GalaxyFlyer wrote:No Learjet ever competed against the Globals—very different planes. No need for two production lines, we’re talking about, at most, 4-5 per month. Downsview is the Global line, with completions and delivery at Dorval. The shorter 8000 design could just as easily be the new 6000-better fuel burn. M.90 Cruise, FBW, larger galley, otherwise very similar size cabin.
TEB-HKG is unlikely, runway length at TEB and 7000nm great circle distance would be a stretch. It wasn’t possible for the original 8000 design. Problem area is crew rest for 17+15 flight time.
Replacement for CL 605/650 is next.
GF
CFRPwingALbody wrote:Good news the Global 7000 is turning out to be beter than expected. Possibly developing the shortened 8000 isn't required anymore. Or it's range could increase as well to over 8200NM.
Didn't Bombardier try to improve the Learjet with the Learjet 85, that turned out disastrous. AFAIK the Challengers are competing much more with the Learjets than the Globals compete with the Learjets.
Max Q wrote:GalaxyFlyer wrote:No Learjet ever competed against the Globals—very different planes. No need for two production lines, we’re talking about, at most, 4-5 per month. Downsview is the Global line, with completions and delivery at Dorval. The shorter 8000 design could just as easily be the new 6000-better fuel burn. M.90 Cruise, FBW, larger galley, otherwise very similar size cabin.
TEB-HKG is unlikely, runway length at TEB and 7000nm great circle distance would be a stretch. It wasn’t possible for the original 8000 design. Problem area is crew rest for 17+15 flight time.
Replacement for CL 605/650 is next.
GF
Interesting points but I don’t think crew rest areas are a big concern for many corporate operators and there’s no regulations mandating them
lightsaber wrote:CFRPwingALbody wrote:Good news the Global 7000 is turning out to be beter than expected. Possibly developing the shortened 8000 isn't required anymore. Or it's range could increase as well to over 8200NM.
Didn't Bombardier try to improve the Learjet with the Learjet 85, that turned out disastrous. AFAIK the Challengers are competing much more with the Learjets than the Globals compete with the Learjets.
It is great news that the 7000 basically has to he range of the promised 8000.
Better to add a tail tank for a 7000ER than a hard to resell shrink.
The Learjet just hasn't had the investment Cessna and Embraer have fone. The L85 was poorly managed, but a neat concept. It would have done well. But now the Embraer and Cessna products are the future. Cest la vie. Bombardier either dies a cleansheet design or will leave the market.
But I didn't mean to derail the thread. It is that business jet design requires investment. Gulfstream will have trouble after Global 7000 production ramps up as this is an amazing design. What will Gulfstream do to counter? Improved engines are a must and prior history has a number if business jets switching vendors for small improvements.
Lightsaber
aemoreira1981 wrote:The Global 8000 is planned to be a shrink of the 7000 with 7900 nmi of range. However, with the ability to easily do a mission like JFK-HKG nonstop (or more likely, TEB-HKG nonstop), what need is there for a shrink? I would say that it's time to abandon the 8000, and I see this as a VIP aircraft of choice for governments without the budget or desire to purchase a mainline jet.
kitplane01 wrote:How does the Global compare with the G-650? Anyone have a feel for which is the preferred platform going forward? Be real interesting to see who wins the sales race.
“We have a healthy order book for the Global 7000 and can confirm that the aircraft is sold out until 2021,” said Bombardier Business Aircraft President David Coleal by email.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:Hinckley,
The people that own these planes look at F in a B777 as if it were economy class, last row. I’ve seen their eyes when told, “the plane has a snag and won’t be available for your trip”. It’s like the scene at Sun Country in Mexico—denial (this can’t be happening), anger (it’s the damned crew’s fault, they didn’t anticipate this”), negotiating (can we get a charter, I can wait til tomorrow morning”), acceptance of the inevitable (alright, but this better not happen again”). Once, “f**k, I’ll cancel the trip for now.”
GF
hinckley wrote:aemoreira1981 wrote:The Global 8000 is planned to be a shrink of the 7000 with 7900 nmi of range. However, with the ability to easily do a mission like JFK-HKG nonstop (or more likely, TEB-HKG nonstop), what need is there for a shrink? I would say that it's time to abandon the 8000, and I see this as a VIP aircraft of choice for governments without the budget or desire to purchase a mainline jet.
I can see this as a government plane, but for me, if I'm flying NYC-HKG, give me the room, comfort and safety of F in a CX 773!
reffado wrote:GalaxyFlyer wrote:Hinckley, The people that own these planes look at F in a B777 as if it were economy class, last row. I’ve seen their eyes when told, “the plane has a snag and won’t be available for your trip”. It’s like the scene at Sun Country in Mexico—denial (this can’t be happening), anger (it’s the damned crew’s fault, they didn’t anticipate this”), negotiating (can we get a charter, I can wait til tomorrow morning”), acceptance of the inevitable (alright, but this better not happen again”). Once, “f**k, I’ll cancel the trip for now.”
Not only are you correct, but for most individuals who outright own jets like these, it's not entirely about comfort - it's about time and convenience. It's about being able to fly from BCT which is 10 minutes from their beachfront $20 million mansion, instead having to take the Rolls Royce through traffic to FLL, PBI or MIA, etc. I literally met a businessman who bought a jet (not a Global, though) once direct scheduled service between his home base and Miami was terminated, because, to him, the time savings of not having to backtrack to the region's international hub was worth the multi-million investment.
With this said, however, I probably would also stick to F. But I live a life that's vastly different from that of Bombardier's target audience.
About the Global 7000 though, I've always wondered with ULR bizjets like these, isn't size an issue? Meaning crew rest areas, and such. I've never been inside such a large bizjet, so I'm really confused by the logistics of it all.
kitplane01 wrote:How does the Global compare with the G-650? Anyone have a feel for which is the preferred platform going forward? The G650 is much more attractive, and probably has a better support network, and is produced by a company with a reputation for management success. But the Global 7000 stats look better. Be real interesting to see who wins the sales race.
Cabin Length: 53 (Global) 47 (G650)
Cabin Width 7.92 (Global) 8.10 (G650)
Range: 7,600 (Global) 7000 (G650)
Runway: 5900 (Global) 6200 (G650)
http://www.dnaviation.com/side-by-side- ... 00-vs-bbj/
https://www.magellanjets.com/blog/gulfs ... hoose.html