Legacy Bashfest - Bring it on!

[LegacyDriver]

N928CW (145528) One of the largest business jets, yet you can't stand up in the cabin even if you are of average height. What's up with that?




I'm glad you posted this picture of a LEGACY I. Notice the windshield wipers, non-faired wheels, lack of aileron/flap seals, and absence of forward intake doors, among other things, all of which are significant drag improvement changes standardized on the Legacy II (http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=721971&size=L&sok=V0hFUkUgIChhaXJjcmFmdCA9ICdFbWJyYWVyIEVSSi0xMzUgTGVnYWN5JykgIE9SREVSIEJZIHBob3RvX2lkIERFU0M%3D&photo_nr=7). At least my "opinion" on these matters is fact.

 

[CatYaaak]

........ The Legacy winglets do their job. The improve CRUISE efficiency. Period. Nuff said.

As for cabin height... How much time does one actually spend standing up in an airplane any way? Not much. If we look at our shrinking population (immigration and so forth are just dragging the average U.S. height down--Norway is now #1 we are #2) then the Legacy cabin accomodates over 90+% of the population and as we shrink it will only accomodate more...so let the other 5-10% decide if it is that important to them. Perhaps they need a BBJ.

My Yak-40 don't need no stinkin' winglets or sissy strakes! It's performance rivals or equals the WSCoD's due to superior collectivist engineering, and not only is it FAR more durable because it's a REAL "real airliner" (unlike your tinker toy-ish Brazilia Spawn), it's also roomy enough for 99.99999999% of people and 99.99999998% of Norwegians to do the Cossack-kick Dance routine including the full-body extention part when everyone shouts "HEY!".

And the Legacyski does all this for far less $$$ than your WSCoD. Period, comrade. 'Nuff said.

"If Lenin's in Heaven,
then unused by his side,
Angel's Wings he was issued.
A Yak-40's his Ride!"

 

[AA717driver]

How much time do people stand up on corporate planes? As often as they want to and they pay big bucks to be able to do so.

The population is shrinking due to immigration. Ok, when those swimming across the Rio Grande start buying large cabin jets, I'll give Embraer a call.

Until then, I'd stick to trying to sell Willy Wonka an airplane...TC

 

[GVFlyer]

WSCoD

Talk about opinions... "Poorly engineered winglets on the Legacy"? Dude, I love how your opinions are considered facts.

Facts are facts. Properly engineered winglets don't introduce adverse aerodynamic qualities that require aerodynamic patches (like strakes) to fix. On the Legacy, the after-the-fact winglets were a trade-off that marginally increased range, but made the aircraft less stable in so doing.

I thought this was a rhetorical question since our resident "test pilot" (HA!) should know this. But...

There are other members of SETP who frequent this board.

Winglets are designed to be efficient in cruise. In high-AOA and/or low airspeed conditions winglets are not operating in their target regime. All winglets (at least until full-circle winglets come out, and they, too will probably suffer when slow), including those on the G-Whiz, have some tradeoffs for low speed/high AOA conditions. In the Legacy's case it is a stability issue. Hence the strakes.

Nicely stated, but your assumptions about the GV/ G550 are wrong. Please advise us as to what you think these trade-offs on the Gulfstream might be. With 30,770 lbs of thrust the jet can achieve extreme pitch angles while maintaining low alpha. The GV has been flown from 74 knots to Mach 1.07 without the need for strakes, vortilons are other aerodynamic patches.

The Legacy winglets do their job. The improve CRUISE efficiency. Period. Nuff said.

It would be, "Nuff said", if the add-on winglets didn't make the Legacy divergent in yaw.

There is a world of difference between a wing initially designed as a straight wing which later has a compromise winglet cobbled on, as on the Legacy, and a wing that was designed to include a winglet.

The 93.47 foot GV wing was developed with winglets by Gulfstream scientists using NASA Blended Winglet Theory on the same Boeing computers that had been used for 777 development. Final development was accomplished at the NASA Langley wind tunnel where the wing was idealized for it's operating environment. It is a technologically advanced design unmatched by any T-category aircraft wing in the industry.

The GV wing was the first application of jointly developed NASA / Gulfstream Micro Vortices Generators allowing a lighter design, greater camber and more interior volume. The entire top surface is a single bonded piece of extruded aluminum using a Vought proprietary process called age creeping. It is an all lifting design including the radius going into the winglet, there are no washed-in or washed-out areas and no stalled regions. The winglets are a NASA design which provide a forward thrust vector. There are no leading edge devices required to provide a minimum Vref of 110 knots or any canoes needed to hide flap gear. The nominal sweep provides benign Dutch Roll characteristics which allow the G550 to be flown at 51,000 feet without a yaw damper. The wing, from it's inception, was designed to be a high speed, high altitude, high efficiency device embodying the latest NASA and Gulfstream technology.

The GV was flown to Mach 1.07 during developmental test with no buffet or adverse Mach effects. Aerodynamic center of pressure moved to 50% MAC and a shock wave formed ahead of the aileron trim tab rendering aileron trim inoperative. Another shock wave formed ahead of the elevators with the same effect, but the all moving tail remained effective for pitch control.

The true proof of a wing design is in how the aircraft performs. The G550 at maximum gross weight, 91,000 lbs., will always initially climb to at least 41,000 feet. 51,000 feet is available for up to the last 3 hours of flight. With 8 passengers, the G550 will fly 6750 nm at M.80, 6500 nm at M.83, 6000 nm at M.85 and 5,000 nm at M.87.

The jet will do M 0.84 at FL490 while burning only 1200 lbs a side. At 51,000 feet the jet can burn as little as 962.5 lbs a side!

As for cabin height... How much time does one actually spend standing up in an airplane any way? Not much. If we look at our shrinking population (immigration and so forth are just dragging the average U.S. height down--Norway is now #1 we are #2) then the Legacy cabin accomodates over 90+% of the population and as we shrink it will only accomodate more...so let the other 5-10% decide if it is that important to them. Perhaps they need a BBJ.

Actually, the most recent anthropometry studies show the US population to be getting taller and heavier. Here's a statistic from that study that will keep you awake at night: "The average woman in the United States is 5"4" tall and weights 164 pounds."

Now, how about answering my question about why the Gulfstream fuselage warranty is 400% longer than the Legacy's.

OK, you give? It's for the same reason the Legacy doesn't have roll control spoilers. The Legacy was designed to be cheap and light. Spoilers would increase complexity, weight and cost. The strength needed to make a jet warrantied for 20 years requires structure which increases weight which increases passenger seat mile cost. The driving force behind EMB 145/ EMB 135 / Legacy development was keeping passenger seat mile costs down and acquisition costs low.

GV

 

[HawkDrvr]

Will this thread PLEASE DIE... LegacyDriver can't get over the fact that his airplane is essentially a polished t%rd.

Trying to compare it to the GV is like me comparing my ever expanding beer gut to Brad Pit's abs. Lets move on...

 

[AA717driver]

The Legacy isn't a polished turd. But it certainly isn't what LD initially asserted in the other thread that spawned this one. The Legacy is not simply a low-cost equivalent to the Gulfstream/Global families.

DOCTOR KEVORKIAN TO THIS THREAD--STAT!!! TC

 

[HawkDrvr]

Love the new Avatar man... Was it time to move on from the other woman ???

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

The GV was flown to Mach 1.07 during developmental test with no buffet or adverse Mach effects.

That was an accident during testing, but still proved the airplane's ability.

Ace

P.S. Man, you write long posts - you must have a lot of spare time.

 

[LegacyDriver]

The Legacy isn't a polished turd. But it certainly isn't what LD initially asserted in the other thread that spawned this one. The Legacy is not simply a low-cost equivalent to the Gulfstream/Global families.

DOCTOR KEVORKIAN TO THIS THREAD--STAT!!! TC

717 I respect that you are at least level-headed and refrain from slurs and slanders, but...

For the "average" Gulfstream IV (450 or whatever) and V mission it *is*. Namely coast-to-coast USA, or USA to Europe, etc.. The airplane does 3200 NM without breaking a sweat for half the price of a Gulfstream (V acquisition, IV and V DOC--and I have yet to talk to anyone in the real world who thinks the V is anywhere close to the Legacy in DOC). For many people (including my boss) it *is* an alternative. That's my point. Alternative doth not mean EQUIVALENT. It is obviously not the exact same airplane for half the money...

You guys either don't know how to read or INTENTIONALLY mis-read every point I make. As I said, the Legacy can compete with just about every airplane in one area or another. It doesn't necessarily compete with every airplane in every area or with one airplane in every area, but there is enough performance and affordability there to make it a viable option in the majority of cases.

 

[LegacyDriver]

I'll give you an answer...

A warranty is a strange thing. If something doesn't break in the near term it is going to last a very very long time. With many products there comes a point where a warranty is more expensive than self-insurance is.

The Legacy warranty is shorter because the Legacy doesn't break and the parts are so inexpensive that there isn't a need for a warranty any way. Meanwhile, since the Gulfstream is a giant, overpriced, flying turd, replacing parts is like having brain surgery--nobody can afford it without insurance.


Also, I do not believe the G-IV was designed for winglets from the get go. Hence, as I stated previously, it has tradeoffs for the envelope outside cruise. In the case of the V I find it *highly* dubious to assert that any wing is as efficient at one end of the envelope as it is at the other. The thought that any winglet is equally adept at performing in cruise as it is on approach is ludicrous at best.