Large Cabin Aircraft opinions wanted

[rice]

Nope!!!

Did you do a term in ICT???

Only been there long enough to get the Lear type.

 

[GVFlyer]

Well the Garrett's have gotten dramatically better in the past several years... When we first got the -40 powered 50EX's (about 6 years ago) we were going through a large number of carbon seals... I can't remember the last time we pulled an engine... For reference, our department is running about 16,000 "engine hours" per year... Are they Rolls-Royce's? Nope, but they have gotten much better...

When the Allied Signal TFE 731-40 and -60 engines were introduced in December 1997 they didn't have a carbon seal, but they did have a defectively manufactured 4th bearing seal which deprived lubrication to that bearing pack requiring that all aircraft with those engines be grounded for repairs. Carbon seals were added later to this series of engines when Garrett recalled the smoke filled cabins created by their previous series of TFE 731's, a line of engines which had started life as DC- 10 APU's.

I doubt that even Falcon Captain will deny that if you look at two Falcon 900's, one of them will have a loaner engine on it.

GV

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

Give up 3 engines for American made larger cabin.

So far all of the comments are good.

The F/A comments are good thoughts, as we will have a F/A.

While the 50EX is an awesome machine, We will be hauling between 9 to 11 on a regular basis, and I dont feel the 50 has enough cabin for that.

We have chartered a GIVSP for them before and they loved it. That would also be my choice, but from what I am seeing, if we were to do it today, the aircraft would be about 5 years old. The owner currently believes that he would rather have a 5 year old 4sp than a new 604. As F/A mentioned, they also noticed a major ride difference on the 4 vs 604.

I HAVE notice that no one has mentioned the 604 yet. I would like some input here. From what I have heard around the old aerodrome, everyone likes the 604,,,,UNLESS THEY FLEW A GULFSTREAM FIRST,,, then they dont like it. CCE comes to mind.

I am also a big fan of 3 engines, however, currently the buyer refers to them as those F-ing French Things. I am trying to leave politics out of this to get the right machines.

Weight and hangar space are also a concern, as we are not in a private hangar.

From your reaction to some of the posts in would seem the GIVSP is the ticket. If the 50EX is a bit cramped for the number of PAX you tend to carry. It also sounds like the boss would like it the best.

Have you considered a Boeing Bizjet? or B717 with extended range tanks. I know you probably think I have been down wind of some second-hand reffer smoke. However, with many airlines in distress could translate into some great deals on longrange medium sized, next generation airliners. Example, there are some corporate MD87s out there that cross the pond on a regular basis.

Your flight department seems very active. This could translate into more PAX per flight, more company freight (COMAT), etc.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

I hate being deprived of lubrication!

When the Allied Signal TFE 731-40 and -60 engines were introduced in December 1997 they didn't have a carbon seal, but they did have a defectively manufactured 4th bearing seal which deprived lubrication to that bearing pack requiring that all aircraft with those engines be grounded for repairs. Carbon seals were added later to this series of engines when Garrett recalled the smoke filled cabins created by their previous series of TFE 731's, a line of engines which had started life as DC- 10 APU's.

I doubt that even Falcon Captain will deny that if you look at two Falcon 900's, one of them will have a loaner engine on it.

GV

Falcon 900's and loaner engines, I can hear Falcon Captain's keyboard clicking away from here. It is time for me to exit this thread, it could get ugly. I have just illuminated the fasten seatbelt sign!

Happy flying gentlemen and good luck with your decision,

Jeff

 

[banned username 2]

I doubt that even Falcon Captain will deny that if you look at two Falcon 900's, one of them will have a loaner engine on it.

Actually neither of our 900's have had a loaner on it in the recallable past... It's been a while... But a few years ago was a very different story...

 

[FracCapt]

You also might consider a 2000EX. It has just as many engines as a G-IV and almost the range. If California to HI is a regular mission, it can do this every day without any issue, ie no wet footprint with 120 +HW. (If you want to read the RAT postings you can go back to previous strings and read the rantings of the paranoid, mis-informed and those who's paychecks dictate that preach this crap)

I've heard about some issues with 2000's as far as insufficient backup electrical in the even of a dual gen failure(not enough/strong enough batteries) when overwater....was that problem rectified in the 2000EX? I honestly don't know exactly what the problems were except that a couple buddies don't like to take the 2000 over the pond because of the issue.

 

[bigD]

What's going on with the corporate board? Used to be that every other thread was hijacked into something involving BBQ. So I try and carry the torch on this thread, and NADA!

You guys have gotten wound too tight, methinks.

 

[FraxJockey]

Operating Target

How many Pax?
Average trip Length?
Target OPerating cost?

I would take a look at the new Challenger 300. Very low operating cost and aquisition cost $19-20 Million. The cabin cross section is similar if not identical to the Gulfstream, albeit not as long. Performance is very good on short/hot&high fields. Only drawback is that they are selling like hotcakes and the backlog is probably at least a year or two. Operating costs are not much more...i'd guess 25% more than a Lear 60. Just a thought.

 

[400A]

Airliners

Used airliners are out of the question for two reasons. 1st: size, We operate to many remote small Hot/High airports such as Marfa Texas and Raton New Mexico, The airliners would not fit at either of them. 2nd: These people are the most white knuckeled I have ever seen. If it is not fairly new and low time, they are not getting on.

Also not quite as easy to taxi into your local FBO and get the MD-87 worked on.

 

[400A]

Fraxjockey

Are you on the 300? The demo guys said so far they have been very reliable for Flexjet. (suprising for low serial numbers)

How about systems redundancy for over water ops?

next one is not available till summer of 2007.

 

[Flyinjunk]

"It has just as many engines as a G-IV and almost the range."



uhhhhhhhh......................way wrong on the range pal!

 

[G100driver]

"It has just as many engines as a G-IV and almost the range."



uhhhhhhhh......................way wrong on the range pal!

what is the real world range of the G-iv. I understand that it is about 4000nm.

 

[GVFlyer]

what is the real world range of the G-iv. I understand that it is about 4000nm.

The G-IV is no longer made, it had a range guarantee of 4220nm. It's successor, the G400 had a range guarantee of 4120nm.

The current product, the G450, is a growth derivative of the G-IV created by joining the nose section and avionics of the G500/G550 to the G400 fuselage for a 12 inch longer cabin, adding FADEC BR 611-8 Tay engines and putting the jet on a drag diet. The G450 has a range guarantee of 4,350 nm with 8 passengers, a crew of three and NBAA reserves.

GV

 

[Flyinjunk]

The G-IV is no longer made, it had a range guarantee of 4220nm. It's successor, the G400 had a range guarantee of 4120nm.

The current product, the G450, is a growth derivative of the G-IV created by joining the nose section and avionics of the G500/G550 to the G400 fuselage for a 12 inch longer cabin, adding FADEC BR 611-8 Tay engines and putting the jet on a drag diet. The G450 has a range guarantee of 4,350 nm with 8 passengers, a crew of three and NBAA reserves.

GV

Whatever he said ^ G100! General dynetics effed up a perfectly good type classification system......imho
I miss my straight pipe G1159

 

[G100driver]

"It has just as many engines as a G-IV and almost the range."



uhhhhhhhh......................way wrong on the range pal!

I guess 400 NM is way wrong on the range. The discussion was on the EX not the straight 2000.

 

[fokkerjet]

What's going on with the corporate board? Used to be that every other thread was hijacked into something involving BBQ. So I try and carry the torch on this thread, and NADA!
bigD
You guys have gotten wound too tight, methinks.

Are you located by Austin? If so, I'm riding in Lance's "Ride for the Roses" in two weeks, what have I've gotten myself into with hills and crowds? I see they have nearly 6500 people signed up now, and I'm doing 70 miles. Where can I fuel up on BBQ also?

 

[bigD]

Are you located by Austin? If so, I'm riding in Lance's "Ride for the Roses" in two weeks, what have I've gotten myself into with hills and crowds? I see they have nearly 6500 people signed up now, and I'm doing 70 miles. Where can I fuel up on BBQ also?

Yep - I'm in Austin!

I've done "The Ride" a few years back on a mountain bike (with slicks). I did the 100 mile course. I don't know what your background is, but the hills shouldn't be too much of an issue. Austin lies on the eastern edge of the Hill Country, so the really hilly areas are to the west of town. Since the course is completely east of Austin, you won't have to deal with the hills all that much.

The crowds are another issue. Back when I rode, it was about half the size it is now. The real problem is that you have people of all skill levels riding out there. Even on the longer 70 and 100 mile courses, you'll find all sorts. You'll have beginners that can't ride a line to save their lives, and then the hard core people that are unwilling to give an inch of room to the newbies. I don't know where you fall in that range, but try and find riders with similar experience and form a group. The good news is that it's a very well supported ride, and given the volume of riders, they do a decent job of coordinating everything. Many of the same volunteers that handle the MS 150 in the Spring (10,000 riders!) also do the Ride for the Roses.

Feel free to PM me once you know your schedule. I'll give you some good BBQ tips while you're here!

 

[Flyinjunk]

I guess 400 NM is way wrong on the range. The discussion was on the EX not the straight 2000.

Nope wrong again.....you were way wrong in compareing a Dassholet to a Gulfstream!

 

[400A]

flyinjunk

I disagree with you. Besed on the mission scenario, the 2000EX is a valid competitor as G100 mentioned. I think we all understand the GIV has more range, however at 3800 IFR, the 2000EX would definately be considered. That still puts it within 10% of the GIV's range.

I see his point.

I also dont see that General Dynamics has done anything to hurt the Gulfstream product line. Not to mention the #1 ranked product support. If more range, more saftey features, and more advanced cock-pits is EFFED-UP as you say then so be it.

 

[Flyinjunk]

I disagree with you. Besed on the mission scenario, the 2000EX is a valid competitor as G100 mentioned. I think we all understand the GIV has more range, however at 3800 IFR, the 2000EX would definately be considered. That still puts it within 10% of the GIV's range.

I see his point.

I also dont see that General Dynamics has done anything to hurt the Gulfstream product line. Not to mention the #1 ranked product support. If more range, more saftey features, and more advanced cock-pits is EFFED-UP as you say then so be it.

"Besed on the mission scenario"


Bro please you are killing me. A 2000ex(cuse) actually making a 3800 nm leg into anything more then a ummmmmm20knot avg headwind uhhhhhhh aint gonna happen!

"I think we all understand the GIV has more range, however at 3800 IFR, the 2000EX would definately be considered."


Want to hear waht me thinks??? shurre it could be considered from an eggheaded beancounting four eyed having perspective. Why ? Because its an over enginered piece of crap.

"If more range, more saftey features, and more advanced cock-pits is EFFED-UP as you say then so be it."

Hey bud calm the EFF down pulleeezzze. I wuz merely reminiszing!