Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Corporate (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/corporate/)
-   -   Falcon 7X (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/corporate/45826-falcon-7x.html)

El Guapo 11-26-2009 01:15 PM

Francis Ford Coppola was on Stern the other morning and made a remark they (the winery) were getting one delivered soon, probably based somewhere around Napa

gbagli 12-26-2009 07:38 AM

Many owners are getting rid of their 7x.... I wonder why.

desk captain 12-26-2009 08:57 AM

No problems with N12U. She's been running great. The only reason to get rid of a 7X is because you can no longer afford it or you are trying to make $$$ by flipping it.

gbagli 12-26-2009 04:52 PM


Originally Posted by desk captain (Post 732933)
No problems with N12U. She's been running great. The only reason to get rid of a 7X is because you can no longer afford it or you are trying to make $$$ by flipping it.

I noticed N12U was a GIV before, how does the 7X perform compared to Gulfstreams?
Our company owns a Falcon 50 and just bought a G450 to be delivered summer '10. Thanks in advance.

desk captain 12-27-2009 08:24 AM

N12U was indeed a G-IV. The 7X has a lot more range, M85 cruise, more neat features for pax as far as connect ability goes. Big window for pax. Excellent visibility for the pilots up front. Far better than the G-IV. The 7X is very quiet in the cabin. The 7X is extremely quiet in the cockpit compared to the G-IV. Pilots can talk at regular levels- no windshield wipers making noise either.

The best part of the plane is the 3 Pratt and Whitney's back there. Sorry- shameless plug for UTC.

Ziggy 12-27-2009 04:48 PM

One thing I can't wrap my hear around is the relatively low power to weight ratio for the 7X. Approx 3.56:1 right? Is that noticeable on high and hot or any other circumstances?

quimby 12-27-2009 08:30 PM


Originally Posted by Ziggy (Post 733613)
One thing I can't wrap my hear around is the relatively low power to weight ratio for the 7X. Approx 3.56:1 right? Is that noticeable on high and hot or any other circumstances?

I would guess it doesn't need the higher THR/WT ratio of a twin due to it still having 2/3 power for eng out climb req's.

desk captain 12-28-2009 05:20 AM

More than a few 7X pilots have noted the 10k or so less total thrust available. They also note how big the thrust feels during takeoff. We don't have many high and hot destinations, so I doubt we'll ever have a problem with that. If we need to go to KTEX in the summer we'd probably send our Hawker 4000, which has a lot of muscle.

Ziggy 12-28-2009 09:07 AM

Quimby: True, with OEI ops it still has more power than the two engine competitors. But overall I was expecting more, at least below the 3.0:1 ratio. The G550 comes in around 2.78:1 and it needs that power especially for OEI ops. But our pilots still comment on how it's a rocket ship. I operate out of the rockies so ASE, EGE, JAC are our backyard. I just hate telling owners/clients to leave people/bags behind or we need a fuel stop.

Ziggy 12-28-2009 09:11 AM


Originally Posted by desk captain (Post 733781)
More than a few 7X pilots have noted the 10k or so less total thrust available. They also note how big the thrust feels during takeoff. We don't have many high and hot destinations, so I doubt we'll ever have a problem with that. If we need to go to KTEX in the summer we'd probably send our Hawker 4000, which has a lot of muscle.

Thanks for the reply. It seems like your getting to play with all the great toys.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:00 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands