Lear 70 ?

[LR60BOY]

We were talking about this a year or so ago Hawk, and I chimed in then.

First, the 60 could use a re-wing job as all of us that fly it know how quick it can run out of wing. If for nothing else but to get some good wheels and brakes.

But it's going to need much more than just a 45 wing. That wing is essentially designed to carry 21,000 lbs and loaded up a 60 is almost 3k more than that.

Secondly, the 60 can't tolerate any reduction in wing fuel. The 45 carries only 6k of fuel. How much of that is wing-only?

Now, if the 45 wing was redesigned to carry say, 2000 lbs of fuel per wing and strengthened to support a gross weight of 27,000 lbs, then you'd have an airplane.

An APU equiped 60 is a 4 pax plane topped off. Folks want a couple more seats usable for longer range trips.

If we could get 9k of fuel and a 27k gross on a re-wing job then we'd have a plane that can do NY-SFO and SFO-PHNL. And that's how a project like this should be looked at.

If the 60 gets re-winged and it only results is some good wheels and brakes and a few more miles down range, it's a big waste of time and money, IMO.

Hmmmmmmmmm.........."An APU equipped 60 is a 4 pax airplane topped off." I beg to differ. I'm operating a late serial # and my BOW is 15200. Yes. it's heavy! Add 7800#'s of gas to that and you're at 23000#. MTOW is 23500#. By my math, that's 2 pax and light overnight bags at best.

Now, MRW is 23750#, so you add the 2 extra pax for a total of 4 with full fuel. Now you have to burn 250#'s of gas before you can takeoff and your not a full airplane anymore.

Just my opinion, I know that there are lighter airplanes out there. The BOW on my old airplane was 14600.

 

[ultrarunner]

We're at 14,900. And we don't hesitate to use ramp-weight. A bit of APU usage and a two engine taxi, and you can make T/O weight. So we can put in 800 lbs...900 if I leave the raft, which I never do. We're not flying fat slobs. Your slob-value may vary.

 

[Mercury]

We'll see what the braintrust in Bombardier come up with.... A double club lear with SFO-PHNL would be a hot seller if it didn't encroach on the CL300 too much.

Glad you brough that up......
Interesting story from a CL300 demo pilot---I asked him why in the world would BAS sell a 3000nm aircraft and only give it one of everything as standard equip.(1 FMS, 1 GPS, 1 DME,) and his reply was "They designed the a/c too well and it would have eaten into the 604/605 market if it would have come fully equipped. So now the customer is forced to make a decision, $22 mil(after options and extra equip) for an 8 pax 3000 nm a/c or pony up the bucks for a 10 pax 3800nm a/c that is fully equipped."

As much as I would like to see a more capable LR60 size a/c, I really dont have a lot of faith in Bombardier.

 

[devine9driver]

Our sales rep gave us a pretty good scoop on the proposed Lear 70. Said hopefully to be announced at this years NBAA, but not sure. Aircraft is said to be 3 feet shorter than the CL300, with a stand up cabin and 2800NM range. It will have Collins avionics probably the epic package. The price according to our rep will be 15mil when it launches in late 2010 early 2011.

 

[Wiggums]

The Lear 60 and the Challenger 605 should go away. What a waste of money to Proline 21 those things while the Global has the oldest avionics of the whole lineup. The 60 can be replaced by taking the Challenger 300, calling it the 250, and taking some gas out of it. Maybe shorten it up and make it seat seven instead of nine. The 605 can be replaced by taking the 300, upping the thrust some and adding the amount of gas it should of had so it has 4000nm range. Want a bigger cabin? The extend the Global range so you have a 4000 model that also has 4000nm range but with the big cabin.

Two less airplanes to support and maybe Bombardier can stock parts and beat someone other the Saberliner in the satisfaction survey.

The 605 and 60 are money makers because the tooling was paid off long ago, but they are no longer competitive. The 60XR is a total hack job. APU is still fussy, it's the same wing, and even the Proline 21 is only half installed. The ICAS didn't make it, so you still have annunciators.

 

[Dinger]

The Lear 60 and the Challenger 605 should go away. What a waste of money to Proline 21 those things while the Global has the oldest avionics of the whole lineup. The 60 can be replaced by taking the Challenger 300, calling it the 250, and taking some gas out of it. Maybe shorten it up and make it seat seven instead of nine. The 605 can be replaced by taking the 300, upping the thrust some and adding the amount of gas it should of had so it has 4000nm range. Want a bigger cabin? The extend the Global range so you have a 4000 model that also has 4000nm range but with the big cabin.

Two less airplanes to support and maybe Bombardier can stock parts and beat someone other the Saberliner in the satisfaction survey.

The 605 and 60 are money makers because the tooling was paid off long ago, but they are no longer competitive. The 60XR is a total hack job. APU is still fussy, it's the same wing, and even the Proline 21 is only half installed. The ICAS didn't make it, so you still have annunciators.

How can you say the 605 is no longer competitive. It offers a legit internatioal aircraft at 9-10 mil less than the global 5000. If you start moding the 300, you increase your manufacturing expenses for no reason. You already are making planes to fit that market.

I don't know anything about the 60, but the 605(604) offers a great size cabin and good range. Dispatch reliability is incredible and it is a good solid airplane to fly.

 

[Wiggums]

Gulfstream builds the 350 to compete with the 605, which is basically a less capable 450. Same idea making a smaller, less capable Global.

When you look at the performance of the Challenger 300 it's clear that the airframe could easily carry another 3000-4000# of fuel. Many of the current performance charts go out to about 4000# over the current gross and there are still few limitations. Basically, the Challenger could fly 4000# over it's current gross and would climb higher and burn less gas then the 605. Right now the 300 only carries gas in the wings, it doesn't even have a center tank yet.

The Challenger 300 is already taking sales from the 60 and 605, so you won't see a 300XR until the 605 goes away.

 

[Dinger]

People who are flying in a 600 series Challenger right now are NOT going to step down to a smaller cabin without making some noise and buying a different product. If you were to stretch the 300 (a great airplane) to get the range out of it, you still have a smaller cabin. The Challenger series offers the widest cabin in the industry. The cabin size alone, I believe, warrants its production for quite a few more years.

 

[hawkerjet]

The Gulfstream 350 is the same airplane as the 450 minus a few options. The range is less than the 450 because they learned a lesson from the G IIB/GIII debacle. The 350 has a plug in the tank to limit it's range to 3800 and thus compete directly with the Falcon 2000EX.