Sovereign vs G200 vs Challenger 300 vs G150

[FraxJockey]

?

The CL300 will not go directly to FL430 at gross and LRC is M.75 not M.78.

`

According to the QRH it can go to F430 at MTGW up to ISA+10. Been there done that MANY times.

According to the Cruise Flight Manual LRC @ ISA @38000# & F430 yields .797Mach.

 

[GEXDriver]

The 300 and Galaxy 200 are galaxies apart.

I agree, the famed Bombardier support we've enjoyed on our Global would be enough to keep me away from a Challenger CL300.

 

[SeaSpray]

According to the QRH it can go to F430 at MTGW up to ISA+10. Been there done that MANY times.

You've been directly to FL430 in a 39,000 pound Challenger 300 at ISA +10?

Bull!

SS

 

[FraxJockey]

You've been directly to FL430 in a 39,000 pound Challenger 300 at ISA +10?

Bull!

SS

I've been to F430 from a MTGW takeoff. I didn't say it was ISA+10. But it can and WILL do it. But heck I only flew it 2 years and have over 1000hrs. on it....what do I know. Plus the only way it would weigh 39K at F430 is if it was teleported there seeing how the MGTOW is 39K.

Frax

 

[400A]

Who told you that? A salesman? I guess somebody's got to believe them.



_SkyGirL_

Salesman does not have to tell you that. A quick search of the internet will show you that.

One website shows 0f 145 G-200's, 9 are for sale. Of 122 CL-300's 0 were for sale. I did however find one aircraft available from toy store. I am sure those numbers are not exact, but is a fair reflection.

I have friends flying both aircraft. The friend flying the 300 loves it, while the one flying the G-200 has his tech rep on speed dial.

 

[GVFlyer]

You've been directly to FL430 in a 39,000 pound Challenger 300 at ISA +10?

Bull!

SS

Good call, SeaSpray! Even if that is in FraxJockey’s QRH, Bombardier has always been wildly optimistic about cruise data.

Take-off and landing data is the only FAA certificated data in the Aircraft Flight Manual. Cruise data need only be representative of a “test article in the developmental test program”. Bombardier is notorious for collecting this data in uncompleted “green” aircraft without interiors.

As a matter of fact, when Gulfstream leased a Global Express for flight test and competitive analysis we found the Global cruise manual overstated actual range by as much as 11%!

I always wanted to run an ad in B&CA or AIN that was simply two blank pages facing each other. On the bottom of one it would say, “Promises Bombardier has kept”. On the bottom of the facing blank page it would state, “Promises Gulfstream has broken”.

In any event, Gulfstream Sales Engineering / Technical Marketing and Fall 2006 Conklin & deDecker agree with you that a Challenger CL300 taking off at it’s 39,000 lb MGTOW (as all initial climb data is stated) at SL on a Standard Day is only going to make it to FL410.

Here’s the Bombardier spec sheet that states the CL300’s initial cruise altitude at MGTOW is FL410.

http://www.spal.com.hk/fact_book/challenger_300_factsheet.pdf



GV

 

[FraxJockey]

Just the facts

I am just stating what I have seen with my own two eyes. It may have been at ISA or Isa-5 but it was at MGTOW and it was F430. It WILL do F410 at any temp (done it at ISA+15) @Mgtow. Regardless of how the OTHER Bombardier products perform, the CL30 meets and most of the time exceeds the book numbers, just ask any CL30 pilot. Regardless of what altitude you go to, the short field performance numbers and high, hot, and heavy numbers are among the best for any aircraft in its class.

 

[fatburger]

I'm going with frax's opinion. Seeing it rather than reading it decide it for me. Proof is in the pudding.

-fatburger-

 

[jonjuan]

Good call, SeaSpray! Even if that is in FraxJockey’s QRH, Bombardier has always been wildly optimistic about cruise data.

Take-off and landing data is the only FAA certificated data in the Aircraft Flight Manual. Cruise data need only be representative of a “test article in the developmental test program”. Bombardier is notorious for collecting this data in uncompleted “green” aircraft without interiors.

As a matter of fact, when Gulfstream leased a Global Express for flight test and competitive analysis we found the Global cruise manual overstated actual range by as much as 11%!

I always wanted to run an ad in B&CA or AIN that was simply two blank pages facing each other. On the bottom of one it would say, “Promises Bombardier has kept”. On the bottom of the facing blank page it would state, “Promises Gulfstream has broken”.

In any event, Gulfstream Sales Engineering / Technical Marketing and Fall 2006 Conklin & deDecker agree with you that a Challenger CL300 taking off at it’s 39,000 lb MGTOW (as all initial climb data is stated) at SL on a Standard Day is only going to make it to FL410.

Here’s the Bombardier spec sheet that states the CL300’s initial cruise altitude at MGTOW is FL410.

http://www.spal.com.hk/fact_book/challenger_300_factsheet.pdf



GV

GV-We trust you on the Global, however, that's not what we're talking about here. The 300's performance, however, is better than advertised. LRC is .78, not .75. I'd love to hear about the Gulfstream G200 test pilots report of their full evaluation of the CL300. I am sure you'd hear a "holy sh1t!" or two. Your AIN ad would start to get filled on both pages. Your defending the performance of the G200 is a bit amusing. Don't worry, however, she's not a Gulfstream.

 

[jonjuan]

I have friends flying both aircraft. The friend flying the 300 loves it, while the one flying the G-200 has his tech rep on speed dial.

Not true. According to GV, Gulfstream keeps its promises.

 

[ag2pilot]

One website shows 0f 145 G-200's, 9 are for sale. Of 122 CL-300's 0 were for sale. I did however find one aircraft available from toy store. I am sure those numbers are not exact, but is a fair reflection.

I have friends flying both aircraft. The friend flying the 300 loves it, while the one flying the G-200 has his tech rep on speed dial.

This speaks volumes to me, especially when you consider the % of new price that they are asking for the G200s.

I'm getting some good information to help. Thanks again.

We still have'nt heard from anybody who flies the G150, though.

 

[GVFlyer]

GV-We trust you on the Global, however, that's not what we're talking about here. The 300's performance, however, is better than advertised. LRC is .78, not .75. I'd love to hear about the Gulfstream G200 test pilots report of their full evaluation of the CL300. I am sure you'd hear a "holy sh1t!" or two. Your AIN ad would start to get filled on both pages. Your defending the performance of the G200 is a bit amusing. Don't worry, however, she's not a Gulfstream.

Gulfstream has not done a closed loop handling qualities flight test of the CL300. The Big G really doesn't have any G200 test pilots either. The production test flights for a certificate of airworthiness are done by IAI test pilots in Tel Aviv. The aircraft are then flown green to Dallas where they are completed. One of the Savannah Gulfstream test pilots went to Dallas last year to assume chief pilot duties and to insure the completion process met Gulfstream standards.

We did, however, do a test flight of the Galaxy prior to General Dynamics buying the company.

The data I gave you for the CL300 was not from flight test, but from Gulfstream Sales Engineering / Technical marketing cross referenced with Fall 2006 Conklin & deDecker.

I was asked not long ago, "What makes the G200 a Gulfstream?" While not the corporate position, my response was accurate. I said, "Because Gulfstream stands behind it."


GV

 

[GVFlyer]

I have friends flying both aircraft. The friend flying the 300 loves it, while the one flying the G-200 has his tech rep on speed dial.

That's remarkable as the G200's 12 month average dispatch reliability for the period ending November 2006, as reported by operators, has been 99.65%.


GV

 

[ag2pilot]

I agree, the famed Bombardier support we've enjoyed on our Global would be enough to keep me away from a Challenger CL300.

What seems to be the problem with Bombardier support, and are they improving?

It seems to me the choices are narrowing down to :
1. A well designed,reliable, well supported but slower Sovereign.
2. A well designed, reliable, better performing, not as well supported CL30.
3. A not as well designed, better supported G200.
4. A G 150 that is a total mystery.

Maybe we would be smarter buying a slightly higher time 50EX, though that really hasn't been on our short list.

 

[g4800xp]

Not really part of this discussion. Asked about some specific airframes and you pipe in with some other airframe not even part of the discussion. I think the 777 is superior, but not relavant to this thread.

Sorry to have offended you. My intention was to not spend more than a minute on the subject, I am impressed more and more with the CL300, yes we go direct to 430, and while we have good reliability, like any new machine there will be a glitch now and then. I see you fly a G200, I said I think it is good and getting better. I have a friend who flew a early ser# and could fill these pages with the problems they had. Had to use the E word several times,,,,,,,,,but the new one they have is great. Very good reliability and no one can knock the job Gulfstream is doing with customer service. No one.
I won' mention the incredible support Gulfstream gives on the G4.. ooops, that would not be at all relavant to the thread about airframes and support from the manufacturer. Bombardier stinks at it and they just don't get it.
I guesss you will really be pissed when i ask about the Raytheon Horizon/4000 in that while 5 years behind will be a direct competetor the the airframes mentioned.

 

[400A]

That's remarkable as the G200's 12 month average dispatch reliability for the period ending November 2006, as reported by operators, has been 99.65%.


GV

That would assume that all operators responded. I know a local aircraft that is not reliable, and spoke with a lockheed-Martin crew who said their new ones were only slightly less grumpy than the old ones.

 

[Muddauber]

That would assume that all operators responded. I know a local aircraft that is not reliable, and spoke with a lockheed-Martin crew who said their new ones were only slightly less grumpy than the old ones.

It would stand to reason that operators who purchased their aircraft before Gulfstream's purchase of Galaxy or who do not seek factory support would have lower availability rates than do those who avail themselves of all possible support and maintain a dialog with Gulfstream.

Of course, your comments have no relevance anyway. You've spoken to a couple of operators out of hundreds. Statistically, your remarks are what is called anecdotal.

What's NetJets experience been with the airplane?


Muddy

 

[400A]

It would stand to reason that operators who purchased their aircraft before Gulfstream's purchase of Galaxy or who do not seek factory support would have lower availability rates than do those who avail themselves of all possible support and maintain a dialog with Gulfstream.

Of course, your comments have no relevance anyway. You've spoken to a couple of operators out of hundreds. Statistically, your remarks are what is called anecdotal.

What's NetJets experience been with the airplane?


Muddy

In fact I have spoken with many operators. I did extensive research including talking to the actual operators of the serial #'s that Gulfstream was trying to sell me. It is your comment that has no relevance. Based on your comments net jets is the only one who knows anything about the aircraft.

Your comments I would call useless.

 

[NJAFracPilot]

In fact I have spoken with many operators. I did extensive research including talking to the actual operators of the serial #'s that Gulfstream was trying to sell me. It is your comment that has no relevance. Based on your comments net jets is the only one who knows anything about the aircraft.

Your comments I would call useless.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, 400A, but NetJets G200 fleet experience is more relevant than you asking a few operators what they think of their dogged out Galaxys.

 

[jonjuan]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, 400A, but NetJets G200 fleet experience is more relevant than you asking a few operators what they think of their dogged out Galaxys.

Funny as the world's largest NJA G200 fleet isn't close to a 99.65% dispatch reliability rate.