Reliability Gulf - Dassault ?

[Senior_Citizen]

Again guys, help us to fly...

My boss has decided to abandon the plan of a mixed fleet (the midsize and the fractional on the GEx while we wait the delivery of the new 7x).

Now he plan to order a G450 or a Falcon 900EX Easy, after talking with the sales man, they offered a good position on the backlog, so the new bird will be delivered on about 11-13 months.

We know about the dispatch record of the Gulfs, also we charted a 900C and our impressions about both birds are excellent.

Also is impressive the Airborne Support of Gulfstream, but Dassalts customers also said they have the best and most flexible warranty (possible Dassault will offer an airborne support program).

The 900's burns very little fuel, has better avionics but a smaller cabin and costs 3 million more equipped with EVS.

The gulf is very reliable, roomier and handsome, but as a some operators commented, some items (not in the 900) requires frequent replacement, also the windshields are expensive, the hydraulic fluid is very corrosive, etc.

I knew here are some certified drivers on both planes.

What is your personal impression about the flying characteristics of each airplane?

Who is easier to fly?

Who is safer to land?

Who is easier (or practical) to maintain?

 

[h25b]

Again guys, help us to fly...

My boss has decided to abandon the plan of a mixed fleet (the midsize and the fractional on the GEx while we wait the deliverry of the new 7x).

Now he plan to order a G450 or a Falcon 900EX Easy, after talking with the sales man, they ofered a good position on the bacaklog, so the new bird will be delivered on about 11-13 monts.

We know about the dispatch record of the Gulfs, also we charted a 900C and our impressions about both birds is excelent.

Also is impressive the Aribone Support of Gulfstream, but Dassalts customes also said they have the best and most flexible waranty (possible Dassault wil offer an airborne support program).

The 900's burns very little fuel, has better avionics but a smaller cabin and costs 3 million more equiped with EVS.

The gulf is very reliable, romier and handsome, but as a some operators commented, some items (not in the 900) requires frequent replacement, also the windshields are expensive, the hidraulic fluid is very corrosive, etc.

I knew here are some certified drivers on both planes.

What is your personal impression about the flying characteristics of each airplane?

Who is easier to fly?

Who is safer to land?

Who is easier (or practical) to mantain?

WHAT ???

Please tell me English is your second language ..

"Aribone Support deliverry" - "romier and handsome" - "hidraulic" - "ofered a good position on the bacaklog"

By the way, all aircraft windshields are expensive ...

 

[Senior_Citizen]

Please tell me English is your second language ..

Sorry by my poor English, I'm not a native English Spoken.

 

[h25b]

Gotcha ...

I think you'll find that on this topic opinions will be unlimited and it will come down to what you value more. (1) Product support... In which case Gulfstream is the way to go, period... (2) Versatility ... Go with the 900EX, period.

If runway limitations is an issue that might be your deal breaker because I've always been led to believe that the Falcon is unmatched. I would PM both Falcon Capt. and GVFlyer with specific mission profiles... Because if you go spend a ton of cash on a bird and it won't go where the boss wants you're going to be in big trouble...

 

[2000flyer]

Getting the crews experience in the 900EASy will go a long way to easing the transition to the 7X, which will also be EASy equipped. DFJ is still trying to get the FAA/EASA to make the "EASy" the type rating, much like the Airbus series and even the Planeview equipped Gulfstreams, and the 50/900. I assume your delivery of the 7X is a couple years out, so that might be resolved by then.

I highly doubt DFJ will offer "airborne support." In our experience, if we can't get counter-to-counter parts same day, they'll be there by 10AM the next morning. We've only had two AOG delays in the 8 years I've been flying the 2000 series.

In my humble opinion, if you've already purchased a 7X, why not get in the 900EASy and get some experience in the DFJ aircraft. You'll be able to build your support and maintenance reps relationship while waiting on your ultimate a/c.

2000Flyer

 

[Senior_Citizen]

if you've already purchased a 7X, why not get in the 900EASy and get some experience in the DFJ aircraft.

No, no plane has been purchased. we only have a CJ2. the purchase is planned for the next month or later depending the conditions.

 

[Dassault Fan]

Buy the 900EX, then the 7X. You will be very glad you did. The 7X will be one hell of an aircraft.

 

[semperfido]

by all means buy the gulfstream. a g450 is nice but a g550 is nicer. who cares about windscreens. 1st rule of thumb= don't believe aircraft salesmen.

What is your personal impression about the flying characteristics of each airplane?

gulfstream flys like a truck when compared to falcon---but who cares.

Who is easier to fly?

non-issue with any competent flight crew

Who is safer to land?

non-issue with any competent flight crew

Who is easier (or practical) to maintain?

gulfstream

 

[Whale Rider]

Gulfstream! There shouldn't even be a question about it.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

Hey guys, if you wanna help, please giveme more arguments, sorry...

Just comments your experiences, not your desires, all of us dreams with the 7X, (also my boss), but we need a big plane earlier than 2008 , also is inminet the launch of a new Cockpit for the Bombardier's Globals identical to the Easy, also with some improvements.

Our situations is the Following, now we have a VW, but we have enough cash for the new announced (hypotetical) Ferrari F7X "Shumacher" , its spectacular, but we can't touch this car until the next Xmas, What we do?, now we think to buy a BMW M6 or a Porsche 911Turbo.

The Gulf's Salesman shows us a unique "ideal" deal: if we contract the G450 and they could sell us and imediately deliver us a 2nds hand G200, we would fly the G200 until the delivery of our G450, the price paid by the G200 would be discounted of the price of the G450, less commissions, depreciancion, etc. The problem with this deal is that the G200 requires more runaway than the G450, and can't land on some of the runaways we used to land, also our crews don't have a G200 rating.

The G450 and the Da900EX covers our performance requirements, we only have doubts about the 900's runaway requeriments on wet surface, the 900 lands slower, but has only one thust reverser.

 

[semperfido]

can you afford a g550? a g450 is just a souped up g4. g200 isn't a gulfstream- no comparison. or just find a nice used g4 to get your feet wet.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

can you afford a g550?

A G500 Maybe, our boss don't need that range, also the 7x's range exceds by far our needs, we have more freedom to choice because our boss don't need to justify the purchase to the stock holders, he considers the 7x by its uniques advantages and 39MM$ isn't much more than 35MM$ for the 900EX.

The 7X flying at .85 has a more realistic 4500-4700nm range.

Our crews (and me) prefers the falcon, but all of us valuate the G450.

Also we ear rumours (from good source), about the launch of a Falcon "5x", few months after or before the 7x's certification, the Falcon 5x is the same 7x but tuned for faster transatlantical flights, and with less usable fuel as the 900DX & 900EX, this plane would replace the 900EX, but this is only speculation, the price also would be cheaper than than 36MM$ if the euro don't rise more than 1.25$.

Whatever my boss don't wanna fly nothing with more than 4000 hr TT, also he is interested on EVS.

 

[semperfido]

evs is a neat toy. it is used about as much as the hud- which is very little. i wouldn't make a purchase based on such things. you won't find BIG round windows in the back of a falcon---that is what pax like.

 

[AA717driver]

In a recent comparison between the 900EX/G500/G450 the G500 had more range but the G450 was about $5M less than the 900 AND the G's have one less engine with a much greater interval between overhauls/major inspections from what I heard at the office...

PM GVflyer and Falcon Capt. for the real info. Take care.TC

 

[2000flyer]

You keep mentioning the "5X." I've searched high and low DFJ's U.S. and French websites and find nothing. An internet search brings up one article in 2002 when even the 7X was an early dream.

I wouldn't be surprised they're considering something like this, however I'm curious where the rampant "rumors" are coming from when even their own websites have no references to it.

Curious,
2000Flyer

 

[Senior_Citizen]

You keep mentioning the "5X." I've searched high and low DFJ's U.S. and French websites and find nothing. An internet search brings up one article in 2002 when even the 7X was an early dream.

I wouldn't be surprised they're considering something like this, however I'm curious where the rampant "rumors" are coming from when even their own websites have no references to it.

Curious,
2000Flyer

What's the surprise? just see the industry's tendences: Gulf launch the G450, then the G350 (the same plane but with less usable fuel), Bombardier launches the GEx, then the G5000 (the same plane but with a shortned fuselage and less fuel usable fuel), also Dassult previously does the same thing with the 900EX and the 900DX.

My sources are't from the web, but if you read this article, you'll find some evidence about I said.

http://www.avbuyer.com/Editorial/Teal Group Aug03.asp

Dassault will have a relatively easier time finding the cash for other new products, probably using the 7X as the nucleus of a family of variant

At the page 50 of this article you'll can found new light

http://www.aviationnow.com/shownews/04nbaa/images/sn_nbaa04_1.pdf
http://www.aviationnow.com/shownews/04nbaa/index.htm

... but with its new wing and concurrent
design and assembly methodology, it is already
being viewed as the base of a new line of jets for
the 21st century.

JOHN ROSANVALLON, PRESIDENT AND CEO, DASSAULT FALCON

 

[Senior_Citizen]

Ahh Ok the "5X" name is mere speculation, but the refered plane is underway

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Hey guys, if you wanna help, please giveme more arguments, sorry...

Just comments your experiences, not your desires, all of us dreams with the 7X, (also my boss), but we need a big plane earlier than 2008 , also is inminet the launch of a new Cockpit for the Bombardier's Globals identical to the Easy, also with some improvements.

Our situations is the Following, now we have a VW, but we have enough cash for the new announced (hypotetical) Ferrari F7X "Shumacher" , its spectacular, but we can't touch this car until the next Xmas, What we do?, now we think to buy a BMW M6 or a Porsche 911Turbo.

The Gulf's Salesman shows us a unique "ideal" deal: if we contract the G450 and they could sell us and imediately deliver us a 2nds hand G200, we would fly the G200 until the delivery of our G450, the price paid by the G200 would be discounted of the price of the G450, less commissions, depreciancion, etc. The problem with this deal is that the G200 requires more runaway than the G450, and can't land on some of the runaways we used to land, also our crews don't have a G200 rating.

The G450 and the Da900EX covers our performance requirements, we only have doubts about the 900's runaway requeriments on wet surface, the 900 lands slower, but has only one thust reverser.

where can you land your 450 that you cant land a G200? thats sounds odd to me...

Dont take the G200 in for any period of time, all you will do is turn your company off from corporate aviation.

While waiting for delivery of a 450 or a 550 you can certainly lease a used one.

G200 - JUST SAY NO.

Also regarding the 900EX. Great airplane but YES that one TR issue is a real concern IMHO and it certainly has caused us to not take it into runways that Dassaults numbers "work" on...but we have other a/c. Take a glance at the contaminated runway required for landing in a 900EX. If I recall, it is something like 350% of the dry runway number.....in other words, to abide by the book - you cant land a 900EX on a contaminated runway less than 9-10K feet. Nice.

 

[Senior_Citizen]

where can you land your 450 that you cant land a G200? thats sounds odd to me...

Really the problem isn't the landing, but to T.O. and fly 2700 nm as we ussualy do from a 3000ft heigh and 6500ft long runaway in hot day, its impossible, we would need to t.o. on minimal fuel and land on a near longer sea level runaway, so if we can not T.O. we can not to land. its a practical appoach.

it is something like 350% of the dry runway number...

thanks for this data. do you know the respective dry runaway numbers for the GIV/G400/G450 ?

 

[sleepy]

Buy the 900EX, then the 7X. You will be very glad you did. The 7X will be one hell of an aircraft.

Yes, yes! It's a no-brainer, if you are going to buy the 7x, then get the 900EX Easy now. The Falcon has better flying qualities, better performance, and a nicer cabin. Our pilots that fly both (GV and DA-900) prefer the Falcon.