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

Hey Falcon 10 Guys

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
At my current "awesome job" I flew a falcon 20, along with the 650 and an early SN 900 all owned by the same department.. All great airplanes.. It's not about showing you up.. It's about being helpful and respectful.. Nowadays flying a Falcon 10, Sabre 65 or even an old G2, is better than flying for any regional, or 135 operator.. And better yet, it's better than being un-employed.. And chances are, you've never flown a Falcon 10, because if you had,you would most likely have nothing but good things to say about them...
 
Last edited:
Why would you waste your time flying a piece of schitt G650 when you could be flying the totally awesome Falcon 10?
 
I have no issue with older well maintained aircraft. I do however think ANY swept wing jet operating on a daily basis out of a 3700 foot strip is a formula for disaster. Even more so if his legs are only an hour. I would do some studies in the time difference on the legs you expect to fly. I used to manage a fleet. As the client's mission grows, they will always start pushing you to stretch the airplanes capabilities. I hate it when someones desire for a jet out weighs logic and safety. As a manager it will become a nightmare for you. Properly maintained older aircraft are just fine. At the time, We had a 1980 King air F-90 with 6000 hours and a Brand new 2000 B-200. Both ran like a Timex, but we all argued over flying the F-90 because the clients we an absolute hoot to fly. Just my thoughts, no judgement. If he just has to have a jet, I would probably push for a Citation. On an hour mission, I bet the Falcon arrives at most 5 minutes earlier. Speed is cool, right until it becomes dangerous.
 
I have no issue with older well maintained aircraft. I do however think ANY swept wing jet operating on a daily basis out of a 3700 foot strip is a formula for disaster. Even more so if his legs are only an hour. I would do some studies in the time difference on the legs you expect to fly. I used to manage a fleet. As the client's mission grows, they will always start pushing you to stretch the airplanes capabilities. I hate it when someones desire for a jet out weighs logic and safety. As a manager it will become a nightmare for you. Properly maintained older aircraft are just fine. At the time, We had a 1980 King air F-90 with 6000 hours and a Brand new 2000 B-200. Both ran like a Timex, but we all argued over flying the F-90 because the clients we an absolute hoot to fly. Just my thoughts, no judgement. If he just has to have a jet, I would probably push for a Citation. On an hour mission, I bet the Falcon arrives at most 5 minutes earlier. Speed is cool, right until it becomes dangerous.


+1.. Well said..
 

Latest resources

Back
Top