• NC Software is having a Black Friday Sale Event thru December 4th on Logbook Pro, APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook, Cirrus Elite Binders, and more. Use coupon code BF2020 at checkout to redeem 15% off your purchase. Click here to shop now.
  • NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.

NetJets 2000EX

ultrarunner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
4,324
Total Time
10000
This is interesting...especially when you do the math...

".....On Sunday July 24th 2005 the Falcon 2000EX flew its 1st passenger leg....The Bangor-Venice trip was 7 hours and 19 minutes and the aircraft landed with over 3,500lbs of fuel on board (nearly 2 hours of fuel remaining).

...Yesterday the Falcon 2000EX flew from Le Bourget Cedex-Paris to Columbus, OH, non-stop with a flight time of 9 hours and 16 minutes....

Hmmmm....how slow did they have to go to keep that beast in the air for 9.3 hours...

...prly not an accident they didn't post the block-in fuel in that second statement...


It had to be thin!

Would some 2000EX experts chime in. I'm reluctant to tell my boss stuff like that, since he'll expect it. We are considering this airplane. Could you have done Legourget - CMH faster going at a higher mach and making a stop?
 

Starman

Truthsayer
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
Posts
211
Total Time
'nuff
The vast majority of our "A Team" or "Go-To Team" or "I'll Do Anything" guys are in the Falcon. Who needs rules when your an "A Teamer?"
 

ETDTBA

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Posts
31
Total Time
some
ultrarunner said:
This is interesting...especially when you do the math...

".....On Sunday July 24th 2005 the Falcon 2000EX flew its 1st passenger leg....The Bangor-Venice trip was 7 hours and 19 minutes and the aircraft landed with over 3,500lbs of fuel on board (nearly 2 hours of fuel remaining).

...Yesterday the Falcon 2000EX flew from Le Bourget Cedex-Paris to Columbus, OH, non-stop with a flight time of 9 hours and 16 minutes....

Hmmmm....how slow did they have to go to keep that beast in the air for 9.3 hours...

...prly not an accident they didn't post the block-in fuel in that second statement...


It had to be thin!

Would some 2000EX experts chime in. I'm reluctant to tell my boss stuff like that, since he'll expect it. We are considering this airplane. Could you have done Legourget - CMH faster going at a higher mach and making a stop?



M77, landing with 1600lbs, perfectly legal
 

learflyer

Time to drill Congress!
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
1,587
Total Time
5000+
Did they have to repo to LA after that? They did have about 5 hours of duty time left! (Something Options would do)
 

Fracster

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
208
Total Time
Enough
Definately dont go on what those NJA EX guys did. Those guys are the top of the seniority list and every bit the "A" teamers at NetJets. If the company asks, they'll do it. If its ????? they'll still do it. They have been at NJA for all these years for a reason...something in their background wouldnt let them get another job.
 

ultrarunner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
4,324
Total Time
10000
learflyer said:
Did they have to repo to LA after that? They did have about 5 hours of duty time left! (Something Options would do)

Flight time was limiting..not duty.
 

2000flyer

EASY FLYER
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
1,586
Total Time
5700+
Jeppesen said:
M77, landing with 1600lbs, perfectly legal

Well, maybe...

I tried running the flight plan at M77, M74 and LRC this afternoon and could not arrive with any fuel (figured zero reserve). Book values show the trip at M77 (no wind) arriving with 1836#. Fuel to 100NM alternate was 1483. Not leaving much room for error. I didn't even look if there was a wet footprint.

A crew did Maui-Nassau not long ago in a litte over 9 hours and had ~1200 remaining. That was with a significant tailwind and flying at M74.

While they may have been "legal" they may also have been "foolish."
 

FracCapt

Clown punchers, unite!
Joined
Mar 11, 2004
Posts
1,415
Total Time
18+yrs
2000flyer said:
Book values show the trip at M77 (no wind) arriving with 1836#. Fuel to 100NM alternate was 1483. Not leaving much room for error.

I'm not defending the crew that flew the trip....nor do I have ANY experience with the 2000.....but do they really need an alternate if the weather is good for landing at CMH, with multiple airports within 20NM that they could put a 2000 down at? I would hope that, if they were landing that light, they checked the weather along the way over the Northeast, and planned a landing short of CMH if weather and/or airport conditions dictated.
 

Diesel

TEB Hilton resident
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,394
Total Time
696969
Why keep the thing in the air that long?

How about highspeed cruise to bgr then highspeed to cmh.

What is the big deal about going non stop. Especially when an ultra is passing you.
 

Flying Illini

Hit me Peter!
Joined
Mar 9, 2003
Posts
2,291
Total Time
6000
Diesel said:
Why keep the thing in the air that long?

How about highspeed cruise to bgr then highspeed to cmh.

What is the big deal about going non stop. Especially when an ultra is passing you.
To say that they did it? It's a psychological thing, going non-stop to the pax is faster than making a stop...even if it isn't true.
 

ETDTBA

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Posts
31
Total Time
some
Flying Illini said:
To say that they did it? It's a psychological thing, going non-stop to the pax is faster than making a stop...even if it isn't true.

I didn't even know an Ultra could go M77. ahahha

If they would have bumped it up to 82 they probably would have saved 15 minutes in the air. The increased fuel burn would have required a stop, probably an hour in Gander or BGR. So they would have burned more fuel, increased the total travel time and put additional cycles on the aircraft. You guys should be happy. It's efficient and not wasting company money, unless of course you count a 9.3 hour ferry as a waste of money. The flights were "test" flights though. I can't think of the proper terminology right now. Proving flights maybe??

If was the crews choice to go non-stop, I haven't met a pilot with-out an ego that needs stroking. hahaha
 

learflyer

Time to drill Congress!
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
1,587
Total Time
5000+
Ultra Grump said:
Good thing the Beechjunk gives you 2 fer 1, huh? :D

True dat......I think citation types give ya a whole bunch too.!
 

CRAWDADDY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Posts
264
Total Time
18,XXX
Fracster said:
They have been at NJA for all these years for a reason...something in their background wouldnt let them get another job.

Sad, but true. Often it's something the company that put in their file and often it's a bunch of BS. I know... A bizzare way to get loyalty. Like the scabs we have here who would probably support ASAP if they weren't already blacklisted. They have no where else to go!
 
Top