Short Field Performance - Best Swept-Wing Corp. Jet?

[CatYaaak]

You are clearly not very skilled at discussions of substance because you haven't been able to follow the course of this one too well.

For one thing, it is not my job to know what is standard equipment on the Legacy. I know what is on the airplane when I fly it and how it works. Knowing how it came to be there or what costs extra is the job for the dealer and the buyer, not the pilot.

You guys claim that the Gulfstream has four million pieces of equipment the EMB doesn't have. The reality is, the EMB has most of it and the things it lacks are not that important--they can be had if one wants with the exception of EVS (another gee whiz gadget that is only going to be used in the rarest of circumstances and probably isn't worth the expense)--for the bulk of the missions both airplanes fly.

Yeah, your airplane has fifteen redundant systems and can land on the deck of a carrier. Woopie. All that does is burn gas.

All airplanes are compromises. The EMB is a compromise in some areas, the Gulfstream is a compromise in others. No single airplane can do it all, and no airplane can do exactly what another can do. But the envelope overlaps enough for the overwhelming majority of cases to make the EMB a competitor to the Gulfstream. Call it what you want. You give the impression that G-String drivers are pious because yours is bigger, or a little faster, or can go a little farther. Immature if you ask me...

As I said, all airplanes are a compromise. Would an F-16 be the performer it is if it were fitted for carrier ops? Of course not! Would it be stronger? Sure. Over-engineering only goes so far however, and it does so at a price. Would the F/A-18 have better performance if built to USAF specs instead of USN requirements? You bet. But both are effective in similar roles. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, but both can do the job very well.

As for all this talk about the EMB being slow... If 0.90 Mach cruise speeds were the most efficient way to fly you can bet everyone would be doing it. But it isn't, and we don't. And anyone who has flown an EMB knows it will run right through the redline in cruise without a problem. That limitation is largely artificial.

The EMB is a good piece of equipment, with safety, comfort, redundancy, and efficiency all rolled into one package. And it is AFFORDABLE! I'm not so sure the terms efficient or affordable work in describing the Gulfstream.

(I love how people hurl insults when they start losing an argument.)

You talk about all aircraft being a compromise, but turn around and imply the EMB is the barometer by which all other aircraft are measured in terms of performance and equipment (which spells "capability") and anything exceeding the EMB's is just not needed, or is a function of ego and wasteful corporate spending. It's similar to George Carlin's observation about how some see other drivers on the road; anyone driving slower than them is a "Moron", and anyone driving faster than is a "f'ing Maniac!".

The reason you can't address operational advantages and enhanced safety pointed out in previous posts except to ignore and/or dismiss them, instead insisting that corporations "don't really need it" as if you can divine what their priorities are while they are blind to their own requirements, is because it's your only way out of your flawed premise that a Legacy and Gulfstream are comparable in the first place.

This isn't an F/A-18 vs F-16 perf envelope debate, because that would imply that the Legacy is F-16-like (which is a chick airplane anyway). It doesn't wash, because the Gulfstream does everything a Legacy does better than the Legacy does itself....easily....and does more that the Legacy can't possibly do, ever. It costs more to aquire this capablility and a few hundred dollars more per hour to operate, but.......

....you need to get over the fact that a lot of corporations DO want the extra capablilty a Gstream offers, that most have to justify it to their own Boards and satisfy their own beancounters (who are no strangers to your all-important "costs" that go alone with running airplanes, be they Direct Operating or Indirect), and that the greater capability and flexibility tangibly translate into a higher level of safety, security, comfort, and time-saving for their employees.

They are willing to pay for these things, so they ARE affordable. If they didn't think so, Gulfstream wouldn't sell any of them in the first place. They sell hundreds. Gulfstream won't lose one customer to Legacy salespeople because any company that decides they need a Gulfstream has already ruled out other aircraft in the Legacy's class.

So insist all you want, but the perf numbers of the EMB don't back you up, and as far as a serious globe-trotting machine, Gulfstream has a track record going back decades with regards to capability and reliablility....the Legacy has absolutely none. I just remember the one that broke in half.

 

[CatYaaak]

It is nice to have that capability, but again, that's why we *have* alternates and such--for those rare instances when we can't get in. Does the one time you use the EVS justify it's cost? That's up to the buyer to decide, not me.

Well in that case, does the one time you "use" EGPWS justify it's cost? Of course, EVS promotes not having to ever use the EGPWS. It's called an enhanced level of safety. If nobody thought this were iimportant or was willing to pay for it, we'd all still be navigating with smoke pots and light beacons strung out along the countryside. Nobody neeeeeeeeds GPS either, we all learned how to dead reckon across those remote areas. Lose those liferafts and survival kits too....I personally have never ditched in the ocean or been stranded in the jungle in the last 25 years so they can't possibly be needed by anyone. Hey, it's cheaper! Oh, and those portable defribulators....jettison!.....

 

[LegacyDriver]

The reason you can't address operational advantages and enhanced safety pointed out in previous posts except to ignore and/or dismiss them, instead insisting that corporations "don't really need it" as if you can divine what their priorities are while they are blind to their own requirements, is because it's your only way out of your flawed premise that a Legacy and Gulfstream are comparable in the first place.

We've already addressed this. They *are* comparable for the bulk of the missions flown. Just because the Gulfstream has excess capability does not make it a good/better fit than the EMB in all (or even *most*) cases.

(BTW, I believe EGPWS is a requirement, not an option for turbines, so that's not exactly a realistic argument, but it's been awhile since I read that reg... On a cost per use basis, however, EGPWS, being much more frequently used than an EVS is far more cost effective. I suppose it boils down to how much it costs you to go to an alternate vs. buying an EVS and using it instead of bingoing...)

 

[LegacyDriver]

This isn't an F/A-18 vs F-16 perf envelope debate, because that would imply that the Legacy is F-16-like (which is a chick airplane anyway). It doesn't wash, because the Gulfstream does everything a Legacy does better than the Legacy does itself....easily....and does more that the Legacy can't possibly do, ever. It costs more to aquire this capablility and a few hundred dollars more per hour to operate, but.......

The F-16 can't do everything the F-15 does (slower, shorter range, lower ceiling, etc..), but they are both fighters and both effective in their own rights. The -16 is cheaper to buy, cheaper to use, and most of the time does what the F-15 does. The Legacy and the Gulfstream are a similar case.

The Gulfstream cannot do EVERYTHING a Legacy can. No two airplanes can.

 

[CatYaaak]

The Gulfstream cannot do EVERYTHING a Legacy can. No two airplanes can.

So what can a Legacy do that the Gulfstream can't?

(and please no more imagined, absolutely unproven, vague suppositions one your part about being "more reliable cuz it's an serious airliner", or "probably being able to go more places".)

 

[Flyinjunk]

The F-16 can't do everything the F-15 does (slower, shorter range, lower ceiling, etc..), but they are both fighters and both effective in their own rights. The -16 is cheaper to buy, cheaper to use, and most of the time does what the F-15 does. The Legacy and the Gulfstream are a similar case.

The Gulfstream cannot do EVERYTHING a Legacy can. No two airplanes can.

Hey Brother , got one for you
Question: How do you know a Gulfstream pilot is lying????
Answer: Any time his lyps are out of synch

{if you must know I got all da ratings cept G-159}

The EMB Leg is a good bird. Our DO is an ex Connie express dude and he raves about em. Its like you said no two aeroplanes are alike........and thats a good thing.

 

[CatYaaak]

We've already addressed this. They *are* comparable for the bulk of the missions flown. Just because the Gulfstream has excess capability does not make it a good/better fit than the EMB in all (or even *most*) cases.

(BTW, I believe EGPWS is a requirement, not an option for turbines, so that's not exactly a realistic argument, but it's been awhile since I read that reg... On a cost per use basis, however, EGPWS, being much more frequently used than an EVS is far more cost effective. I suppose it boils down to how much it costs you to go to an alternate vs. buying an EVS and using it instead of bingoing...)

EVS enhances safety on any approach when the vis is low or the sun is down, especially into unfamiliar places. That's a lot more than you'll hopefully be needing EGPWS. In fact it may just prevent you from needing it.

You don't know what the bulk of the missions flown are, unless you are using some kind of "Fleet-Average Stage Length X Seats Available X DOC = Best Airplane for the Company" quasi-airline formula that fails to take into account the other considerations pointed out before in other posts. Some of those considerations outweigh, by far, your $$-only emphasis. If that's the formula your using, then Falcon 2000EXs and Challengers do just as well especially if we consider the "average pax load", and better in most performance areas. I'd say beat that competition first, then worry about what the G-Vs and Globals are doing.

As for "fit", your shtick is trying to fit (by way of assumption), a company's requirements into your Legacy, not the other way around.

 

[xrated]

WOW, a lot of talk on this subject but only one factor will determine who has a clue........SALES. Is the Legacy selling well. I'm not talking about the EMB 135/145, I mean the Legacy. At the end of the month, there will be three green Legacies on the ramp in PHX. Trust me, the customers are NOT lining up to buy the P.O.S. !

 

[LegacyDriver]

226 cu. ft. of baggage space compared to 240 cu. ft. for starters!

It's also a lot cheaper to buy and use. Haven't seen a GV cockpit in person yet, but I am sure it is not the world's most ergonomic design. The Legacy is darned close.

Dunno how many people a G-V can carry in a shuttle configuration, but I'm sure it wouldn't be 37.

As for sales, they sell well all over the world. Embraer has shipped a lot of Legacies. They aren't catching on as fast in the U.S. but give them some time...

(Thanks flyinjunk...I'd suggest you duck now or put on flameproof underwear.)



Fitting a company's requirements into an airplane is how these things get sold in the first place! You think companies don't have criteria and look to see which airplanes will do the job, selecting the best one for their budget and desires? Dude....

 

[CatYaaak]

226 cu. ft. of baggage space compared to 240 cu. ft. for starters!

It's also a lot cheaper to buy and use. Haven't seen a GV cockpit in person yet, but I am sure it is not the world's most ergonomic design. The Legacy is darned close.

Dunno how many people a G-V can carry in a shuttle configuration, but I'm sure it wouldn't be 37.

As for sales, they sell well all over the world. Embraer has shipped a lot of Legacies. They aren't catching on as fast in the U.S. but give them some time...

(Thanks flyinjunk...I'd suggest you duck now or put on flameproof underwear.)



Fitting a company's requirements into an airplane is how these things get sold in the first place! You think companies don't have criteria and look to see which airplanes will do the job, selecting the best one for their budget and desires? Dude....

You miss my point. YOUR argument in these posts rests on your assumption that Gulfstream operating companies really don't need them, because their criteria for budgets and desires and mission fit better into a Legacy. This assumption of yours maintains that the excess performance, flexibility, and capability a Gstream offers is NOT in line with those companies' budgets, and doesn't appear on their list of desires..criteria you mention above. You pretend this to conveniently re-shape these companies into imaginary entities that will fly or forsee flying only as high, far, or as fast as your Legacy will go (re-iterate the George Carlin observation regarding drivers).

Of course, these assumptions you make have nothing to do with the real world, which you yourself realize when you write....

"Fitting a company's requirements into an airplane is how these things get sold in the first place". The proof is on ramps everywhere.

 

[LegacyDriver]

The proof is also in the boneyard and the smelter. Many viable alternatives have come along to place them there.

No, my argument is simply to explain to you folks why the Legacy *is* a competitor of a G-IV or G-V because it can do an overwhelming percentage of the same things the former can but at a much lower cost.

My point is merely to point out why the Legacy is a viable alternative. Nothing more, nothing less. People who claim it is not a "real business jet" are incorrect.

The Legacy has been a success all over the world. It is too early to tell if it will be a success in the USA. You may be proven correct that it won't work here. We'll just have to see. I am hoping it will and will do my part to see that folks at least consider it as an option.

 

[Silver Wings]

A bout that broken back

I thought I'd catch up a few areas of missunderstanding that seem to have sliiped into the thread......

Legacy does have a substantial avionics fit, but clearly nothing close to the GV etc.....

On a Legacy you can count on dual FMS/GPS, dual IRS and dual channel Iridium satcom (single channel is standard), dual VHF (third is an option on almost all aircraft so far), single HF (but most seem to have the 2nd HF option as well), there is EGPWS (level 7) and aircraft is RVSM and has ELT (latest freq's). A HUD is available as an option, and is flying on some ERJ's......The GV et al have EVS... being offered now which is a step beyond the HUD alone, but at a price, a big price. But ther'e no denying that an EVS equipped aircraft has a plus.
Heh you think Embraer can't provide a jungle survival kit ? crazy. Of course the Legacy can pack all the survial aids quoted, and they do. Under that huge divan in the rear can store all sorts of stuff and the baggage hold isn't exactly squeezed for space.....The AE3007 engines of the Legacy have an IFSR 4 times better than would be required for an ETOPS 180 and all the required systems redundancy for such a clearence.....not true of all other types of corporate jets.....but here the G-string is OK (except how many hours on those BMW engines ???? certainly not over 10,000,000 that the AE3007's have achieved !!!!!! But still, with the hours they have achieved they've proved reliable.

It's all about safety. Hence, the ERJ/Legacy record is the ultimate proof of design concept. over 5,000,000 hours in a high cycle environment (in many different parts of the world) accident rate - zero nobody hurt or killed to date.... and we all know about those low time F/o's in the regionals..... if these guys can keep the ultimate clean sheet then the aircraft/cockpit/pilot combination has proven it's worth. (this is not a criticism of the regional crews....they do a great job....proof )

At last update of database I'm using (Nov 2003, so apologies on not being super current, the G-string fleet since the days of props doesn't have this sort of hours (just over 3 million) and the Dassault fleet (since the 10 has amassed just over 4 million. For clarity, the Challenger & Global fleet less than 1 million total.
I'm not counting how many of any of these types have 'augered in', which is a very good reason why they have been developed and improved over the years with new systems, and why such systems development continues...often with the G-string guys leading the way. Their buyers are often the only ones who can afford the marginal potential benefits avaiable now.

There was a time when $1 of system got you $1 of extra safety. that time has long since gone and it is more like $1million for $1 equivalent extra.... each buyer sets the limit and the G-string buyers set the limit (and pay a lot for it) a little higher than the Legacy (or other corporate jet) buyers. The only real fact is there is zero proof to date that they have actually got something useful for their money as the Legacy/ERJ safety record is the best there ever has been for any commercial aircraft. Nothwithstanding...if I had the megabucks (and no accountability) I'd also consider a G-string, but if I had a board and shareholders to answer to the Legacy would sure grab my attention as well. The point about having additional systems for International Ops is valid, but perhaps a little exagerated in terms of where post International Ops go, and what is available. Most G-string flights end up in the International airports anyway, as that's where the $$$ is (or at least close by) in most countries. OK, so there are exceptions..sometimes....
The point about matching the tool to the need is the most important and a G-string is probably not the most efficient on many of the flights it is asked to do. That isn't negating that on some flights (especially the longer range) it comes into it's own.

Interesting point is that according to the database (albeit a little out of date..) the average FH/FC for the aircraft are:

GV/G550 = 2.9 hrs
GIV/G300/G400 = 2.7 hrs
F900 series = 2.6 hrs
F2000 series = 2.2 hrs
Global series = 3.6 hrs
Challenger series = 2.0 hrs
Legacy = 1.6 hrs
(A more recent fleet study isn't likely to change this result much)

Whilst the 'heavy iron' are clearly doing some of these long range missions (shown by the slightly higher FH/FC average) the numbers show that the vast bulk of flights must be well below the 7-8 hours Legacy max mission time (at whatever speed). The less range the mission the less important the ultimate speed is really going to be in time difference at arrival (or even the FL...with the odd weather exception).

As for missions that a Legacy can do and a G-string can't (yet) then I repeat no G-string is able to get into London City or Lugano as both require a certified 5.5 degree glideslope. This is certified on the ERJ family and ERJ135's have been operating into LCY (Jet Magic).

Oh yes, we keep hearing about the ERJ with the broken back. It was a Rio Sul aircraft and the F/O cut power as he was above glideslope too early on a non stabilized approach. It appears the pilot had little jet experience and the slower time to respond when he re-applied power caused the hard landing. The g loads on landing would break the back (and more) of any aircraft, incl a G-string (over 6 times design load). The aircraft was flyable at all times (until it hit the deck)...it was a pure pilot error (if such a thing occurs). All systems were functional, despite the dramatic picture of the aircraft afterwards, hydraulics, electrics etc...no fires.......and they did taxi off the active runway....so even the undercarriage stayed in place and functional..... in actual fact this should really be an advert for the tough build of these aircraft, rather than an area of critique.

A few of the posts are clear and factual and reasonable and have raised this debate to a good level, even if we don't all agree.....then there are the others.....(and this broken back 'red-herring' deserves to be put to rest here)!

So best fleet aircraft.

Legacy at $20 million (putting the $25 million capital saved form not buying a G-string into the bank at 10% = $2.5 million a year)
Using the $2.5 milllion a year (or less) to charter in a G-string or VIP B747/BBJ2 or Cit II or whatever, for the flights when the Legacy is either too much or not enough..... Hey I might even buy NJ shares and cut a deal with them to manage the Legacy as offset......whatever the solution $45 million + for the top G-string is a hell of a lot of capital at risk..........when there are potential alternatives. Thankfully they're possibly always going to be G-string buyers willing to lay down the big bucks so that the more $$ wise amongst us can charter them without the financial hassle, and hence take the benefit from buying the Legacy....now all I need to do is work out how to get the big bucks ......Hmmmmmmm !

 

[LegacyDriver]

Wow! I don't think there's anything left to be said on this one.

 

[CatYaaak]

I
Legacy at $20 million (putting the $25 million capital saved form not buying a G-string into the bank at 10% = $2.5 million a year)
Using the $2.5 milllion a year (or less) to charter in a G-string or VIP B747/BBJ2 or Cit II or whatever, for the flights when the Legacy is either too much or not enough..... Hey I might even buy NJ shares and cut a deal with them to manage the Legacy as offset......whatever the solution $45 million + for the top G-string is a hell of a lot of capital at risk..........when there are potential alternatives. Thankfully they're possibly always going to be G-string buyers willing to lay down the big bucks so that the more $$ wise amongst us can charter them without the financial hassle, and hence take the benefit from buying the Legacy....now all I need to do is work out how to get the big bucks ......Hmmmmmmm !

At least you concede the Legacy is not the plane for world-wide ops. But you must haven't checked an NBAA directory lately or seen enough flight departments up close to realize that most of them already do what you surmise they haven't been doing.....fitting airplanes to the mission. There's plenty of companies that have more than one fleet type, using cheaper, less-capable aircraft flying those in addition to more capable ones (another flaw in your premise is the notion that mixed fleets don't exist). That's becaue the usual process involves a company outgrowing what they already have, and then they decide to either supplement or replace what they do, not running in to plunk down $45m on their first aquisition. Pilots are not the sole possessers of this concept...you're preaching to the choir not only made up of pilots, but of beancounters and Boards everywhere.

And just like they know the options of available aircraft, because of the expenses involved at any level, they certainly know the options of ownership vs. frac vs. charger, and continually run the numbers. If a company WANTED to charter for those long flights, they would..and some do. Some supplement their fleets with a frac share for that purpose. These are KNOWN options.

But many (and at the Gstream buying-power level, most) companies opt for ownership because when they send employees abroad...especially high-level exec types....they want to retain operational control over the situation. They WANT their own security, pilot, mx, and dispatchers, not someone they pluck out of a phone book. As the situation exists today, especially for Americans, this takes on even more importance and Accountability, as you bring up, encompasses a much broader range than than DOCs. What you brush aside as no biggie....no operational control to save a few bucks... is indeed a huge consideration for some.

So let's put aside this notion that anyone using a Gstream is stupid because they don't buy something smaller and just use that money to charter, and compare the Legacy to similar aircraft that are ALREADY fitted to the job you've defined. If you suggest that Gulfstream owners should send them to the boneyard and replace them with Legacies on sheer effeciency, then I'd imagine there will be a stampede to trade in something less capable than the Legacy for the same price!

With similar aquisition costs, range, and cabin cross-section (consult the Average Table where you found the Avg Stage Length and I'm sure you'll find that the "Avg Pax Per Stage" is far less than the seating capacity of a Legacy...and hey, it's your rules) the Falcon 2000/-EX and Challenger 604 seat 10/12, and are already filling that bill and can go transcon and certainly do those 2.9 hour stage lengths you're using as a barometer for "Best Aircraft". How does the Legacy compare to these two? You stated you liked facts and reasonable discussion, so please provide some facts.

The Falcon and Challenger have a bigger cross section inside I believe. I think both are wider than the Gulfstream..How does the Legacy compare?

They both faster and higher, with its inherent advantages, and do it effeciently. Its not like a Falcon has to struggle into the 40s.

I believe they both have lower DOCs than the Legacy (1615 hour posted here).

And to get back to the original question this thread asked...what are the numbers for T/O and land performance? The original poster, LegacyDriver, didn't even put up the numbers for comparison so anyone could answer his own question. You've not come forth any either. All we've heard are "feelings" about how tough Legacies are, declarative statements of how perf and redundant systems are bad, opinions that Magic Boxes are nonessential yet "ergonomics" are something to be proud of, and whimsical notions that accountant-less companies blindly fling money into the wind, yee-hawing as they trot up their Gulfstream stairs.

Now, knowing that this whole now-miserable thread was designed specifically to smoke out and yank the chain of G-guys, it nonetheless provided fodder for debate, but now I'm getting bored because no specifics are forthcoming....no new fodder.

So please, for the love of god, country, Jonathan Livingston Seagull and all the rest that's holy in aviation...what are the T/O and landing perf numbers for the Legacy?

Oh, and is it really limited to airports 8,500' elevation or less?

 

[dtoften]

You guys are having an amusing, but informing, pissing contest. My plane is better than yours crap. It's like comparing a C172 to a Bonanza to a PC12.


Pscho: The name's Francis Sawyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you.
Leon: Ooooooh.
Pscho: You just made the list, buddy. Also, I don't like no one touching my stuff. So just keep your meathooks off. If I catch any of you guys in my stuff, I'll kill you. And I don't like nobody touching me. Any of you homos touch me, and I'll kill you.
Sergeant Hulka: Lighten up, Francis.


As for the Pq for dirt, are you refering to the triaxial shear test? Pq diagrams are different for different types of soil.

 

[GVFlyer]

With similar aquisition costs, range, and cabin cross-section (consult the Average Table where you found the Avg Stage Length and I'm sure you'll find that the "Avg Pax Per Stage" is far less than the seating capacity of a Legacy...and hey, it's your rules) the Falcon 2000/-EX and Challenger 604 seat 10/12, and are already filling that bill and can go transcon and certainly do those 2.9 hour stage lengths you're using as a barometer for "Best Aircraft". How does the Legacy compare to these two? You stated you liked facts and reasonable discussion, so please provide some facts.

The Falcon and Challenger have a bigger cross section inside I believe. I think both are wider than the Gulfstream..How does the Legacy compare?

They both faster and higher, with its inherent advantages, and do it effeciently. Its not like a Falcon has to struggle into the 40s.

I believe they both have lower DOCs than the Legacy (1615 hour posted here).

Large Cabin aircraft Dimensions are as follows:

G550 - 43'11"L X 7'4"W X6'2" H
F900EX - 33'2"L X 7'8"W X 6'2"H
CL604 - 25'6"L X 8'2"W X 6'1"H

The Legacy dimensions are:

Total interior length: 43 X 6'11"W X 5'10"H (I don't have Cabin length)

Direct Operating Costs are:

G550- 1912.00
F900EX - 1668.00
CL604 - 1463.00
F2000EX -1382.00
Jungle Jet - 1615.00

So please, for the love of god, country, Jonathan Livingston Seagull and all the rest that's holy in aviation...what are the T/O and landing perf numbers for the Legacy?

Legacy T/O and Ldg, MTOW, SL, Standard Day:

T/O - 5770
Ldg. (MLW) - 2663

A G550 fueled for a 3,300nm trip at Mach .85 with an initial altitude of 43,000 feet (exceeding the Legacy's max range at .74 mach) would achieve the following numbers:

T/O - 3630
Ldg - 2217

Oh, and is it really limited to airports 8,500' elevation or less?

Yes... and the G550 goes into 15,000 foot airports.







.

 

[banned username 2]

I like to give GVFlyer a little ribbing from time to time just like anyone else here... But c'mon guys, comparing a Legacy to a G-550????

Puuulllleeezzzzeeeee....

That isn't comparing Apples to Apples... It ain't even comparing Apples to Oranges... That is comparing Apples to Brussel Sprouts (Yuck!)...

Please, lets move on to a more constructive topic!

 

[bigD]

Please, lets move on to a more constructive topic!

BBQ! .

 

[501261]

I like to give GVFlyer a little ribbing from time to time just like anyone else here... But c'mon guys, comparing a Legacy to a G-550????

Puuulllleeezzzzeeeee....

That isn't comparing Apples to Apples... It ain't even comparing Apples to Oranges... That is comparing Apples to Brussel Sprouts (Yuck!)...

Please, lets move on to a more constructive topic!

Thank you.

It’s insulting to compare a G550 to a Legacy.

Going back to the original question, I’m curious if there are any true business jets currently in production that the Legacy can actually beat in short field performance.

Know any good BBQ places in Vegas?

 

[banned username 2]

BBQ!

NOW we are getting somewhere!!!