Update -Dassault Falcon 2000

As a development of the 900 the 2000 makes as much use of the former aircraft’s components and systems as possible. The Falcon 2000’s internal fuselage is the same height 188cm (6ft 2in) and width 2. 34m (7ft 8in) as the Falcon 900 but is about a third shorter in length (The 2000’s internal length is 7. 98m (26ft 2in), compared to the 900’s 11. 9m/ 39ft). Externally however the 2000 and 900 are very similar in length. The reason the Falcon 2000 is so comparatively long for its internal cabin length is a product of the major differences between the 2000 and the 900, the engine configuration. The 900’s trijet configuration is extremely aero-dynamically efficient as the centre fuselage mounted engine’s exhaust influences the air to flow smoothly and creating relatively little drag around the tail cone and the two externally mounted engines. In contrast the Falcon 2000’s engines are comparatively large, and to combat the drag-inducing effects of the engines Dassault engineers had to design a long and aerodynamically clean tail.

The reduction in drag has largely been achieved through the use of area ruling. The rear fuselage tapers very noticeably aft of the passenger cabin, creating a coke bottle ef fect, similar to that on many early generation supersonic fighters such as the F-102. This low drag also delivers an extra margin of range and speed.

Considerable effort was expended to perfect the tail shape, the clean design of the tail being a significant aerodynamic achievement. The tail, as was the whole airframe, was designed using Dassault’s Catia three dimensional computer aided design programme, which Boeing has used to great success in its 777 design effort. Skills acquired from design work for the Rafale fighter were also transferred across to the Falcon 2000. The entire tail design effort lasted for 12 months, and almost all the work was done using the Catia system. Only was it in the final stages of design that wind tunnels were used to verify results.

The Falcon 2000’s wings were adapted directly from the Falcon 900, with the only major difference being the deletion of the latter’s inboard slats. The 2000’s wing also has modified leading edges. The wing was originally designed for the Falcon 50, and has proven to be very adaptable to the two larger designs, even though it was not designed with larger and heavier aircraft in mind.

Aside from the clean airframe, the other major component in Dassault’s drive to keep fuel consumption and thus operating costs down are the two new CFE turbofans. CFE is a new partnership between General Electric and AlliedSignal (nee Garrett), with their first product being the Falcon 2000’s 5725lb (25. 65kN) thrust CFE738-1-1B turbofans. In the 50:50 partnership GE supplies the core and engine controls, while AlliedSignal is responsible for the fan, low pressure turbine, accessory gearbox and installation interfaces. (AlliedSignal also manufactures the TFE731, which powers the Falcon 900. ) At the time of the 2000’s launch, Dassault aimed to improve operating costs compared with existing jets in the order of 20% “through astute aerodynamic design and selection of powerplants, and simplicity of design, with much forethought given to reliability and maintainability of the airframe and systems. ” This effort on clean aerodynamic design and efficient engines also benefits the 2000’s performance. A high thrust to weight ratio means the Falcon 2000 is able to make takeoffs at maximum weight and climb directly to a 41,000ft cruising altitude, allowing it to climb above airline traffic and to be routed directly to its destination, saving both time and money. Its range while cruising at Mach 0. 80 with eight passengers, baggage and reserves is 3000nm (5560km), while its maximum operating speed is Mach 0. 85.

Inside the cockpit, Dassault has selected Rockwell Collins Pro Line 4 avionics. This system includes four side by side CRT displays that present primary flight and navigation information. Autopilot, flight director and centralised avionics maintenance functions are provided by the system’s Integrated Avionics Processing System. The Collins ProLine 4 avionics family has already been selected for a number of aircraft including the Canadair Regional Jet, Saab 2000, Embraer EMB-145 and Beech’s Starship and BeechJet/Jayhawk. Various flight management systems are available, and while the 2000 will be certificated with a Global system, Collins, Honeywell and Universal systems will also be offered.

While all its flying controls are conventional, the 2000 uses a Messier brake-by-wire system, similar to that already used on the Mirage 2000 and Rafale fighters.

From mid 1995, the Falcon will also become available with a Category Illa landing capability, a virtue due to a Flight Dynamics Head Up Display, which will allow approaches down to 200m (700ft) runway visual range (RVR) at airports with only basic landing aids installed. Initially the HUD will display primary flight information and an arti- ficial runway profile. Later on this will be upgraded to a full enhanced vision system capable of presenting inputs from microwave and infrared sensors.

The Falcon 2000’s Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) is an AlliedSignal Garrett GPC 3160 as used on the Falcon 900. A new air crossfeed system allows airstarting of the two comparatively large engines, a first in a Dassault business jet.

Reversing a trend among other manufacturers, and despite extensive experience in the field, Dassault has actually reduced the amount of composites used in the 2000’s airframe, in order to lower repair costs. Composites are still used for fairings, the nose cone and engine cowlings, while the ailerons, which are made from composites on the Falcon 900, are made from conventional aluminium.

Dassault has a number of industry partners on the Falcon 2000 programme, and the foremost of these is Alenia, which is a 25% risk sharing partner. Alenia participated in the design of the aft fuselage, for which it is responsible for production, Alenia’s other areas of responsibility being the engine pylons and nacelles and thrust reversers. The thrust reversers are in fact supplied by Alenia’s US based subsidiary Dee Howard, while Alenia has subcontracted other work to Piaggio in Italy.

Dassault’s primary competitors against the Falcon 2000 are the Cessna Citation X, Hawker 1000 and Canadair Challenger. In terms of space and performance, its nearest rival is the Challenger, which has better range and a wider cabin. In its new 603 form, a number of improvements have been made to the decade old Challenger, including increased thrust engines and an EFIS cockpit and higher thrust en- gines. Even though, the Falcon is considerable less expensive, (although at $US15. 7m in late 1992 dollars, the Falcon 2000 is itself more expensive than either the Citation X or 1000) and has a longer and more voluminous cabin, and better operating economics. The Falcon 2000 also has a far larger cabin than the Hawker 1000 and Citation X. The 1000 burns about 10% less fuel than the Falcon, and has an 8% longer range, but it is considerably slower. The Citation X meanwhile is the fastest of the four bizjets, and is slightly less expensive than the 2000, although it too has a smaller cabin.

Dassault’s design effort with the Falcon 2000 culminated when the new jet made its first flight on March 4 1993. It is interesting to note that this first aircraft is not a traditional prototype, and is essentially a production aircraft, fitted with a complete cockpit and passenger cabin. Although the aircraft is only about half way through its certification programme already it has been on sales tours of North America, Europe and the Middle East, and has flown more than 300 people on demonstration flights.

Within 11 months of its first flight the first Falcon 2000 had flown more than 400 hours and 200 flights, and is still on track to be awarded simultaneous European and US certification in December, with the first customer delivery to follow in March 1995. Six Falcon 2000s are currently in production. The CAA’s decision to make impact activated ELTS (Emergency Locator Transmitters) mandatory has sparked criticism from a number of fronts on how the system is installed. Most vocal has been the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), which queries not so much the need for ELTS, but what type should be fitted, where and when. Tony Wilkinson, AOPA’s Chief Executive Officer, presents the arguments.