ACJ A220 vs Gulfstream G700 vs Bombardier G7500

[@ryanbyrnes4336]

The ACJ is a converted commercial aircraft. It's also important to mention that it was designed by Bombardier and later sold to Airbus. The Falcon 10X fits better into the same category as the G700 and Global 7500

[@dmack1827]

The ACJ will appeal to Middle East customers. Ultimately, aircraft buyers are brand loyal. If they own a Gulfstream, they normally buy Gulfstream. Same with Bombardier. As a pilot, I would take the 7500 all day long.

[@danielfarrar5154]

Why, over the G650 or G700? And what about the Falcon 10X? Is there one of the builders that is safer and more reliable over the others or are they all about the same?

[@Puzzoozoo]

No-one ever thinks of asking the person at the front which aircraft is the most rewarding to fly, as after all it is their job to get the person at the back who pays all the bills to their destination and then return them safely home again.

[@Snmy-lw7nn]

I love watching things which I could not afford

[@jos6216]

IMHO: ACJ / Like the room, but slower, short on range and altitude. Also requires more parking space. GS / Like the speed, altitude and range. Global / MY CHOICE / Like the speed, altitude and range. Like the Wing design and better field performance.

[@adamcloud705]

Bomb-bar-deee-aye

[@ZackWolfMusic]

No it's bomb bar dier

[@astormofwrenches5555]

Both are correct.

[@phillier1]

@@astormofwrenches5555 nope

[@BillyBob-fd5ht]

funny how someone know the airline bsiness does not know how to pronouce Bom bar dier

[@julie1369]

@@BillyBob-fd5ht maybe cause they are not the same person 🥸 and maybe because the world won’t stop working because someone mispronounced a word.

[@airzulu2733]

Beautiful jets . The interior and the avionics on these aircraft are incredible. Loved working around all the private Jets. My how aviation has changed.

[@stradivarioushardhiantz5179]

The competition would be head to head between; Falcon-10X vs G700 vs Global-7500

[@naughtyUphillboy]

Yes, but ACJ220 is very close, much larger cabin & economics of operation are close

[@stradivarioushardhiantz5179]

@@naughtyUphillboy indeed the ACJ220 cabin is more like other Bizliners....it has relatively same amount of fuel capacity around 22t....but the other 3 Bizjets fly far further to >7500nm & access to smaller airports

[@anthonytakouam2392]

But you can't land it in smaller airports

[@naughtyUphillboy]

@@anthonytakouam2392 Whaere G7500, G650 can land ACJ220 can !!!!!

[@donpearson5071]

Totally agree. The Falcon 10X can't be ignored. It's right in there with these specs.

[@trthib]

I would take the ACJ because of the avaiability of the staff already certified on the plane. If you need a pilot, flight attendant or aircraft mechanic fast on your plane the success of the commercial 220 will benefit you there. Plus, the cabin volume, cost to run and access to short runaways like London City actually make this the most interesting ACJ ever

[@ZhenyaTyoma]

Do you really believe, Bombardier G7500 Can't land in LCY? I suppose it is certified for that steep approach already

[@trthib]

@@ZhenyaTyoma That's not what I said/meant. I was comparing the ACJ 220 to the others ACJs and BBJs too. As said previously, having the possibility to hire crew from all allready operational in the commercial aviation sector is such a big operationnal advantage that if I was to get a jet in that range I just wouldn't consider bombardier/dassault/gulfstream at all... Only practicality & safety, couldn't care less about the badge...

[@jeremyweekes2126]

I agree to an extent, but I would probably still go for a purpose built business jet (ie Gulfstream G700, Bombardier Global 7500 or Dassault Falcon 10X) because of the higher service ceiling & speed. With a service ceiling of 51,000 feet you can fly above all the commercial traffic (not that commercial traffic is a huge problem at the moment with Covid lol). The ability to fly higher & faster with greater range (7,500-7,700NM) makes the Gulfstream, Bombardier & Dassault more versatile than the ACJ. The one significant advantage Airbus's ACJ range, & Boeing's BBJ range have over the purpose built business jet market is the cabin size & number of passengers they can carry. So if you were quite regularly traveling with a significant entourage, then I would definitely say Airbus's or Boeing's ACJ & BBJ range would be the way to go. But if you generally only traveling with a small entourage, then I think the purpose built business jets are the way to go. But that is obviously just my opinion.

[@loretog7315]

Great video!! I would choose the ACJ Two Twenty, simply because it has the largest and most comfortable cabin (by far).

[@largol33t1]

The video conveniently "forgets" to mention that the airline version of the 220 cannot compete. The ACJ beats it very easily by over 1,000 nm! And it will let passengers have huge parties without smashing their skulls on everything. If I was a billionaire, I'd buy an ACJ and all my flight attendants will wear bikinis!

[@neil5611]

This is not an easy choice to make but if I had to pick one, it would have to be the G700 because of its Technology, space, advance features, its sheer speed, altitude & distance capabilities and cabin pressure feature. Still, not an easy choice to make at all.

[@stevensims8922]

'10X best of both worlds. Roomier cabin, 6 ft 8 in cabin height (I'm 6'4", guess how many times I've hit my head on a bulkhead above the door) but with the same performance of the 700 and 7500 and an even lower cabin altitude. I know it's a few years off but the 10X will turn some heads. The ACJ220 has its niche though. They are going to sell a lot of them.

[@jasonpb27]

It's a reasonable comparison, most flights the G700/7500 won't be flying at Mach 0.925, especially if range is required, having said that most legs wouldn't be pushed to the full range capability either. Support for Airbus would be superior, the size and capacity would make a big difference in terms of experience and I can see this being a very popular choice. In terms of what I would rather fly, that would be the 7500.

[@largol33t1]

the ACJ wipes the floor with its airline cousin: it will outfly it by almost 1,900 naut. miles! The secret is a lot of amenities normally for average passengers can be removed and replaced with a spare fuel tank.

[@baileyclose5650]

All incredible machines

[@I_Am_Victor]

Global 7500 wins hands down. Range and performance with reliably, plus it looks sleek and modern as compared to more commerical looks of others. Good Presentation 😎👍

[@JetStream-]

Thanks!

[@reyd8609]

the square windows make it look dull

[@I_Am_Victor]

@@reyd8609 No compromise for Range reliability and proformance, can't be based on looks of windows. It's what you get in long term that really matters or is a sound investment ☝️😎.

[@reyd8609]

@@I_Am_Victor That was just the looks. It would have been the whole package for me IMHO if it had the windows of the G700. By the way, the cockpit technology in the G700 is more advanced.

[@shouvicbanik5175]

@@reyd8609 What may like ugly to you, might not look ugly to others...I personally prefer the rounded square windows of the Global 7500 as compared to those big circle windows of G700.....

[@georgeandy6923]

Very good and informative video. I really like how you made a side by side comparison of these 3 Awesome Jets!

[@JetStream-]

Thanks for the feedback, really appreciate it!

[@danielfarrar5154]

Yes, THAT is how you compare things.

[@billelmenesraoui8083]

I think bombardier is the best manufacturer of private planes.

[@donvirgo]

The ACJ is a Bizliner, whereas the G700 and G7500 are both Ultra Long Range Heavy aircraft... two separate categories. A better comparison would be between the G7500, G700, and the 10X. If you want to compare the ACJ, it would be against the BBJ.

[@JetStream-]

Thanks for the feedback. I will make these comparisons.

[@matthewbaken7669]

Bombardier is pronounced as Bom-Bar-Dee-Aye. It’s a Canadian brand, and is properly pronounced in the French Canadian style.

[@rickparker3921]

Bombardier (bom BAR dee ay) is the surname of the founder of the company, Joseph Armand Bombardier so yes, it is definitely mispronounced in this video.

[@harkmi3]

2 of them designed originally by Bombardier.

[@towersofzeyron]

Keep working on the dreams, guys. You too could be the next billionaire mover and shaker!!! Now get to work!

[@Flash-yi9tt]

Falcon 10x - "this is racism"

[@CaseysTrains]

Bom-BAR-Di-Aye!!!!!! Dammit. Every time you Bomb A Deer, I'mma slap you

[@JetStream-]

😄

[@markosemene376]

i love them all!

[@randyreynolds1045]

Gulfstream is the best❤

[@LMays-cu2hp]

Thank you for sharing.

[@TChalla007]

Should have thrown in the Falcon 10X

[@JetStream-]

Will do in the next video! Thanks!

[@Big.Ron1]

They are all great airplanes. I wish I could afford a new one. However, thats not likely to happen.

[@JetStream-]

Get to it!!

[@ChiragSDogra]

Fun fact: Those who could afford this wouldn't be watching this video.

[@Aaron71222]

The acj is 3 times the size of the g700 and much cheaper to operate the only thing that stops it from being an absolute no-brainer is the speed.

[@fernandobernardo6324]

Is the speed really that important? How much time would save let's say from London to New York? It's not a big difference and you are aboard a private plane with more space.

[@Aaron71222]

@@fernandobernardo6324 about 1.5 to 2 hrs. N if ur a business man making that trip a few times a week that adds up to a lot of time.

[@faammar]

There is a mistake in the table, you mentioned altitude of 15000 instead of 51000 for Bombardier

[@jec1ny]

Waiting for the Falcon 10X

[@GUNS4084]

This is much better than the Russian Il-112B

[@kidfresh07]

Great video but your team need to take time & preview your videos before publishing them. It's full of errors.

[@JetStream-]

Thanks for the feedback. Always improving 🙌

[@mic7504]

Something's fishy about these comments... No one has mentioned the 1970's U.S. media pronouncing of the then Skid-oo only manufacturing "bomb-ba-deer". It was never and still is not pronounced "bomb-ba-deer". It is a Quebec-qua family name. pronounced "Bom-bar-dee-eh".

[@rudigermullins8343]

If you cannot pronounce Bombardier correctly, you cannot afford it

[@JetStream-]

😂😂😂

[@MusicmanDavid]

Is anyone else annoyed by the way he pronounced Bombardier? 😕

[@mini_steve]

One may suggest that you double check the max altitude height on the Bombardier. 15,000 ft, I've seen 30 year old boats fly higher.

[@maxsdad538]

One may suggest that you pay attention to what they actually say, like the max altitude on the Bombardier is 15,545 METERS, dumas! Yes, there's a typo where they say "15,000 ft", but anyone with the intelligence of a dried cat turd would KNOW what they meant. Don't be a dooshbag, Smitty!

[@yeeyiceng8853]

Many potential customers may put their hands on the Gulfstream, since it is a GULFSTREAM! lol

[@spitfirenutspitfirenut4835]

ACJ=Airbus Canadian Jet. ( Bombardier ).

[@imakevideos1687]

no it’s airbus corporate jet

[@spitfirenutspitfirenut4835]

@@imakevideos1687 It's a Bombardier. Airbus did not develop this aircraft. Everyone knows this. All they did was buy the rights because they knew how good it is.

[@richt6956]

You made a mistake in your comparison table for the G7500. You indicated 15,000 ft max altitude and ot should be 51,000 ft. You reversed the 1 and the 5.

[@glynfellowes]

These planes will look out dated when the new kid on the block arrives that being the Dassault 10x with it's fighter pedigree and very latest cockpit technology and new low burn engines. This private jet is going to turn heads and give other aircraft manufacturers a headache.

[@malamuteaerospace6333]

But in 2025 when it is certified and then goes into production and they are rolling of the assembly line by 2026/2027. Gulfstream shall be on the 800 or 750. And Bombardier has already got the 8000 certified 2023 hell in 2025 the Global Express 8500 shall be out. The 10x looks great. IF IF IF it can carry all it's promising. And in aviation that is a big If.. The G750 is the next generation of the G650 and it's talking 8700nm range. 53,000ft operations at MGW. With 750mph ground speeds 22 people. The 8000 is a glorified 7500 with 8300nm and quieter greener engines. Falcon needs a 8x trijet replacement. Plus they are now going T tail and positive dihedral of +6 degrees of up wing instead of the classic Falcon negative -6 to 11 degree sweep for awesome low speed control and T/O and landing speeds.

[@bobalto]

@@malamuteaerospace6333 Oups!!! 😁

[@rcairflr]

@@malamuteaerospace6333 > Hate to burst your bubble, but Bombardier has no plan at this point to build the Global 8000

[@mmm0404]

​@@rcairflr say it again

[@rcairflr]

The original 8000 was supposed to be a shorter longer range version. All they did was make a couple minor changes and call the 7500 the 8000

[@ah244895]

Why do you compare a commercial airline against the other two planes? A220 is more a competitor against B737 and A319. A very different class off plane.

[@JetStream-]

Thanks for the feedback. I’ll make sure to make a comparison video with the B737 and A319.

[@rocksolidfossils]

Accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and allow Him to change your life :)

[@Cougar1212]

Narrator only has to learn how to pronounce three brands of jets, and can only get two right.

[@emmakimble8946]

Hi sorry u r wrong my bombardier g7500 gos 51,000 ft and MWOT IS 41,000 ft I know I have this ✈️

[@danielfarrar5154]

I am considering a pre-owned maybe G650ER. Why did you pick Bombardier over GS? Personally, I just love the look of the interior better on the GS. Would you ever consider the Falcon 10X?

[@e.s.5529]

g700 and b7500 are just about the same aircraft . Airbus is completely different .

[@rcairflr]

Yes because they were designed for different purpose. But the Global 7500 and Airbus A220 have the exact same avionics and Fly By Wire systems.

[@augustagaldino4377]

Great way to get views for those who don't study or don't speak English, this video of yours was kind of ridiculous 🤡🤦🏻‍♀️🙄 I was expecting a little more from him

[@ZackWolfMusic]

Acj 220 range sucks!

[@trthib]

I disagree. Flight crews are humans, not machines. I wouldn't xant to fly a 20+ hours flight operated by one tired crew for anyone's safety. The longest commercial flights (New Zeland to Europe I think) actually have two full crew. If not, I'd rather spend a night on land and continue the next day (for any flight ove 10/12 hours) than become a statistic...

[@ChanelNo.2]

bomb ba deer LOL

[@mouhammadndir2508]

First

[@mhxxd4]

Not even the same category

[@halimtalafuka9946]

Hari Rabu.Tgl.2/3/2022/.Halim Talafuka,Allahumma Amiin.@$#

[@augustinvanlakerveld3402]

Why would I support a channel than cannot pronounce BOMBARDIER, one of the most important aviation companies in the world. What are thinking. Bye

[@ub59]

Please learn how to pronounce 'Bombardier.' It's a French name from a company located in Montreal, Quebec. It's certainly not laughably pronounced "bomb-a-deer." Thirty seconds on Google Translate would have corrected this dumb mistake, which is especially inconsiderate for such an advanced aircraft that competes well with any similar business jet other nations can put into the air.

[@malamuteaerospace6333]

THat airbus range sucks speed sucks 41,000ft??? stick to the airlines

[@tp5487]

Those planes are made for people who fly with bunch of people every single time Flying with full capacity in a g700 or globa 7500 everytime is not fun

[@reyd8609]

@@halid.S 4,500 cab alt while flying at 41,000 is not bad at all with the Global 7500

[@GregTGolden]

As a proud Canadian, I would most definitely take the Gulfstream. No self respecting canadian could buy an airplane built 90% on taxpayers dollars. Fortunately for me, I will never have to make such a tough decision in life .

[@omgcoasters4023]

Greg isn’t the Airbus 220 and Global both built in Canada? Wouldn’t a proud Canadian want to buy a product built by his fellow Canadians? You know supporting the trade and labor of your country. Unless you think the American product, the Gulfstream is better?

[@GregTGolden]

@@omgcoasters4023 yes...they are both built in Canada. But Bombardier has had more government bailouts than any bank or auto manufacturer. Its stupid how much money the government here has thrown at that company. And yet, the executives still pay themselves millions upon millions of dollars in salary and bonuses. For running an essentially bankrupt company. Its too bad, because it does look like a good product, but they just need to figure out how to be competitive.

[@Daniels656993]

@@GregTGolden Don't forget all the well paying jobs Airbus and Bombardier provide to Canada's economy. That is something people like you often overlook.

[@GregTGolden]

@@Daniels656993 uh huh. "People like me" think management should take a paycut before getting a hand out from taxpayers. Simple logic would deduce that if managent didnt get paid out so much in bonuses....they wouldnt have needed that money in the first place. Its not a bailout....its a taxpayer-funded executive bonus scheme. The workers have nothing to do with this situation. But then again, if the government is stupid enough to get played and not demand anything in return for the "loan" then I guess the taxpayers had it coming for electing said idiots. What do "people like you" have to say about this taxpayer bonus scheme? Im not opposed to bailouts to maintain jobs...but get something in return for it. Either equity or corporate bonds. If the company cant raise the money privately...why is the government giving out unsecured loans to a deadbeat company? Bombardier has been siphoning off of government for decades.

[@erictremblay4940]

Greg Golden: 90%? You have no idea what you are talking about. As a Canadian, I'm very proud the way the Feds were clever in their support for Bombardier. Ok, let's look into what were the Bombardier programs in which the feds provided funds. Those were "reimbursable" subsidies/loans, repaid via royalites from each plane sold. (In order to not get accused of illegal subsidies from the WTO) --------------------------------------------- Since the 90's, Bombardier builts 1,950 CRJ aircrafts. The CRJ program was a great commercial success, and this resulted in significant reimbursements to governments. In fact, Bombardier received approximately $180 million in loans for this program and reimbursed $315 million - representing a 175% return for taxpayers. If we look at actual numbers, from 1986 to 2009, Bombardier received a series of reimbursable loans totalling $596 million. These loans were repaid with interest through royalties on aircraft sales. Bombardier repaid $760 million (or 127% of the amount initially received). Then, Bombardier received additional loans in 2009 and in 2017, totalling $816 million, to support the research and development of two Canadian game-changing aircraft programs: the C Series and the Global 7500. As with past loans, repayments are made through royalties. These new aircraft are delivered and repayments have begun. -->> Airbus Canada now owns the C-Series program (now called the A220), but they are still paying the same royalties (for each A220 delivered to customers) to the Government of Canada.