Bombardier today annouced the Global 5500 and Global 6500 with new RR engines:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ing-demand

Am I correct that this mark the rather surprising re-entry of Rolls Royce into the biz jet market? I would surely have expected them to return on a new biz jet in the future after loosing out on the Gulfstream, but this quickly?

https://twitter.com/RollsRoyce/status/1000816571235950592Interesting new engine from RR: Pearl

Anybody have any details?

GulfstreamFive wrote:

Anybody have any details?

BR700NG.

edit: Actually thinking about it, it might not be. I'll need to check a few things.

I suspect it’s a refinement of the BR725 presently only on the G650. Add in wing refinements, the extra climb thrust FBW technology from the G7000 and you have a 500-700 nm range increase easily. Should be a great competitor to the new GLF models.


GF

What's the difference with the BGE? Is it just the engines and the minor details or is it a length difference or something else too?

What’s a BGE? Probably the new G7000 fuselage and FBW but now G6000 (also about G8000) length.

GF

Not that much of s surprise. There was a huge gap in the Bombs lineup that was uncompetitive with the G500/G600 and Falcon 6X. Something had to be done.

Engine work was intense 5 years ago. I'm glad it moved forward.

A new wing was a must. The old wing was too slow at cruise.

What this is bad news for is the Falcon 8X and resale values of the G550. As much noise as has been made of the recovery in used business jet sales, has anyone looked at how long it takes to sell a plane as well as the prices? Oh, people who have held on since 2009 are selling, but at appropriate pricing for aircraft age and now buying new.

Lightsaber

Late edit, link noting new wings:
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1IS0OG

On the Bombardier biz jet webseite we can currently see these models: Global 5000, 5500, 6000, 6500, 7000, 7500 (!!!???) and 8000 (on hold).

I have never heard of a Global 7500 before....

Am I correct the 7000 had better range than anticipated, pretty much neutralizing the need for a shrink -8000? Does 7500 complete this?

A bit more. Global 7500 is just a renamed 7000. I assume the web page is keeping the 7000 for those familiar with the name.

Rolls Royce Pearl engines... Ok, a River in China? Am I dating myself recalling RR engines were named after rivers?

9% more thrust.

https://airinsight.com/bombardier-launc ... -at-ebace/

It doesn’t look like the G7000 windows, so I’m guessing it’s the current G6000 fuselag3 refreshed.

GF

lightsaber wrote:

Rolls Royce Pearl engines... Ok, a River in China? Am I dating myself recalling RR engines were named after rivers?

9% more thrust.

https://airinsight.com/bombardier-launc ... -at-ebace/

That has always been the case, going down the Chinese named route is like Manufactures putting an 8- on the Aircraft I suppose....

Wes...

wezgulf3 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Rolls Royce Pearl engines... Ok, a River in China? Am I dating myself recalling RR engines were named after rivers?

9% more thrust.

https://airinsight.com/bombardier-launc ... -at-ebace/

That has always been the case, going down the Chinese named route is like Manufactures putting an 8- on the Aircraft I suppose....

Wes...

RR engines were named after rivers at the start of the jet age, highlighted the air flow through jet engines as being like the flow of a river. A few names were Welland, Nene, Dart, Avon, Conway, Spey, Tay, Trent etc. These were all UK rivers. The Pearl looks a sound choice of river for an international firm. RR Pearl details are on the RR web pages from 08.00 UK time.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

It doesn’t look like the G7000 windows, so I’m guessing it’s the current G6000 fuselag3 refreshed.

GF

Right, the Global 6500 prototype at Ebace is a modified Global 6000.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I suspect it’s a refinement of the BR725 presently only on the G650. Add in wing refinements, the extra climb thrust FBW technology from the G7000 and you have a 500-700 nm range increase easily. Should be a great competitor to the new GLF models.


GF

No, it's a new engine family based on Advance 2 program.

queb wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I suspect it’s a refinement of the BR725 presently only on the G650. Add in wing refinements, the extra climb thrust FBW technology from the G7000 and you have a 500-700 nm range increase easily. Should be a great competitor to the new GLF models.


GF

No, it's a new engine family based on Advance 2 program.

BR700NG

https://www.rolls-royce.com/products-an ... cts.aspx#/


edit: ugh. Dopey webpage about as logical as RR's systems. From the link above, go down to "related stories" and click on "Rolls-Royce celebrates launch of new Pearl engine family".

So this.....
https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/press-releases/2018/28-05-2018-rr-celebrates-launch-of-new-pearl-engine-family.aspx

GulfstreamFive wrote:

So this.....
https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/press-releases/2018/28-05-2018-rr-celebrates-launch-of-new-pearl-engine-family.aspx

Yep - that.

Were you able to get that link from the other page? Or did you have to re-route through somewhere?

Pretty intense secret to keep all this time without any leaks. An optimized wing, new engines (already certified) and a prototype they can fly across the Atlantic, and not a whisper!

Not only did they supplant Gulfstream's latest entries completely, they keep secrets better than them as well!

I think this will scare the boys in Savannah, in the end all that new technology is candy for for the pilots with marginal improvements in safety (touchscreen, coupled sidesticks...). Operators will look at performance only.

This move just vindicated Bellemare, and I am a big critic of their management given my trauma from working on CSeries.

Not a clue this was coming, and great way to do it as well! Perfect move from Montreal.

Cheers
rP

rocketPower wrote:

This move just vindicated Bellemare, and I am a big critic of their management given my trauma from working on CSeries.

Not a clue this was coming, and great way to do it as well! Perfect move from Montreal.

Yes, most un-Montreal like!! Usually full of bluster, powerpoints and idiotic decisions.



----------
Would I be correct in saying this completely undermines the two new Gulfstream's that are yet to enter service?

Amiga500 wrote:

rocketPower wrote:

This move just vindicated Bellemare, and I am a big critic of their management given my trauma from working on CSeries.

Not a clue this was coming, and great way to do it as well! Perfect move from Montreal.

Yes, most un-Montreal like!! Usually full of bluster, powerpoints and idiotic decisions.



----------
Would I be correct in saying this completely undermines the two new Gulfstream's that are yet to enter service?

Yes and no. Gulfstream has an incredibly loyal customer base. Once an operator operates a Gulfstream and wants to upgrade, they usually go right up the GLF product line. But sometimes you see an operator switch brands once a new model comes out. For example, I know a couple number of owners of GLF4's / GLF5's (legacy V's) who went to the Global 6000 after it was introduced. You'd be surprised on how much cabin width goes into buying a biz jet, and they didn't feel like waiting ~5 yrs for a G650 or have to pay 5 extra million for one on the market. Sometimes with these expensive toys, it's not what new model you have, it's how fast you get it!! But seriously, Gulfstream operators will typically stick with Gulfstream and Global operators will stick with Global. Both product lines will do just fine

Personally I think the Global 7500 will be the game changer. The largest cabin of any purpose built biz jet and greater range over G650ER.

I can see the Global 8000 getting axed for good. I don't think any operator will sacrifice the cabin space just for an extra 200nm in range. In other words, there are one maybe two operator who would actually use that extra 200 miles regularly.

Gulfstream G650ER range - 7500nm Cabin length - 46 ft 10 in
Global 7500 range - 7700 nm Cabin length - 54 ft 7 in
Global 8000 range - 7900 nm Cabin length - 45 ft 7 in

The cabin is what sells the airplane, once ranges are similar!

rocketPower wrote:

Pretty intense secret to keep all this time without any leaks. An optimized wing, new engines (already certified) and a prototype they can fly across the Atlantic, and not a whisper!

Not only did they supplant Gulfstream's latest entries completely, they keep secrets better than them as well!

I think this will scare the boys in Savannah, in the end all that new technology is candy for for the pilots with marginal improvements in safety (touchscreen, coupled sidesticks...). Operators will look at performance only.

Not a clue this was coming, and great way to do it as well! Perfect move from Montreal.

Cheers
rP

Actually, if you know your history Gulfstream keeps their secrets as well as anyone. Remember the first press release about the G500/G600? No one had any idea it was a project and at that very press conference the G500 actually taxi'd up to the reporters! Now that's a well kept secret.

Not taking away anything from Bombardier's achievement but let's not get carried away with ourselves.

jackieman27 wrote:

Personally I think the Global 7500 will be the game changer. The largest cabin of any purpose built biz jet and greater range over G650ER.

I can see the Global 8000 getting axed for good. I don't think any operator will sacrifice the cabin space just for an extra 200nm in range. In other words, there are one maybe two operator who would actually use that extra 200 miles regularly.

Gulfstream G650ER range - 7500nm Cabin length - 46 ft 10 in
Global 7500 range - 7700 nm Cabin length - 54 ft 7 in
Global 8000 range - 7900 nm Cabin length - 45 ft 7 in

The cabin is what sells the airplane, once ranges are similar!

Keep in mind the G650/G650ER actually have wider cabins than the Global 7500/6500/5500. They are all comfortable cabins but the G650 has no worries about cabin comfort or utility.

Regarding the Global 8000, I imagine it may still be made because the very improvements that led to the G7000 being rebranded the G7500 would also likely apply to the G8000 giving it possibly a greater than 7900 nm range. Maybe they'll re-brand it the G8500! Now that is a jet I'd like to see.

jackieman27 wrote:

Personally I think the Global 7500 will be the game changer. The largest cabin of any purpose built biz jet and greater range over G650ER.

I can see the Global 8000 getting axed for good. I don't think any operator will sacrifice the cabin space just for an extra 200nm in range. In other words, there are one maybe two operator who would actually use that extra 200 miles regularly.

Gulfstream G650ER range - 7500nm Cabin length - 46 ft 10 in
Global 7500 range - 7700 nm Cabin length - 54 ft 7 in
Global 8000 range - 7900 nm Cabin length - 45 ft 7 in

The cabin is what sells the airplane, once ranges are similar!

The Global 8000 specs you indicated are those that were planned when the Global 7000 was to have 7400 nm range. Considering the new specs of the 7500, if BBD was to shrink it and get more range we would be looking at a 8200-8300 nm bird.

Is there a market for such a plane? If a market exist but the closest alternative is a Global 7500, why would BBD spend $$$ to develop it just to cannibalize itself?

Me think BBD will sit tight and burn thru the 7500 backlog. They definitely need a few years of good revenues and profits to pay down their debts and lick their wounds (Cseries, Lear85). The 7500 is a brand new platform at I'm sure they can expand it later (Strecth, shrink, PIPs), once (if) Gulfstream eventually reacts with a aircraft that matches or surpass the specs of the 7500.

Pearl engines "real" name is BR700-710D5-21

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... e%2011.pdf

queb wrote:

Pearl engines "real" name is BR700-710D5-21

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... e%2011.pdf

My, you have been busy, well done. But the name is Pearl 15, the certification number is just that?

Egerton wrote:

queb wrote:

Pearl engines "real" name is BR700-710D5-21

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... e%2011.pdf

My, you have been busy, well done. But the name is Pearl 15, the certification number is just that?

“Pearl” is the marketing name. The official name is what is on the certificate. They usually match, but not always (especially if it is a BBD product).

Another potential candidate for a CRJneo.

Polot wrote:

Egerton wrote:

queb wrote:

Pearl engines "real" name is BR700-710D5-21

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... e%2011.pdf

My, you have been busy, well done. But the name is Pearl 15, the certification number is just that?

“Pearl” is the marketing name. The official name is what is on the certificate. They usually match, but not always (especially if it is a BBD product).

Come on my dear Polot, a name is what someone or something is called. This pearl is called Pearl 15. What is on the certificate is for 99% of the population just irrelevant.

Egerton wrote:

Polot wrote:

Egerton wrote:

My, you have been busy, well done. But the name is Pearl 15, the certification number is just that?

“Pearl” is the marketing name. The official name is what is on the certificate. They usually match, but not always (especially if it is a BBD product).

Come on my dear Polot, a name is what someone or something is called. This pearl is called Pearl 15. What is on the certificate is for 99% of the population just irrelevant.

Right, and it’s official name is the BR700-710D5-21, which may be of interest to people here trying to dig up more info about the engine. What RR calls it in marketing material is irrelevant to 99% of the population too.

So BBD was quietly flight testing this aircraft all this time? Already over 2000 hours in trying for the Global 7500
https://twitter.com/bombardierjets/stat ... 47360?s=21

Navion wrote:

Actually, if you know your history Gulfstream keeps their secrets as well as anyone. Remember the first press release about the G500/G600? No one had any idea it was a project and at that very press conference the G500 actually taxi'd up to the reporters! Now that's a well kept secret.

Not taking away anything from Bombardier's achievement but let's not get carried away with ourselves.

I think flying it across the Atlantic and nobody knowing what was actually coming kinda beats that no?

Amiga500 wrote:

Yes, most un-Montreal like!! Usually full of bluster, powerpoints and idiotic decisions.



----------
Would I be correct in saying this completely undermines the two new Gulfstream's that are yet to enter service?

Yeah this got my silicon-valley-style new phone launch excited. Was Bellemare wearing a turtle neck and jeans.

And yes part of this excitement is that they completely undermined G500/600. All the technologies that matter are on the G6500/5500 now. Better engine, wing and avionics. And no one cares about touchscreens or coupled sidesticks if it doesn't perform as well. The only thing the new globals are missing is the FBW of the 7500, but maybe I'm biased on that.

rocketPower wrote:

Navion wrote:

Actually, if you know your history Gulfstream keeps their secrets as well as anyone. Remember the first press release about the G500/G600? No one had any idea it was a project and at that very press conference the G500 actually taxi'd up to the reporters! Now that's a well kept secret.

Not taking away anything from Bombardier's achievement but let's not get carried away with ourselves.

I think flying it across the Atlantic and nobody knowing what was actually coming kinda beats that no?

If it was a new airframe then you'd be right, but that is not what crossed the Atlantic. It is basically the same Global 6000 airframe with new engines, albeit in the same nacelles, with basically the same avionics (sounds like enhanced), and a treatment to the trailing edge of the wing. That wouldn't be noticeable.

A G500, which never existed before and was a completely new aircraft, now that is tougher IMO.

rocketPower wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Yes, most un-Montreal like!! Usually full of bluster, powerpoints and idiotic decisions.



----------
Would I be correct in saying this completely undermines the two new Gulfstream's that are yet to enter service?

Yeah this got my silicon-valley-style new phone launch excited. Was Bellemare wearing a turtle neck and jeans.

And yes part of this excitement is that they completely undermined G500/600. All the technologies that matter are on the G6500/5500 now. Better engine, wing and avionics. And no one cares about touchscreens or coupled sidesticks if it doesn't perform as well. The only thing the new globals are missing is the FBW of the 7500, but maybe I'm biased on that.

I really don’t think this update of an aged platform is something that I’d say “completely undermined” Gulfstream. At first glance, I do like the looks of the new HUD and Nuage seat. I also like the ProLine 21 based Fusion cockpits but they don’t seem to be boasting about some of the RAAS and airport/taxiway viewing capabilities of the new Honeywell product in the 500/600. As you mention, the FBW is a very nice safety enhancement and the one aspect you don’t address pertaining to FBW and the side sticks is weight savings vs legacy systems. For instance, the 5500s BOW is ~4000lbs heavier than the 500 and although the 5500 has 500nm more range, it’ll take an extra 9000lbs (nearly 30% more fuel) to get the extra 1 hour+ of flight (only 9% more range). The 500 also has a high speed cruise advantage, .90 vs .88. Then you have the large Gulfstream windows vs the old Global windows, in fact I’m really surprised they didn’t change to the new 7000/7500 windows. The engines seem to be awash on paper, but both manufacturers are having major issues with airliner models, and it’ll be interesting to see how that affects EIS of both planes. So in the end the G500 has a 13400lb lighter MTOW with similar thrust engines, more speed, and a very similar cabin. So minus 500nm’s I think the G500 will hold its own just fine, including performance wise.

G500Captain wrote:

rocketPower wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Yes, most un-Montreal like!! Usually full of bluster, powerpoints and idiotic decisions.



----------
Would I be correct in saying this completely undermines the two new Gulfstream's that are yet to enter service?

Yeah this got my silicon-valley-style new phone launch excited. Was Bellemare wearing a turtle neck and jeans.

And yes part of this excitement is that they completely undermined G500/600. All the technologies that matter are on the G6500/5500 now. Better engine, wing and avionics. And no one cares about touchscreens or coupled sidesticks if it doesn't perform as well. The only thing the new globals are missing is the FBW of the 7500, but maybe I'm biased on that.

I really don’t think this update of an aged platform is something that I’d say “completely undermined” Gulfstream. At first glance, I do like the looks of the new HUD and Nuage seat. I also like the ProLine 21 based Fusion cockpits but they don’t seem to be boasting about some of the RAAS and airport/taxiway viewing capabilities of the new Honeywell product in the 500/600. As you mention, the FBW is a very nice safety enhancement and the one aspect you don’t address pertaining to FBW and the side sticks is weight savings vs legacy systems. For instance, the 5500s BOW is ~4000lbs heavier than the 500 and although the 5500 has 500nm more range, it’ll take an extra 9000lbs (nearly 30% more fuel) to get the extra 1 hour+ of flight (only 9% more range). The 500 also has a high speed cruise advantage, .90 vs .88. Then you have the large Gulfstream windows vs the old Global windows, in fact I’m really surprised they didn’t change to the new 7000/7500 windows. The engines seem to be awash on paper, but both manufacturers are having major issues with airliner models, and it’ll be interesting to see how that affects EIS of both planes. So in the end the G500 has a 13400lb lighter MTOW with similar thrust engines, more speed, and a very similar cabin. So minus 500nm’s I think the G500 will hold its own just fine, including performance wise.

Hmm are you sure about these numbers? The below link says fuel burn is reduced by 13% and it's max speed has been increased to M.90 too.


https://airinsight.com/bombardier-launc ... -at-ebace/

G500Captain wrote:

I really don’t think this update of an aged platform is something that I’d say “completely undermined” Gulfstream.

So minus 500nm’s I think the G500 will hold its own just fine, including performance wise.

My logic was along the lines of; Gulfstream have just sunk X billion into developing the G500/600.

Bombardier have spent X/Y (Y >> 1) on the Global5500/6500 and achieved much the same capabilities, better in some areas, worse in others.


Imagine if Boeing or Airbus had decided to renew their single-aisle line in 2010 - and the other decided to re-engine (and fit a trailing edge extension) a couple of years later and roughly matched their EIS date with a similar performing platform. This place would be in meltdown.

waly777 wrote:

G500Captain wrote:

rocketPower wrote:

Yeah this got my silicon-valley-style new phone launch excited. Was Bellemare wearing a turtle neck and jeans.

And yes part of this excitement is that they completely undermined G500/600. All the technologies that matter are on the G6500/5500 now. Better engine, wing and avionics. And no one cares about touchscreens or coupled sidesticks if it doesn't perform as well. The only thing the new globals are missing is the FBW of the 7500, but maybe I'm biased on that.

I really don’t think this update of an aged platform is something that I’d say “completely undermined” Gulfstream. At first glance, I do like the looks of the new HUD and Nuage seat. I also like the ProLine 21 based Fusion cockpits but they don’t seem to be boasting about some of the RAAS and airport/taxiway viewing capabilities of the new Honeywell product in the 500/600. As you mention, the FBW is a very nice safety enhancement and the one aspect you don’t address pertaining to FBW and the side sticks is weight savings vs legacy systems. For instance, the 5500s BOW is ~4000lbs heavier than the 500 and although the 5500 has 500nm more range, it’ll take an extra 9000lbs (nearly 30% more fuel) to get the extra 1 hour+ of flight (only 9% more range). The 500 also has a high speed cruise advantage, .90 vs .88. Then you have the large Gulfstream windows vs the old Global windows, in fact I’m really surprised they didn’t change to the new 7000/7500 windows. The engines seem to be awash on paper, but both manufacturers are having major issues with airliner models, and it’ll be interesting to see how that affects EIS of both planes. So in the end the G500 has a 13400lb lighter MTOW with similar thrust engines, more speed, and a very similar cabin. So minus 500nm’s I think the G500 will hold its own just fine, including performance wise.

Hmm are you sure about these numbers? The below link says fuel burn is reduced by 13% and it's max speed has been increased to M.90 too.


https://airinsight.com/bombardier-launc ... -at-ebace/

Yes, .90 is the Mmo and according to Bombardiers website .88 is listed as high speed cruise. As for the 13%, you have to read the presser carefully, that number refers to the fuel burn reduction over the Global 5000, which was always a bit of a fuel hog.

Amiga500 wrote:

G500Captain wrote:

I really don’t think this update of an aged platform is something that I’d say “completely undermined” Gulfstream.

So minus 500nm’s I think the G500 will hold its own just fine, including performance wise.

My logic was along the lines of; Gulfstream have just sunk X billion into developing the G500/600.

Bombardier have spent X/Y (Y >> 1) on the Global5500/6500 and achieved much the same capabilities, better in some areas, worse in others.


Imagine if Boeing or Airbus had decided to renew their single-aisle line in 2010 - and the other decided to re-engine (and fit a trailing edge extension) a couple of years later and roughly matched their EIS date with a similar performing platform. This place would be in meltdown.

Fair enough, and fortunately in corporate aviation we’re not always too worried about every pound of fuel burn, and actully cabins often times will sell airplanes. Thus the seats, I think, can be huge. I will say that with the C-series $ issues I am fairly impressed they were able to pull this off before the 7500 certification. They must have had to dig deep into the coffers or take a pretty big loan. We’ll just have to see if the order book is able to justify the investment when going up against this kind of competition. But with the already very obvious fuel burn differences, I can already see CFOs looking at the cost of ownership and seeing a definite advantage on the Gulfstream side.

Now we just need to get that type certificate so we can see what the G700 and/or G800 will look like.

I would surely have expected them to return on a new biz jet in the future after loosing out on the Gulfstream, but this quickly?

Work on the BR700NG program has still been going on these past years, even if it moved behind the scenes, or partially changed name (Advance2). The engine was developed at RR's Berlin-Dahlewitz site, which is their center for small engines, and that is also where they are testing the gearbox for their own future version of the GTF. The engine is certified since 28th february, but they have kept it quiet (and asked EASA to do likewise, as it only just appeared on their website).

Pearl engines "real" name is BR700-710D5-21

I suspect it’s a refinement of the BR725 presently only on the G650

As the type certificate confirms, it is an evolution of the BR710, not the BR725. And the type certificate name gives a lot more information about the engine - specially of they type that we are looking for on a.net - than "Pearl". Just like 787-9 gives more information about the aircraft than "Dreamliner".

At 7% (*) better fuel burn with 9% more thrust, while keeping the same nacelle footprint, this necessarily implies a new, smaller, more efficient core.
High pressure compressor & turbine stages are staying the same as BR710 at 10 and 2 respectively, so no change in overall core architecture.

On the low pressure side, note also that it has a 3-stage LPT instead of the 2-stage LPT of the BR710. And expect some minor refinements to the fan even if it stays the same in diameter and number of blades.

Given that the "Pearl" has been announced as a family (you gotta get the most out of that new core), you can guess for yourself what the next member could be...

(*) The airinsight article states 13% better fuel burn, but the RR press release says 7%. I consider RR as the valid source, the number given by airinsight is likely the overall aicraft fuel burn improvement, once the new wing etc are accounted for. But their wording is ambiguous.

r2rho wrote:

At 7% (*) better fuel burn with 9% more thrust, while keeping the same nacelle footprint, this necessarily implies a new, smaller, more efficient core.
High pressure compressor & turbine stages are staying the same as BR710 at 10 and 2 respectively, so no change in overall core architecture.

On the low pressure side, note also that it has a 3-stage LPT instead of the 2-stage LPT of the BR710. And expect some minor refinements to the fan even if it stays the same in diameter and number of blades.

Given that the "Pearl" has been announced as a family (you gotta get the most out of that new core), you can guess for yourself what the next member could be...

(*) The airinsight article states 13% better fuel burn, but the RR press release says 7%. I consider RR as the valid source, the number given by airinsight is likely the overall aicraft fuel burn improvement, once the new wing etc are accounted for. But their wording is ambiguous.

Guess the next member? I honestly thought the first platform would be for the G650. With the Global 7000, Gulfstream must improve that airframe. a 7% cut in fuel burn coupled with a bit more thrust would allow a small stretch to stay competitive.

So what will gulfstream do on the low end? The G280 isn't the right plane to anchor the line. While the G500 is a very nice replacement for the G450, the Global 5500 and 6500 will keep Gulfstream from owning the mid-market. (I'm a Pratt fan).

So overall for RR:
1. High end the GE Passport will be a thorn in every competition vs. a new higher thrust Pearl.
2. Mid-high end, the PW816 will be a thorn in every competition vs. the Pearl.
3. Low end of the high end, the PW812 is very competitive and if the Silvercrest is re-born, I see no open market space.

This leaves the question of if there will be a new engine the next tier down. Both Honeywell and Pratt offer... out of date engines in that category.

What will Bombardier do for replacing the Challenger 350? For the Challenger 650, a new wing and either PW812s for the Silvercrest is the obvious solution.

For what it is worth, I think the 5500 and 6500 will save Bombardier's high end business jet business. The 7000 made the company vulnerable in the category below.

Am I bad for wishing Bombardier had picked the PW816?

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Guess the next member?

I'd imagine they have to be looking at the CRJs.

Particularly if scope doesn't shift.

A re-engined CRJ with ~10% sfc improvement is gonna appeal to many many bean counters if Embraer cannot offer the 175-E2.

Amiga500 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Guess the next member?

I'd imagine they have to be looking at the CRJs.

Particularly if scope doesn't shift.

A re-engined CRJ with ~10% sfc improvement is gonna appeal to many many bean counters if Embraer cannot offer the 175-E2.

Next will be to replace the BR725 on the G650.

The Pearl could be a new CRJ core. But that is later. Too much earlier work was for components optimized for business jet duty. Due to the higher cruise speed of today's business jets, we have lost commonality with commercial low spools and externals.

Lightsaber

Dash9 wrote:

On the Bombardier biz jet webseite we can currently see these models: Global 5000, 5500, 6000, 6500, 7000, 7500 (!!!???) and 8000 (on hold).

I have never heard of a Global 7500 before....

No more Global 7000. It's now officially the 7500.

https://businessaircraft.bombardier.com/en/aircraft

After reading this on the Pearl on Flight Global's site...

"The layout of the Pearl 15’s engine core is strikingly similar to the company’s BR.725. It features a 10-stage high-pressure compressor, although with six instead of five stages of blisks. The compression ratio is 50% higher, rising to 24:1 on a faster rotation speed and a more advanced cooling system, Goodhead says. It uses a new combustor that leverages advances introduced on the Trent XWB engine family. Like the BR.725, the Pearl 15 uses a two-stage high-pressure turbine.

The low-pressure section also bears a similar profile to the BR.725, yet is significantly more efficient in operation. The 24 titanium fan blades match the profile and 50in-diameter of the BR.725, but use a lighter fan containment system."

I would assume that the Pearl 15 would also be the next upgrade for the BR.725, probably marketed as the Pearl 17 (16,900 lbs thrust like the 725). I'd imagine that they have retained the ability to modify thrust via software and have mentioned on their site that the Pearl family will span from 10K to 20K lbs thrust.

It looks like the Wikipedia page has also been updated to include the Pearl information and also follow on development guidance for the Pearl family and the Advance3 program for the BR-700 series.

Guess the next member? I honestly thought the first platform would be for the G650. With the Global 7000, Gulfstream must improve that airframe. a 7% cut in fuel burn coupled with a bit more thrust would allow a small stretch to stay competitive.

I was referring to the next member of the BR700NG / now Pearl engine family, not the aircraft for which we can only speculate.
But it seems clear to me that a follow--on for the BR725 is due next.

I also see the G650 as the next logical candidate for a BR725NG / Pearl XX. And perhaps even the B-52 re-engine?
A CRJ NEO with a Pearl 15 adapted for higher-cycle airline use would be nice, but mostly limited to the scope-clause US market.