The take off has to be just as amazing. Post it!

Worked on Falcons my entire career. Best in my opinion. Craftsmanship and attention to detail is incredible.

Magnifique avion, ce Falcon 8X! Ses performances sont carrément "bluffantes" ... !!

Awesome views !

Stunning performance

Now this is what all aircaft should be able to do. Great range, speed and comfort with excellent short field performace.

Beautiful!!!!!👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

Wow amazing 👍

That’s a nice looking aircraft.

Que Aeronave!!!!!👏👏👏👏👏👏

👍 Super vidéo 👍 👏 ❤️ 🇨🇭

This is my DREAM Jet, one day I'll own it for sure.

Nice hrd landings

And now the Take-off with 1/10 of the fuel and only the pilot.

@tristantriton8115

4 жыл бұрын

while you take your cessna to ferry you to a field to fly on its competitor.

What a treat, was looking for a successor to the 7x @ Gstaad video

Looks like they touched down kind of hard.

@marcoaureliojardimgusmao8108

4 жыл бұрын

is there anyway to perform a short landing without it ?

@Kevingamer1998

4 жыл бұрын

mike blackford short field landing procedures are to touch down as soon as practical. If not go around

@NiTeHaWKnz

4 жыл бұрын

@@Kevingamer1998 Another words, if you have to hit the runway harder then normal, do it.

I watched a couple landings of this aircraft. I noticed it bounces like the MD11 when it lands. Cool, but not always a good thing. Can this land smoother without the bounce?

@TheSomeoone

4 жыл бұрын

DaNihsel I think so yeah he landed hard to be as close the threshold he can be and in a short distance

@tristantriton8115

4 жыл бұрын

MD-11 has a CG design issue that attributes to its bounces that have led to flipping over where as the Falcon 8X was designed properly with no such flaw so comparing the two in terms of bouncing and flipping over is nonsensical.

@niilespunkari8832

4 жыл бұрын

Maybe during low fuel, the triple engines in the back produce an unbalanced weight proportion and thus the aircraft bounces at landing.

@superchargedpetrolhead

4 жыл бұрын

he brought it down hard, he had to cause there is not a lot of runway to work with.

what weight did they do taht with

Top❤

❤❤❤

❤❤❤❤❤

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

❤❤

Landing Distance is a bit misleading here. Official Landing Distance is with VREF at 50 ft above threshold, resulting in a touchdown at approximately the 1,000 ft / 300 m touchdown zone marker. You can land shorter, but this does not mean that the official Landing Distance is any shorter.

Waoo

Que aeroporto é esse? (What airport is this?)

@rodfeher

Жыл бұрын

está literalmente no título do vídeo

Notice at 1:00 they switched to another angle as he was very close to hitting the aft of the 8X, yes indeed tricky landing for a short runway. Nothing about landing weight, how many bags/pax were on board etc... honestly without this information it's another landing. With tri holers I've yet to see how the cost of operation makes sense over 2 engines like the G550/G6

@alexanderkamerbeek9693

4 жыл бұрын

Your not going to hit the back on a falcon, the tailsection sits quite high. Only reason for the cut I think is it shows less bounce as the touchdown was hard! I agree on the lack of specifications given which takes away of the magnitude of this performance. 3 engines actually do make sense if you look at the fuel economy its slightly more fuel efficient due to the smaller engines, if you look at maintenance then sure it could be a bit more expensive but here the same applies the engines are smaller and therefor could be a bit cheaper which evens things out. Just to add I found this link comparing the g650 VS the 8x and see for yourself why 3 could safe you money. blog.wepushtin.com/blog/clash-titans-g650-vs-falcon-8x/

@tristantriton8115

4 жыл бұрын

The Falcon 8X will save you $250,000 annually over that useless G650. It has 3 engines yet burns less fuel per hour, less on insurance, can't be stalled, true fly by wire and the list goes on. Can a G650 fly into Aspen? No Only recently got approved to fly into London City years after its irrelevancy. 1 recorded crash during testing. Breaks easy, software is temperature sensitive and drinks fuel like its party hour. If you care to know how then read on but chances are you won't. The G650 is worthless not that you would ever own one to see for yourself. G650 Burns right around 452.70 gallons of fuel per hour. $5.00 a gallon cost you $2,263.50 per hour Maintenance cost around $1,191.76 per hour You’ll spend $3,455.26 on direct costs every hour between fuel and maintenance. At 346 hours, that’s a total of $1,195,519.96 each year. Crew expenses on average, $227,175.00 annually To hangar the G650, you’ll likely pay $55,867.50 for the year Insurance, including hull and legal liability, will cost you $56,598.75 for the year. Pilot training will cost you $64,155.00 for the year. At 346 hours, we’re looking at the following costs: Total annual direct costs: $1,195,519.96 Total annual fixed costs: $403,796.25 Total annual cost: $1,599,316.21 Falcon 8X Burns right around 346.50 gallons of fuel per hour. $5.00 a gallon cost you $1,732.50 per hour Maintenance cost around $2,568.19 per hour At 346 hours, you’re looking at spending $939,957.54 annually on direct operating costs. Crew expenses on average, $227,175.00 annually To hangar the Falcon 8X, you’ll likely pay $78,800.00 for the year Insurance, including hull and legal liability, will cost you $44,850.00 for the year. Pilot training will cost you $64,155.00 for the year. At 346 hours, we’re looking at the following costs: Total annual direct costs: $939,957.54 Total annual fixed costs: $414,980.00 Total annual cost: $1,354,937.54

@niilespunkari8832

4 жыл бұрын

@@tristantriton8115 ... and with Falcon 8x, with its triple engines, you can pretty much fly anywhere on this planet: any pacific island, I assume above the arctic, and stop-by at antarctic, too. Wild!

@superchargedpetrolhead

4 жыл бұрын

@@niilespunkari8832 yep, i have seen videos of the 7x operating in the antartic. Apparentely it flies there often to take supplies...

@dirkbogarde7796

3 жыл бұрын

@@tristantriton8115 Thank you for posting these numbers. Very interesting.

🥰🥰🥰

And T/O distance?

@pierre-andreguilleuxdephil2517

4 жыл бұрын

300ft

@tedsmith6137

4 жыл бұрын

Unknown. It is still stuck there till someone arrives with a truck and an angle grinder!

@tristantriton8115

4 жыл бұрын

It took off from KSMO and flew across the US to Teterboro. Same runway length so I'm sure it was no problem so please ignore the broke trolls that think otherwise.

@dirkbogarde7796

3 жыл бұрын

There are many HD vidoes of the Falcon jets taking off from small airports across the EU and 🇨🇭 . You can see how short the take off can be. No numbers of course. But it masters short run ways with ease, with the Alps all around. Be it Samedan or Bern. So high take off on a short run way, with no go around. Presumably with a realistic load on board during routine operations.

It is possible to land and takeoff with full capacity

@superchargedpetrolhead

4 жыл бұрын

nah, this runway is too short for MTOW but the falcon will still do much better than their competitor cause most of them won't even get into such a small airport

@bijaysitaula7006

4 жыл бұрын

@@superchargedpetrolhead Ok thanks. I know one airport in Nepal which is Simara airport which is Domestic airport and its length is 1192 meter and with is 25 m wide. Is it possible to land.

@superchargedpetrolhead

4 жыл бұрын

@@bijaysitaula7006 i think so, i just checked the Simara airport, it is slightly longer than the airport in this video but it's width is similar and most important it's elevation is only 450ft but for the airport in this video the elevation is at around 3300ft. So i would assume the falcon would surely be able to operate in that with no problem but it may not be able to operate at maximum takeoff weight cause it would need 1800 meter/5880 feet runway. That being said, you might have to check whether there is any restrictions in the airport, cause many in the himalayan region has strict restrictions based on weight, size etc and some even doesn't allow jets to land there. So you might have to check that. But theoretically the falcon can operate in simara airport. Check out this official site for more info on it's performance : www.dassaultfalcon.com/en/Aircraft/Models/8X/Pages/overview.aspx# cheers.

Try to make it on Global or Gulfstream-))) It’s simply impossible. You can’t take pax or enough fuel on these types but Falcon can do it. Only clever and educated people buying Dassault. Average guys who understand only max cabin length and width would stick to Global and Gulfstream.

@NiTeHaWKnz

4 жыл бұрын

She may not be the fastest aircraft in the hanger but she has fighter jet DNA. Definitely my choice of a private jet, or, a AJC319

@monrow11

3 жыл бұрын

You can land a g550 that short. I’ve done it. G450.....no......g550 comes in like a glider.

That's the highest IFR airport in Europe? It's only 1020 metres AMSL! I wonder who allowed that building so close to the threshold? That is WAY too close.

@Uni1Lab

4 жыл бұрын

Ted Smith : do You know Switzerland? Lands are rare here and pilots have certifications to land here.

@margauxj-broussel9186

4 жыл бұрын

I thought the same about that warehouse: so scary. Was it here before the airport or the other way around ?

@Renato.Stiefenhofer.747driver

4 жыл бұрын

It is tricky to operate a Falcon Trijet into an airport like the one shown in this nice video (Les Eplatures, La Chaux de Fonds). It was a good idea to land it firmly. After all, it is a commercial video... I was based in Lugano and we operated our Falcon 900 into the tiny airfield of Marina di Campo, on the island of Elba, Italy (LIRJ). It's runway got less than 1000 meters and the approach is, well, special. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_di_Campo_Airport . I always loved to fly the Falcon. It is by far the best midsize private jet. Yes, we also had a Gulfstream. Nice airplane, too. But in the mountains and on short runways I'd prefer the luxury of three engines. Also crossing the waters makes me feel more comfortable, for obvious reasons. Three engines can only be topped by ... four? Greets from the 747-8 flightdeck. R

@maxsdad538

3 жыл бұрын

Maybe for you, but not for a REAL pilot, Teddy.

ryanair recieved an challenge

Pretty hard landing though...

@chaspfrank

4 жыл бұрын

Old Navy trick. Smash it down to deplete energy.

@emjeebutterz4405

4 жыл бұрын

Had to be done. But that doesnt take away from the great short field performance of this aircraft.

@chaspfrank

4 жыл бұрын

@@emjeebutterz4405 You say it had to be done but I doubt there was a reason to do it other than to show it could be done...which was foolish. To put an aircraft in and out of an airport like that when it would never be done under normal operations is risking crew, aircraft and surrounding property and people just to make a point. No compelling reason that I can think of.

Нямате желание госпожица ok алес гут ang man 2024😊

Very nice video of Les Eplatures but it is not in the Alps it is in the Jura mountains.

o pessoal faz um monte de pergunta como se fosse comprar

@dedk0

4 жыл бұрын

pergunto o que eu quiser

@rodfeher

Жыл бұрын

vc nao vai?

"demonstrates its agility the Alps" Last I checked, La-Chaux-de-Fonds is in the Jura mountains. Pas exactement la même chose ;-)

@maxsdad538

3 жыл бұрын

Last I checked, you had to fly THROUGH the Western Alps to get to La-Chaux-de-Fonds. Exactement la même chose.

@jeanpauljh

3 жыл бұрын

@@maxsdad538 - per FOCA charts there is no requirement to fly *through* the Alps to reach this airport. ;-)

Almost any airplane can do this if it is empty, low fuel and it abuses the brakes and thrust reversers. You would do this crap one too many times and the owner would wonder why his maintenance budget is out of wack. NOT great job security!! This is like the airplane sales people say a plane can fly 4,000nm at MACH 0.85. Yes, BUT it can't so both things at the same time. It can go fast or go far but not BOTH at the same time. Used car sales people at their worst!

❤❤❤❤❤

❤❤❤❤❤