Legacy Bashfest - Bring it on!

[banned username 2]

FACT - the production Legacy II is a lighter, cleaner, longer-ranged airplane than the Legacy I (many of which went to Options I believe) and the prototypes used for flight test and performance,

FACT - Those airplanes all weighed in excess of 30000 lbs BOW. My Legacy weighs a shade over 29000 BOW (and each Legacy built has incorporated drag and weight improvements over the one before it). OPINION!

FACT - Virtually every pound of weight saved went to payload. Changes internally to the airplane have added significantly to the fuel capacity over the Legacy I and the prototype. OPINION!

FACT - The interior on the last airplane (I saw 809) is superior to those previous esp. The I and the prototype. OPINION!

FACT - The II is quieter. Insulation and wiper removal have significantly toned it down up front. No more DCs. OPINION!

FACT - FL410 capability will improve the numbers on the airplane a great deal more over the book values. OPINION!

These are the facts. Just the BOW weight reduction alone amounts to roughly three percent! Any idiot can see this will help the airplane perform better even ignoring the drag reduction program. OPINION!

As for going when the books say we won't make it... I base that decision on accumulated performance data and then make judgment based on what hapens when we get up there. If it looks like I will be able to skip a fuel stop because of a greater than expected tailwind I keep going and vice versa. Who doesn't? As yet the full performance data has been dead on accurate--and better than the book. That is good enough for me.

OPINION!

 

[GVFlyer]

First of all I wonder where you are pulling out those DOC/hour costs.

The Direct Operating Costs are from Conklin & de Decker Fall 2004, the acknowledged source for business aviation data. The data from the engineers in Gulfstream Sales Engineering / Technical Marketing is more accurate, but a.) It is proprietary and b.) I doubt you would believe it anyways.

Secondly our min direct alt is going to be 410 in January (I believe). That wipes out that argument.

Conklin & de Decker gives you an initial altitude of FL370 with the AE 3007 A1E engines rated at 7,953 lbs thrust.

The Embraer website says the Legacy has to spend 2 hours at FL390 before it can step up to FL410.

http://www.legacybyembraer.com/english/content/executive/mission.asp

Thirdly, that extra 7m bucks would earn quite a lot of interest if invested or pay for a lot of gas.

Listen up this time; as I told you before a 100% capitalized lease is available from GFS or GECAP if that better meets your financial requirements. What that means is that there is no initial capital outlay. You just start paying the lease.
To make it more simple, there is no $6.35 million for you to wisely invest, nor the $21.15 initial expenditure you would make to buy a Legacy.


By the way, did you notice the substantial performance, size and comfort advantage you acquire with the Gulfstream for the $6.35 million differential in price between it and the Legacy? I would call it money well spent.


GV

 

[GVFlyer]

"The average rate of return for the Dow is TEN percent (I ran the numbers with a conservative seven percent for error)."

Over the past five years, today's date over date, the rate of return on the:

DJI = almost exactly 0%

S&P 500 = approximately -3%

NASDAQ = approximately -50%

In the current economic climate it might be unwise to expect a sudden market reversal in the near term.

The usual comparitor when making the sorts of investment assumptions you indicate is the risk free rate. That is, the rate currently available on long term US government securities. This rate is aproximately 4%.

Smith Barney is history, my investment account is going to be managed by AcroChik!

GV

 

[AcroChik]

Who's Your Mommy?

"I hit the enter key 11 times by mistake on this PDA's microscopic keyboard. Even with the error I am still underestimating the interest by millions.."

13 million compounded at 7% over an 11 year term is 27,363 million, not 27.54 million as you claim.

Again, just 180,000 of some billionaire's money, but critical when playing with other people's cash. And key to the credibility of the arguments you make for your airplane.

CFOs with critical impact on purchase decisions will not appreciate your magical thinking. EMB sales and financing people might even wish you'd go away.

Further, when valuing assets in the way you propose, the impacts of depreciable life, PITI (principal, interest, taxation, insurance), and numerous other variables are part of the modelling.

When financial analysts propose alternate application of capital in fixed asset valuation models, US Treasury securities are the benchmark comparitor, not something as variable as an equities index such as the DJI. Among the many reasons for this, a fixed asset has predictable, stable value, more similar to the predictability of a fixed income security such as T Bills, though of course not as liquid.

As I said earlier, though I have a lot of hours for my age, I'm just a puke CFII and know my place on this board. I've never flown a Gulfstream or a WSCOD ~ but I hope to one day. On those topics, I ask questions and let the captians speak.

When it comes to mathematics and financial analysis, my suggestion to you is, "Down boy." You're just hurting your arguments.

 

[CatYaaak]

And the Spankfest continues..

"... EMB sales and financing people might even wish you'd go away..."

Wow AcroChik, I don't understand half of what you just wrote, but I know a severe spanking when I see one administered.

And if, for a moment, you'll allow yourself to represent the other "chiks" of your caliber I may have been in close proximity to in the past, let me take this opportunity to apologize for all those times I tried to copy your test answers in class and thank you for the times I was able to. Like them, you should have been issued at least 2 diplomas.

 

[LegacyDriver]

*Yawn* My PDA still comes up with.my number not yours be it ten years or eleven. Anyone who doubts one or the other break out a calculator. The point remains.

As for the "opinion" rant, these are facts. That you refuse to acknowledge them says more about you than it does about me.

There were changes to the fuel system that are documented in the AOM. I do not recall the S/N offhand but can easily look. Fire suppressive foam was removed from the forward tanks providing weight reduction and added capacity. This is fact.

The wipers were removed and insulation added to the cockpit reducing noise. This is FACT. It was a measured and significant change.

The weight saved went directly to payload--fuel for the insulation and wing changes. If it did not go to payload/useful load, where did it go moron?

The Legacy I weighs a thousand pounds more than my airplane. My understanding is 809 (the last one built that I am aware of) weighs 29,460ish. This is lighter than PT-SAB which was 30,500 range. FACT.

Also, perhaps I misunderstand the definition of min direct altitude. I go to 390 direct every time I can get it. I see no prohibition against it in the AOM at max gross weight.

 

[fokkerjet]

*Yawn* My PDA still comes up with.my number not yours be it ten years or eleven. Anyone who doubts one or the other break out a calculator. The point remains.

As for the "opinion" rant, these are facts. That you refuse to acknowledge them says more about you than it does about me.

Also, perhaps I misundersdtand the definition of min direct altitude. I go to 390 direct every time I can get it. I see no prohibition against it in the AOM.

Yeah........what ever!

AcroChik. You own any leather?

 

[banned username 2]

*Yawn* My PDA still comes up with.my number not yours be it ten years or eleven. Anyone who doubts one or the other break out a calculator. The point remains.

As for the "opinion" rant, these are facts. That you refuse to acknowledge them says more about you than it does about me.

There were changes to the fuel system that are documented in the AOM. I do not recall the S/N offhand but can easily look. Fire suppressive foam was removed from the forward tanks providing weight reduction and added capacity. This is fact.

The wipers were removed and insulation added to the cockpit reducing noise. This is FACT. It was a measured and significant change.

The weight saved went directly to payload--fuel for the insulation and wing changes. If it did not go to payload/useful load, where did it go moron?

The Legacy I weighs a thousand pounds more than my airplane. My understanding is 809 (the last one built that I am aware of) weighs 29,460ish. This is lighter than PT-SAB which was 30,500 range. FACT.

Also, perhaps I misunderstand the definition of min direct altitude. I go to 390 direct every time I can get it. I see no prohibition against it in the AOM at max gross weight.

You aren't providing any documentation or sources of your information, just your own opinion...

Everyone else is using facts and figures from manufactures web sites...

Still waiting...

 

[LegacyDriver]

13 million compounded at 7% over an 11 year term is 27,363 million, not 27.54 million as you claim.

Again, just 180,000 of some billionaire's money, but critical when playing with other people's cash. And key to the credibility of the arguments you make for your airplane.

I cannot believe I even have to post these #s...

Simple interest at seven percent compounded annually:

13
14.883
15.925
17.040
18.233
19.509
20.875
22.336
23.899
25.572
27.363

These are the numbers I have used from the get go. If you saw something else it was a typo.
Not that these facts will cause anyone to jump on you for being a moron. Jump my case and you get a free pass on making stupid mistakes with this crowd.

 

[LegacyDriver]

Quote soirces?? How about the w/b data from the airplanes themselves and the AOM???? You do not get any more definitive than that!