20 Apr 2024, 09:52 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 12:40 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/13/18 Posts: 214 Post Likes: +175
|
|
Flat wing stopping in Columbia, SC. Getting their marketing dollars worth.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 12:45 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/30/12 Posts: 4006 Post Likes: +4411 Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Flat wing stopping in Columbia, SC. Getting their marketing dollars worth. So I have to go back to work? Shucks.
_________________ Be Nice
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 12:47 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 6945 Post Likes: +3605 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Oh my OCD ... that FMS panel... Attachment: 10286_gb1_300x300.jpg
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 13:06 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11105 Post Likes: +7090 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Oh my OCD ... that FMS panel...
Not OCD, that thing needs a cleaning.
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 13:06 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/16/09 Posts: 7093 Post Likes: +1961 Location: Houston, TX
Aircraft: BE-TBD
|
|
Quote: THE FLIGHT YOU’VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR ACTIVE WINGLETS VS FLAT WINGS flat wing CJ: PWM-CAE-PBI active winglet CJ: PWM-PBI in the parlance of our times, come’on man
_________________ QB
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 13:18 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/23/10 Posts: 849 Post Likes: +661
|
|
This marketing effort is a fail with the preplanned fuel stop and different routes. We all understand what they were trying to illustrate, but it would have been more dramatic and really drilled home the point if they had both aircraft depart under identical conditions fly the same route in trail of one another, to a destination that the winglet CJ would land with minimal reserves and have the flat wing CJ divert about 3 hours into the flight for fuel and then continue on to the ultimate destination. They could compare total trip times, total fuel burn, etc. on exact routing and conditions. The overwater portion exaggerates the final tallies (which I get is the point) as the flat wing CJ can't stop for fuel in the Atlantic, but it all appears too contrived. It's too much of a corner case. Unless they are specifically going after the Northeast to Florida traveller, which may be the objective.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 13:27 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/25/15 Posts: 218 Post Likes: +191
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This marketing effort is a fail with the preplanned fuel stop and different routes. We all understand what they were trying to illustrate, but it would have been more dramatic and really drilled home the point if they had both aircraft depart under identical conditions fly the same route in trail of one another, to a destination that the winglet CJ would land with minimal reserves and have the flat wing CJ divert about 3 hours into the flight for fuel and then continue on to the ultimate destination. They could compare total trip times, total fuel burn, etc. on exact routing and conditions. The overwater portion exaggerates the final tallies (which I get is the point) as the flat wing CJ can't stop for fuel in the Atlantic, but it all appears too contrived. It's too much of a corner case. Unless they are specifically going after the Northeast to Florida traveller, which may be the objective. And who would go to CAE on this flight anyway for gas? Its a 100 mile detour and will give much less favorable ATC treatment as well.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 13:36 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/26/13 Posts: 19915 Post Likes: +19643 Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: And who would go to CAE on this flight anyway for gas? Its a 100 mile detour and will give much less favorable ATC treatment as well. And it's into the wind. It's all a marketing stunt. Not that I have a CJ, but I've lost interest. I'm not going to learn anything from today's stunt that I don't already know.
_________________ My last name rhymes with 'geese'.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 13:49 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/30/12 Posts: 4006 Post Likes: +4411 Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: And who would go to CAE on this flight anyway for gas? Its a 100 mile detour and will give much less favorable ATC treatment as well. KPMZ is a shorter route, cheaper fuel and allows a direct feed into the ARs. Do winglets help make up for poor flight planning decisions?
_________________ Be Nice
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 14:13 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/28/11 Posts: 1342 Post Likes: +590
Aircraft: V35A, B300
|
|
Why file different routes. So stupid.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 14:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/24/11 Posts: 500 Post Likes: +555
Aircraft: PA31, PA32R
|
|
Looks like they adjusted the route for 44VS, now there's only 11 miles difference, pending the actual route for the second leg of 741CC.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 15:00 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/21/21 Posts: 545 Post Likes: +624
Aircraft: B55 Owner
|
|
Clearly not using the same climb speed with the two airplanes either. (look at the GS difference)
This whole thing is a joke, and as someone else has said, a turn off on the winglets. My business partner just bought a CJ, and was really wanting to put the winglets on. This "stunt" has caused him to rethink a bit.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flat wing 525 vs Tamarack winglet 525 face-off Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 15:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/17/21 Posts: 10 Post Likes: +11
Aircraft: Citation M2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Clearly not using the same climb speed with the two airplanes either. (look at the GS difference)
This whole thing is a joke, and as someone else has said, a turn off on the winglets. My business partner just bought a CJ, and was really wanting to put the winglets on. This "stunt" has caused him to rethink a bit. The winglet plane is only 900' higher vs. the stock and it only took off 51 seconds behind and its ground speed is way slower trying to climb faster. What a joke....
|
|
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 2007-2024
|
|
|
|