Originally Posted by
QuietSpike
I will take the pepsi challenge on runway numbers with a 550 and a 7x...
Losing only 1/3 of the power on a 3 engine plane and 1/2 the power on a 2 engine plane is not accurate. 2 engine aircraft have much more power out of each engine, thus the need for only 2. I think you'd be surprised to see actual numbers with your statement!
Falcon 7x engine makes 6100 lbs thrust x3= 18300... x2=12200. G550 engines make 15385 each, x2=30,770. Single engine, the 550 makes more than the 7x (bigger plane, but you see the difference is about nil). Dont buy into falcon's "3 engines are safer" BS that they have been trying for years! They make a great plane, dont get me wrong! However they used to raz gulfstreams by saying "winglets are a product of poor aerodynamic design"... Now all new falcons have winglets
The 550 wing is *incredibly* efficient. Able to cruise up to .89, with a normal cruise of .85 (everyday), and a typical ref speed in the very low 100's-- all with no leading edge devices. The less moving parts, the less ****** breaks!
-spike
True G550 still has more power with OEI than the 7x. But might I add that you need to convert your numbers into power loading. Single engine the G550 comes in around 5.9:1 vs the 7x's 5.65:1 (Using your data). The only time I would really wish I had 3 engines would be on long flights over harsh territory, and enabling me to flight more direct routes.