Falcon 10

Falcon 10s are okay. Like any other airplane, it depends on your mission. If you compare it to a Lear 35, which was it's primary competition when new, the 35 out performs it in almost every respect except for runway length at sea level, and absolute speed. Otherwise, the Lear 35 flies higher, goes further, burns less fuel, and carries more payload. The 35 also costs less to maintain.

There is a reason they built 600+ 35s (and quite a few 31s), and only about 250 Falcon 10s.

The biggest problem with the Falcon is the takeoff performance when you get to a hot, and or high, airport. The plus side for the Falcon 10 is that they are getting pretty cheap, which, if your mission will accomodate it, could make it a decent choice. Just be sure the maintenance is up to date and hasn't been neglected!

One of the Falcon 10s I used to fly ended up parked for a while, and since the Falcon maintenance is mostly calendar based rather than flight time based, the inspections keep on accruing. Eventually the airplane needed about $600k in maintenance to make it airworthy, and it was only worth about $600k, at best. It ended up being parted out.

Not that different than some low end Ferraris!

FYI, I'm type rated in Falcon 10s, and for a few years flew both a Falcon 10 and a Lear 35. Haven't been in a Falcon 10 in some years, but I'm still current and flying 35s.

 

If you have any specific Falcon 10 questions, feel free to ask!

 

A Falcon 10 is incredibly well built. Sometime look at a one with the paint stripped and notice the smooth skins. Then look sometime at a Citation II series and notice the oil canned surfaces or a Lear 35 and check around the wing to fuselage fairing.

DonV confirms what others told me; Falcon 10 is more maintenance intensive. Falcon has historically not been a winner on the parts cost.

Typically a Falcon 10 has a higher quality interior than a regular Lear 35 and far, far beyond what an old Citation would have.

Again, Don V is right on the need to look at your mission requirements. How far do you need to go most of the time? How many people are normally going to be with you? How much baggage? [The baggage issue could be a concern since in both the Lear 35 and the Falcon 10 stowage is in a compartment aft of the last seats, some Falcons have had the mod for some external stowage in the "H*ll Hole"] How do you feel about cabin size versus operating costs?

Jeff Kennedy

 

I would say the Falcon 10 cabin is slightly nicer than the 35, although there is more variety in Falcon 10 interior configurations, so it depends. On baggage, they are about the same-- the Falcon's interior baggage (unless it has a forward baggage cabinet) is a joke, but most of them do have some sort of external baggage mod. Of course the nice thing about external baggage is that you don't have to drag the baggage over the seats. Also, many Lear 35s now have the Raisbeck external locker, which gives them an edge if you want to carry golf clubs or skis.

On climb, no contest-- the Lear weighs less and has more power, so much better takeoff performance and climb. If you are thinking of flying it yourself, I would try flying a Lear also-- personally, I find the Lear to be much more enjoyable to fly. The Falcon 10 is faster, yes, but typically to go fast you have to stay at FL350 or below, and don't imagine you'll be going 1,300 miles at M 0.85 in a Falcon 10! To get that range, you'll be going M 0.78, just like the Lear.

I don't know what you mean about the "3C" inspection-- I believe a C check is every 6 years, so if it were freshly done this year it would be due in 2014. The other big "gotcha" on Falcon 10s (and any Falcon, for that matter) is the landing gear-- there are inspections required on the gear based on number of landings which are both expensive and time consuming.

I don't know if Falcon 10s have a history of corrosion, but I would look into that as well.

Again, if you find a good one, and never plan on going into any mountain airports in the summer, the Falcon 10 can be a nice airplane. They're cheaper to buy, and will be cheaper to sell, than a 35, but more expensive to own. If it were my money, I'd get a 35. But if the Falcon 10 appeals to you, go for it!

Also, one plus for the Falcon 10 is that the cockpit is much more comfortable than the Lear, if you're a big guy (I'm 6'4").

 

Click Here = Flying Magazine takes a flight in King Aviations Falcon 10.

I worked for Skycharter in Toronto who purchased N10FJ the Falcon Jet demonstrator back in 1981, and still operate the aircraft to this day!, as C-GRIS. Photo C-GRIS .

I now live near Buttonville Airport near Toronto, home to FlightExec who currently operate 4 Falcon 10/100 aircraft.
The Falcon 10 was known as the fastest sub-sonic passenger jet in service when it hit the market.