Lear 31A

[stratman560]

Hey guys. Just wondering what the fuel burn numbers are on the Lear 31A. Thanks. Also, things to look out for in the 31 line. AD's, SB's, etc.

Thanks.

 

[sydeseet]

I loved flying that airplane. I would give anything to "have one in my garage" so to speak. The best hand flying airplane I ever flew, hands down.

Now about your questions. Sorry but I don't remember fuel burns that well but recall using 1400 for the first hour, followed by 1000 per hour thereafter if you were up in the mid 40's which is where you need to be get 3+ hours out of a tank of gas. We could make it from the mid-atlantic area to DFW 95% of the time if you managed things correctly and got good climbs and descents. I remember making it home from Denver in 3:20 and landing with a little less than an hour's worth of gas.

Have fun!!!

 

[jergbsn]

I loved flying that airplane. I would give anything to "have one in my garage" so to speak. The best hand flying airplane I ever flew, hands down.

Great Airplane to Hand Fly,,, I agree.

We use 1400 the first hour then, 1200, 1000. Maybe 1500 if your down low for an hour trip.

We've got the raisbeck locker, if that makes a difference.

 

[bbond]

I agree about the best hand flying airplane. Hand flew at FL470 and never even acted up. Numbers are very close on the other guys fuel burns. 3.5 hours you better be VFR and have the gear hangin out and on short final. Needed more gas and baggage space, but overall I loved that airplane. Have fun, you'll love the performance.

 

[ABurgh]

I think I always used 1500 then 1000. Got it up to FL510 a while ago after a few previous failed attempts. Awesome airplane.

 

[Count Dracula]

We use similar numbers for fuel burn. CLT-DAL, no alternate, VMC upon arrival normally landing with around 1000lbs. If the winds are tight, we ask ATC on the ground if they can work out an uninterrupted climb to FL 400 if possible. Then request PD descent and sip as long as possible. Any weather out there and we just plan on a fuel stop. Good airplane, just way too small, but economical. I've flown the ER version with the additional 600lbs of fuel makes a big difference if normally light on bags.

 

[WMUSIGPI]

We generally planned on about 1500 first hour then 1100/1000/Find a gas station. But that was also operating in the Northeast where unrestricted climbs were rare. We would do Pittsburgh area to Miami area all winter no problems. Usually took off within 300 of max weight and climbed right on up to 430, at the one hour mark we asked for 450. Never did go any higer than that. The captain wasn't comfortable with the thought of a depressurization above 450.... Gotta agree with the lack of baggage and the lack of baggage door. We routinely filled the compartment then had to start belting bags on open seats. Not fun in Florida in the summer.
Nicest plane I have ever flown except it can't compare to the roominess of the Avro. I'd put it in the top of it's size class for sure.

 

[Lead Sled]

Personally, I never thought the 31 made much sense. (Although I've never flown one, I've got about 3K hours in 35s.) Granted they'll go high, but from what I've read and heard if you want near 31 performance out of a 35 all you have to do is fly a 35 at 31 weights.

Were we really got a performance increase was when we went from operating the 35 to an Astra. The Astra uses Garrett -3s vs. the Lears -2s so you had a little more thrust per side (200 lbs) and the fuel burn was slightly higher but the performance was an order of magnatude higher - appproximately 2.5 times more cabin volume, 20 knots faster, a good 1000 nm more range, and our operating costs dropped.

LS

 

[GVFlyer]

I did a closed loop handling qualities evaluation of the Lear 31 for my service when I was still in the military. It is essentially a Lear 35/36 fuselage mated to a Lear 28/29 Longhorn wing. While a satisfying airplane to hand-fly, contrary to what some have said, it's control harmony is not that good and pitch forces change with velocity.

The real issue with the jet is that it has no range. Bombardier claims 1455 nm, but I think that 1300 nm is more realistic. If you are going to get anywhere at all, you have to fly it like CJ610 Lear, that is to say in a parabolic arc.

How much money do you have to spend?


GV

 

[LJ45]

The real issue with the jet is that it has no range. Bombardier claims 1455 nm, but I think that 1300 nm is more realistic.

GV

That's not enough range for an entry level jet? Many current jets have that approximate range, like the: BE400, CJ, Premier etc..