Sovereign vs G200 vs Challenger 300 vs G150

[NJAFracPilot]

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

You're a dope if you think NetJets G200 dispatch reliability numbers are not included in Gulfstream's G200 dispatch reliability statistics. Who do you think supports these aircraft?

Who do you work for?

 

[GVFlyer]

You're a dope if you think NetJets G200 dispatch reliability numbers are not included in Gulfstream's G200 dispatch reliability statistics. Who do you think supports these aircraft?

You are correct, Sir!

NetJets fleet dispatch reports are a part of Gulfstream's dispatch reliability numbers.


GV

 

[jonjuan]

The Citation X costs over $20 million and has a step-down aisle.

Our crews like the G200. It'll fly legs my Falcon 2000 won't.

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

`

1) Wrong on the X being over $20 million. Not a person in the world has paid over $19MM. 2) The CL300 will go directly to 430 at gross. 3) LRC is .78. Where do you get your info?

 

[400A]

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.

I hate to break it to you, but it was many of YOUR Net Jets crews that spoke VERY poorly of the aircraft.

Where you only want to look at one group of operators, I checked with all kinds. Small, large, high useage and low useage.

 

[hawkerjet]

I have reviewed those 3 airframes as well as several others for our companies consideration. I attended the regional NBAA meeting at LGB and spoke to the pilots as well as APG ( aircraft performance group) to verify numbers. Like everyone said, the citation and 300 are performers and the 150 and 200 are good planes also. I eliminated the 150 and 200 for performance considerations. I need to put 8 pax on board out of VGT @ 104 degrees and go to another 5000 ft strip 1000 miles away. The cabin was much better in the 300 as well as avionics package. The cockpit was a tight squeeze in the citation and the 300 came out on top in that respect. My opinion was that the 300 was a better value.

 

[ag2pilot]

Thanks hawkerjet. My research (in addition to this forum) shows me the same. It may come down to availability, there are a few used 680's on the market.

It will be interesting to see what the boss wants to do, but I know we won't hurry into the wrong decision.

 

[thatpilotguy]

I suppose I should throw in my 2 cents. I think what I like most about this discussion is the brand loyalty that so many different people are showing. I have some of that myself. I have been impressed with the 300 since I stepped in the door. True customer service can't compare to Gulfstream, but thankfully the dispatch reliablity is so high that we rarely need to deal with them. Capability...as previously stated and Frac is correct...straight to 430 at max gross, and long range cruise is .78. I could post some performance book pages is you want proof, but when 4 or 5 300 pilots all say the same thing, I think that pretty much ends that arguement.

From the aircraft listed, the 300 wins all day long and twice on tuesday. The problem is, good luck getting one...the list is out till 2008, I guess it really is all it's cracked up to be!

 

[SCT]

ThatPilotGuy,
How does the 300 fly stick and rudder? Our 604 is a good a/c but is not a great airplane to hand fly.
The 300 sure does have ramp presence....nice looking bird.

SCT

 

[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

So much for your "Wildly optimistic" claim, counselor. I believe your AIN ad is quickly getting filled on both pages.

 

[thatpilotguy]

I would have to say that the 300 isn't all that bad in the stick and rudder department. The best way to describe it is predictable. It doesn't have any nasty characteristics. All around there are no surprises with the 300, that's probably why everyone is so surprised by it!