Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiplash7 I could be wrong but I think this would make it difficult for the air traffic control to manage all the distributed airports. |
Owners want their jet at a full fledged airport not only for access to maintenance & professional ground support but also to be able to attract flight crew into their employ. The pilots would typically not agree to be based at a remote station as their main operating hub. Building and managing an airport is so expensive that it makes the costs of a biz jet seem small. A absolutely bare shell airport with say an 8000' runway would incur operating costs about Rs 8 to 10 crores a year just to stand still. And this does not include the cost of capital to build it in the first place or depreciation either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiplash7 Do you have to still go through a security check when using a private jet? and should you inform the airport when you plan to take off in advance or can you just decide to leave anytime and then inform the tower or airport for take off clearance? |
Yes you still need to go through full security but there is usually no queue. Yes you inform ATC well in advance, file your flight plan just like any other flight. No concessions. As the passenger you at least have the luxury of arriving 10 minutes before engine start up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedub89 Read this somewhere-
"For a private jet owner, the two happiest days in their lives are the ones on which they bought the plane and the day the plane got sold." |
You bet. Unless your business generates an EBT of USD 1bn + owning a large biz jet is not economical in India at least. In USA with fractional ownership (ie time share) even top professionals get into the game. Azim Premji, NRN, Deepak Parekh, Uday Kotak are but some highly successful names who run very large corporations but have lived very well without owning a jet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vivtho I believe that Dassaults were popular because the Tatas had an agreement to sell and service the brand in India. I'm not sure if that is still the case though. |
Dassault and Bombardier sell well in India as they are more flexible on price and extended support - they are also somewhat cheaper for comparable models. Reality check: Lagos, Nigeria - just that one city has more business jets based there than all of India. Since 2011 India has had a roughly static population of business jets, turboprops and choppers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by androdev Yes it will be impossible to put myself in their shoes as I work from home. I take a "flight of stairs" to reach my office |
You have a wealth that none of the biz jet owners do.
Quote:
I recently went to Nepal and I spent more time researching flight safety than actual destination.
|
No disrespect for that otherwise lovely country but where air safety goes I would take two prayer beads along - one for each hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rehaan Actually there are/were a handful of commercial flights that did Mumbai-NYC in 14-16 hours (non-stop).
So that bring me to my questions for D33-PAC:
1) What would a 'sensible' (non-full throttle) time be from the G650?
2) If a commercial jet was going full-throttle, what would its time be (and would it have enough fuel to do this trip full throttle)?
3) In addition to the Extended Range, is the impressive thing about the G650 the speed? Or is it just that very few private jets can do such a long trip? |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikhilb2008 So, the 13 hours thing was a one-off test by Gulfstream, but can this plane, with a full load of passengers do a Bombay-NYC direct flight? Even if it takes 16 hours instead of 13? Because 16 hours is still a massive improvement over the current 24-28 hours of commercial jets with a stop over. |
Not my area of expertise and I will lean on others to add more. Right now as it is relatively new we do not have much more than the OEMs claims to go by.
* The jet they state flies 7500 nautical miles while cruising at Mach 0.85 with 8 pax - that's ~900 kmph at cruising altitudes. That will fly you BOM-NYC in 14 to 15 hours with allowances for head winds, climbing in steps but not for major diversions,circling etc. And you will land with the last 10% odd of your fuel load. They say the top speed is Mach 0.9 or ~950 kmph. Theoretically that could save you 45 to 60 minutes at best. So what do these speeds mean. A Boeing 777 cruises at Mach 0.84 or ~892 kmph at 36,000' and has a top sustained speed of 945 kpmh. As you see the speeds are not so different. Yes both aircraft could for sake of a test be flown at their top speed over the course. Where a biz jet like G650 scores is the ability to cruise high above the limitations of the main airways. So an airliner would typically fly long distance starting at say ~30,000' and would climb in stages to ~40,000'. The G650 and others like it will start their cruise at 41,000' and climb in steps to 51,000' ie it flies on an elevated and almost empty air corridor. The impressive piece is the range and the cruising altitude. Mach 0.83 to 0.88 is about the peak cruising speed for any transonic airliner. This upper limit was achieved 60 years ago with the Boeing 707 and hasn't changed much. Designers don't try to push for speed but instead for the lowest drag at and around Mach 0.80 to Mach 0.88 or so. Beyond that diminishing returns set in. Hope this helps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raj_RD Yup the owner seems to be Bank of Utah trustee, not sure what that means. |
The aircraft is almost always housed in an SPV. And it is the SPV that gets sold - similar to what happens in big real estate deals. That Bank of Utah Trustee is an escrow agent through which the monies are paid and title deed transferred. It 'owns' the aircraft for a couple of hours to a couple of days. It protects the buyer and seller from a last minute default by either,
* These are approximate figures to illustrate the discussion but they are directionally correct give or take 5%