29 Jun 2025, 12:39 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn...  Posted: 12 Dec 2022, 15:00 |
|
 |
|
|
Joined: 12/30/09
Posts: 996
Post Likes: +806
|
|
|
Max payload with full fuel is approx 2500#, max payload is 4800# - 7100#, depending on model.
I would assume that those numbers are based on ZFW but I’m not typed so this is from spec sheet data.
Brad
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 13 Dec 2022, 00:13 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20395
Post Likes: +25581
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Gross weight isn't meaningful. What is the fuel burn per passenger mile, or per payload mile. Don't forget the multiple stops and routing needed to complete the KVNY to ESSB route for a turbine Commander. I'm sure the GE will win the overall mission fuel per passenger/payload mile equation. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 13 Dec 2022, 00:32 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/23/10
Posts: 901
Post Likes: +720
|
|
|
There is a reason the airlines aren’t flying Commanders.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 13 Dec 2022, 00:56 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6652
Post Likes: +5960
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Aerostar Superstar 2
|
|
Well, without knowing the empty weight, MGTOW etc, there's no knowing. Also, the passenger count is not very indicative as these planes carry very few for their size. I don't know what the best metric would be to compare - like Matt said, payload/mpg seems to be the best. And I think that if we ever did that comparison, P180 Avanti would obliterate pretty much everything..  But yeah, I'm also surprised it didn't burn a bit more, actually. That's only about 4x of what an old Citation or Westwind would burn, and it has considerably more capacity.
_________________
Without love, where would you be now?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 13 Dec 2022, 02:11 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/02/08
Posts: 7825
Post Likes: +5855
Company: Rusnak Auto Group
Location: Newport Coast, CA
Aircraft: Baron B55 N7123N
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Just a fun little story:
So, an old Swedish buddy of mine is a captain on a 2007 Bombardier Global Express that flies regularly between Van Nuys and Stockholm (we drove taxi together in Stockholm back in the early 90's and he started his PPL shortly after me). This particular GLEX is exclusively chartered by a very rich game developer living here and is always at his disposal with a full crew. Not cheap, but he's got the means and likes to know it's always there for him. Adam, I’ve seen that GLEX many times while taxiing out from the VNY Prop Park. Always wondered why a Swedish registered plane was there so often. You just explained it!
_________________
STAND UP FOR YOUR COUNTRY
Sven
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 13 Dec 2022, 04:37 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/23/10
Posts: 901
Post Likes: +720
|
|
Username Protected wrote: How did this become about Global Expresses vs Commanders?  It's not. Mike made the comment it was more efficient than a Commander. My (botched) point was that generally in transportation the larger the more efficient.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 22 Dec 2022, 00:46 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/13/19
Posts: 591
Post Likes: +709
Company: USAF and Polaris Program
Location: FL
Aircraft: F-35A A-JET L39 A36
|
|
|
Our jet (F-15E) with two external tanks carries 31500lbs of fuel. That lasts us about ~1.8-2.3hrs of a "normal" combat mission. A clean jet carries 23300lbs of fuel and that can get us anywhere from a .7 to 1.5hrs of a "normal" combat mission.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 22 Dec 2022, 10:36 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/02/12
Posts: 286
Post Likes: +257
Location: Birmingham, AL
Aircraft: B55 President 2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Our jet (F-15E) with two external tanks carries 31500lbs of fuel. That lasts us about ~1.8-2.3hrs of a "normal" combat mission. A clean jet carries 23300lbs of fuel and that can get us anywhere from a .7 to 1.5hrs of a "normal" combat mission. What kind of range can be expected in those flight times? I'm assuming a F-15E using up 31.5k lbs of fuel in 1.8 hours is moving quite a bit faster than the Global is.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 22 Dec 2022, 11:04 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/28/15
Posts: 42
Post Likes: +28
Aircraft: Cessna 208B
|
|
|
Next time someone jokes online about playing Minecraft on a maxed out game computer I’ll think about that Global.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 22 Dec 2022, 11:11 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/13/19
Posts: 591
Post Likes: +709
Company: USAF and Polaris Program
Location: FL
Aircraft: F-35A A-JET L39 A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Our jet (F-15E) with two external tanks carries 31500lbs of fuel. That lasts us about ~1.8-2.3hrs of a "normal" combat mission. A clean jet carries 23300lbs of fuel and that can get us anywhere from a .7 to 1.5hrs of a "normal" combat mission. What kind of range can be expected in those flight times? I'm assuming a F-15E using up 31.5k lbs of fuel in 1.8 hours is moving quite a bit faster than the Global is.
It depends a good bit on the drag index. For us 4th gen fighters, that's the drag value of carrying various external stores. The F-15E (normally configured) has a different aerodynamic profile than the F-15C. The E model (normally) has conformal fuel tanks, which add gas but also significant drag from the BRU-46/47 bomb racks. Various combat configurations are different, training configurations and ferry configurations are all different as well. The drag delta between each can be very significant. Combat profiles can also represent a huge different in range (i.e. how much Afterburner use, how many times going from 40,000' to 300' and back again, how many energy depleting maneuvers expected).
When I took a F-15E to Oshkosh, I had no training missiles on the pylons, no external fuel tanks (so 23,300lbs) and only two "travel pods" hanging on two of the BRU-47s (bomb racks on the belly). We had enough gas to go from KGSB in NC to KOSH in WI (~713nm) with about 2500lbs for patterns or vectors, landing with ~2500lbs. We're non-RVSM, so that factors in as well.
Our bar-napkin, in a pinch rules of thumb for diverts for a training configured jet are about 1000lbs/50nm for mid level cruising and about 1500lbs/50nm for low-ish, non-tactical point to point.
Also, for a 3rd external fuel tank, the drag penalty and extra fuel burn is roughly equal to the quantity in the tank (i.e. it doesn't really extend your range).
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 22 Dec 2022, 14:53 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 03/28/17
Posts: 8400
Post Likes: +10598
Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Our jet (F-15E) with two external tanks carries 31500lbs of fuel. That lasts us about ~1.8-2.3hrs of a "normal" combat mission. A clean jet carries 23300lbs of fuel and that can get us anywhere from a .7 to 1.5hrs of a "normal" combat mission. Don't let the Climate Crazies know that; they'll be demanding electric powered fighters; hook up to the "tanker" to recharge the battery. 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Global Express fuel burn... Posted: 23 Dec 2022, 13:54 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/07/21
Posts: 408
Post Likes: +396
Aircraft: M20J/R, Sr22, SR20
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Our jet (F-15E) with two external tanks carries 31500lbs of fuel. That lasts us about ~1.8-2.3hrs of a "normal" combat mission. A clean jet carries 23300lbs of fuel and that can get us anywhere from a .7 to 1.5hrs of a "normal" combat mission. Don't let the Climate Crazies know that; they'll be demanding electric powered fighters; hook up to the "tanker" to recharge the battery.
Non RVSM? You have to stay below that air space, even as military flight?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
