Choice of Bizjet Selection.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Singapore
Age: 61
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Choice of Bizjet Selection.
We are deciding on buying a biz jet and would like to get feed back on the Hawker 4000 and the Challenger 300, will need to fly about 6 passengers
And would mostly fly from Selatar, Singapore to Beijing, Darwin and sometimes to Melbourne.
Please advise on support, reliability and views on the two jets.....or any other choices that are better?
Thank You
And would mostly fly from Selatar, Singapore to Beijing, Darwin and sometimes to Melbourne.
Please advise on support, reliability and views on the two jets.....or any other choices that are better?
Thank You
You've doubtless read Hawker's sales blurb but, in case you haven't here are some snapshots:
What I can tell you for sure is that they are both fine pieces of equipment and both highly compatible in terms of performance. The Hawker may just lead the Challenger in terms of possessing a slower rate of depreciation but this, for the most part, has yet to be established as used 4000's are still somewhat scarce.
What I can tell you for sure is that they are both fine pieces of equipment and both highly compatible in terms of performance. The Hawker may just lead the Challenger in terms of possessing a slower rate of depreciation but this, for the most part, has yet to be established as used 4000's are still somewhat scarce.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Singapore
Age: 61
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, any views on the performance and handling? What about the cabin
In-flight, can anyone give me their actual views on this and it's reliability and support.
Appreciate it.
In-flight, can anyone give me their actual views on this and it's reliability and support.
Appreciate it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Singapore
Age: 61
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would surely like some feedback on this, I think it's a little short, I have used a CL 604 and we did it with 5 pax.
Will this aircrafts do it like what some brokers has said?
Will this aircrafts do it like what some brokers has said?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Singapore
Age: 61
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I checked in the web sites and found many aircrafts for sale, also some falcons.
However, will the cost be much more to operate with this additional engine. I think so but how much?
I don't see many in Seletar airport on my visits there, one friend of mine said it could be because of it's high cost? Is this true? What about Pilots, will it be difficult to employ pilots to fly these aircrafts?
However, will the cost be much more to operate with this additional engine. I think so but how much?
I don't see many in Seletar airport on my visits there, one friend of mine said it could be because of it's high cost? Is this true? What about Pilots, will it be difficult to employ pilots to fly these aircrafts?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Where logic doesn't fail
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If your serious, you need to sit down with someone that has ran a flight department, not a salesmen, and discuss budget, crews, mission requirements, etc
Do you just want a nice big cabin, do you want range, are you willing to stop half way on the longer trips......
Do you just want a nice big cabin, do you want range, are you willing to stop half way on the longer trips......
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Singapore
Age: 61
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, do you think the Challenger 605 can compete and be better in cost, and reliability....please advise.
However I see many 605's for sale.....does it show a negative image or it's something else?
However I see many 605's for sale.....does it show a negative image or it's something else?
We are deciding on buying a biz jet and would like to get feed back on the Hawker 4000 and the Challenger 300, will need to fly about 6 passengers
And would mostly fly from Selatar, Singapore to Beijing, Darwin and sometimes to Melbourne.
Please advise on support, reliability and views on the two jets.....or any other choices that are better?
Thank You
And would mostly fly from Selatar, Singapore to Beijing, Darwin and sometimes to Melbourne.
Please advise on support, reliability and views on the two jets.....or any other choices that are better?
Thank You
A few thousands spent on a specialist like that could be very handsomely repaid in having made the right decision.
G
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: where the money is
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Hawker might look promising and I'm sure it's a good airplane, but it's rare and new and you might have a problem finding adequate support if something breaks (which it will, no matter what airplane you buy). The sales guys (actually, there is a girl selling Hawkers...) will promise you everything to make you sign the contract - but do you really want to be Beechcraft Hawker's guinea pig in your area? 
The there are the other usual suspects from Bombardier, Dassault or Gulfstream... Depending on whom you ask, the one is the 'ideal airplane' and the others utter crap.
If you (or your boss) is willing to spend that much, then get a consultant who's independent and pay him for his/her analysis. Money definitely well spent.
At the end of the day, if you end up with an airplane that does 80% of what you require, you have chosen wisely.
The there are the other usual suspects from Bombardier, Dassault or Gulfstream... Depending on whom you ask, the one is the 'ideal airplane' and the others utter crap.
If you (or your boss) is willing to spend that much, then get a consultant who's independent and pay him for his/her analysis. Money definitely well spent.
At the end of the day, if you end up with an airplane that does 80% of what you require, you have chosen wisely.
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you desire to have an aircraft capable of flying a 3,500NM trip, do not purchase an aircraft with an advertised 3,500NM range. Purchase one that has at least a 4,000NM range or more. Personally I would recommend at least an advertised 4,500NM range.
The reason is that the advertised range of any aircraft is the most optimized range that the manufacture can make. It is derived by using average historical winds, very good weather and computer models. In real life one very seldom encounters those conditions.
Also, if you are not going to be the Chief Pilot, I would recommend hiring a chief pilot prior to the purchase. Ideally one with experience in the types of aircraft that you are considering and use his knowledge and experience in choosing the best aircraft that will meet your expectations.
Also, as someone else here suggested, hire a dependable independent aircraft broker to assist you. They usually can recommend some pilots for you to interview.
If you are going to operate from any high altitude airports that has high temperatures, I would strongly recommend the Falcon 900EASY. If not, just add it to the list of aircraft to consider.
I wish you good luck and have a good time selecting the aircraft you need.
The reason is that the advertised range of any aircraft is the most optimized range that the manufacture can make. It is derived by using average historical winds, very good weather and computer models. In real life one very seldom encounters those conditions.
Also, if you are not going to be the Chief Pilot, I would recommend hiring a chief pilot prior to the purchase. Ideally one with experience in the types of aircraft that you are considering and use his knowledge and experience in choosing the best aircraft that will meet your expectations.
Also, as someone else here suggested, hire a dependable independent aircraft broker to assist you. They usually can recommend some pilots for you to interview.
If you are going to operate from any high altitude airports that has high temperatures, I would strongly recommend the Falcon 900EASY. If not, just add it to the list of aircraft to consider.
I wish you good luck and have a good time selecting the aircraft you need.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Freelander
You're in a great position here so enjoy it! Especially with the market as it is, there are bargains to be had!
As everyone says an expert would be the best way to go to advise you. If you don't personally know one however be careful. It can be a messy business. I have personally seen an 'independent' consultant boast about playing manufacturers off against one another for the biggest backhander. Very unfair to the end customer as he is paying also. Indeed Whenever I see the UK plc in question in the completely wrong aircraft for their mission profile it winds me up.
Of the two you mention I would say the 4000 all the way. It is technologically a far superior machine. It's been around a while now, I think there are about 50-60 about. It had a few bugs to start but the latest update seems to have addressed all of them. Because it's the flagship from what I've seen and heard support is excellent.
You asked about composite. It seems to be the way forward. Boeing are building the 787 from it so I'm sure it's the future.
However as someone pointed out look at the number of times you'll fly the longer sector. If it's often enough you may want something bigger. But again you're moving up a class in terms of costs. Only you know if your pax will be ok with a tech stop.
You're in a great position here so enjoy it! Especially with the market as it is, there are bargains to be had!
As everyone says an expert would be the best way to go to advise you. If you don't personally know one however be careful. It can be a messy business. I have personally seen an 'independent' consultant boast about playing manufacturers off against one another for the biggest backhander. Very unfair to the end customer as he is paying also. Indeed Whenever I see the UK plc in question in the completely wrong aircraft for their mission profile it winds me up.
Of the two you mention I would say the 4000 all the way. It is technologically a far superior machine. It's been around a while now, I think there are about 50-60 about. It had a few bugs to start but the latest update seems to have addressed all of them. Because it's the flagship from what I've seen and heard support is excellent.
You asked about composite. It seems to be the way forward. Boeing are building the 787 from it so I'm sure it's the future.
However as someone pointed out look at the number of times you'll fly the longer sector. If it's often enough you may want something bigger. But again you're moving up a class in terms of costs. Only you know if your pax will be ok with a tech stop.
Educated Hillbilly
Silverknapper, just because Boeing and Airbus are doing the B787 and A350 in composite doesn't mean anything. I can assure both programs have experienced a series of problems due to the use of composites. And anyone with experience of working on the structural side of the industry will know that while composite is the wonder material on paper in practice it is seriously over-rated.
Composites are very difficult to do in service repairs on compared to conventional metallic structures, hence why ATR are going to have all future fuselages made in aluminium; on the technology share agreement with Beoing Alenia could have used the same technology for producing fuselages for ATR, but ground damage issues mean metallic will remain for ATR fuselages.
A400m, I can't believe the thinking behind making a military transport composite considering small arms damage resistance (although this isn't that relevant to a biz jet).
Note Mitstubishi were a major Risk Sharing partner on the 787, hence could have used composite for the MRJ100 they are remaining with metallic as trade studies have shown the metallic design will still be lighter and can be produced more quickly.
You can rarely guraentee that a composite will come out of the curing process 100% as is should be on paper, so you have to assume the fairly conservative reductions in the assumed strength; consequently it is often the case a metallic component can often be just as light as the composite equivalent.
Use of composites is more of a marketing ploy by the manufacturers. I will admit as composite technology improves then one day it may well be better than metallic, but at the same time alloying technology and machining processes are improving as well meaning metallic still remains a competitive option.
Composites are probably popular because of government grants for developing new technology are part funding alot of the composite development.
Composites are very difficult to do in service repairs on compared to conventional metallic structures, hence why ATR are going to have all future fuselages made in aluminium; on the technology share agreement with Beoing Alenia could have used the same technology for producing fuselages for ATR, but ground damage issues mean metallic will remain for ATR fuselages.
A400m, I can't believe the thinking behind making a military transport composite considering small arms damage resistance (although this isn't that relevant to a biz jet).
Note Mitstubishi were a major Risk Sharing partner on the 787, hence could have used composite for the MRJ100 they are remaining with metallic as trade studies have shown the metallic design will still be lighter and can be produced more quickly.
You can rarely guraentee that a composite will come out of the curing process 100% as is should be on paper, so you have to assume the fairly conservative reductions in the assumed strength; consequently it is often the case a metallic component can often be just as light as the composite equivalent.
Use of composites is more of a marketing ploy by the manufacturers. I will admit as composite technology improves then one day it may well be better than metallic, but at the same time alloying technology and machining processes are improving as well meaning metallic still remains a competitive option.
Composites are probably popular because of government grants for developing new technology are part funding alot of the composite development.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: was Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Age: 47
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Choice of Aircraft
FreeLanderII -
I have operated corporate aircraft in the Asia Pacific, India Pacific, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Macau region for several years. That includes KL and Seletar. Congratulations on your corporation's decision to privatise their air travel. And welcome to pprune.com.
Without going in to full detail here, properly selecting a relevant aircraft follows fairly well established guidelines. It begins without consideration of any particular aircraft at all. Typically, the choice of a specific manufacturer, make, or model of aircraft comes almost at the end of the process, and is generally driven from within the process. The appropriate category / model of aircraft will narrow to a very specific few models. Choosing among those is another major drill in and of itself.
If this is a real event you speak of, then, as others have suggested, you simply must engage the services of a professional. In business, one does this as matter of course with any planned multi-million dollar (sing dollar, ringgit, rupee, dinar, pound, euro) expenditure. Whether that experienced, paid professional is to be the Manager or Chief Pilot of your new Flight Department, or a well known major Aircraft Brokerage House, or other Qualified and Experienced Consultant, is one of your early decisions and each consideration requires a fair amount of research on its own.
You seem to have identified some of your needs, including destinations, but please don't talk about a specific aircraft until you can quote the actual Airways distances that you will have to fly to reach them and their alternate airports. Average trip winds and temps aloft? Standard delays? Runway requirements? Can any of the aircraft you are posting here operate routinely and full range out of Seletar? An experienced advisor can provide the questions you should be asking, and provide the answers that ultimately will shape your choice of aircraft.
Now, with that out of the way; a quick commentary on some of the posted aircraft. Scrap them. The Hawker 4000 is not generally supported outside of the US, has not yet been certified in most countries; indeed, is not fully certified in the US! It has a legion of reasons not to be considered. The Challenger 300 is a superb aircraft for domestic US, Europe, Australia service. A positively great aircraft for what it was intended, but by no measure an international aircraft. Point one is the lack of provisions for even a single Inertial Navigation System, much less the common two or three systems found on over-water aircraft.
For non-stop 4000+ mile trips (statute or nautical?), you should be looking at a Falcon 900 variant, the G-IV/SP, G450, G-V, or G550. (nb - ETOPS and the number of engines is a requirement for corporate aircraft in only a few countries, even then only under very specific operating parameters)
For reference:
Seletar (WSSL) to Beijing (ZBAA) via Airways - 2538 nm
Seletar (WSSL) to Darwin (YPDN) via Airways - 1819 nm
Seletar (WSSL) to Melbourne (YMML) via Airways - 3310 nm
Approximate IFR ranges with 6 passengers using NBAA domestic reserves:
Challenger 604/605 - 4000 nm
Falcon 900B - 3960 nm
Falcon 2000EX - 3990 nm
Gulfstream G-IV/SP - 4030 nm
Gulfstream V - 6450 nm
Your capital outlay for aircraft acquisition and startup will be probably be somewhere in excess of $12 to $14 Million Dollars US. Your annual budget may be upwards of a million dollars.
Again, fantasy choices of aircraft here are fun, but are a diversion outside of and ahead of a professionally guided process.
Regards and good luck.
I have operated corporate aircraft in the Asia Pacific, India Pacific, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Macau region for several years. That includes KL and Seletar. Congratulations on your corporation's decision to privatise their air travel. And welcome to pprune.com.
Without going in to full detail here, properly selecting a relevant aircraft follows fairly well established guidelines. It begins without consideration of any particular aircraft at all. Typically, the choice of a specific manufacturer, make, or model of aircraft comes almost at the end of the process, and is generally driven from within the process. The appropriate category / model of aircraft will narrow to a very specific few models. Choosing among those is another major drill in and of itself.
If this is a real event you speak of, then, as others have suggested, you simply must engage the services of a professional. In business, one does this as matter of course with any planned multi-million dollar (sing dollar, ringgit, rupee, dinar, pound, euro) expenditure. Whether that experienced, paid professional is to be the Manager or Chief Pilot of your new Flight Department, or a well known major Aircraft Brokerage House, or other Qualified and Experienced Consultant, is one of your early decisions and each consideration requires a fair amount of research on its own.
You seem to have identified some of your needs, including destinations, but please don't talk about a specific aircraft until you can quote the actual Airways distances that you will have to fly to reach them and their alternate airports. Average trip winds and temps aloft? Standard delays? Runway requirements? Can any of the aircraft you are posting here operate routinely and full range out of Seletar? An experienced advisor can provide the questions you should be asking, and provide the answers that ultimately will shape your choice of aircraft.
Now, with that out of the way; a quick commentary on some of the posted aircraft. Scrap them. The Hawker 4000 is not generally supported outside of the US, has not yet been certified in most countries; indeed, is not fully certified in the US! It has a legion of reasons not to be considered. The Challenger 300 is a superb aircraft for domestic US, Europe, Australia service. A positively great aircraft for what it was intended, but by no measure an international aircraft. Point one is the lack of provisions for even a single Inertial Navigation System, much less the common two or three systems found on over-water aircraft.
For non-stop 4000+ mile trips (statute or nautical?), you should be looking at a Falcon 900 variant, the G-IV/SP, G450, G-V, or G550. (nb - ETOPS and the number of engines is a requirement for corporate aircraft in only a few countries, even then only under very specific operating parameters)
For reference:
Seletar (WSSL) to Beijing (ZBAA) via Airways - 2538 nm
Seletar (WSSL) to Darwin (YPDN) via Airways - 1819 nm
Seletar (WSSL) to Melbourne (YMML) via Airways - 3310 nm
Approximate IFR ranges with 6 passengers using NBAA domestic reserves:
Challenger 604/605 - 4000 nm
Falcon 900B - 3960 nm
Falcon 2000EX - 3990 nm
Gulfstream G-IV/SP - 4030 nm
Gulfstream V - 6450 nm
Your capital outlay for aircraft acquisition and startup will be probably be somewhere in excess of $12 to $14 Million Dollars US. Your annual budget may be upwards of a million dollars.
Again, fantasy choices of aircraft here are fun, but are a diversion outside of and ahead of a professionally guided process.
Regards and good luck.
Last edited by GLF5driver; 7th Sep 2011 at 08:43. Reason: adds distances and aircraft