Large Cabin Aircraft opinions wanted

[bigD]

I think the real question that needs to be answered here is whether or not the plane can get in and out the BBQ mecca of the U.S. (Llano, TX), as well as how much BBQ it can haul out of there.


I'd be willing to bet that the 900EX beats the Gulfstream pretty easily here - especially given the Gulfstream's 500 pound useful load penalty due to the added weight of the pilots' egos.

 

[longrangekiller]

So far all of the comments are good.


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.

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)

With that said, it is the only airplane that you can purchase NEW for less than $28 million and have operating costs below $1500/HR. The cabin is very comfortable for 8 people. If you get above that it would get crowded for long flights. The galley is the same size as the as the 900 and the airplane also has about 1/3 more baggage space.

Life is good when you are buying up. No matter what your flight department does life will only get better for you.

Good luck with you decision.

 

[GVFlyer]

So far all of the comments are good.

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.

When we were evaluating the Challenger and the GIV at Andrews AFB we flew the Gulfstream first which, when we got to the Challenger, made it feel as if it were operating single-engine.

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.

If three-engined airplanes were a good idea then someone in addition to Dassault would make them.

The current Conklin and DeDecker hourly Direct Operating Costs for the two aircraft are as follows:

Gulfstream G450 - $1744

Falcon 900EX - $1688

Remember that the G450 is a much larger jet. (75,000 v. 49.2 with a tip of the hat to Falcon Captain).

It is difficult to come by recent statistical information on the failure rate of TFE-731's as Dassault has clamped down on Allied Signal and they no longer release this information.

The G450 is not ETOPS certified (ETOPS applies only to Part 121 aircraft), but the jet meets double the ETOPS 180 requirements, which is a testiment to it's reliability.

As AA717 has suggested the pre-owned G-IV market is a hot one right now and the aircraft are demanding a premium price.

GV

 

[banned username 2]

It is difficult to come by recent statistical information on the failure rate of TFE-731's as Dassault has clamped down on Allied Signal and they no longer release this information.

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...

 

[xrated]

A lot of used Boeings parked in the desert. Get one cheep and use all the extra scratch on interior and fuel. The boss would love the room in a 747-200.

 

[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.