Hawker 800 vs. 800 XP

[FalconPilot69]

Could anyone tell me what the actual cost savings and performance differences are between the 800 and the 800 XP. I am also interested in finding out what the cost is to put on winglets and if there is a true savings there as well as far as performance and fuel burn. My boss is looking at them and I am doing the research for him.

Thank you in advance.

Falconpilot69

PS. Feel free to email me if you wish.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

easy: http://www.omnijet.com/database/hs8001000/
accurate : Cocklin & de Decker

 

[FalconPilot69]

Winglets?

Senior,

Thank you for the reply. Rumor has it that the XP has a winglet conversion that will increase the range by adding an additional 45 minutes of flight as well as better performance. Do you or anyone know this to be fact? Also, I am told that the conversion cost is approximately 500,000. Do you know if this is fact as well?

Thank you again.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

the only data I know is from AP web site: http://www.aviationpartners.com/hawker/hawker.html
also for pricing, on the web you can found some references:http://www.aviationweek.com/shownews/04nbaa/aircraft2_07.htm

The Hawkers are good planes, reliables and with the best support in it's class, but its performance is far behind the G100/G150, LJ60, and Ce680 (Sovereign), th winglets helps, but the performance numbers can't be used for Planning, because the plane wasn't re-certified, and only has an STC to use the winglets, (it's my opinion, you must to write to AP inc for acurate data).

I saw a Hawker 800Xp with winglets and looks awesome, like a mini G-IV.

 

[Clutch_Cargo]

Falcon,

Take a look here: http://www.aviationpartners.com/hawker/hawk_faqs.html. This should answer your winglet questions.

cc

Edit: Ugghh... were going to have to change Senior name to QuickDraw... or mine to Pokey!

 

[starvingcfi]

saw a straight 800 with the winglets on friday. looks pretty cool.

 

[Bandit60]

the only data I know is from AP web site: http://www.aviationpartners.com/hawker/hawker.html
also for pricing, on the web you can found some references:http://www.aviationweek.com/shownews/04nbaa/aircraft2_07.htm

The Hawkers are good planes, reliables and with the best support in it's class, but its performance is far behind the G100/G150, LJ60, and Ce680 (Sovereign), th winglets helps, but the performance numbers can't be used for Planning, because the plane wasn't re-certified, and only has an STC to use the winglets, (it's my opinion, you must to write to AP inc for acurate data).

I saw a Hawker 800Xp with winglets and looks awesome, like a mini G-IV.

\
I have to disagree with you on that the performance is far behind the LJ60. Yea it wont climb as fast or as high, but it has much better take off numbers in all phases. The hawker has longer legs and is much more stable at altitude. It does much better high and hot numbers than the lj60 (not second segment) but the Hawker800xp can take off with flaps 0 so the length of time your at second segment is extremely short. There are many trips that I can do now that I could not do with the LJ60.
Dont get me wrong..I love the Lears, they are a blast to fly.
PS The Hawker with the proline 21 is nice

 

[westwind driver]

Just my 2 cents;

If you really start looking at the 800 series, and turn more towards straight 800s, I would HIGHLY suggest aiming for one without thrust reversers. On the straight 800 they are just about a waist. They take a couple of hundred pounds away from your payload (T/Rs add to the BOW)

By the time you land in a Hawker and deploy the lift-dump, the aircraft has slowed considerably and the T/Rs lose the majority of their effectiveness.

I know 800 (with T/Rs) pilots that upon touchdown deploy the T/Rs to idle-deploy and then deploy the speed-brakes/lift-dump. The lift-dump sends the flaps to a near 90 degree down angle acting like big barn doors, causing lots of aerodynamic drag. The 800 has good brakes on it too, so below 80 why not use them?

Maybe by getting a straight 800 without T/Rs, you'll save money vs. an 800XP, and you could afford the 1/2 MIL to do the winglets? Not sure what kind of weight they add, but I wouldn't think it to be much.

I would like to hear more opinions on the 800 with/without TRs topic.

 

[FalconPilot69]

Thank you

Thanks a lot guys. I really appreciate all of the info that you gave me.

Fly safe.

FalconPilot69

 

[patq1]

Just my 2 cents;

If you really start looking at the 800 series, and turn more towards straight 800s, I would HIGHLY suggest aiming for one without thrust reversers. On the straight 800 they are just about a waist. They take a couple of hundred pounds away from your payload (T/Rs add to the BOW)

By the time you land in a Hawker and deploy the lift-dump, the aircraft has slowed considerably and the T/Rs lose the majority of their effectiveness.

I know 800 (with T/Rs) pilots that upon touchdown deploy the T/Rs to idle-deploy and then deploy the speed-brakes/lift-dump. The lift-dump sends the flaps to a near 90 degree down angle acting like big barn doors, causing lots of aerodynamic drag. The 800 has good brakes on it too, so below 80 why not use them?

Maybe by getting a straight 800 without T/Rs, you'll save money vs. an 800XP, and you could afford the 1/2 MIL to do the winglets? Not sure what kind of weight they add, but I wouldn't think it to be much.

I would like to hear more opinions on the 800 with/without TRs topic.

We had both T/R and non T/R 800s where I used to work. And yes, normally on landing I would open the T/Rs to idle and that's it. The airplane does decelerate quite nicely with the lift dump. I would still rather have the reversers than not. That little bit extra is always nice to have especially on a slippery runway when the brakes aren't much help. I would much rather have the reversers than the winglets.

pat