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

[CatYaaak]

Speaking of which, about the only thing in here that we don't have on a Legacy is the EVS, and I am quite certain that any operator willing to spend a little money can get it. I'll defer to the experts on what is standard equipment and what is an option on the EMB--the point being, if someone wants the gizmo it can be had. A C-130 can do a Self-Contained Approach invented on the fly to any square foot of dirt in the world. Nice thing to have for the special ops missions they do but does that mean a Legacy or a G-V needs it just because it is a really cool toy?

Dude, you've been ranting and raving about how (in your opinion) stupid it is a Gulfstream has all that "expensive" equipment because you think it causes it to burn more gas and serves no purpose other than to boost a pilot's ego. Now here, not only do you say a Legacy has all those things!....but "hey anyone can buy it" too!

Make up your mind. Or is the problem you don't even know what a Gulfstream has in the first place? How can you know what it has when you admit you don't even know what standard equipment is on your own?

(now I'm sure....either a demo pilot at his first civi job, or an ex-regional guy at his first corp job... or a kid with a flight sim.).

 

[LegacyDriver]

Dude, you've been ranting and raving about how (in your opinion) stupid it is a Gulfstream has all that "expensive" equipment because you think it causes it to burn more gas and serves no purpose other than to boost a pilot's ego. Now here, not only do you say a Legacy has all those things!....but "hey anyone can buy it" too!

Make up your mind. Or is the problem you don't even know what a Gulfstream has in the first place? How can you know what it has when you admit you don't even know what standard equipment is on your own?

(now I'm sure....either a demo pilot at his first civi job, or an ex-regional guy at his first corp job... or a kid with a flight sim.).

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.)

 

[LegacyDriver]

By the way, since you've avoided the subject of your own experience, why should anyone pay attention to you except as a time-killing exercise in debate? You certainly can't believe that anyone would change an opinion on how to spend 10s of millions of dollars on what you've offered here....do you?

I have given enough hints about my background. I need not say more. I do have an extensive background flying Corporate Jets. As I have said before, Citations mostly... Also, I will repeat again, I have no beef with the Gulfstream. It is a fantastic airplane. However, the Legacy is also a wonderful airplane and people will make the judgment for themselves which one better fullfils their mission requirements.

Some families like ONE SUV, others like TWO four-door sedans. You do what is best for your mission requirements. The EMB is clearly a viable alternative.

 

[TundraT]

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)

With the capablility of flying a 15 hour leg in the GV/G550 and weather at your destination changing for the worst, even with the best forecast. I'm more than happy to put the HUD down and EVS on, plant it on the TDZ, taxi in and be putting a few down at the bar while everyone else is making missed approaches or filing for their alternate. Rare, maybe, but when you need it why be wishing you spent the money.

 

[LegacyDriver]

With the capablility of flying a 15 hour leg in the GV/G550 and weather at your destination changing for the worst, even with the best forecast. I'm more than happy to put the HUD down and EVS on, plant it on the TDZ, taxi in and be putting a few down at the bar while everyone else is making missed approaches or filing for their alternate. Rare, maybe, but when you need it why be wishing you spent the money.

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.

Believe me, when I saw the EVS the first time I sounded like Will Smith in INDEPENDENCE DAY, "I gotta' get me one a'these!!" But in the last seven years I can only think of two instances when I would have used it (I went to my alternate instead), so for me it seems to be more money than it is worth.

Again, I'm not saying that the Legacy can do *everything* the G-String can do. Obviously it can't. But it does enough to make it an option and it's a heck of a lot cheaper to buy and fly. That's the point of all this. (I think I managed to hijack my own thread from Short Field performance to G-String vs. Embryo.)

*sheepish grin*

 

[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.