Learjets

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
There's a fractional jet operator out of Cinncinati Lunken, by the name of Executive Jet, and they fly a variety of Learjets

[/ QUOTE ]

Executive Jet Management (EJM) in LUK is not a fractional operator. They are a Part 135 company who is "owned by" a fractional operator. They do operate a handful of Learjets under the charter part of their operation.

http://ejmjets.com/

 

[FLYMcDoofer]

Speaking of Bombardier.....
At work the other day I had a good conversation with a Gulstream Engineer and we got to talking about the Global Express. From his professional standpoint in the industry he seems to think there is something wrong with it and in no way does he worry it will ever conquer the GV or G550.
He commented on how the GLEX price tag is down to like $22 million (not sure if this is true) which he said is half of what it used to be and have of the G products.
He also said that with so few out there and with so many Gulfstream products out there he wonders if any problems might arise with it down the road ala Lear 45 style with the grounding.
Overall just an interesting conversation. Yes he was the company man and proud of Gulfstreams but he did make some interesting points.

About those 45s also....I am sure FlexJet is hurting bad from it!

 

[Mr_Creepy]

[ QUOTE ]
Lear currently only manufactures 3 airframes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you mean Bombardier. (pronounced "Bomb barge-ay")

 

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you mean Bombardier.

[/ QUOTE ]

Learjet, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Bombardier. The only "true" Bombardier planes if you will, are the Challenger/RJ/GEX line.

I have noticed that Bombardier likes to emphasize itself rather than its products. For example, if you go to Flexjet's website and look for "history," you get the history of Bombardier, not Flexjet. The same goes for all of their press releases. They print a sentence or two about their product and 4 paragraphs on Bombardier, Inc.

Is anyone else having trouble viewing the Bombardier websites? Every time I try to open them, all I see is a lime green screen.

 

[Eagle]

I guess if 35% of the fleet are made up of Citations and LJ, I don't think that one could say it is more likely that you will fly one to the other.

funny tho the company I started with had 1 CE-500, AND ONE LJ35, both were Leasebacks, So don;t know if the acft themselves made it into the NBAA database. Plus the owner of the CE-500 managed 2 other 500s, that were private acft, and I woudl doubt they would be on the list as well.

 

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess if 35% of the fleet are made up of Citations and LJ, I don't think that one could say it is more likely that you will fly one to the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a feeling we are looking at the previous post from different angles. Why are you referencing the 35% under 29,000# NBAA figures? The way I understood, he was only asking about the chance of crossing paths with more Lears or more Citations. The key phrase in his post I was referring to was "I think you will find MANY MORE Citation Jets around than you will with the Lears." (emphasis added.) Not necessarily his chances of flying one or the other.

The NBAA figure for % of fleet makeup is pretty broad, and encompasses many more types than the LR and Ce. You would have Westwinds, Hawkers, Hansas, early Sabres, Falcon 10/100, Astra, Be400/Diamond, etc...all under 29K

In a nut shell, there are 1500+ more Citations than Lears. Therefore, you have a greater chance statistically of seeing a Citation than a Lear. Unless, you are spotting from a Lear dominated airport/maint facility.

 

[Tired]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you mean Bombardier.

[/ QUOTE ]

Learjet, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Bombardier. The only "true" Bombardier planes if you will, are the Challenger/RJ/GEX line.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't Bill Lear design the Challenger for Fedex before is was bought by Bombardier?

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you mean Bombardier.

[/ QUOTE ]

Learjet, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Bombardier. The only "true" Bombardier planes if you will, are the Challenger/RJ/GEX line.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't Bill Lear design the Challenger for Fedex before is was bought by Bombardier?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought so too starting with the original 600 model.

 

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't Bill Lear design the Challenger for Fedex before is was bought by Bombardier?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, he did. How could I forget? However, Canadair is the one that used Lear's design. The CL600 came out in 1978. Bombardier took over Canadair in 1986.

There is a CL600 based here with the top mounted entry door (cargo style). One of the few that FedEx had ordered, but they never took delivery of any.

 

[Eagle]

I don't know what you guys are all talking about all my books still say Gates Learjet. must be a misprint huh? heh

 

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know what you guys are all talking about all my books still say Gates Learjet

[/ QUOTE ]

1962-1967 Lear Jet Corporation
1967-1987 Gates Rubber Company (Gates Learjet)
1987-1990 Bought by aquisitions firm and renamed "Learjet, Inc.)
1990-present Learjet, Inc. bought by Bombardier

 

[Eagle]

[ QUOTE ]
1967-1987 Gates Rubber Company (Gates Learjet)

[/ QUOTE ]

well that explains the condom dispenser in the lav..

bada bum..

hear all week try the veil....

 

[Tired]

[ QUOTE ]
.

There is a CL600 based here with the top mounted entry door (cargo style). One of the few that FedEx had ordered, but they never took delivery of any.



[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, the first 25 have the door hinged at the top, then they went to the more traditional door.

Pretty amazing how the Lear designed 600 has led all the way to 90 seat RJs.

 

[aloft]

[ QUOTE ]
Speaking of Bombardier.....
At work the other day I had a good conversation with a Gulstream Engineer and we got to talking about the Global Express. From his professional standpoint in the industry he seems to think there is something wrong with it and in no way does he worry it will ever conquer the GV or G550.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've heard this too; something about a Japanese wing that didn't perform as advertised and thus not yielding the range numbers they promised (as in "not-quite-Global Express").