The Russian

[Hugh Johnson]

"I have experimented with this procedure a few times both in the 50 and the 900 at or above 41.0 during deadhead legs. With the number 2 engine at idle, not shut down. There is a major difference in case you do not understand that. As far as I could determine there could be an increase of range under certain conditions. However, despite your constant and repeated assertions I would never consider using any such type procedure for trip planning."

Now you're just lying. According to the drift down charts the only way you can maintain 410 on two engines is if you weigh less than 26000 lbs. Our EX BOW is more than that. Nice try, I'm sure everyone is impressed with your knowledge. Gotta have your facts right first. See ya in the FBO's.

 

[avbug]

Out PB4Y procedures included three and two engine takeoffs, and the airplane was designed for, had performance charts for one and two engines shutdown...for extended periods...and yes, missions could be and were, planned that way.

The P2V required that two engines be shutdown after takeoff. With the outboards burning, fuel conumption tripled.

I've done three engine ferries, and have shut down engines enroute for maintenance or for fuel, and have departed knowing that I intended to shut one down after takeoff for various reasons, as part of a preplanned mission profile...and yes, depending on the mission, it's a perfectly legitimate procedure.

That it may be foriegn to you, or outside your experience, doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means you're too inexperienced to know otherwise.

 

[The_Russian]

...and yes, depending on the mission, it's a perfectly legitimate procedure.

These seem to be the key words in the discussion.

 

[con-pilot]

Now you're just lying. According to the drift down charts the only way you can maintain 410 on two engines is if you weigh less than 26000 lbs. Our EX BOW is more than that. Nice try, I'm sure everyone is impressed with your knowledge. Gotta have your facts right first. See ya in the FBO's.

Sigh, you just don't give up do you. I never said that one could remain at 410 or above at any weight with on engine inoperative (or at idle) in the 50EX or the 900EX.

Now next time you manage to find a Falcon 900EX performance manual turn a few pages farther to the "ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE FLIGHT PLANNING LONG RANGE CRUISE @ 33000FT" or 31000FT or 27000FT. there are also charts for MAX. CONTINUOUS THRUST as well. (In case you don't know that.)

Now using your infamous 'drift down charts' in conjunction with the above charts you just might be surprised.

Again and for the last time, I have never attempted to use what we are discussing in any type of pre-trip planning what so ever. Can you possibly get that through your thick head?

Now as for this statement; "Now you're just lying." I should have expected this from you. You can accuse me of being wrong, I could have perhaps over-simplified my reasoning and comments. However, to accuse me of lying is over the top and totally uncalled for. If you should see me "in the FBOs" I strongly suggest that you leave as soon as you possibly can.

This is my last post to you that will address any futher comments from you on this matter or any other matter.

I bid you good day Sir.