Flight International - 5 June 2018

flightglobal.com 5-11 June 2018 | Flight International | 31

Challenger 350 versus competitors

Challenger 350 Cessna Longitude Falcon 2000S Gulfstream G280 Embraer Legacy 500

Range NBAA IFR 3,200nm/8 pax 3,500nm/4 pax 3,3500nm/6 pax 3,600nm/4 pax 3,130nm/4pax

Range fully loaded* 3,200nm 3,348nm 3,321nm 3,350nm 2,913nm

Cabin H x W x L 1.83 x 2.19 x 7.68m 1.83 x 1.96 x 7.67m 1.88 x 2.34 x 7.98m 1.85 x 2.11 x 7.87m 1.83 x 2.08 x 7.30m**

Passengers, typical/max 8/10 8/12 6/19 8/10 8/12

Price (2016) $26.7m $27m $28.9m $24.5m $20m

Cumulative deliveries 678 (300, 350) Still in certification 42 (DS, S) 380 (G200, G280) 60

2017 deliveries 56 0 2 28 15

Key selling points Full fuel, full pax, full range Lowest operating cost Handles like a fighter EVS & HUD available FBW; EVS & HUD available

Source: Manufacturers, NBAA *NBAA IFR, 8 pax @ 225lb/103kg each, M0.8, std BOW **not incl 1.07m wardrobe aft of lavatory

off was just under 18min.
Once level I allowed the Challenger 350 to
accelerate to and maintain M0.82, its High
Speed Cruise condition. At an indicated air-
speed of 231kt a total fuel flow of 1,700lb/h
had the Challenger truing out at 464kt. While I
manually manipulated the thrust levers to
hold speed, the FADECs have a “MACH
HOLD” feature that allows +/-3% of set N1 to
keep a target speed. Next I used the speed
brakes to rapidly slow to a Long Range Cruise
target of M0.78. Speed brake extension caused
a minor pitch up, easily countered with for-
ward yoke pressure. At the more economical
condition total fuel flow was 1,540lb/h at
219KIAS. On the colder than standard day, re-
sultant true airspeed was 443kt.
Regular readers might know this is the point
in my typical business jet review where I take a
few minutes to experience the passenger
cabin. For the Challenger 350 I had the oppor-

tunity to ride in the cabin on an empty ferry

flight, an experience I will detail later.

With the work at altitude complete, I retard-

ed the thrust levers and lowered the nose for a

descent to medium altitude. During the de-

scent I allowed the Challenger to accelerate to

M0.81 and extended the speed brakes to simu-

late an emergency descent. In the mid 30s we

were descending at over 6,000ft/min, a rate fast

enough to expeditiously get us to a safe alti-

tude. In a real emergency the speed brake

“EMER” position also extends the inboard

multifunction spoilers, for an even quicker de-

scent. Once at medium altitude I did some

hand-flown manoeuvres to reacquaint myself

with the Challenger 350. The aircraft has hy-

draulic elevators and rudder, with manual ai-

lerons. Roll control is augmented by spoiler

panels, one on each wing. During bank-to-

bank rolls at up to 60° angle of bank, at speeds

from 160 to 300KIAS, I found roll control was

good, allowing for easy capture of desired an-

gles of bank. In general I found control forces

in pitch and roll were well harmonised. Some

of these manoeuvres were completed with gear

and flaps extended; again, the Challenger re-

sponded in a prompt and smooth manner.

After the area manoeuvres were complete

we turned towards Hartford, air traffic control

providing vectors to final for an instrument

landing system approach to runway 24. Yount

loaded the approach into the FMS, with the

frequency and localiser course automatically

loading. At a gross weight of 12,973kg, our ref-

erence speed with flaps 30 (full) was 114KIAS,

with a target speed of 119KIAS. I followed the

flight director’s V-bar guidance cue in the pri-

mary flight display to track the localiser and

groundspeed. As mentioned above, Bombar-

dier has added an FPV to the primary flight

display. While the FPV is quite useful by itself,

it would be even more powerful had it been

tied into the flight director’s guidance cue. On

final approach, the 350 had an essentially flat

attitude, with about 58%N1 needed to main-

tain Vtarget.

At about 50ft radio altitude (RA) I started re-

tarding the thrust levers, reaching “IDLE” by

30ft RA where I started the flare. Just before

touchdown I pulled the nose up a degree or so

to establish the landing attitude. After the

Challenger settled on to the ground, I flew to

plant the nose wheel onto the runway. In the

three-point attitude Yount set the flaps to 20°

and reset the stab trim for our touch and go. On

his call I advanced the thrust levers to the

“TO” detent, with Yount calling “rotate” as we

accelerated past our approach target speed.

Once airborne the gear was retracted, and I

turned the Challenger on to a downwind in the

visual pattern for a full-stop landing.

Fully configured and rolled out level on

final, I used the synthetic vision system dis-

play and FPV to determine when I had inter-

cepted a 3° glidepath to the runway. I was a

bit less mechanical on this approach, and was

rewarded with a soft touchdown. The power-

ful wheel brakes slowed the Challenger, with

the thrust reversers only partially deployed

when we hit their low-speed limit, 70KIAS.

Once slowed to a safe taxi speed I used the

Linda Epstein

Larger and less-upturned winglets

are the primary visual difference

versus the previous standard

❯❯

CHALLENGER 350