Gulfstream to announce new jet Oct 14 2014
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: MCO (occasionally)
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my tours of the factory, my take is that Gulfstream builds most of the fuselage in house, in Savannah.
I think they want to have a differentiated product, which is an upgrade to the 450/550. The 450 is an old dog now, and while the 550 is still a fantastic machine, it seems reasonable to make two versions as long as you're building a new bird. The 650 needs to be the big daddy, and be different from the pack, so it gets the wide body treatment.
Although the Bombardier lovers look at the wide cabin as being a fantastic advantage, most G owners feel that the old-school width is fine. What exactly do you need the 5 extra inches of width in the cabin isle for?
FR
I think they want to have a differentiated product, which is an upgrade to the 450/550. The 450 is an old dog now, and while the 550 is still a fantastic machine, it seems reasonable to make two versions as long as you're building a new bird. The 650 needs to be the big daddy, and be different from the pack, so it gets the wide body treatment.
Although the Bombardier lovers look at the wide cabin as being a fantastic advantage, most G owners feel that the old-school width is fine. What exactly do you need the 5 extra inches of width in the cabin isle for?
FR
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 61
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GF,
Don't know if I'd refer to the Plane View II cockpit on the G650 as "Old", this is still very much a "state of the art" avionics system, but basically the overall thought to the layout and design of the G650 was made with the intention that it would share a common type rating with the G550/450, unfortunately Gulfstream doesn't have the same clout with the FAA that Boeing does and this idea got nixed, the result being that you have a completely new type, "GVI" for the 650.
From my experience flying the two models I can tell you that the G650 is a very different animal from all previous Gulfstreams, the FBW system is completely "invisible" to the pilot and makes it an absolute pleasure to hand fly, it's ground handling, braking and landing characteristics are by far the best of any previous Gulfstream.
As for the Cabin on the 650, I suspect that Gulfstream wanted to build a cabin that would hands down beat the cabin on their principal competitors, namely Bombardier.
I'm guessing that when it came to the new 500/600 models the thinking was that they wanted to develop a model that would best compete with the latest Falcon models in terms of cabin size/range/efficiency without possibly canibalizing the sales of the 650, hence the slightly smaller cabin cross section along with a smaller, more efficient engines that can still deliver what has now become the trademark cruise speed of Gulfstream, Mach.90.
The new Symmetry flight deck takes the existing Plane View a step further and will also be an easy transition for existing 450/550/650 crews. From what I have been able to gather so far these new 500/600 models will also be a further evolution of the 650 which was itself an evolution of the 550 and so on.
Don't know if I'd refer to the Plane View II cockpit on the G650 as "Old", this is still very much a "state of the art" avionics system, but basically the overall thought to the layout and design of the G650 was made with the intention that it would share a common type rating with the G550/450, unfortunately Gulfstream doesn't have the same clout with the FAA that Boeing does and this idea got nixed, the result being that you have a completely new type, "GVI" for the 650.
From my experience flying the two models I can tell you that the G650 is a very different animal from all previous Gulfstreams, the FBW system is completely "invisible" to the pilot and makes it an absolute pleasure to hand fly, it's ground handling, braking and landing characteristics are by far the best of any previous Gulfstream.
As for the Cabin on the 650, I suspect that Gulfstream wanted to build a cabin that would hands down beat the cabin on their principal competitors, namely Bombardier.
I'm guessing that when it came to the new 500/600 models the thinking was that they wanted to develop a model that would best compete with the latest Falcon models in terms of cabin size/range/efficiency without possibly canibalizing the sales of the 650, hence the slightly smaller cabin cross section along with a smaller, more efficient engines that can still deliver what has now become the trademark cruise speed of Gulfstream, Mach.90.
The new Symmetry flight deck takes the existing Plane View a step further and will also be an easy transition for existing 450/550/650 crews. From what I have been able to gather so far these new 500/600 models will also be a further evolution of the 650 which was itself an evolution of the 550 and so on.
Astra,
So, a type certification from 1967 was the basis for trying to make a common type for the G650? Wonderful, the G550 was engineered when the Beatles was the leading edge of music. I would hope it's the best of any Gulfstream, they still didn't make it modern.
See this!
GF
So, a type certification from 1967 was the basis for trying to make a common type for the G650? Wonderful, the G550 was engineered when the Beatles was the leading edge of music. I would hope it's the best of any Gulfstream, they still didn't make it modern.
See this!
My current type is G650 - yes, I'm off the Global, but you cannot be serious about a Global being a step behind a Gulfstream. The G650 has good range, speed and cabin (when the cabin works...) but it is LIGHT YEARS behind when it comes to systems - I'll spell it out for you below...
BD700 - from the early 2000's
G650 - from 2012.
G650 - dark cockpit - you're kidding right?
G650 - Break Power Transfer - WTF? What on earth is this? Cannot transfer from Ext AC power to APU Gen without a Break Power Transfer which can break computers and make your life a misery! Give me a break.
G650 - no RAT autodeploy, must turn off RAT gen first, then deploy RAT, then wait 30 secs and then select RAT gen which will result in a Break Power Transfer - AND no autopilot on the RAT - for goodness sake!
G650 - no autostart - wait, what? On a newer engine varient? Why?
G650 - manual ground spoilers - seriously, I have to power up first, then turn the ground spoilers on, otherwise they'll pop up and scare the pax... Rubbish.
G650 - the most antiquated cabin pressurisation system I have EVER had the displeasure to use.
The G650 takes at least 20 mins longer to prepare for flight than the BD700 - I can go on, but don't have time right now. The old Global is miles ahead of the G650...
Bring it on!
BD700 - from the early 2000's
G650 - from 2012.
G650 - dark cockpit - you're kidding right?
G650 - Break Power Transfer - WTF? What on earth is this? Cannot transfer from Ext AC power to APU Gen without a Break Power Transfer which can break computers and make your life a misery! Give me a break.
G650 - no RAT autodeploy, must turn off RAT gen first, then deploy RAT, then wait 30 secs and then select RAT gen which will result in a Break Power Transfer - AND no autopilot on the RAT - for goodness sake!
G650 - no autostart - wait, what? On a newer engine varient? Why?
G650 - manual ground spoilers - seriously, I have to power up first, then turn the ground spoilers on, otherwise they'll pop up and scare the pax... Rubbish.
G650 - the most antiquated cabin pressurisation system I have EVER had the displeasure to use.
The G650 takes at least 20 mins longer to prepare for flight than the BD700 - I can go on, but don't have time right now. The old Global is miles ahead of the G650...
Bring it on!
Why all the bickering...
Dassault, Gulfstream and Bombardier all make superbe aircrafts!
When a owner pays big bucks for his aircraft a lot of it comes down to his personal preferences for what ever reasons just like when he would chose a Mercedes over a BMW or Audi.
Pilots also have their preferences and no matter how good the competition is you may want and prefer to fly the other brand.
Just my $0.02.
When a owner pays big bucks for his aircraft a lot of it comes down to his personal preferences for what ever reasons just like when he would chose a Mercedes over a BMW or Audi.
Pilots also have their preferences and no matter how good the competition is you may want and prefer to fly the other brand.
Just my $0.02.
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just one question, do the new Gulfstreams have anywhere the room in the cockpit as the Challenger series aircraft?
Not that I'll ever fly again, but still, the biggest shock in my life was when the first time I flew a G-IV was how bloody small the cockpit is, not much room for a guy my size.
Especially when I was going to sit in it for eight hours. The 900EX has a little more room, but not that much really. Hell, the old Jetstar has a lot more leg room in the cockpit and it was designed in the late 50s.
Not that I'll ever fly again, but still, the biggest shock in my life was when the first time I flew a G-IV was how bloody small the cockpit is, not much room for a guy my size.
Especially when I was going to sit in it for eight hours. The 900EX has a little more room, but not that much really. Hell, the old Jetstar has a lot more leg room in the cockpit and it was designed in the late 50s.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 61
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GF,
Well clearly your intimate knowledge of Gulfstream engineering is spot on, nothing has changed since the Beatles were making records, but just like Paul McCartney keeps selling out stadiums, Gulfstream keeps selling airplanes, they both must be doing something right!
As for the former BD700 pilot who for some reason abhors the idea of having to occasionally make a decision for himself, and God forbid, having to lift a finger to do it, I doubt he won't be happy until he gets to fly an airplane that has just two switches, one labeled "On/Off" and the other "Take-off/Land".
In the meantime Gulfstream will continue to build airplanes that actually meet or exceed their design performance expectations.
Well clearly your intimate knowledge of Gulfstream engineering is spot on, nothing has changed since the Beatles were making records, but just like Paul McCartney keeps selling out stadiums, Gulfstream keeps selling airplanes, they both must be doing something right!
As for the former BD700 pilot who for some reason abhors the idea of having to occasionally make a decision for himself, and God forbid, having to lift a finger to do it, I doubt he won't be happy until he gets to fly an airplane that has just two switches, one labeled "On/Off" and the other "Take-off/Land".
In the meantime Gulfstream will continue to build airplanes that actually meet or exceed their design performance expectations.
Oh, dude, that was a bit rough...
I'm happy flying both jets, I just really expected the latest and greatest from Gulfstream to be a fair bit less antiquated. Where did I say anything about not wanting to make decisions?
Why so bitter and nasty? I was critising the jet (and not everything about it) cause I'm lucky enough to be in a position to compare - I'm not some brand fanboy. And I certainly wasn't critising anyone else.
But, Astra Driver, I'll make an exception - you're a knob.
I'm happy flying both jets, I just really expected the latest and greatest from Gulfstream to be a fair bit less antiquated. Where did I say anything about not wanting to make decisions?
Why so bitter and nasty? I was critising the jet (and not everything about it) cause I'm lucky enough to be in a position to compare - I'm not some brand fanboy. And I certainly wasn't critising anyone else.
But, Astra Driver, I'll make an exception - you're a knob.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 61
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joseph,
OK apology issued, I'm a knob. I wanted to address your complaints more specifically but was short on time.
The BPT you get switching from GPU to APU is really a non-issue since it is seldom ever required except in some European airports where there is an APU time limit, if that happens refer to the OIS that tells you to start the APU without the GEN, start at least one engine to get one IDG online and then a no break power transfer from the GPU can be accomplished. I personally have never had to do this yet as the folks at LFPB tell me there is an exemption to the time limit if "no GPU Is available", (handler says as he gives the classic French shrug)
No RAT auto deploy, having to push the GEN off, then on again? I think this is done out of an abundance of caution to preserve what would be in this situation your last continuous power supply left. But since you have 3 GEN's (any one of which is capable of running the entire plane) that would have to crap out before this would happen, (exception being L Main bus fault) the likelyhood of ever actually getting to this point in real life is statistically small, and it if you ever did the fact that you would need to push a couple of buttons and have to hand fly for a bit would be the least of your concerns.
No auto Start? Well if you mean having to wait until you see positive LP rotation before moving the Fuel control switch to "Run", everything is fully automated and protected by the FADEC after that. Really, what's the big deal about having to do that? Personally I think it's a good thing as it keeps the crew more involved in the start process and increases the likelihood of avoiding a start anomaly.
No "Auto" ground spoilers? A bit of a misnomer here as the Ground Spoilers do deploy automatically, but yes, you are required to arm them on line up with at least one throttle "cracked", and yes this step could be avoided by having then linked to a minimum tire or ground speed, but I suspect this was not done as this feature could be one more thing to potentially fail and subsequently cause dispatch ability problems. In day to day operations it really is a non-issue;
"Ground Spoilers", "Do you have one up?", "Yes", "Spoilers armed, speeds boxed, EICAS clear".
"Most antiquated Pressurization system ever"?
Okay, you have me stumped here, a fully automated system which requires virtually no input from the crew other than to verify it's in AUTO and a couple of pre-flight checks of the back up systems. A system that also provides what is probably the highest pressurization differential (10.69psi) in Aviation resulting in a cabin altitude of 4,850 ft at FL510 or slightly over 3,000ft at typical low 40's cruise altitudes and has full redundancy and multiple back up modes.
"G650 takes 20 minutes longer to preflight than BD700"
I find that with a competent Co-Pilot I can have the 650 ready to go in about 15 to 20 minutes, usually the limiting factor here is how long it takes to Fuel or more often how long the FA needs to get ready.
I can see where crew new to the aircraft will need more time to prepare and I think part of the problem here is the way the checklist is written, it bares no resemblance to a logical flow pattern and can trip up crews new to the airplane.
Add to this the incorrect rumors that you can't turn on the FBW system or the GCMS until the IRU's are aligned. (The IRU's just need to be switched ON first, it's OK if they are still aligning).
I'm sure folks here can find other "Short comings" to list, but the point is every Aircraft has its strong and weak points. I've never flown a Bombardier product but I'm sure I would list its strong points and look past its weak points if I had.
OK apology issued, I'm a knob. I wanted to address your complaints more specifically but was short on time.
The BPT you get switching from GPU to APU is really a non-issue since it is seldom ever required except in some European airports where there is an APU time limit, if that happens refer to the OIS that tells you to start the APU without the GEN, start at least one engine to get one IDG online and then a no break power transfer from the GPU can be accomplished. I personally have never had to do this yet as the folks at LFPB tell me there is an exemption to the time limit if "no GPU Is available", (handler says as he gives the classic French shrug)
No RAT auto deploy, having to push the GEN off, then on again? I think this is done out of an abundance of caution to preserve what would be in this situation your last continuous power supply left. But since you have 3 GEN's (any one of which is capable of running the entire plane) that would have to crap out before this would happen, (exception being L Main bus fault) the likelyhood of ever actually getting to this point in real life is statistically small, and it if you ever did the fact that you would need to push a couple of buttons and have to hand fly for a bit would be the least of your concerns.
No auto Start? Well if you mean having to wait until you see positive LP rotation before moving the Fuel control switch to "Run", everything is fully automated and protected by the FADEC after that. Really, what's the big deal about having to do that? Personally I think it's a good thing as it keeps the crew more involved in the start process and increases the likelihood of avoiding a start anomaly.
No "Auto" ground spoilers? A bit of a misnomer here as the Ground Spoilers do deploy automatically, but yes, you are required to arm them on line up with at least one throttle "cracked", and yes this step could be avoided by having then linked to a minimum tire or ground speed, but I suspect this was not done as this feature could be one more thing to potentially fail and subsequently cause dispatch ability problems. In day to day operations it really is a non-issue;
"Ground Spoilers", "Do you have one up?", "Yes", "Spoilers armed, speeds boxed, EICAS clear".
"Most antiquated Pressurization system ever"?
Okay, you have me stumped here, a fully automated system which requires virtually no input from the crew other than to verify it's in AUTO and a couple of pre-flight checks of the back up systems. A system that also provides what is probably the highest pressurization differential (10.69psi) in Aviation resulting in a cabin altitude of 4,850 ft at FL510 or slightly over 3,000ft at typical low 40's cruise altitudes and has full redundancy and multiple back up modes.
"G650 takes 20 minutes longer to preflight than BD700"
I find that with a competent Co-Pilot I can have the 650 ready to go in about 15 to 20 minutes, usually the limiting factor here is how long it takes to Fuel or more often how long the FA needs to get ready.
I can see where crew new to the aircraft will need more time to prepare and I think part of the problem here is the way the checklist is written, it bares no resemblance to a logical flow pattern and can trip up crews new to the airplane.
Add to this the incorrect rumors that you can't turn on the FBW system or the GCMS until the IRU's are aligned. (The IRU's just need to be switched ON first, it's OK if they are still aligning).
I'm sure folks here can find other "Short comings" to list, but the point is every Aircraft has its strong and weak points. I've never flown a Bombardier product but I'm sure I would list its strong points and look past its weak points if I had.
Ad Astra and I have had a chat behind the scenes - evidently he's not a "knob" - we both had a simultaneous vent of frustration and agree that life is pretty good in any such aircraft! Apologies for the name calling...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my tours of the factory, my take is that Gulfstream builds most of the fuselage in house, in Savannah.
I think they want to have a differentiated product, which is an upgrade to the 450/550. The 450 is an old dog now, and while the 550 is still a fantastic machine, it seems reasonable to make two versions as long as you're building a new bird. The 650 needs to be the big daddy, and be different from the pack, so it gets the wide body treatment.
I think they want to have a differentiated product, which is an upgrade to the 450/550. The 450 is an old dog now, and while the 550 is still a fantastic machine, it seems reasonable to make two versions as long as you're building a new bird. The 650 needs to be the big daddy, and be different from the pack, so it gets the wide body treatment.
How does that compare with BBD for its Global series. Can they use just one assembly line if the various Globals all have the same width.
I find it amazing that a G500 lists as over 20 million cheaper than a G650. Is the G650 really that much better?
