Challenger 300/350 vs Falcon 50: how the two fleets are really flown
On three of the four chapters' lead measures, the gap inside each fleet is bigger than the gap between the Challenger 300/350 and the Falcon 50. The clearest difference is flights a month: the middle Challenger 300/350 at 10, the middle Falcon 50 at 5.
Bombardier Challenger 300/350 fleet statistics →Dassault Falcon 50 fleet statistics →
Fatigue
On hours per landing, the two fleets' medians match, at 1.6 : 1.
What each landing and pressurization cycle costs the structure: landings per hour and short hops.
Hours per landing
Where the two fleets sitSide by side
Every active aircraft of each type in North America: 755 Challenger 300/350s and 157 Falcon 50s.| Measure | Challenger 300/350 median | Middle half | Falcon 50 median | Middle half |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hours per landing Each aircraft’s average flight hours per landing | 1.6 : 1 | 1.4–1.8 : 1 | 1.6 : 1 | 1.3–1.9 : 1 |
| Short hops Share of legs under 300 nm | 35% | 28–41% | 36% | 28–49% |
| Leg length Median leg | 481 nm | 389–595 nm | 463 nm | 328–621 nm |
Corrosion
On salt air, the gap between the types is smaller than the spread inside either fleet: the middle Challenger 300/350 at 4%, the middle Falcon 50 at 1%.
What the air around the fleet does overnight: salt, damp and freeze–thaw.
Salt air
Where the two fleets sitSide by side
Aircraft we can place on enough nights at known fields: 609 Challenger 300/350s and 101 Falcon 50s.| Measure | Challenger 300/350 median | Middle half | Falcon 50 median | Middle half |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salt air Nights within 2 km of the coast | 4% | <1–9% | 1% | 0–5% |
| Near the coast Nights within 10 km of the coast | 25% | 6–44% | 6% | 2–38% |
| Damp air Hours a day at 80% humidity or more, above freezing | 7.1 h | 6.0–8.1 h | 7.3 h | 5.6–9.4 h |
| Freeze–thaw Nights that froze and thawed within the day | 8% | 4–13% | 6% | 2–14% |
| Moisture in the air Average absolute humidity overnight | 9.5 g/m³ | 8.4–10.5 g/m³ | 9.8 g/m³ | 8.1–12.0 g/m³ |
Engines and brakes
On short runways, the gap between the types is smaller than the spread inside either fleet: the middle Falcon 50 at 23%, the middle Challenger 300/350 at 20%.
What departures ask of engines, brakes and tires: heat and height, and runway length.
Short runways
Where the two fleets sitSide by side
Departures we could assess: 755 Challenger 300/350s and 157 Falcon 50s.| Measure | Challenger 300/350 median | Middle half | Falcon 50 median | Middle half |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short runways Departures where the longest runway was under 1.25× the takeoff distance | 20% | 15–26% | 23% | 13–35% |
| Hot, high takeoffs Departures at 5,000 ft density altitude or more | 6% | 3–9% | 5% | 1–9% |
| Density altitude Typical density altitude at takeoff | 1,432 ft | 1,206–1,717 ft | 1,547 ft | 1,197–1,982 ft |
Utilization
On flights a month, the types sit further apart than the middle half of either fleet spans: the middle Challenger 300/350 at 10, the middle Falcon 50 at 5.
How steadily each fleet is used: flights, flying days and estimated hours.
Flights a month
Where the two fleets sitSide by side
Every active Challenger 300/350 (755) and every active Falcon 50 (157). Each type uses the tracking rule its own fleet page uses.| Measure | Challenger 300/350 median | Middle half | Falcon 50 median | Middle half |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flights a month In the months it flew | 9.8 | 5.8–25.8 | 5.2 | 3.7–8.3 |
| Days flown a month Days with at least one flight | 6.6 | 4.3–14.0 | 3.7 | 2.8–5.5 |
| Estimated hours a year From time in the air | ≈194 h | 114–527 h | ≈96 h | 67–156 h |
Choosing between a Challenger 300/350 and a Falcon 50?
Check both tails, not the types.
Enter the two tails on your shortlist. TailCheck grades each one on Fatigue, Corrosion, Engines and brakes, and Utilization against its own type, then puts them side by side.
Trip-length mix
36% of Challenger 300/350 legs and 37% of Falcon 50 legs were under 300 nm, a gap of 1 percentage point; 24% and 25% were over 900 nm.
| Leg length (nm) | Challenger 300/350 | Falcon 50 |
|---|---|---|
| <150 | 16% | 20% |
| 150–300 | 20% | 17% |
| 300–450 | 13% | 11% |
| 450–600 | 10% | 9% |
| 600–900 | 17% | 18% |
| 900–1,200 | 11% | 11% |
| 1,200–1,800 | 8% | 9% |
| 1,800+ | 5% | 5% |
Share of legs by length in nautical miles, 1 Aug 2025 – 31 Jul 2026: 129,080 legs by 755 Challenger 300/350s and 9,798 legs by 157 Falcon 50s, every leg with a known distance. The Challenger 300/350's trips bunch at 150–300 nm, the Falcon 50's at <150 nm.
Challenger 300/350 vs Falcon 50: on paper
Certified figures come from each type certificate data sheet, the rest from the manufacturer. Each figure names its source; a range covers the variants one page tracks together; a dash means we don’t have a source for that figure yet.
| Measure | Challenger 300/350 | Falcon 50 |
|---|---|---|
| Range (manufacturer) | 3,065–3,200 nmChallenger 300: Manufacturer (archived spec page, 29 Sep 2012); Challenger 350: Manufacturer (archived spec page, 14 Jul 2021) | 3,075 nm (Falcon 50EX)Manufacturer (spec page, Web page, captured 13 Apr 2009) |
| High-speed cruise (manufacturer) | Mach 0.82Challenger 300: Manufacturer (archived spec page, 29 Sep 2012); Challenger 350: Manufacturer (archived spec page, 14 Jul 2021) | —Not in our sources yet |
| Takeoff distance (manufacturer) | 4,835 ft (Challenger 350)Manufacturer (archived spec page, 14 Jul 2021) | 4,890 ft (Falcon 50EX)Manufacturer (spec page, Web page, captured 13 Apr 2009) |
| Cabin length (manufacturer) | 25 ft 2 in (Challenger 350)Manufacturer (archived spec page, 14 Jul 2021) | 23 ft 6 in (Falcon 50EX)Manufacturer (spec page, Web page, captured 13 Apr 2009) |
| Maximum takeoff weight (certified) | 38,500–40,600 lbUK CAA TCDS UK.TC.A.00099 Issue 2, p.9 | 38,800–40,785 lbUK CAA TCDS UK.TC.A.00161 Issue 01, p.15 |
| Fuel capacity (certified) | 14,150 lbUK CAA TCDS UK.TC.A.00099 Issue 2, p.7 | 15,514 lbUK CAA TCDS UK.TC.A.00161 Issue 01, p.13 |
| Maximum operating altitude (certified) | 45,000 ftEASA TCDS EASA.IM.A.080 Issue 11, p.7 | 45,000–49,000 ftUK CAA TCDS UK.TC.A.00161 Issue 01, p.14 |
| Passenger seats (certified) | Up to 16EASA TCDS EASA.IM.A.080 Issue 11, p.8 | Up to 19UK CAA TCDS UK.TC.A.00161 Issue 01, p.17 |
Challenger 300/350 vs Falcon 50: questions
Which is flown more, the Challenger 300/350 or the Falcon 50?
The Challenger 300/350, by about 98 estimated hours a year: the middle Challenger 300/350 flew ≈194 h a year, the middle Falcon 50 ≈96 h. That is a fleet median: the middle half of Challenger 300/350s logged 114–527 h and of Falcon 50s 67–156 h, so one aircraft can sit far from its type. In flights, the medians are 10 a month for the Challenger 300/350 and 5 for the Falcon 50.
Which lands more often for its hours, the Challenger 300/350 or the Falcon 50?
About the same: the middle aircraft of both types flies 1.6 hours per landing. More landings per hour means more pressurization cycles for the same time in the air. Short hops, legs under 300 nm, make up 35% of the middle Challenger 300/350's legs and 36% of the middle Falcon 50's.
Which flies longer trips, the Challenger 300/350 or the Falcon 50?
The Challenger 300/350, by 18 nm on the median leg: 481 nm for the middle aircraft, against 463 nm for the Falcon 50. 36% of Challenger 300/350 legs and 37% of Falcon 50 legs were under 300 nm, a gap of 1 percentage point; 24% and 25% were over 900 nm.
Which spends more nights by the sea, the Challenger 300/350 or the Falcon 50?
The Challenger 300/350, by 3 percentage points: its middle aircraft spends 4% of its nights within 2 km of the coast, the middle Falcon 50 1%. Salt air is one of the corrosion inputs a TailCheck report grades for one aircraft against its own type.
Which has the longer range on paper, the Challenger 300/350 or the Falcon 50?
The manufacturers quote 3,065–3,200 nm for the Challenger 300/350 and 3,075 nm (Falcon 50EX) for the Falcon 50. Those are book figures at stated conditions; how far the fleets actually fly is in the trip-length mix above.
Cite this data
The Aircraft Ledger. “Bombardier Challenger 300/350 vs Dassault Falcon 50.” Data to 31 July 2026. theaircraftledger.com/compare/bombardier-challenger-300-vs-dassault-falcon-50
Embed a chart
<iframe src="https://theaircraftledger.com/embed/compare/bombardier-challenger-300-vs-dassault-falcon-50/fatigue" title="Fatigue: Hours per landing" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:960px" loading="lazy"></iframe>Method: Challenger 300/350s and Falcon 50s with most departures in North America, ADS-B tracking. Flight measures cover 1 Aug 2025 – 31 Jul 2026; each figure is the median of its own fleet, with the middle half (25th–75th percentile). Estimated hours from time in the air. We assume the longest runway at each field, so short-runway figures are conservative. Specifications from type certificate data sheets and the manufacturers, each cited. About our data