Search

Notices

C Series Info

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-03-2017, 09:48 AM
  #551  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
flyallnite's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Stay THIRSTY, my friends!
Posts: 1,898
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
There are no range restrictions in the contract. I also don't know where the 1500 miles came from. The one chart shows the CS100 capable of NYC to SLC with every seat full against winter headwinds which is 1730 miles. SLC is the intermediate stop for fuel by JetBlues A320's often in the winter. That range line may also include fuel to a divert however it does not state either way. This puts the range right where Bombardier states for the standard aircraft. They offer a high gross weight version which is what they typically quote for range. We purchased the standard model.
Warning: not an engineer or mathematics major---

As someone recently corrected me, the preview states that we purchased the 134K MTOW version, which is the higher weight version, if there is such a thing. I just got ahold of some technical publications from Bombardier for airport planning. This is what I understand from that:

The engine types are broken out for balanced field performance. As you would expect, those charts vary based on temp, altitude etc, and there is a different chart for each engine.

Here's where it gets interesting though. There's only one chart for payload range, applicable to the CS100. The engine type isn't included as a factor. For a 134K MTOW, the range-- ISA standard sea level day, no wind, is 2760NM. That's assuming 120 passengers. Ours will be configured for 109 pax, according to the preview. That takes the ZFW down another 2400lbs, using the 225lb pax weight that Bombardier assumes. According to the spaghetti chart, that takes the still air range out to 3100NM. So that's 3100NM for a two class configuration, just like the Bombardier sales literature says.

Guess what? The 1950NM range that the preview states matches up on the chart with MZFW, 111K. Is that a realistic, everyday assumption? Not sure.


Also, what you said about SLC, is part of the reason that it would make sense to base the aircraft there, not on a coast that it needs a fuel stop to make it to the other base... but who says any of this needs to make sense?

Last edited by flyallnite; 09-03-2017 at 10:01 AM.
flyallnite is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 10:31 AM
  #552  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

FWIW, a ground school instructor at the LGB factory said that we bought the 160k MGTOW MD-88 but only had it certified to 149.5k, in order to save on landing fees. We also had the forward airstair removed and put in storage. These moves could be reversed in order to increase the resale value of the airplane down the road.
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 11:42 AM
  #553  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Position: retired 767(dl)
Posts: 5,743
Default

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
FWIW, a ground school instructor at the LGB factory said that we bought the 160k MGTOW MD-88 but only had it certified to 149.5k, in order to save on landing fees. We also had the forward airstair removed and put in storage. These moves could be reversed in order to increase the resale value of the airplane down the road.
It was always interesting to watch the HVP's wait to go down the aft steps and be the last through customs.
badflaps is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 12:39 PM
  #554  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ItnStln's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,588
Default

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
FWIW, a ground school instructor at the LGB factory said that we bought the 160k MGTOW MD-88 but only had it certified to 149.5k, in order to save on landing fees. We also had the forward airstair removed and put in storage. These moves could be reversed in order to increase the resale value of the airplane down the road.


LGB being the German toy train manufacture, or who?
ItnStln is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 12:50 PM
  #555  
Gets Weekends Off
 
saturn's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Supreme Allied Commander
Posts: 1,074
Default

Originally Posted by flyallnite
Also, what you said about SLC, is part of the reason that it would make sense to base the aircraft there, not on a coast that it needs a fuel stop to make it to the other base... but who says any of this needs to make sense?
Or instead of an inland base with the coasts as outstations, they can have the coasts be bases (LAX, NYC) and the inland cities be the outstations. You don't necessarily need direct base to base flying capability.
saturn is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 01:09 PM
  #556  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

Originally Posted by ItnStln
LGB being the German toy train manufacture, or who?
Long Beach, CA, but the MadDog does resemble a Lehmann Gross Bahn product in several ways.
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 01:14 PM
  #557  
veut gagner à la loterie
 
forgot to bid's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Default

Originally Posted by ItnStln
LGB being the German toy train manufacture, or who?
LGB was a magical land where they made things not meant to fly, fly.
forgot to bid is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 01:48 PM
  #558  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
There are no range restrictions in the contract. I also don't know where the 1500 miles came from. The one chart shows the CS100 capable of NYC to SLC with every seat full against winter headwinds which is 1730 miles. SLC is the intermediate stop for fuel by JetBlues A320's often in the winter. That range line may also include fuel to a divert however it does not state either way. This puts the range right where Bombardier states for the standard aircraft. They offer a high gross weight version which is what they typically quote for range. We purchased the standard model.
So what's the actual difference? Just a pencil whip t/o or ldg weight that enables more fuel to be carried? Bigger tanks?
gloopy is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 01:51 PM
  #559  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ItnStln's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,588
Default

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
Long Beach, CA, but the MadDog does resemble a Lehmann Gross Bahn product in several ways.


Thanks for the explanation, I forgot about that LGB!
ItnStln is offline  
Old 09-03-2017, 01:51 PM
  #560  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ItnStln's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,588
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
LGB was a magical land where they made things not meant to fly, fly.


That seems to be true!
ItnStln is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
acousticgrace
Regional
10
09-25-2014 10:37 AM
rmr1992
Cargo
24
09-11-2014 09:17 AM
Horhay
United
131
02-13-2013 10:58 PM
fartsarefunny
Foreign
6
06-14-2012 05:17 AM

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices