Reliability Gulf - Dassault ?

[2000flyer]

...There was nothing mechanically wrong with this G-IV...

GEX,
Who the hell said anything about it being mechanically wrong? If you review my post it certainly wasn't me.

For the sake of argument (a major understatement of this thread) only one GIV has had a fatal accident, FINE. So, we have GIV: 1 - DA900EX: 1. This somehow makes Gulfstreams by and large a superior product??? Now there is some logic for you.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised with such a spirited group of aviators amassed here who are loyal to the products they fly. If tomorrow your (or my) company switched aircraft to a Falcon or Gulfstream, I'd bet you a keg of your favorite beer you'd be more than glad to fly it!

Respectfully,
2000Flyer

 

[TIS]

If the pilot had not grabbed ahold of the yoke while the AP was engauged none of this would have happened.

Gee, that's nice. A plane which, if the autopilot is engaged while the pilot tries to prevent it from behaving badly (i.e. trim runaway), develops a problem that may result in fatalities. That's some fine engineering!

That wouldn't happen on a Gulfstream - PERIOD!

But I digress. The AQ unit is there for a reason and it isn't because the engineers thought it would be nice to have along for the flight. It's there to fix something that would prevent certification if not addressed.

It is often stated that Falcons fly really nicely and, not having flown one, I can't really say. However, one of the reasons it flies the way it does is because it has a magic little box that no one seems to understand the construction or function of that prevents pilots from overcontrolling the plane at high speeds. The Greek accident demonstrates that when that little gem goes inop the result is an airplane with unpredictable, or at least masked, control characteristics. Equipment like the AQ unit is there to fix engineering problems pure and simple.

What I know is that though there are countless engineering problems with Gulfstreams (that's what ASCs fix), none of them seem to be potenitally life threatening. So guess what. I prefer the Gulfstream on that basis alone, nevermind the experience of the last ten years of my life.

Zero Compromise. That's what Gulfstream means.

I've seen the advantages of that many, MANY times over the years.

TIS

 

[2000flyer]

Gee, that's nice. A plane which, if the autopilot is engaged while the pilot tries to prevent it from behaving badly (i.e. trim runaway), develops a problem that may result in fatalities. That's some fine engineering!

That wouldn't happen on a Gulfstream - PERIOD!

But I digress. The AQ unit is there for a reason and it isn't because the engineers thought it would be nice to have along for the flight. It's there to fix something that would prevent certification if not addressed.

It is often stated that Falcons fly really nicely and, not having flown one, I can't really say. However, one of the reasons it flies the way it does is because it has a magic little box that no one seems to understand the construction or function of that prevents pilots from overcontrolling the plane at high speeds. The Greek accident demonstrates that when that little gem goes inop the result is an airplane with unpredictable, or at least masked, control characteristics. Equipment like the AQ unit is there to fix engineering problems pure and simple.

What I know is that though there are countless engineering problems with Gulfstreams (that's what ASCs fix), none of them seem to be potenitally life threatening. So guess what. I prefer the Gulfstream on that basis alone, nevermind the experience of the last ten years of my life.

Zero Compromise. That's what Gulfstream means.

I've seen the advantages of that many, MANY times over the years.

TIS

So, the Airbus is a POS, right? B777? Falcon 7X? F16? F22? Each one of these aircraft has systems, subsystems, software, etc., to make them fly better. Just because the boy's in Savannah haven't figured out how to make a truck handle like a Porche is no reason to trash the rest of us.

Pretty bold comments coming from one who admits to never having flown a Falcon.

By the way, that accident wouldn't have happened on the Falcon had the crew followed procedures and disconnected the autopilot rather than force it to something it's not supposed to.

2000Flyer

 

[GEXDriver]

GEX,
If tomorrow your (or my) company switched aircraft to a Falcon or Gulfstream, I'd bet you a keg of your favorite beer you'd be more than glad to fly it!

Respectfully,
2000Flyer

In addition to the Global we have two Falcon 2000 eASY's and a G-IV. By far, I like the G-IV better than the Falcons. I like it's systems, it's redundancy and rugged reliability, plus, it makes the Falcons seem underpowered. Without experience in both types I don't see how you can validly comment on which one is "better".

 

[semperfido]

In addition to the Global we have two Falcon 2000 eASY's and a G-IV. By far, I like the G-IV better than the Falcons. I like it's systems, it's redundancy and rugged reliability, plus, it makes the Falcons seem underpowered. Without experience in both types I don't see how you can validly comment on which one is "better".

 

[G100driver]

A plane which, if the autopilot is engaged while the pilot tries to prevent it from behaving badly (i.e. trim runaway), develops a problem that may result in fatalities. That's some fine engineering!
TIS

Hmmmm, I always thought it was SOP to DISENGAUGE the AP before trying to hand fly the airplane. But I guess that is old school these days.

Zero Compromise. That's what Gulfstream means.

TIS

That is a laugh. Have you seen the full line of Gulstream products. They are filled with compromises. Just ask the guys who are flying international in the new Gulfstreams that only have 2 AHARS with no IRS. You cannot tell me that they are not Gulfstreams. Do know how I know? The Gulstream salesman tried to sell us one.

 

[G100driver]

GEX,

I guess I shouldn't be surprised with such a spirited group of aviators amassed here who are loyal to the products they fly. If tomorrow your (or my) company switched aircraft to a Falcon or Gulfstream, I'd bet you a keg of your favorite beer you'd be more than glad to fly it!
2000Flyer

Hey man, even it is a WSCoD I would fly it. Whatever pays the bill brother!!! Amen. This is all academics.

These stories by the G-men are just another lie perpetrated by the man trying to keep a brother down!

 

[gern_blanston]

Gee, that's nice. A plane which, if the autopilot is engaged while the pilot tries to prevent it from behaving badly (i.e. trim runaway), develops a problem that may result in fatalities.

So if the Gulfstream is descending in V/S mode and you just pull back on the yoke, the autopilot doesn't trim against you or disconnect? Interesting. I learn stuff every day.

... one of the reasons it flies the way it does is because it has a magic little box that no one seems to understand the construction or function of that prevents pilots from overcontrolling the plane at high speeds. The Greek accident demonstrates that when that little gem goes inop the result is an airplane with unpredictable, or at least masked, control characteristics.

Al that little box does is to move the position of the pivot on the artificial-feel unit to vary the amount of spring feedback to the controls an inch or two. Hydraulically in the older planes, electrically in the newer ones. And, again, having flown the '2000 with the Q-unit stuck in the high-sensitivity position, I can tell you that absolutely nothing unpredictable happens. There's just slightly less resistance on the controls. Not evenperceptible if you're hand-flying and you're trying to do a smooth job of it. The light comes on, you get your checklist out, and it tells you that things might be a bit more sensitive than normal. The Gulfstream has artificial feel springs, too, doesn't it?

 

[2000flyer]

In addition to the Global we have two Falcon 2000 eASY's and a G-IV. By far, I like the G-IV better than the Falcons. I like it's systems, it's redundancy and rugged reliability, plus, it makes the Falcons seem underpowered. Without experience in both types I don't see how you can validly comment on which one is "better".

Go back and re-read each and every one of my posts. Besides the glib truck comment (go back and re-read the posters reference to a Gulfstream flying like a truck in this thread as well) I never once made any reference, implication or otherwise, any experience whatsoever of having flown a Gulfstream. I'm not shocked by the mud slinging either.

True, compared to the Gulfstream, I'm sure you feel the Falcon is under powered. I"m sure someone flying an F15 feels the Gulfstream is under powered. Whats your freggin point?

 

[semperfido]

Besides the glib truck comment (go back and re-read the posters reference to a Gulfstream flying like a truck in this thread as well)

The gulfstream total package is far superior and if you had the opportunity to operate both (like i have), then you would get it. but if my boss bought a falcon i would love to fly it and my opinion wouldn't change.

 

[GVFlyer]

That is a laugh. Have you seen the full line of Gulstream products. They are filled with compromises. Just ask the guys who are flying international in the new Gulfstreams that only have 2 AHARS with no IRS. You cannot tell me that they are not Gulfstreams. Do know how I know? The Gulstream salesman tried to sell us one.

I know it's not PC, but I don't think any of us think of the Israeli Aircraft Industries aircraft as Gulfstreams. Real Gulfstreams come from Savannah or Beth Page, not Tel Aviv. Flight Test did a closed-loop handling qualities evaluation of the Galaxy before Gulfstream purchased Galaxy Aircraft, Inc. so the guys in Mahogany Row would know what they were buying. The kindest thing we said about it was, "It flys like a Challenger."

I was recently asked by a person considering purchasing a G200, "What makes this a Gulfstream?" The best that I could muster was, "Gulfstream stands behind it."

So if I say Gulfstream I mean G-I, G-II, G-III, G-IV, G300, G350, G400, G450, G500, and the G550.

GV

 

[gern_blanston]

Gulfstream does have a great rep for customer service. And having flown a 'G100' I wouldn't wish it on anyone from a handling point-of-view. And this from an old Westwind II driver. You wanna' talk about an airplane that doesn't handle well... Baby, the IAI 1124B is it!

 

[GEXDriver]

True, compared to the Gulfstream, I'm sure you feel the Falcon is under powered. I"m sure someone flying an F15 feels the Gulfstream is under powered. Whats your freggin point?

My point is that I like flying in the Forties as opposed to flying in the Thirties. I like flying above the North Atlantic Tracks as opposed to being stuck in them. I like being able to top weather and turbulence as opposed to being banged around or having to alter my course by hundreds of miles. I like being able to kick up my speed to M 0.85 or better regardless of altitude if the boss is running late. I like having enough redundancy in systems that if something major breaks in the Third World, I still have enough airplane left to fly it back to the First World to get it fixed. The simple truth is that for a corporate operation like ours the Gulfstream just does every thing better than the Falcon.

 

[G100driver]

G-VFlyer .... do you have 2 handles? You are quoting me as if I responding to your post. Hmmmm, one nice lovable Gulfstream demo pilot (or is that a former Gulfstream demo pilot who now works for an insurance company in MSP area) and the other handle ... well less refined.

Yes I know your opinion about the complete Gulfstream line, but when I go to the web page it still says Gulfstream.

I guess my real gripe is we used to own a G100 (hence the flightinfo name) and were VERY excited when Gulfstream bought out IAI. We were made promises about this fix and that fix on how Gulstream was going to make the Astra/G100 a reliable Gulfstream. In the end that is all we got, empty promises and much more expensive (although more avialable) parts. Our G100 was a POS until the end. Gulfstream did nothing to fix "their" airplane.

I know the "legacy" line is an awesome fleet, but the G100 -G200 is now your line and you must own it ... like or not. If is was not a Gulfstream they would call it a Gulfstream 200, right? Even if it is a total compromise in the Gulfstream tradition.

 

[2000flyer]

My point is that I like flying in the Forties as opposed to flying in the Thirties. I like flying above the North Atlantic Tracks as opposed to being stuck in them. I like being able to top weather and turbulence as opposed to being banged around or having to alter my course by hundreds of miles. I like being able to kick up my speed to M 0.85 or better regardless of altitude if the boss is running late. I like having enough redundancy in systems that if something major breaks in the Third World, I still have enough airplane left to fly it back to the First World to get it fixed. The simple truth is that for a corporate operation like ours the Gulfstream just does every thing better than the Falcon.

GEX, I won't argue with your love of the Gulfstream. I have no doubt you fly a fine machine. But I too fly in the 40s, I fly above the tracks, I'm on top the weather, not banging around in it. If my boss is late, I do .84, a scant few knots difference from your .85 (BTW, I do .84 on ~2000pph total. Whats your number? ). I have system redundency (I know the old arguments on this board so lets not go there). I have never been "stuck" somewhere, though I tend not to go to third world countries.

To be quite honest, today I'd probably be flying a Gulfstream. Our company several times requested literature and demos. Our hangar was built around a GV. Each time the salesman literally said "don't call us, we'll call you." Our owner gave him another chance and was told "I'm too busy to talk this week, I'll call you when I get more time." End of story. I can assure you with a 99% probability that this owner will never darken Savannah's door again. What is humorous, this is our second 2000 in 10 years and the gang in Savannah knows it. We get monthly calls from their sales staff checking our interestes in the Gulfstream line. Go figure...

So, here I am flying a Falcon. It does everything we ask it to do. I can fly a 200nm trip and not have my lunch eaten. I can fly it across the country and across the Atlantic. It does a fantastic job for us. I'm as partial to it as you are to the Gulfstream. The statement best fitting most of this thread is we agree to disagree.

2000Flyer