is inferior) has no credibility at all. The 604 cockpit positively sucks.

I don't know about the CRJ, but I just got to go on a Challenger 604 at Dulles and the cockpit looked very comfy.

 

[aeronautic1]

This thread

WAFWOT !

 

[SkyGirl]

aeronautic one,

Judging from the number of views and replies, not everyone agrees with you.

-SkyGirl-