Falcon 2000S
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Falcon 2000S
16 MAY 2011
Dassault Introduces the Falcon 2000S
(Geneva, Switzerland, May 16, 2011) – Dassault Falcon today launched the Falcon 2000S, bringing a large cabin aircraft to the super mid-sized business jet market. It will offer category-leading payload, range, performance and efficiency. The 3,350 nm Falcon 2000S will feature inboard slats, high-Mach blended winglets, a new generation PW308C engine that produces fewer emissions, an entirely new BMW Group DesignworksUSA interior and redesigned cockpit aesthetics along with the next-generation EASy II flight deck. It is expected to be certified in the end of 2012 with deliveries beginning in early 2013.
Dassault Introduces the Falcon 2000S
(Geneva, Switzerland, May 16, 2011) – Dassault Falcon today launched the Falcon 2000S, bringing a large cabin aircraft to the super mid-sized business jet market. It will offer category-leading payload, range, performance and efficiency. The 3,350 nm Falcon 2000S will feature inboard slats, high-Mach blended winglets, a new generation PW308C engine that produces fewer emissions, an entirely new BMW Group DesignworksUSA interior and redesigned cockpit aesthetics along with the next-generation EASy II flight deck. It is expected to be certified in the end of 2012 with deliveries beginning in early 2013.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: where the money is
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adding the inboard slats to the F2000's wing is a long-awaited improvement. I am wondering why they haven't come up with this earlier, since the F2000 and the F900 share the same wing - with the exception of the slats at the wing root.
Will they let the 2000DX die slowly now?
Probably next on the to-do list...
Will they let the 2000DX die slowly now?
I was hoping to see them come up with a stretched 7X to better compete with GLEX and G5 cabins. Perhaps that segment is a lost one already....?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was hoping to see them come up with a stretched 7X to better compete with GLEX and G5 cabins. Perhaps that segment is a lost one already....?
They have this installed user base of Falcon 50 and Falcon 900 owners that they will lose if they don't service them with a new product. "Falcon SMS" was supposed to have serviced that Falcon 50 market. Thats why I think that their next major project will not be a significant reworking of the 7X. They stopped making the Falcon 50 after many years of production several years ago. The Falcon 900LX that they are still manufacturing is based on a 27 year old airframe. Older if you consider that the wing for the original 900 is almost directly from the 50.
So Falcon 50 or 900 replacements are the obvious next project for Dassault... and they have publicized that their next project will be "Super MidSize"... a 50 replacement then.
However, what has always intrigued me about "Falcon SMS" is that back in 2007, they awarded Rolls Royce the engine for Falcon SMS for their new 10,000 lb engines, and a while later that announced that they were nullifying that selection as they needed more power and wanted to re-select an engine based on their new requirements. What they hell kind of plane are they building that they need that kind of thrust? Certainly not a super midsize like we currently have on the market. The 2000S and 2000LX have large cabins and their engines only make 7,000 lbs. The largest and highest output super midsize, the G250, has 7,450 lb engines.
I guess there are a few possibilities.
1: Are they building the "Citation X of the SMS class", traditional SMS cabin and range with very high cruise speeds? Doubtful to me, Dassault has historically focused on low operating costs.
2: Are they building a plane with an SMS sized cabin but with Falcon 900 type range? There is some sense to this as it would allow Dassault to sell a smaller and thus cheaper plane for people to do longer segments with.
Seems to me like its just a matter of how much cheaper they can actually make it because as long as people are already paying for an airplane that can do that range, I think they are also willing to pay a little more to have the comfort of a traditional large cabin.
3: Were they originally planning on building a Falcon 50 replacement, but then perhaps seeing the SMS category too overcrowded with new designs, decide to go straight to making a Falcon 900 replacement?
This is my favorite oddball theory. My reasoning is that while Dassault may have invented the SMS category with the 50, a lot of people are playing now:
Hawker 4000
Challenger 300
Citation Ten
Legacy 500
G250
Why enter that market? Even without Dassault adding another airplane, I think it will be hard for the airframers to make money on those projects. Too many companies chasing too small a market.
In contrast, the ~4500nm range market of the Falcon 900 is ready for a new entrant. The 900 and G4 are old, and then Global 5000 is getting up there too. There are at least 3 brand new engine designs for the 9,000 to 12,000 lb thrust market that a Falcon 900 replacement would need. Such as the aforementioned RR RB282 or SNECMA Silvercrest.
These airframers build their planes around available engines. A lot of the reason that gulfstream large cabins turned out the way they did was because Gulfstream was designing a plane around the available low end commercial airliner engines. A lot of the reasons that dassaults turned out as they did is that they were based on high output business engines designs of the time, and they would use 3 of them to get the thrust that they needed.
These new engines producing 9-12,000 lb will be the first time that competitive new engine designs in that thrust class have been developed in a very long time, going all the way back to when there were commercial airliners small enough to use engines in that thrust class. Business jet airframers are going to take advantage of that.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IF you can afford it, why fly anything other than a G-IV?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being "only" a four year old airframe ( first delivery in June, 2007 ) and more than a hundred deliveries ( No 100 was delivered in November 2010 ), I very much doubt, that they are working on a "stretched" version of the 7X.
Customers are pretty much happy with the 7X, especially regarding operational costs
LG
Customers are pretty much happy with the 7X, especially regarding operational costs
LG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True. But if you want to win over client who would traditionally go for GLEX/G550/G650 because of the bigger cabin then you need to come up with something bigger.... A stretched 7X seems like the "cheap" way of doing just that. Not sure if it can be done though. Was (is?) there not some issue with the rudder surface vs x-winds or something on the 7X? If so, then perhaps not an easy fix to just stretch the current airframe...?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True. But if you want to win over client who would traditionally go for GLEX/G550/G650 because of the bigger cabin then you need to come up with something bigger...
