Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Why does the Falcons have 3 engines?

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Why does the Falcons have 3 engines?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th Nov 2003, 18:56
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VC10 in Manchester the other night.

The style and looks of the old bird put others to shame.

Long may she fly on.
master slug is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2003, 01:48
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree, under normal conditions aircraft will exceed the cert requirements.

But unless grossly over engined, all aircraft end up WAT climb limited at some point. And that's when the cert minima come into play.

That min performance case is also likely to be when you care most about your performance - "plenty" and "more than plenty" are both fine, "just enough" and "not quite enough" is another matter
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2003, 05:43
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mad Scientist - no great secret there, squire, twins will certainly climb better than tri-s with all engines turning.

But with 2-engines out, the tri flies better

DA50pilot - agreed! The 50 and the 900 are magic machines. And on a dark stormy night over the Atlantic or Pacific that 3rd go-lever used to give me such a warm fuzzy feeling.
tired is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2003, 03:03
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: las vegas
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As my piston twin instructor put it - the Falcon has three engines - because it can't fly with two ..

This aircraft is not in a FAR category where ETOPS is an issue.

It is a beautifully designed aircraft - DASSAULT should be making commercial jet liners rather than Le brand- X.

The PRATT comment is typical from a company that has been resting on their laurels - recall these were the same guys who said GE should stick to lightbulbs - Pratt will have to exit this business if they dont quit making "buggy whips"
used2flyboeing is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2003, 13:55
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Nirvana South
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
used2flyboeing,

"DASSAULT should be making commercial jet liners rather than Le brand- X"

They tried it once - can you say <<Mercure>>? and they were NOT a success.
ICT_SLB is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2003, 03:22
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: las vegas
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When DASSAULT rolls out a product it is spot on - AIRBUS - it is redesigned while it is in production ..
used2flyboeing is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2003, 04:01
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Because for numerous reasons in the corporate market segment these jets are designed for...3-small is better than 2-bigger...so be happy you have the choice...
whynerh8ter is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2003, 13:39
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: oklahoma
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
and what's with the windshield?

looks like adapted from caravelle, number of windows at least...
natedog74 is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2003, 11:48
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: las vegas
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
you mean 727 ??
used2flyboeing is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2003, 06:41
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: oklahoma
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
nope, 27 has the standard 2-pane windshield, falcons seemed to have stuck with the 3-pane design of yore reminiscent of caravelles and comets...it's flat of course so it's probalby also noisier on top of restricted visibility
natedog74 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2003, 02:54
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: SEA
Posts: 130
Received 57 Likes on 24 Posts
Cool

Two stories which circulate at FSI:

The Fed's made a stop at Aspen the other day and checked all departing IFR traffic. And guess what, the only aircraft to fly legally out of Aspen IFR are tree-engine Falcons. All other twin jets departing IFR got busted for vioaling the FARs. Cuz there´s no way they could have managed the required engine out climb gradient. Maybe under certain condition they might be able. But I reckon they checked on a hot summer day.

Oh, and the Falcon 900 is the only airplane which can legally fly between St Moritz and NY non-stop. Now that must be quite convenient for some individuals with deep pockets.

I am sure there are a lot more examples which prove the flexibility of three-engine Falcons.
wondering is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.