Gents,

I have a friend flying in Russia. Their small department has Hawker-125, but the owner is thinking to upgrade the operation.
He is looking at G200 and CL300 from the financial standpoint.
And being a nice guy he is asking his pilots for their opinions as well.

What do you think about both aircraft?
Flying, corks, comfort, dispatch reliability - anything will be appreciated.

Handling in ice?

Thanks a million!

I flew the G200 once and I worked at a department that had them... they have really high ref speeds, they have boots instead of heated edges and eat up a lot of runway in a contaminated situation. If I had the choice of boots or heated leading edges over in Russia I'd probably shy away from the boots. It definitely didn't have the dispatch reliability of the standard Gulfstreams. Again, I'm not typed... the avionics were nice but it wasn't my favorite aircraft.

I work at a place that use to fly the -125s and currently fly a Challenger model and they can't say enough GOOD things about the Hawker!

USMCFLYR

there's a really good article on the October issue of Profesional pilot magazine, "Bombardier hit a home run with the CL300". Both passengers and pilots love it.

I know a flight attendant that used to work for Flexjet. She said the -300s are now doing more crossings than the -604s. She said owners prefer the CL300 vs the CL604 for the long legs.


I'm probably the biggest CL300 fan outhere. She's a sexy beast and does the job

CL300, or better yet FA2000 if you can afford

LoL... What?

Having heated edges over boots is pure ego.

First, you *rarely* need the boots... and second, they rob 100% of ZERO engine power! So while most lose a significant percentage of thrust in the climb, the G200 keeps rocketing upwards with no thrust loss.


The cabin is larger on the G200. The cargo is larger on the G200. The range is longer on the G200. The cruise speeds are the same. The avionics are very comparable. The direct operating costs are comparable... and the G200 right now would be much cheaper to buy with the G250 coming out than the CL300. Not to mention, the product support with Gulfstream is light years ahead of Bomardier.

Having said all of that... If given the choice, I, too, would choose the CL300. It is a better pilot's airplane, it looks better (pure ego/preference)... it is, in my opinion, a more "capable" airplane. However, I feel when the G250 is delivered, the CL300 will be obsolete.

Having plenty of time in a G200, it dosen't rocket anywhere....except far down a long long runway when its attempting to takeoff with that bizarre wing it has...

and yes - they are cheap...but thats always for a reason, right?

Thank you very much!

One of the pilots over there is under impression that the CL300 doesn't have any wing anti-ice protection at all (?) He heard that the wing is built the way that the ice accumulation is minimal - is that true?

Thx

LoL... again... what??

I took a G200 from Geneva, Switzerland, climbing at 300/.80 to FL390 in 13 minutes... that is a rocket.

Your take-off distances for a normal 2-3 hour leg are in the 3800-4300' ballpark with typical loads.

Out of Aspen on a clear day, you can make it to the east coast doing .80 cruise with zero problems.

You are in cruise power range in the climb out until about 20k feet, otherwise you would be doing 5-7 thousand feet per minute.



What 200 are you flying?



And the reason they are cheap right now is because of the G250... and the market sucks (not sure if you noticed). You think they would still ask 20 million for a CL300 if the CL350 came out?

Full-fuel useful load is much better in the CL300 than the G200.

As to performance...Bombardier advertises 3100nm @ 0.80M with eight passengers while Gulfstream says the G200 will go 3400nm @ 0.75M with four passengers...or 3050nm @ 0.80M with again, just four passengers. Takeoff distance @ MTOW & ISA for the G200 is 6080ft, while the CL30 is 4810ft.

Conferring with pilots who have flown both airframes, they always prefer the CL300 while their pax tend to prefer the cabin of the G200.

As to pricing...sure seems Falcon 2000s of similar age have held their values MUCH better than the G200 in a down market, even with the successor 2000EX/LX variants.