G650 ER real range
Why would you not want to believe the numbers quoted by Gulfstream??.
Do you think that they would lie?.
Do you think that if they did lie that pilots and operators would not have publicised that lie?
There are enough of them flying worldwide now now that it should be easily verified.
Go to Flightaware, find a G650 or two and track their flight history, it should be fairly easily determined what their range is.
Gulfstream are well known to be very accurate in their actual claims.
Do you think that they would lie?.
Do you think that if they did lie that pilots and operators would not have publicised that lie?
There are enough of them flying worldwide now now that it should be easily verified.
Go to Flightaware, find a G650 or two and track their flight history, it should be fairly easily determined what their range is.
Gulfstream are well known to be very accurate in their actual claims.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Switzerland
Age: 55
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have it from the horse's mouth that a 7'200 NM trip was made with all necessary reserves and 5 people on board with a G650, without the ER STC.
If you fly the speeds as published, Gulfstreams tend to overperform the published figures. Be careful to consider ALL factors of your flight (Load, Temperatures en route, available flight levels, etc...) before committing to a figure...
I have done 6490 air miles myself with an older G5, 4 people on board.. The reason we had almost 3'000lbs on board at landing was that we had consistent ISA -15 over the whole route, were able to get some non-standard intermediate levels, and flew consistent LRC. Had we done optimum climb and descent profiles for fuel we could have saved another 200-300 lbs.
If you fly the speeds as published, Gulfstreams tend to overperform the published figures. Be careful to consider ALL factors of your flight (Load, Temperatures en route, available flight levels, etc...) before committing to a figure...
I have done 6490 air miles myself with an older G5, 4 people on board.. The reason we had almost 3'000lbs on board at landing was that we had consistent ISA -15 over the whole route, were able to get some non-standard intermediate levels, and flew consistent LRC. Had we done optimum climb and descent profiles for fuel we could have saved another 200-300 lbs.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Amazon Jungle
Age: 38
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go to Flightaware, find a G650 or two and track their flight history, it should be fairly easily determined what their range is.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have not flown the G650/650ER, however I do have a lot of experience in G11, GIV, GV and G550. Without exception they have all exceeded the range of the published figures, admittedly some not by very much but still better than some other manufacturers products that I have flown that have not even come close to meeting their published figures.
Soave,
If you look at historical flights for any aircraft type and past flights then you will see actual distances flown, flight times, and whatever.
Seriously, check it out and then come back at me.
f
If you look at historical flights for any aircraft type and past flights then you will see actual distances flown, flight times, and whatever.
Seriously, check it out and then come back at me.
f
I don't doubt its range, my question is who wants to be cooped up in a tube for 16 hours? What about inflight rest for four pilots? I've done 12.6 in a Global and that's two hours two much.
GF
GF
But, at 12 hours aloft, the commercial standard (91K,135,121, foreign rules for NCC ops) is four pilots. We put a third pilot on when 10 or hours, but try sleeping across from the galley. The business just isn't big enough.
GF
GF
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
. But, at 12 hours aloft, the commercial standard (91K,135,121, foreign rules for NCC ops) is four pilots. We put a third pilot on when 10 or hours, but try sleeping across from the galley. The business just isn't big enough.
Not proper crew rest facilities on a 14-16 hr jet?
Can't use a pax lay-flat seat with a curtain?
(Just curious, never flown a biz-jet, but lots of long-haul Boeings)
In both the Global and the GLF, the crew rest area, either lie-down or reclining seat are opposite the galley--noise, smells, F/A shuffling around. There us only an acoustic curtain to separate the two. Remember the "tube" is about 8" narrower than a -9, too. The pax area is just that--the pax area, not yours, usually. There just isn't a lot of floor/volume to out anything like a Boeing crew rest area. And, it's a 16-hour plus jet.
GF
GF
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
2 bunks behind a curtain across from the galley?
Yeah, guess we are spoiled on the Boeings, especially the 747 freighters.
Bunch of bunks and 1-class seats in the upper deck area.
Big galley too. (Still long days, get jet-lagged and dehydrated regardless)
So, how often do you guys go with double crews and 16+ hrs flights?
Once a year, or twice a month?
No stops and crew changes enroute, fuel tanks are too big, ouch.
Yeah, guess we are spoiled on the Boeings, especially the 747 freighters.
Bunch of bunks and 1-class seats in the upper deck area.
Big galley too. (Still long days, get jet-lagged and dehydrated regardless)
So, how often do you guys go with double crews and 16+ hrs flights?
Once a year, or twice a month?
No stops and crew changes enroute, fuel tanks are too big, ouch.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Switzerland
Age: 55
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Under EASA commercial rules, we can go the full range of the 650ER and more with 3 pilots (18 hours duty). However, the rules for the crew rest are a bit more specific: to be an approved crew "bunk", there needs to be a full-flat bed, light proof, with adjustable temperature, and reasonable sonic insulation. As the rest is right next to the forward galley and the forward lav, I need earplugs however to catch some Z's....
The big "cheat" is that there is no space for a second flight attendant, nor for the first one to have a decent sit-down when the crew bunk is occupied. So most operators don't have FAs but "ISP"s instead (inflight service providers).. They don't have official emergency duties, so they don't need proper rest or training..
If I owned a 70M$ airplane, it would bother me that the person preparing my food and looking after my well-being, as well as being closest to me when things go pear-shaped, is not subject to flight duty limitations...
The big "cheat" is that there is no space for a second flight attendant, nor for the first one to have a decent sit-down when the crew bunk is occupied. So most operators don't have FAs but "ISP"s instead (inflight service providers).. They don't have official emergency duties, so they don't need proper rest or training..
If I owned a 70M$ airplane, it would bother me that the person preparing my food and looking after my well-being, as well as being closest to me when things go pear-shaped, is not subject to flight duty limitations...
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: UK. East Mids.
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyMD,
Could not agree more. As an FA, in our operation, we do not get trained, however both of us come from commercial aviation backgrounds, and have been trained within an inch of our lives in our previous flying incarnations. There is talk/want for us to be trained properly on this operation, but if that were to happen, who knows... Also talk of a new longer range aircraft too, and I could see the FA's crew rest becoming the forward lav... (joking obviously... or am I? 
)
But, you make a very valid point, the person in the back has the possibility of doing a hell of a lot more than just serving the food and washing the dishes... If there was a lav or cabin fire, or a medical incident, I would prefer (if I owned a jet ) that the person who is in the cabin knew how to fight a fire correctly on an aircraft and how to use the equipment available... OR, do effective CPR and use the Defib and Oxygen on the principal passenger in those valuable couple of minutes when they have just hit the floor after going into a post heart attack cardiac arrest...
But, hey how... That is the business aviation industry for you!
The big "cheat" is that there is no space for a second flight attendant, nor for the first one to have a decent sit-down when the crew bunk is occupied. So most operators don't have FAs but "ISP"s instead (inflight service providers).. They don't have official emergency duties, so they don't need proper rest or training..
If I owned a 70M$ airplane, it would bother me that the person preparing my food and looking after my well-being, as well as being closest to me when things go pear-shaped, is not subject to flight duty limitations...
If I owned a 70M$ airplane, it would bother me that the person preparing my food and looking after my well-being, as well as being closest to me when things go pear-shaped, is not subject to flight duty limitations...
)But, you make a very valid point, the person in the back has the possibility of doing a hell of a lot more than just serving the food and washing the dishes... If there was a lav or cabin fire, or a medical incident, I would prefer (if I owned a jet
) that the person who is in the cabin knew how to fight a fire correctly on an aircraft and how to use the equipment available... OR, do effective CPR and use the Defib and Oxygen on the principal passenger in those valuable couple of minutes when they have just hit the floor after going into a post heart attack cardiac arrest... But, hey how... That is the business aviation industry for you!
Tower Dog
Who said anything about 2 bunks, just one. I flew lots, LOTS of augmented days in the C-5 and it was much better than the Global or GLF for in-flight rest. The best comparison would be the C-141, if flew it.
FlyMD,
That's basically our rule as a 91 operator, but wouldn't be sufficient for any commercial FAA operation. We, more often than not, did a crew change at the tech stop, but the Global was about a 12-hour plane at M.85. Frankly, the G5000 is perfect--11 hours, stop, board a new crew and catering and go on. There's nowhere you can't make in 22 hours at .85. And a tech stop is only an hour.
GF
Who said anything about 2 bunks, just one. I flew lots, LOTS of augmented days in the C-5 and it was much better than the Global or GLF for in-flight rest. The best comparison would be the C-141, if flew it.
FlyMD,
That's basically our rule as a 91 operator, but wouldn't be sufficient for any commercial FAA operation. We, more often than not, did a crew change at the tech stop, but the Global was about a 12-hour plane at M.85. Frankly, the G5000 is perfect--11 hours, stop, board a new crew and catering and go on. There's nowhere you can't make in 22 hours at .85. And a tech stop is only an hour.
GF
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Switzerland
Age: 55
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tray Surfer, we do train our ISPs, keep them current on all the Emergency stuff, firefighting, etc... In addition to the operator's requirement they do hangar-based training on the doors and emergency exits, and additional medical training with regards to our pax's needs..
However when there is an enlarged flight requires 3 pilots, the ISP loses on all fronts: less storage space for the catering, only the cockpit jump seat to have a sit-down, and she does the whole flight without hour limitations. I
However when there is an enlarged flight requires 3 pilots, the ISP loses on all fronts: less storage space for the catering, only the cockpit jump seat to have a sit-down, and she does the whole flight without hour limitations. I
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: UK. East Mids.
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyMD, I am hoping that will become the case with my Op, although I am going to do my own training this year, just because I feel I should keep myself current, and, compared to the US for example, recurrent is peanuts in the UK.
However, it will still be the same as you for flight time Ops etc. Hey ho...
However, it will still be the same as you for flight time Ops etc. Hey ho...