Friday, February 09, 2007

Bambazonke Drops Another Bamba

BZ's latest comment trumps what I intended to post tomorrow.

For the benefit of new readers, KKA refers to the mythical symbolic head of Eclipse, Kaptain Kool Aid, who upon drinking the magic kool aid only brewed in New Mexico from a nearly extinct mushroom, KKA is able to visulize events that no one else can see.

KKA is not the same individual as kka who often contributes to the blog but does not drink the same magic kool aid and therefore sees things more like what us mortals see.

Here's Bamba's questions to KKA:


KKA, this Eclipse Magazine is just the type of hype that one could expect from this flim flam outfit? Here are some of the questions I would pose to KKA based on information in the comic release if I was an aviation writer/journalist;

"It’s official. The FAA has awarded Eclipse Aviation its FAA type certification on the Eclipse 500™ jet. As this magazine is being distributed, we are already delivering the first production models" of our revolutionary jet. We are proud to have delivered the very first production jet to Dave Crowe and the second to DayJet."

KKA: just how many of these wonder machines have been delivered now? Does the EA-500 really have a "Type Certificate", or was that just a little misprint "Provisional Type Certificate" maybe, at 5800 lbs, not as the rest of your propaganda machine says 5950 lbs. Is this the kind of butt kicking you boasted about in an interview recently or did we miss something?

"By August 1, we are scheduled to have 12 Eclipse jets in the production line . By the end of 2006, we plan to be manufacturing 1.2 jets a day."

KKA we hear so much about how this wonder company of yours is on the cutting edge, how about updating this comic strip and telling us just how many you delivered to retail customers in 2006, and what your daily production rate is? This ezine of yours does not reflect the current status, and you are misleading the public, again.

"All of us at Eclipse are obviously excited about where we are today. We’ve proven all the critics wrong no matter how they twist the facts. And we will continue to prove them wrong."

KKA, as everyday goes by, and the last time I counted we are 40 days into this year, I see zero deliveries, just who are you proving wrong? What facts are being twisted, you have not produced any facts to be criticized..

"In publications ahead, we plan to share information from the Eclipse Owners’ Club, which is being formed very quickly now that we’re into production."

The Eclipse owners club being formed quickly now you are in production? I guess you meant to say as quickly as we can produce, the Eclipse owners club will be performed, I suppose this is another one of those facts that are being twisted..

"Eclipse, we hope, will be the kind of company with which you want to continue doing business."

KKA, is really the kind of company that you think the world wants to deal with? As everyday goes by, this is becoming more and more of a joke. Your company does not communicate with it's position holders, it makes claims (NBAA Range) that when asked for data to corroborate the claim, you cannot produce this. EAC is a company that went from being transparent to one that is highly secretive, EAC places onerous restrictions on data that position holders who have parted with huge up front payments should be entitled to, like a POH. No this company does not meet the profile of a company that people want to continue to deal with.

"FAA type certification has been achieved. The champagne bottles are empty and the entire Eclipse Aviation team is back hard at work on the next phase of business: ramping up production and delivering quality airplanes on time."

KKA, so tell us once and for all, do you have a TC, can we see this document? When was it awarded? Don't you think that one of the obstacles you have created for yourself is with this hype of yours you have created the perception that EAC is a company that really needs to be watched, particularly by the FAA. Don't you think that your concept of what these credentials are is so out of perspective. Don't you think the use of words such as delivering quality airplanes on time should be deleted from the lexicon of EAC..

"First Deliveries:
• The first Eclipse 500™ was delivered to Dave Crowe
• The second Eclipse 500 was delivered to DayJet
• Nine Eclipse 500s are being delivered in the first two months of production."

KKA, come on, let's get a confession from you that this statement is patently false, it is written in past tense, i.e. the event has occurred. Just how many planes have you truly delivered? Really none? Don't point to Cessna, they are not making claims on the number of planes they have delivered.

"No matter how many articles are written, brochures published, videos created, or speeches delivered, it is inevitable—people simply cannot get enough of Avio! Frankly, we can’t either. Yet the reality is that Avio is such a comprehensive, feature–rich system that the traditional means of disseminating product information simply aren’t adequate. To understand and appreciate Avio, you must experience it. And that is exactly what you will be doing soon in your own Eclipse 500™ jet!"

Right, so where are all these instructional videos, they are not in the hands of the position holders. This wonderful Avio, that has no GPS, no DME, prevents this wonder plane from flying above FL-240, at which altitude the plane has a range of less than 700 miles, great stuff, tell us more...

"Don’t be fooled—the Eclipse 500 is not your daddy’s jet. Instead, the Eclipse 500 is a no–compromise aircraft, offering standard features like autothrottle, smart crew alerting, electronic checklists, control–based system synoptics…and the list goes on. Total Aircraft Integration means more for less, which is the Eclipse Aviation definition of value."

KKA, Not our Daddy's jet, really...don't you think our Daddy's jet out performs your little plane any day of the week? Note I said you little plane, I did not say out performs your claims, that is another matter altogether. Autothrottle, yeah right, another slip of the typing keys, don't you know how to spell FADEC, isn't this what you meant to say? Big difference between FADEC and autothrottles.. BTW, is the FADEC working? or is it just another one of those wild claims.

"To date, pilots of all experience levels have had the opportunity to fly the Eclipse 500 (see Bill Nutt’s story on page 12)."

Really..I read Bill Nutt's flight, this is the one where you only let him go to 3000 feet. Great article and the plane was really shown how it performs in it's normal operating environment. Point to a real flight test, with a real aviation journalist, and we would love to read that article.

"The bird’s extremely benign handling characteristics coupled with its outstanding performance capabilities make it very difficult to get yourself into a sticky situation."

KKA, if this bird is so benign why is it that we recommend upset training..yes I have read all the stories about how safe this is supposed to make things.. Just how many jets have been lost in upsets so I can evaluate this..

"The spool time of the Pratt & Whitney 610Fs is almost instantaneous, resulting in turboprop–like acceleration and deceleration rates."

KKA, Gee they look like such little engines, how do they provide a the same deceleration as a turboprop? This another one of those wild claims or something you can back up?

Here is some flight training provided in the magazine for people wanting to be well on the way to flying their Eclipse jet:

"Preparing to Fly the Eclipse 500

FLY GLASS: It doesn’t matter what type of glass or what airplane you get your hands on, just fly glass. A GNS430/530 or MX–20 does not count. I’m talking a fully glass airplane with at least a primary flight display. Get used to interpreting critical flight information such as airspeed, attitude, and altitude on a glass display.

DON’T BE LAZY: When practicing in a glass aircraft, be sure to actually practice. Don’t do the easy stuff; challenge yourself. Never accept the visual approach. Practice flying an instrument approach as many times as you can, couple it to an autopilot, and even practice the missed approach procedure. The best conditioning that you can do for yourself is to sharpen your skills as a single pilot in high–workload events. Of course, don’t forget your safety pilot.

USE THE ECLIPSE TRAINING MATERIAL: New training material is in development that will help you learn the Avio system, and it will be coming to you in advance of your official training. This material will be invaluable to you. The more you use this material, the better prepared you will be for your initial type training course. Take my word for it; you’ll be glad you did.

By applying these simple pointers, you are well on your way to a simple transition into your Eclipse 500 jet. You’re going to love flying and operating this airplane. I’m sure of it!"

Great, read all that, got it, where is my little jet so I can go fly now?

For the original Ezine transcript check:

www.eclipseaviationmag.com

62 comments:

airtaximan said...

airtaximan said...
EB,

what a sham and shame.
Vern claims to have "invented" Phostrex. NOT TRUE. Someone who invented and patented it showed up at Eclipse and proposed it to them.

The claim to have invented and patented a Phostrex fire suppression system is misleading.
Eclipse developed the "system" not the chemistry, and they trademarked the name phostrex. No big deal, really.

They would have us believe they did the whole thing, over three years, and that the chemistry belongs to them.....not the case.

There are numerous cheical variants which could be equally effecive, similar to HALON variants, to which they have NO CLAIM. Welcome to the world of Vern-sh_t. Another slight of mouth.

Shanmeful, but understandable given the positive reaction/ remarks here and in the press, regarding how their patent will save the company.

Kinda silly, isn't it? An aircraft company saved by a tirtiary sub-sytem such as a fire suppression system? A minimal overall weight impact, unless you are struggling for every ounce.

THIS will SAVE Eclipse. COME ON.

Sad, really.

Stan Blankenship said...

bz,

Since the blog started, Eclipse has made it easy.

They set themselves up as a big target, then provide the ammunition.

airtaximan said...

stan, post the link to the magazine, and let everyone see the vernsh_t

Frank Castle said...

You can scratch the link, they took it offline.

No surprise there.

EclipseBlogger said...

Cabbie said... What a sham and shame. Vern claims to have "invented" Phostrex.

Vern has never claimed to have been the one that invented Phostrex. In all fairness, Eclipse did spend the time, money, and energy to get Phostrex FAA certified, and approved by the EPA. The chemistry was invented by Dr. Peter Holland. He was looking to have his invention brought to market and contacted many large corporations, including Boeing, to take on the task. Everyone turned him down until he contacted Eclipse.

Cabbie said... There are numerous chemical variants which could be equally effective, similar to HALON variants, to which they have NO CLAIM. Welcome to the world of Vern-sh_t. Another slight of mouth.

If only you knew what you were talking about before your keyboard runneth over. Yes, there are other chemicals that are effective, but they are also very toxic and harmful. Because Phostrex is rendered inert once released into the atmosphere, it make is a very important fire suppression system. Not even DuPont has a chemical at this time that won't rip the skin off your face when you come into contact with it. Otherwise they would have marketed a Halon replacement long ago.

gadfly said...

Let's not get all stirred up over "Phostrex" as a quick way to make a profit. Even if it were offered to the aircraft industry "at cost", it would probably have great benefit for Eclipse . . . the "PR" might in itself help them back toward credibility.

Pretend for a moment that there are, maybe, 300,000 aircraft in the US of A, and that suddenly it's required that 20% must be fitted out with a "Phostrex" system over the next five years (pick any number . . . it really doesn't matter).

Let's say that each system costs $2,000 on average (remember, this is for all types of aircraft, not just business or commercial). That's $120 million (60,000 aircraft x $2,000 each spread out over 5 years), or $24 million per year.

Rare does an inventor get more than 1% or 2% of gross sales, but say that for some reason the "licenser" (Eclipse) gets 10% . . . stretch your imagination to the limit.

It will take much more than $2.4 million per year for any real benefit to come back to Eclipse, or anyone else in even the most generous scenario. A single person (inventor) would be most happy with even a "half percent", but for a corporation the size of "Eclipse", this product, no matter "how good" is not a significant source of potential income . . . in view of their true needs and credibility.

If this product is all it's cracked up to be, and let's give credit to the inventor, and take it at face value, and give further credit to Eclipse for at least recognizing a need and the proper solution. It might be best to spin off a seperate company to promote it, or simply "license" it to someone already in the game. And I'm sure that better minds have already begun such a move.

New products rarely become known and profitable in less than ten years. Anything to reduce that lead time might save lives. Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Whatever the "500" might, or might not, be, an effective and safe fire suppressant system should be welcomed by all concerned.

gadfly

Gunner said...

eclipseblogger said:
"The chemistry was invented by Dr. Peter Holland. He was looking to have his invention brought to market and contacted many large corporations, including Boeing, to take on the task. Everyone turned him down until he contacted Eclipse."

And the astute businessman would ask the operative question:
Why wasn't anyone else interested? Oh, that's right....dinosaurs; couldn't get a REAL plane to market if they tried.

I'm still waiting for the source for llyod's claim that "This is a new fire supression system that will be mandated to be installed and retrofitted to all aircraft with onboard systems.

Why not simply claim that Avio will revolutionize the air travel industry, being required on all passenger jets beginning 2010? Why not? Because it's still vaporware in 2007, that's why not.

Gunner

EclipseBlogger said...

Gunner said... I'm still waiting for the source for Lloyd's claim that "This is a new fire suppression system that will be mandated to be installed and retrofitted to all aircraft with on-board systems.

Lloyd happens to be right. The Montreal Protocol eliminates productions of Halon, and limits it's use. Aviation fire suppression systems were exempt from the treaty until such time as a suitable substitute could be found. To date, Halon is still in use because a suitable substitute has not been brought to market. Once a substitute does exist, all aviation fire suppression systems will be required by the act to convert over.

airtaximan said...

EB,

You re-stated my position wonderfully, thanks:
"Eclipse did spend the time, money, and energy to get Phostrex FAA certified, and approved by the EPA. The chemistry was invented by Dr. Peter Holland"

This is the first time I've seen this clearly stated by a die-hard or e-clipsnick. Thanks for admitting this. Vern always made it seem like Eclipse invented Phostrex - at least the true credit was buried in not being forthright and stating the facts, as usual. For proof of the confusion, see the previous 10 posts regarding Phostrex on this blog. Again, thanks for the clarity and affirmation of the truth.

You continue in usual fashion:

“Cabbie said... There are numerous chemical variants which could be equally effective, similar to HALON variants, to which they have NO CLAIM. Welcome to the world of Vern-sh_t. Another slight of mouth.

If only you knew what you were talking about before your keyboard runneth over. Yes, there are other chemicals that are effective, but they are also very toxic and harmful. Because Phostrex is rendered inert once released into the atmosphere, it make is a very important fire suppression system. Not even DuPont has a chemical at this time that won't rip the skin off your face when you come into contact with it. Otherwise they would have marketed a Halon replacement long ago.”

So, I'm glad to see that you've unilaterally decided that any compound using similar or improved chemistry to Phostrex is never possible from now on. It’s nice to know that you have perfect knowledge of all future developments regarding fire suppression chemistry, and that it will be impossible for anyone to improve on it or develop another similar chemical fire suppressant. Also, the clock has apparently stopped ticking on fire suppression advancements at the moment you are aware of any developments. All I said was “are numerous chemical variants which could be equally effective” – and we should all be glad to know you think Phostrex is the end of human advancement on the subject…

Explains a lot about what we’ve heard from you, actually...

airtaximan said...

EB,

Glad to know that you have unilaterally decided what the definition of "suitable substitute" is...

I'm certain you "did not have sexual relations with that woman" either...

It's going to be fun watching Phostrex SAVE Eclipse...

Just for giggles, I wonder what Vern spent on the Phostrex work? What is his break even? What does the system cost to produce? Including all the NRE and all costs included. There may be NO business case...just like his plane.

My guess is, E-clips was not the inventor’s first choice for a partenr in the chemical technology...and there could be other reasons the chemistry was rejected by other companies, before Vern took it on. Just a hunch. Perhaps like the EJ22 engine that never found a home on any other aircraft - Vern was a real revolutionary blowing tons of money on that deal, too.

By the way, after 3 years of development, the E-clips plane's engines were tucked inward and aft in a patented and revolutionary design, in order to avoid bird strike. This "technology" and competitive advantage (invented by Sam Williams, licensed by Vern) was dog - sh_t...too... it proved to be completely impractical and the FAA said "NO". Impressive high tech licensing and technology development moves...

Keep defending this dud...

EclipseBlogger said...

Cabbie said... I'm certain you "did not have sexual relations with that woman" either...

I thought you never figure out my secret identity. I was kind of pissed that you actually thought I was Vern.

Cabbie said... So, I'm glad to see that you've unilaterally decided that any compound using similar or improved chemistry to Phostrex is never possible from now on. It’s nice to know that you have perfect knowledge of all future developments regarding fire suppression chemistry, and that it will be impossible for anyone to improve on it or develop another similar chemical fire suppressant. Also, the clock has apparently stopped ticking on fire suppression advancements at the moment you are aware of any developments. All I said was “are numerous chemical variants which could be equally effective” – and we should all be glad to know you think Phostrex is the end of human advancement on the subject…

You know, reading comprehension is a basic requirement in our world. It's a wonder you can read an approach plate and haven't flown into a mountain yet. Where did I ever state any of this rant of yours. What I stated was that AT THE MOMENT no one has brought to market a suitable replacement. Once ANYONE does bring to market a suitable replacement, EVERYONE, except the military, will be forced to convert and abandon Halon once and for all, by treaty. A SUITABLE REPLACEMENT must comply with the Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depletion, and the Clean Air Act. The only one SO FAR approved by the FAA and EPA is CURRENTLY Phostrex. Other very effective compounds DO EXIST, but they are HAZARDOUS TO HUMANS and fuzzy creatures (not sure about Cabbies).

Gunner said...

Boy, looks like PhosTrex strikes a nerve around here.

Lemme understand something:
- All aircraft must abandon Halon once a suitable replacement is brought to market.

- Eclipse brought a conforming product to market in 2005 and got it FAA approved.

- Numerous dinosaurs had the opportunity to corner the market for EVERY SINGLE fire suppression system to be installed or replaced on aircraft, worldwide. Yet, in typical fashion, none saw the windfall profit potential. Then came Vern.

So, why two years without any progress on adoption?

Why is the Phostrex web site pretty much brain dead?

Could it be that the system's REAL importance to Eclipse was to catch a few more headlines with more industry-shattering news?
Gunner

airtaximan said...

Gunner,

E-clips was the only ones who saw a benefit in spending wildly to save weight on one of the smallest/lightest systems on the plane. Like FSW maybe saving the weight of some rivits, Phostrex saves some weight on a system that weighs 5 lbs.

Congratulatins: you can now add a bag lunch with a balony sandwich and a small bottle of water to E-clips' available payload.

airtaximan said...

EB,

Phostrex is being offered by die-hards on this blog as something so terrifc that it could save E-clips and is the only viable replacement for Halon.

I am just trying to be realistic, and you seem to support that Phostrex is the only solution to Halon and it will therefore be of huge benefit to Eclipse. If I am wrong in interpreting your defence of that position, I appologize. It may be your way of expressing yourself, not my poor reading comprehension. I can read. Just becasue my understanding/interpretation of what I read might be different than yours, doesn't mean I have a problem. That attitude starts wars.

Phostrex is not unique, in fact HALON had many variants, and Phostrex chemistry might as well. I do not belive E-clips cornered the market on every variant. If its so terrific, there will be improvements.

It may not be an acceptable alternative to Halon, just based on price. Sorry if I wasn't clear - you seem to have concluded that you know exactly what an acceptable alternative is, and I am not sure you have all the bases covered. It could take a long time before anyone agrees on what is an acceptable alternative.

At the acceptable price, they may not make any money.

Perhaps, the commercial cost-benefit did not make the cut at any of the established companies...like the little engine that couldn't.

Frank Castle said...

Everything about this whole Phostrex things screams "bullsh_t" so loud it can be heard across several states.

I never saw the website, stating what Vern had said, and then EB shows up and says 'that's not what it says' or' that's not what it means.

I think you ARE vern or his little brother, Spike, running around saying, 'hey, that's my brother, and he's gonna build the most awesomest airplane in the world, you just wait, yea, he's show you."

I still stand by my assertion that you FOOLS had better bail , and bail soon, or else your vacation money is going up in smoke. My living's guaranteed. I work for a valued and RESPECTED builder of aircraft. I make no excuses about their behavior, or what goes on around here. Good days and bad, we all work to achieve the same thing.

REALITY.

Something Vern can't touch, because he's too stupid to know when to keep his mouth shut.

And THAT'S a proven fact.

bambazonke said...

The excitement around ABQ for deliveries of SN-4 has all gone up in smoke. No reasons offered, but the owner of SN-4 had his planned weekend of excitement canceled by the KAC (Kool Aid Crowd) in ABQ.

When I read that the position holder was going to accept delivery of his plane I must say I questioned the logic, unless he was just looking for a return on his cash from EAC. We know that EAC is paying $20k per month for SN-1 whilst they sort out their issues, so this might have been his motivation, at least this would offer him some 'real' return on the 60% that KKA has tied up.

Anyone want to offer any other reasons why someone would want to take delivery of an A model, no DME, no RVSM, no GPS, non functioning panel, reduced range, no factory support in his area (MO) and the other risks associated with this flim flam oraganisation?

Frank Castle said...

And, here's a challenge for YOU, "EB".....

How long could you stay away from here ? HOW LONG can you mind your own business, and get to building and DELIVERING a COMPLETE product your customers deserve to enjoy ?!?

Why don't you quit your spying and lying, and get off the computer and get back to work ?!? EVERYONE around here( I assume) thinks you work for EAC. I agree. And you can go screamin back to your big brother,

And tell him THIS. Vern, and the "upper management team" (haha)have made themselves the laughingstock of aviation, NOT the "pioneers" they claim they are. They started in with the media blitz, from day one, touting claims that COULD HAVE been fulfilled, but one man's foolishness made that impossible.

So now, he can't even put up or shut up. Baloney flights to "prove" the numbers, of course shot down by the die-hards as a "training flight", and no compliance with the FAA, as far as PC goes, and they won't get as far as ACSEP, that's fer sure.

I wouldn't have an incomplete aircraft, with provisional this and that, and you can only fly it below FL240, and HOW DARE YOU BOOBS THINK YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH IT ?!?

Go, get back to work, keep your mouth shut, and TRY and live up to your word. You are dishonorable. Plain and simple. A word I have not heard uttered around here, and it is SO TRUE. Your precious EAC is dishonorable in it's business dealings, in it's communications, and on top of that, dishonorable people defending "the Crown" by screaming, "it will happen with us !!"

Not this time.

EclipseOwner387 said...

FC,

That's the problem. You think we FOOLS have spent our vacation money. Most of us are "beyond" secure jobs to support ourselves. I would agree someone working for a living like yourself would be foolish to purchase a Jet on spec. Especially if you work for the competition. So I understand and "respect" where you are coming from on this. Enjoy your secure job and continue the bashing. It does nothing to deter me but maybe those foolish enough to be involved in Eclipse with "vacation money" should heed your warning.

Frank Castle said...

Oh, I bet I could pull together enough to get a position,and I could bounce it around and possibly make a better return off of it. But it would be worthless, and I want a better return on my money, rather than a tax write-off.

NOt only that, but it's dishonorable to trade in worthless "beans". Offer a product that works, and has SOME value, not speculative interest.

Frank Castle said...

Btw, 387, I am mostly aware of how & what is going on. My stepdad retired, and his brother is soon to retire, from making very good livings as commodities brokers.

Not a bad day's work, I guess, sellin "beans".....

EclipseOwner387 said...

FC,

I bet your bosses would not approve of your particpation in this board. It makes your firm seem cheezy. I had visions of owning a huge citation someday but with folks like you working for companies like that I am really turned off.

Gunner said...

bamba-
Time we start keeping a scorecard of insider info.

Your info states no delivery of SN000000004 this week. EO387 has provided inside info that the following will occur:
- Feb 12: First Training Class to Start
- Feb 12-19: @2 A/C Delivered
- Feb 21-28: PC Announcement

Obviously someone here is getting bad inside info. Gonna be an interesting week, n'est ce pas?
Gunner

Frank Castle said...

What's so cheesy about being able to deliver our product ?

And we are not so high and mighty to think we are "IT", after all we can take criticism too, look at Daimler's remarks after taking three of our Citations. I can take the hint, and it will help me to help "us" in the long run.

We are, and have been, consistent for many, many years. We work and strive to be very good at what we do. And we really don't have to toot our own "horn" that hard. We have publicity, and we use it accordingly. If you think that's cheesy, you deserve an E500A.

and a can of "beans".....

airtaximan said...

About 100 posts ago, I stated that it appeared as if there were a lot of E-clips positions with "for sale" signs.

This created quite a lot of stir - not the welding kind, either. The die-hards wanted to make the point that there were only around 30 positions for sale. They were extremely emphatic and would not agree. Period.

Anyway, a few people bashed away at be and said I had no basis. They wrote long involved analysis of the listings on Controller, and even the real estate market in their neighborhood. Once again, they would not have it that there seemed to me to be around 75 E-clips holders looking to get out of their positions.

Anyhow, within a few weeks, Michael Press wrote that around 100 positions were already sold off.

This is the kind of crap we have to deal with. The belief the spin, even when it makes no sense given the reality of the situation. Twisted facts, Vernacular arguments. A lot of energy and gymnastics in defense of what Vern says and does. Even if none of it, makes any sense, and there is 9 years of lies to indicate how to think about this.

If you choose to take Vern at face value, I think it's fair to say, after all we've seen, that's foolish. You have to use common sense.

Those who have been around for a long time can smell the lies. There is a way to be open and honest, and then there is a way to be like Vern. To some its clear. As for the die-hards, it's very sad.

The beans story works very well in this case. A few different people have brought it up. It works, right down to the fact that once the can is opened, the beans stink and are not very appetizing.

I remember Vern starting the "position business" with a PLANNED auction...the bidders club. I couldn't believe it. I guess he understood that some folks would jump in and try to make money with the positions instead of make flights with the plane. HE obviously did not want to be left behind in the planned E-clips position arbitrage business. So he encouraged it. No one has ever done this before, in fct, companies try to defend their order books and keep them filled with real buyers.

Perhaps a real first in aviation history.

Unabashed hucksterism.

Some people will buy snake oil...some will even get involved selling it and distributing it, some will even deny that it fails to work.

Some won't

EclipseOwner387 said...

gunner,

check again. I never said inside source. I said a source. I made it clear I was just posting it on their behalf. I made no claims to its accuracy. this source does have considerable more contact than I with eclipse than I so I am sure they believed these dates were the expectations and weren't making it up. I even finished my preamble with enjoy because I personally would not make any date claims considering eclipses track record and knew you guys would enjoy disecting the info.

airtaximan said...

EO,
I feel your pain, man.
It's tough when people take comments and opininons, and state them as if we presents them as fact, then barrage us with direct criticism. In this case, it did appear as if you were offering credibility based on the nature of the informer.

We should keep track of what your buddy has been told, and told you, no? We can assume both you and he are being honest and as accurate as you can be...and that the information from Eclipse to him and on to us, can be evaulated based on what actually transpires.

Right?

Frank Castle said...

Naw, it's the same ol' bait & switch.....

Make some claims, then craw-dad out of 'em. Or try.

Always the same ol' BS, never changes. That's why no one that posts any info from Eclops can be believed. You can either run the fuzzy math down, or let the calendar do it for you.

Either has worked in this blog with great success.

airtaximan said...

FC,

HOw much fun would this be without all the BS to shoot down? You get the horses mouth flavor BS from Vern, the indirect from his PR and Sales Department, and then the "distilled, insider scoop, I know-better-than-you" brand from the die-hards and other who have been BS'd by E-clips and add their own twist/interpretation/exaggeration/broken-telephone. There's the "additional" kind, from stakeholders, re-sellers and others seeking their own good who make their own stuff up on top of BS they've been fed. Then of course there's the "paid for" brand from the media.

Don't call off the dogs. Like you say, its just more of the same, but its good to see it in all its forms coming from of all sides.

Frank Castle said...

"Cheesy" is NOT being able to deliver over 1,200 aircraft, TO REAL CUSTOMERS, over the past year.

And, to dig the knife in further, there were LOTS AND LOTS that were delivered with ZERO SQUALKS !!

That means fully functioning avionics, engines, no collared breakers, AND functioning support centers !!

Everyone wants to try and compare Eclops with Cessna, but that's like comparing fisheggs and caviar.

bill e goat said...

Well, despite the occasional enthusiastic posting, this certainly is an interesting blog.
I think we all wish Eclipse well; the management team, the employees, the depositors (excuse me, I meant to saw owners- gentle humor, I assure), and the other investors (“non-owners”).
Vern is not a bad fellow- I think we all enjoy the spectacle of his PR efforts, and take pretty good jabs at those PR efforts, but not him personally.
The employees are tops- really motivated “aircraft people”. Some of the recent additional manufacturing folks are new to the industry (others are veterans), but all are dedicated and enthusiastic. The long-term (well, for Eclipse anyway) employees who have been with the company for years are phenomenal, and I think all the customers can rest assured their aircraft are being design, tested, and assembled by a team dedicated to safety and satisfaction.
Even the Eclipse PR/marketing team is a nice bunch, and are basically telling the truth, and are well meaning in their attempts to preserve the company's financial future- and the jobs of their fellow employees.
The customers also seem, from this blog, to be passionate aviation enthusiasts, so I think all of us bloggers here have much more in common that is sometimes evident in a few of the postings. I think we all appreciate each contributors opinions, despite an occasional slightly testy response, but these all have some truth in them, so they are worthwhile to read also.

I think we all enjoy this blog for:
1)the insight gained into small aircraft design and manufacturing, from the witty and knowledgeable contributions posted here, and
2)the delicious fun of seeing how our fellow bloggers read through the Eclipse PR releases. None of us wants to see Eclipse go belly up, but it is fun to read through the obfuscation of their schedule slips and on-going technical challenges (sort of like Kremlinology, a some years back). It would be so bland if they just published the whole truth, but I guess they deserve some slack as a startup company, guilty of both wishful thinking, and are trying to insure both the company's survival and their ability to (eventually) deliver as promised to the customers.

There are lots of fine companies out there, Cessna is certainly one of the finest. I became somewhat tired of the Eclipse swipes at them, but it seems things have become a bit more civil lately, perhaps out of embarrassment with their own delays, or perhaps as Eclipse as a company matures, they are gaining an appreciation for what their competitors have (already) gone through.

Thanks for running a nice blogspot Stan.

gadfly said...

Senor William E. Goat

Your observation is very much correct!

With this company, there is a fatal flaw built-in right from the start.

A person with a dream and a huge ego puts himself in charge, and with financial connections proceeds to fulfill those dreams. Maybe he had great success as a manager, but not as an "aircraft designer". And his experience was throwing money and educated engineers at a problem until you get it right . . . or "near right" . . . with the attitude of "work out the bugs later", after it's on the market.

A designer, with an equally big ego, and some recognized success, is brought on board to design an aircraft that stretches his abilities just beyond anything he has done before.

Someone else, with plenty of money (but no real knowledge of things "aeronautical") catches the fever . . . and a predictable chain of events begin.

Few people appreciate the fact that designing an airplane is more an “art form” than a science . . . the art goes “hand in hand” with the science. You cannot anymore legislate the design of an aircraft than legislate a fine painting, or the composition of an opera.

Every successful aircraft began in the mind of one man . . . maybe “two”, even though there may be many later variations of that “first” successful airframe.

For better or worse, the “designer” (or “artist”) was removed before his work was done. Worse than that, the result of his work was “sold” to gullible people before his “masterpiece” had been begun, with the promise that it would be a great work. The “artist” should have been given support to finish his work, to either prove or disprove his creation. Then, and only then, should “buyers” have been brought in. But now that’s too late. Instead, the “artist” (good or bad) was fired . . . another artist was hired.

Now, the other “artist” has been brought in to “finish” the work of the first. This committee attitude will always fail. A crew with the best skills and work ethic will almost always do their best. The success promised was premature. All the care and work of an excellent and dedicated crew will not be able to save this venture.

Folks should “back off”, and allow this company to sink or swim on their own. Without vitriolic passion, go ahead and make facts known, to make up for the false claims. But be careful about personal attacks . . . it is not a healthy way to live out a life.

The local paper in Albuquerque had an article this morning about the “Honda Jet”, to be manufactured in North Carolina, and introduced in 2010. ‘Modest claims coming from a company with a long history of success. Remember when “Detroit” said, “Can’t”, Honda stepped in and said, “Can do!” . . . and they did. Maybe they’ll do it again.

Gadfly

Jet_fumes said...

Bill e goat and Gadfly. Fantastic posts.

Ken Meyer said...

Bambazonke wrote...
"Anyone want to offer any other reasons why someone would want to take delivery of an A model, no DME, no RVSM, no GPS, non functioning panel, reduced range, no factory support in his area (MO) and the other risks associated with this flim flam oraganisation?"


That statement has got an awful lot of errors in it. No DME? Huh, that's wrong. No RVSM? Huh? No GPS? No panel? Reduced range? (reduced from what?). Flim-Flam--maybe; that's an opinion and you're entitled to it, but most of the rest of it is just wrong.

I picked this particular post because it has so many inaccuracies, but it seems like every time I check in here, I scratch my head wondering if anybody engages their brain and does a little fact-checking before putting their fingers in high-gear and writing stuff that is just wrong. If Eclipse is so bad, why the heck do you have to make up stuff about it?

Ken

Gunner said...

Gunner said:
EO387 has provided inside info that the following will occur:
- Feb 12: First Training Class to Start
- Feb 12-19: @2 A/C Delivered
- Feb 21-28: PC Announcement


EO387 Responded:
"check again. I never said inside source. I said a source. I made it clear I was just posting it on their behalf.

EO-
Just when I was getting to accept your posts as balanced, you say what?

- That you responded to criticisms of Eclipse's production claims with a statement from someone whom you could knew might possibly have had no idea what he was talking about?

- That you attempted to head off a string of criticism with the well-worn Eclipse tactic of, "Wait'll you see what happens next week. We're on it NOW."?

- That you are just dragging over RUMOR that you received from what? An anonymous cell phone text?

Doncha get it, guy? You REPRESENT Eclipse on this blog and for the tens of thousands who check in here for counterpoint to Eclipse's claims of Aviation Giant Steps.

You can't come into this game on a Raise and then simply "Check". It affects your own credibility, in addition to Vern's.

So let's get this behind us now based on what YOU believe. Will we see at least the following or not, in accordance with your previous claim, which you now state as useless:

- Feb 12: First Training Class to Start
- Feb 12-19: @2 A/C Delivered
- Feb 21-28: PC Announcement

Answer honestly and specifically.
Gunner

gadfly said...

For a moment, I thought I had stumbled onto an Eclipse "press release":

"My candle 'burns at both ends;
It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--
It gives a lovely light!"

But I was wrong!

(Apologies to Enid, "A Few Figs from Thistles", 1920)

Gadfly

bambazonke said...

Ken Meyer,

I know you are a position holder, are you prepared to comment then on why SN-1 does not have a working DME, (albeit virtual DME), the reason that the plane flew to Camarillo CA from ABQ February 3rd and had to land at Prescott because it could not make CMA non stop, and the reason given by the pilot who flew the plane was the DME not being functional in the latest release of software from Avidyne. The same reason applies as to why the group certification of the RVSM has not been completed, because they cannot fly above 28000.

Now either you are lying or the pilot that flew the plane is lying, which is it?

If you are going to come across here and make these statements make sure that you can back them up, the example I have quoted is FACT, check it out. I suggest you get off the KOOL AID, it is occluding your senses!

Niner Zulu said...

Bambazonke you da man!

Your commentary is always cutting edge. Besides that, you provide me a good laugh on a regular basis.

By the way, did anyone watch the VLJ episode on "Wings To Adventure" on the Outdoor channel? Lots of flying video - the Mustang, Adam, Diamond, Honda and especially the Eclipse in shot after shot. Also good video of our favorite good-time girl Marion lavishing the praise on a tail-wagging Vern at Oshkosh last July. It all sounds so good that it (almost) makes me want to drink the kool aid :-).

Ken Meyer said...

Bambazonke wrote,
"If you are going to come across here and make these statements make sure that you can back them up,"


Mr. Bambazonke (or is it Ms.Bambazonke??) Let's start with one fact straight out--whoever the heck you are, you don't think enough of yourself, the readers of this blog or your so-called "facts" to sign your real name to your posts. Why should anybody believe anything you write if you don't think enough of it to sign your real name to it?

That said, have you actually read the FAA-approved AFM for this aircraft? I think you'd be less likely to make so many glaring errors if you relied on that instead of dazzling us with 3rd hand hearsay that is usually flatout wrong.

I stand behind what I write; I don't have to hide behind a funny made-up name so I can post funny made-up "facts."

Ken Meyer

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

So True-Believers, can you tell us how many systems and/or functions are actually inoperative?

If anyone other than the annointed few could see an actual AFM Mr. Meyer, we might be able to discuss that.

How many INOP placards are in the plane? I am assuming that Eclipse has to placard any\all inoperative systems, unless of course that only applies to dinosaur aircraft companies like Boeing and Cessna.

Autothrottle? Autopilot? GPS? DME?

Did Eclipse not state openly that they would provide a handheld GPS with the early deliveries due to specific functions being unavailable?

We pilots call missing functionality INOP, and the Feds REQUIRE that any system or function that is inoperative be identified as such.

I thought Bamba was kidding about an Eclipse magazine until I went there and read it myself. What a self-serving load of BS that is - still touting 'transparency' while shielding any operational info (or inoperative info for that matter).

Change = failure? At what aircraft company? In aviation Failure = Fatality. When your PC crashes while playing pilot on flight simulator it is an inconvenience, have a system crash at FL370 or holding in hard IMC at night and people die.

The FAA is to blame for a lack of innovation in aviation? Talk about chutzpah, the man is dependent on that very organization to earn his PC for the wonderjet and he has the unmitigated gall to blame what HE sees as a lack of innovation on the FAA.

Glass panel displays, enhanced situational awareness, synthetic vision, Capstone, TAWS, ADS-B, Electronic Flight Bags are just a few innovations the dinosaurs of aviation (Boeing, Jeppesen, Airlines and the ATA) have come up with in the last decade alone. I supopse innovation only counts when it comes from Albuquerque now.

Vern and the people who endlessly protect him and regurgitate his PR are pathetic. Eclipse may have a talented team but any team is only as good as its worst member, and unfortunately for Eclipse, that person sits in the corner office and on the Board of Directors.

Rule #1 in business is never believe your own rhetoric and always face the situation as it IS, not as you want it to be.

Unless and until the Board takes this crucial step, there will be a trickle of deliveries, endless excuses for lack of functionality, and lack of PC - watch for Vern to make up for these shortcomings by sponsoring another movie night at OSH - 'pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, I am the great and powerful Oz!'

bambazonke said...

Ken, Ken... you are so wrong, so let's have a look at a couple of the items that relate to the blog, my moniker is not the subject of this blog; having a moniker is a common feature of blogs and this is so people like myself can speak their minds without the fear of losing their job, it is accepted for reasons of anonymity, so get over it. My moniker does not change the facts, so let's deal with facts.

1. Where can anyone get a copy of the AFM? IF this secretive company would release these, like Cessna, this would answer a lot of the questions about this 'wonder bird'.

2. Do you think that the A model, SN-1, has the range that has been promised by EAC? If not why do you question the remark 'limited range'?

3. You challenged the DME, GPS, functional panel etc. remarks that I made, don't deflect the direct questions by wondering who on earth I am. Knowing who I am won't change any of the FACTS about these items that I am describing. You came to this blog to find out what people were saying about the Eclipse, you did not come here to find out who all the bloggers were surely? We could learn from you if you have some valid information to post.

So back to the little challenge that was thrown down for you, does SN-1 have a working DME? Does it have a working GPS? I am not talking about the hand held GPS-496, I am talking about one that the little jet's autopilot will follow. Did it fly to Camarillo via Prescott because it could not do the flight non stop? Was that because it could not fly above 24000 feet? If the plane has a DME and RVSM, why was there such a scramble in ABQ on the day of the fantasy flight to TLH and GNV getting the ATC clearance for a non RVSM aircraft to do this flight? Do you have a piece of paper that you can show us that says the Max Ramp Weight is 5950 lbs? I have one that says that it is only 5800 lbs. Can you point to the document that gives the class certification of the RVSM for the EAC-500? I don't need to go over all the statements that I have posted, you get the idea, supply us some information, if you can, I am quite prepared to admit I am in error to any item that you can substantiate that I was wrong on.

Whilst I am very curious to get my sticky little mitts on an AFM, I am rather suspicious of it, because it is written by the same company that has been making all kinds of claims that have not been entirely accurate, like the one at the time of the AOPA in PSP, when they told us the fleet was being used for certification and that it was too busy and that is why there was no plane in Palm Springs, when it turned out the problem was the rear spar bushing...You see when there is this track record of unreliable information coming out of an aviation company, it leads people like those that publish comment on this blog to question their voracity and reliability.

Do you think that EAC is going to produce a plane that can carry 710 lbs of people 1135 miles? If so, have you tried to get the weight off the comparator on the EAC website? It will certainly not be possible with a typically equipped plane according to their data.

I am sure that you will agree that the flying public values aviation manufacturers that exhibit integrity. Regrettably this sentiment is not shared by many people in the aviation world about EAC. This is through their own doing, and like others have said, they themselves provide the fodder for this blog.

So, balls in your court, enlighten us on the topics in dispute between us with some facts. I am sure you could send the AFM that you possibly have to Stan and he can post it here if you like.

If you cannot address them one by one without trying to figure out who I am, you are in my mind validating the claims I made. They are not difficult items for someone such as yourself to get answers on from Ken McNamara, ask him, then come back and let us know, I am sure that you have made some of the readers curious.

All of this started with the question of why someone would take delivery of a plane that was not meeting the spec, if you can answer that question as well, I am curious..

You see, some of the answers to these questions I DO have first hand knowledge on, so maybe this will help you understand why my moniker needs to remain Bamba Zonke.

Stan Blankenship said...

The blog has certainly heated up.

Sounds like a bunch of type "A" personalities throwing punches and taking punches. Some hard shots here and there but no knockout blows on either side. None below the belt so the referee did not have to step in though he kept an eye on things.

The give and take on Phostrex was enlightening for both sides and germane to the Eclipse program. Only time will prove who was right.

Same with all the issues aired and yet to be aired. They won't be settled here but will get well discussed.

If you want to post comments be my guest, just be dammed prepared to defend your position.

To eo387, I have never predicted what milestones the company might achieve. Months ago I said the company will go until it runs out of money.

When you consider what Eclipse has spent plus development costs at Pratt and all the other suppliers, you are pushing a billion dollars. For this, they have delivered one airplane!

It is a given Eclipse will achieve better efficiencies once they start delivering more airplanes and further believe that if Vern can raise another billion, he might even get your airplane delivered as well.

EclipseBlogger said...

Eclipseowner387 said... IF YOU THINK EB IS VERN YOU ARE JUST PLAIN STUPID. VERN WOULD NEVER SEND THE PERFORMANCE CHART THAT BORDERS POSTED ON THE YAHOO SITE TO STAN. NO OFFENSE EB BUT THAT PROBABLY PISSED OFF SOME FOLKS ON THE ECLIPSE SIDE.

I believe there should be nothing to hide in the truth. That was public information found in more than one public location on the Internet. I am here on this blog to find out the truth, and to expose the lies, incorrect assumptions, and nonsense than seems to so prolific here. Eclipse has its problems, but in the long run I believe they will eventually find their way and become very successful. They made some rather bold claims about the product that I think they believed they could achieve. The other manufactures, Cessna included, did fight back with equally bold lies about Eclipse. I guess in the tone of the claims from both sides, that's to be expected. But as in any development project, there just never seems to be enough time, manpower, and money, but there is always an abundance of areas to occupy them all. I think Eclipse just fell behind the curve as a new company expanding at an almost unmanageable rate. In the end, I hope to be one of the Eclipse customers having the last laugh.

gadfly said...

“Curiouser and curiouser!” cried Alice
(she was so much surprised,
that for the moment she quite forgot how to speak good English).

This truly is a "Wonderland" . . . wondering where Elipse will land next!

Gadfly

Lloyd said...

Anyone can purchase a copy of the AFM on the Eclipse website. Go to Avio and then Avio flightbag. Purchase the software, and an AFM is included in the library section. $399 Includes a year of updates and all VFR and IFR enroute and approach plates for the US. The AFM is not 100% complete, but is updated ~ every 10 days.

Stan Blankenship said...

Thanks lloyd,

Got mine on order.

In the meantime, if you have yours, can you tell us what AFM shows for Vmc and maximum crosswind?

Jeff Rockwood said...

The FAA should be ashamed of playing along with Vern! This snake-oil salesman has literally painted himself into a corner. $600 million raised to date and NOW he's asking for more funding from the customers? WOW!

Maybe they should have cut back on the millions of dollars they spent on marketing. Oh, but then they wouldn't have had all that great ass-kissing press from aviation magazine editors who were thanking them for all that money in advertising. It really is amazing that no one has finally written a detailed article about this.

It looks pretty obvious what's going to happen here. They are going to fully certify this aircraft, then turn around and file for bankruptcy. Erase the debt and then start back up with a clean slate (all be it with new management)...its the only way out. They are not going to be able to make 1000 aircraft a year (roughly a 200% share of the projected market for VLJ's as stated by the FAA and Forecast International) in order to break even and make money. The market is not there.

Can anyone confirm that the share price during the fourth round of financing went from $195 a share to $25 a share? That's gotta hurt!

EclipseBlogger said...

Jeff Rockwood said...
$600 million raised to date and NOW he's asking for more funding from the customers?

Did you just wake up from under a rock?

Jeff Rockwood said...
It looks pretty obvious what's going to happen here. They are going to fully certify this aircraft, then turn around and file for bankruptcy. Erase the debt and then start back up with a clean slate (all be it with new management)...its the only way out.


Now here a guy that has no idea of what he's talking about. Almost all of the money raised to date has been from equity financing. The press releases for the last round of financing stated that they were from institutional investors as mandatory convertible debt, meaning that at IPO the debt is automatically converted into equity shares. The investors already own the company. Why would they declare bankruptcy? To lose their own investment?

Ken Meyer said...

Bambazonke wrote...
"I am quite prepared to admit I am in error to any item that you can substantiate that I was wrong on."


Splendid. Read the TCDS and the AFM and then we can talk about the actual A model capabilities and perhaps get into what the B model modifications will add.

I can see why you post under the name "Bambazonke." It would take a brave soul indeed to sign his own name to some of the stuff you've written.

You say you're protecting your job. OK. What kind of job would a guy cherish so much he has to hide behind a goofy pseudonym? I'm actually quite curious--what is it you do that you think would be threatened if you told the truth and signed your real name to it?

Ken

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

I could be wrong but "Ken Meyer" and "Eclipseblogger" sound an awful lot alike to me. 'Since you are not using your 'real' name you must a schmuck' - this is the internet guys, a person can 'say' they are anybody they want to - judge by the content and accuracy (or lacktherof if you care to actually prove it) of their posts.

As professionals in industry many participants on this blog, myself included, have a stake both in our anonymity as well as in the future success or failure that Eclipse has on our beloved industry.

Since the "B" Model has not been certified, there is no TCDS so we can only go by the currently 'certified' A Model, I put 'certified' in quotes because the airplane is not, as presently certified, the aircraft that the early-adopters, and the media, and the 'dinosaur' competition were told to expect.

I will ask again since the answers seem to not be forthcoming from the KKA brigade, what systems are presently INOP? Can the aircraft legally operate above FL240? Can you legally use the onboard GPS for navigation? Does the aircraft have a functioning DME (either real radio-based or virtual slant range via GPS)? Do the accessories work (Avio Flight Bag, hell, what about a cigaratte lighter)?

Extraordinary claims (Vernspeak in other words) require extraordinary proof. Where is the beef?

EclipseOwner387 said...

EB,

For the record I agree with you on having full transparency. I was only trying to point out that Vern would not send Stan an email with a chart from the yahoo site, and to me that is proof enough you are not Vern. Frank Castle is rediculous for making claims like that. I have noticed lately at least one owner is asking his posts remain "for owners eyes only" now so that is why I said it probably pissed off some on the Eclipse side. I personally am fine with getting info out in the open for analysis and I have really appreciated your contributions here.

EclipseOwner387 said...

FC,

Did you say the www.eclipseaviationmag.com had been scratched? Or did I misunderstand you? Seems to be a live and kicking to me.

EclipseOwner387 said...

Anonymous source (not an employee of Eclipse) sends me the following to post in regards to last post. NOT MY INFO. JUST PASSING ALONG. IF I GET ANY CRAP I WILL STOP POSTING THIS STUFF FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT. DIRECT YOUR RESPONSES TO ANONYMOUS SOURCE.



The reason the airplanes did not get delivered this week is that Eclipse made the decision to go ahead and perform the wing attachment bushing modification BEFORE turning them over to the FAA for inspection. Original plan was to get CofA and then do mod. This is a 3-5 day job for those airplanes that were produced before the modification fix was approved for production. Originally the idea was to get the airplanes cleared for delivery and through the FAA Certificate of Airworthiness and then do the mod. The only difference is that there is a periodic inspection due until the modification retrofit. The FAA could still give the CofA before the mod with the understanding that the airplane would need this periodic inspection until the mod retrofit was completed. Eclipse and owners thought it would be good idea to do the mod first then turn it over to the FAA for CofA inspection. There were a couple of reasons for this decision, the most important was the limited FAA manpower budget.

Another problem Eclipse is experiencing is that the FAA is short of people and money. The 2007 Federal Budget has still not been approved by Congress and the President. The FAA is running out of money and people. They are trying to do the PC Audit and the CofA at the time with only a handful of FAA inspectors. So to take some pressure off the FAA, Eclipse decided to do the wing mod first and let the inspectors concentrate on the PC Audit and only do CofA on one airplane at a time.


BTW—I am sure the bloggers will think Eclipse is blaming the FAA for missing this new schedule (which is not an Eclipse schedule but a blogger’s schedule), but have them look at what the FAA did to the startup company Symphony—which went bankrupt waiting for the FAA to TC their glass cockpit on their new airplane. I saw a report that said the FAA told them they did not have budget or manpower this year to look at their glass cockpit and would have to wait until next year. The Company could not raise the money to wait so they went bankrupt. Here is a report from one news source:


“The first two Symphony 160s equipped with an Avidyne Entegra glass panel were also waiting to be delivered as the company entered protected status. The company was waiting on the needed Canadian and FAA certifications for the glass panel upgrades... which never came.”


The CEO did not blame the FAA but the lack of capital markets in Canada.


“The underlying cause of the company's financial problems, according to Costanzo, is the "dismal" venture capital environment in Quebec. "There is a lack of appetite for this type of business venture," he said. "We've turned over every stone we thought was worth turning over and we have not been able to bring the capital into the business that we need."


They are thinking about moving to the US where they will get investors and political support.


Eclipse of course has Governor Richardson (D) from New Mexico and if they have trouble with the FAA budget or the FAA, I am sure Gov. Richardson can pick up the phone and call Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid and get some action. Eclipse is now one of the largest employers in New Mexico and also New Mexico has invested $20M with Eclipse and offered significant tax breaks.


Eclipse is still shooting for PC before the end of February (again not an Eclipse published schedule date but a blogger’s schedule).

bambazonke said...

Ken Meyer has no interest in addressing the issues raised, is not accurate in the TCDS description, and now can read from the EO387 post that the 'periodic inspection' of the spar attach fitting is true. BTW the term periodic in this instance is DAILY.

Ken appears not to have the ability to contribute meaningful data and is obviously hampered by the cataracts caused by a new phenomenon afflicting pilots known as KACAT (Kool Aid CATaracts), Bless him.

Stan in case you don't have the TCDS I am sending it to you, maybe you could post it somewhere for Ken and the other KAC to read...

bambazonke said...

Stan,

On the question of X wind numbers, I'll bet it is no higher than 18 kts.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Thanks EO387 for clearing that up.

I thought Vern said, rather definitively in fact, that 'production airplanes would not be affected' by the 'flight test' production 'misassembly'.

So we have issues with the structural windshields, the structural rear wing attach, and an indeterminate number of inoperative systems and functions that are 'normally' required for safe and effective operation of aircraft - at least for aircraft built by dinosaurs like Cessna and Boeing.

Symphony went tits-up cuz' they ran out of money. They needed about $5-6M dollars to complete cert on the glass panel 160's and get through production issues. Vern wastes that much money a week.

They did not blame the FAA, or their competition and critics. Comparing a certified sportplane with a checkered past to the Eclipse may end up being a far more accurate comparison than any of us suspect at this point.

The past month or so has seen 3 OEM's goes bankrupt (Symphony and Tiger are done, and Taylorcraft has been kicked out of its HQ). This is simply far more complicated then developiing a great software idea and selling it during the 'new economy' NASDAQ bubble. Of course none of them were any where near as well heeled as Eclipse but it IS possible to exceed an 'unlimited' budget - just ask Beechcraft about the Starship.

3-5 days in mod for each of the 40 airplanes we constantly hear about would be a significant test for the service capacity of Eclipse. And that 200 days worth of work does not include the aero-mods for the "B" Model, or the installation and certification of additional software functionality.

Remember, any function that was not working at the issuance of the TC will require an STC or Ammended TC - at least it would for any dinosaur aircraft company - with this outfit, who knows.

airtaximan said...

Can anyone with a stong engineering background please explain to me how a plane, designed for high cycle airline type operations for thousands of hours a year have the cracking/parts failure issues already?

The design criteria, engineering methods, testing and overall care would lend itself to producing a plane that would not show these sorts of problems for years, right?

Doesn't Vern's claims that this plane was DESIGNED/Engineered for this purpose mean that this sort of thing would not happen?

Otherwise, what does "designing for high cycle air taxi operations" mean?

Thanks

EclipseBlogger said...

ColdWetMackarelofReality said... 3-5 days in mod for each of the 40 airplanes we constantly hear about would be a significant test for the service capacity of Eclipse. And that 200 days worth of work does not include the aero-mods for the "B" Model, or the installation and certification of additional software functionality.

First, the 3-5 day mod turn around time for the wing bushings is news to me. If this is true, which I cannot confirm or deny, then I would assume that it only effects the aircraft produced that did not have the wings attached at the time of the design/installation change. Therefore the actual number of aircraft that are effected should be small, and certainly not all 40.

EclipseOwner387 said...
Did you say the Eclipse Magazine had been scratched? Or did I misunderstand you? Seems to be a live and kicking to me.

The Eclipse magazine displayed on the web site was printed BEFORE the certification was issued. It was actually available in hardcopy at the Eclipse TC open house in September. Although not a great analogy, but just like an obituary it was written and published in advance of the full TC event, waiting to be distributed at the proper time. You can see that S/N 001 was not delivered days after TC as claimed in the magazine. Much of the other information and articles are not time dependent. This has also been the only issue so far released in six months.

Gunner said...

EO387-
I'm not even gonna dignify "Anonymous'" statement that the delay is caused by the FAA. But the statement that the wing bushing issue affects the current production fleet most certainly flies in the face of previous OFFICIAL statements from Eclipse.

So who's lying?
- The source who promised us two planes next week?
- The source who says it ain't gonna happen and blames the FAA?
- Eclipse Aviation Corp?
- All of the above are lies and emanate from the same place?

I guess only time will tell; but one thing's for dead certain. There's a whole lot of whoppers being told about this company and its product; most all of them seek to gain benefit for Eclipse Aviation.

Like somebody once said, "Follow the money!"
Gunner

Nerdy Engineer said...

airtaximan said...

...what does "designing for high cycle air taxi operations" mean?


It means jack #$%@. It's a marketing ploy just like FSW, "revolutionary", etc. No one designs disposable airplanes, especially considering the scores of dirtbag lawyers just waiting to sue.

These premature failures are probably due to a combination of two factors: an inexperienced design team and, more importantly, management interference. Vern probably hired chief engineers who could do the best powerpoint presentations, not those who were the best designers. (Haven't they gone through several quality managers?) This was compounded by the fact that upper management planned fatigue testing so late in the program. No amount of computer simulation replaces real loads on a real airframe. Engineers make mistakes but with good management, both engineering mgmt and corporate, these failures would have been discovered earlier.


p.s. Correct me if I'm wrong about the schedule but I thought I read that somewhere.

Stan Blankenship said...

nerd,

No need to ask for corrections on this blog. If you say something wrong, you are going to hear about it.

You make some valid points and since I am about to make a new posting, your comments are going to get moved up where they don't get left behind.

Jeff Rockwood said...

The only one under a rock here is EclipseBlogger if he thinks this sinking ship is ever going to get to IPO...and they still have debt...lots! I'd love to hear how much you think this floating turd of a stock would be valued at? Shuffle the deck chairs all you want on this sinking ship...its not going to happen!

EclipseBlogger said...

Jeff Rockwood said...
The only one under a rock here is EclipseBlogger if he thinks this sinking ship is ever going to get to IPO... Shuffle the deck chairs all you want on this sinking ship... its not going to happen!

I guess the recent $225 million worth of investors should have talked to you first. You could have saved them from themselves.