Monday, May 21, 2007

Paper Airplane or Fait Accompli?

To the faithful, it is fait accompli, the program is coming into fruition. After all, Eclipse has a Type Certificate, a Production Certificate, airplanes are trickling off the production line, awarded Certificates of Airworthiness, and titles transferred to the very patient owners in waiting. Even a handful of flights are showing up on http://www.flightaware.com/.

However, the skeptics look at the program and largely share whytech's view:

"My picture of the situation is far from complete, but here is what seems to be the case in broad strokes:
1. the acft is terribly late
2. because it is late, it is no longer “revolutionary,” and other manufacturers have introduced designs which achieve parity or even do better in some respects
3. the acft will apparently not meet the original claims for performance
4. their are many, many teething problems now known, and, it is likely that more will be revealed as field experience with the acft is gained
5. there is no support network up and running for the acft yet
6. the training program is not yet up and running at a “professional grade” level
7. there are numerous airframe and systems mods that will be required, with perhaps more to come
8. the insurance situation remains muddy
9. the Company’s financial future appears to be in question
10. other issues that I have forgotten to include?

With this view in mind, if I were a depositor, I would be working with my attorney to recover my deposit, (or would likely forfeit my deposit if I had not yet reached the 60% threshold).

Who needs this aggravation and disappointment? Buying a jet should be a fun and exciting experience for an owner/pilot. If I just had to have an Eclipse, I’d get my money back now, and wait to see what happens before putting $1.5mm -$2.0mm on the line.

I am having trouble seeing and understanding the rationale for staying with it after all that has happened just so far."

Alexa, one of the faithful, explains it this way:

"My rational….there is no other aircraft announced or available that has similar capability at an equivalent price point. Remember many of the early buyers have gotten preferential pricing. The Eclipse even today fills a niche. Most of us that have been around aviation expect new designs to have teething problems. I can’t speak for other customers but my interaction with Eclipse employees lead me to believe that they truly care and are doing everything possible to find and correct any problems."

Gunner, had a different take:

"In some cases, I think it's simply explained as JetJock Fever. Let's face it, every one of us flying a piston or turboprop aircraft would LOVE to be flying a jet, myself included."


Airtaximan concluded:

"Two opposite opinions on virtually everything...kinda like religion...based on belief more than fact. Then "facts" used to support the beliefs.

Both sides are probably comprised of nice folks...just of differing beliefs.

The lack of real data (on purpose) is the problem. This IS the first jet in history with so many myths, inaccuracies, missing functionality, and wavering guarantees.."

Gunner added:

"Never have we seen a SUCCESSFUL aviation company start off by delivering half finished, half certified aircraft."

Then sparky wrote:

"That's where the arguments start. Critics look at what IS, and comment on it. The backers look at what is PROMISED and argue back as though it's a forgone conclusion that it will happen."

What has been promised to the faithful are the next three milestone events:

1. Certification of the "B" mods, which according to the company, will bring the airplane performance into compliance with the performance guarantees required by the purchase agreement.

2. Certification of the aircraft for flight into known icing, promised by September but an unlikely goal unless the company decides to venture into South America this summer in a search for natural icing.

3. Full integration of the avionics suite and certification by the FAA.

Until these events are accomplished, the Eclipse 500 will remain a paper airplane in the eyes of most.

107 comments:

cj3driver said...

Gunner said:

You once were where most of us VLJ types are now. Does it or does it not cause you to shake your head when you hear a single engine Turbo owner or a twin piston owner confidently gushing about jumping right into a twin turbofan after a couple dozen hours of training?

cjDriver? Whytech? HiFlyer?
Be honest, now.

Gunner,
You’re right..Jumping in single pilot… no way. The mentor deal is a must. I trasitioned from 1600 hrs mostly Mirage and JetProp. My only multi was 12 hrs in a Seminole for the twin rating. I flew with a “professional” pilot for about 150 hrs, before earning a single pilot type and ATP rating. In fact, FlightSafety has fairly strict prerequisites for acceptance to their single pilot type training program. I’ll see if I can find them and post it later.

Not to mention Insurance…… My first couple of years was ridiculous. Its just now becoming competitive. But IMHO,…. It was worth it.

ExEclipser said...

Unfortunately, most folks that lurk here read Stan's big posts and don't bother coming in here for the meat.

I have a question. According to Wikipedia, MTOW for the Mustang was 8395 lbs. According to a recent article in the International Herald Tribune, the MTOW was slated to be 10800.

That's a difference of 2400 lbs. So I tried the tie-breaker. Cessna.com has for the official MTOW of the Mustang listed at N/A.

That's why Cessna is refusing to call their 'little' jet a VLJ any more. It's a tank.

highfloat said...

Gunner,

I agree with CJ3 driver on this. The most important component of a transition like this is pilot attitude. A sense of realistic personal limitations coupled with a strong desire to create and adhere to a rigorous initial and re-current training program (including mentoring) is worth an extra 1000TT in my eyes.

CJ3 - Ironically your 150 hours of mentoring is exactly what I quoted some future eclipse owners when myself and a few partners had a beta mentoring shell set-up. When we pitched the program to eclipse we were almost laughed off the phone - "150 hours are you kidding - try 25. I mean cmon' these things aren't hard to fly - how hard can it be!" Direct quote from eclipse. Amazing.

Of course the real driver here is insurance - period. CJ3 - how much did the 150 hours of mentoring set you back? 15-20K?

ExEclipser said...

1. the acft is terribly late
So was the SJ-30, the Hawker Horizon, and countless other aircraft. 7 years as a viable company to first delivery ain't bad for a start up. Name others that have succeeded faster.

2. because it is late, it is no longer “revolutionary,” and other manufacturers have introduced designs which achieve parity or even do better in some respects
Looking for certified aircraft that can carry 700 lbs at full fuel for 1250 NM at 370 kts - all for under $2.5 Mil. Hmmm - only one. Called the E500

3. the acft will apparently not meet the original claims for performance
The statement is flawed immediately when the term "apparently" is used. Don't forget the +/-'s when judging.

4. their are many, many teething problems now known, and, it is likely that more will be revealed as field experience with the acft is gained
As with any new product.

5. there is no support network up and running for the acft yet
Gainsville manager is in place and should be staffed and operational soon. Albany not too far behind.

6. the training program is not yet up and running at a “professional grade” level
Looking at Mike Press' statements, it seems grueling enough. The demand for 'crankin' 'em out' just isn't there because of the few aircraft available. From eclipseaviation.com: "Eclipse is on track to receive its first simulator in June 2007".

7. there are numerous airframe and systems mods that will be required, with perhaps more to come
Most of which are in work. I think this is double booking concern #4.

8. the insurance situation remains muddy
And it will until the first guy gets his policy.

9. the Company’s financial future appears to be in question
The E500 is a starter. Future models and PhotrEx will secure the company financially with the customer base created.

10. other issues that I have forgotten to include?
Oh, I'm SURE there are.

Stan Blankenship said...

ExEclipser said...

Unfortunately, most folks that lurk here read Stan's big posts and don't bother coming in here for the meat.

Eclipser, at least we can agree on that point which is why I included several quotes on this latest post. The comments were just too meaningful to get buried in some of the background noise.

The blog is about the Eclipse, not the Mustang, but since you brought it up, the FAA Type Certificate Data Sheet (available on line, www.faa.gov, look for the Cessna 510) shows MTOW at 8,645 lbs.

While I was never able to find a published predicted empty weight, several sources quoted a 8,000 lb MTOW. My guess is Cessna missed their empty weight projection and had to raise their gross weight as well to achieve their stated useful load.

Missing empty weights targets is almost a foregone conclusion with practically every new aircraft program. What makes it so tough for the Eclipse is that every pound of fuel left in the truck means a mile less in range.

Your Mustang comment caused me to dig through the trash to recover yesterday's Wichita paper and an interview with Ron Holter, VP of Cessna's Mustang production and former VP of Mfg for Eclipse. Had intended to let this pass but since you brought it up:

"We're starting to get into a Mustang rhythm on deliveries...We had four deliveries that were 'zero squawk" deliveries, meaning there was absolutely nothing wrong with the airplane...We had one with a squawk, and it was minor...But it was still one. It needs to be zero everytime. That's the kind of enthusiasm that the team has...It has to be perfect."

cj3driver said...

Highfloat said;
CJ3 - how much did the 150 hours of mentoring set you back? 15-20K?

Highfloat,
I got lucky, One of my friends happend to retire from an aviation career, "and worked for food"! We flew the pants of my first CJ over the summer of 04. Normaly, however, one could hire a 525 pilot for about $400 per day. Based on that, your estimate of 15-20K would be correct.

ExEclipser said...

Dave Crowe's plane is booking it Southbound from Vancouver at a nice chop of 405 kts, FL270.

Winds aloft at SEA 24000 = 330 @ 25; 30000 = 330 @ 63. So he's getting between 340 and 380 airspeed.

cj3driver said...

Eclipser
the CJ1+ is 10,800 MTOW

ExEclipser said...

Stan:
If the 10800 is right, then that's a 20% increase. Eclipse's increase was around 10 (after the new engine). You're right. Weight creep is a big deal.

You're right. This is an Eclipse blog, not a Mustang blog. But let's be intellectually honest here and note that ECLIPSE'S PROBLEMS ARE NOT UNIQUE. That's why I feel compelled to continue to question your posts and stir up debate. There are legitimate concerns. Absolutely.

And congratulations to Rod for 0 defects for a new product that has 75 years or so of processes and history behind it. Cessna is an awesome product. Eclipse is a baby, though. Sure there are teething pains. They'll grow out of it. You lose your first set of teeth before you get your permanent set.

ExEclipser said...

CJ3: Thanks for that info. I hope someone passes it along to IHT. Ooops if they mucked that one up bad.

I hope that the Mustang doesn't go over 10k. I'd like to see it in the VLJ class. I'd like to remind everyone that if there were no Eclipse, there wouldn't be a Mustang.

Gunner said...

CJ and Highfloat-
Thanks for the comments and insight. I'm not a low time pilot, for a private type (3K+ Hours) and, like most of us here, have been tested in situations that I'd prefer not to have to go through again.

Still, as I started to look at what's necessary to start flying loved ones in a twin jet with the same confidence that I take them in a twin piston, I realize that it's a pretty damned substantial jump.

Mentoring at 150 hours? Can't say that I disagree. Did my own Multi in 15 hours in my own plane and continued flying 3X per week with an instructor until I'd racked up 120 hours. (Still had my C-210 for travel).

I think EO has the right idea. He's taking his time, flying a Turboprop single and has every intention of hiring a full time Mentor pilot for the Eclipse. Here's a guy that I'd passenger on a jet with the day he said he was ready as PIC. (Well, maybe not the EA-50X just yet).

Likewise, Ken Myer deserves credit. His puts a LOT of hours in on the turboprop, took the time to get additional certificates and essentially has a built-in crew, as his wife is an equally experienced pilot.

For myself, I'm going SE Jet, and perhaps turbo-prop, in the interim. (Actually, I think the DJet will be less challenging than a Baron in a lot of ways).

Still, it must cause you guys a really nervous chuckle when you see the profile of some of the Eclipse Depositors. Yes, the Eclipse training is grueling...and it should be. But, done with that, I think the training is just starting.
Gunner

cj3driver said...

Whytech said;

……Having said all this, there is probably a CJ-3 in my future (Jet fever, you know!)

WT,
You will love the CJ3,

My calculator says:
HOU-LAX 1,100 nm 80kts headwind

Eclipse 1,916 lbs 5hrs, 2 min.
PC12 2,531 lbs 6 hrs 1 min.
CJ3 2,916 lbs 3 hrs 26 min.
Eclipse has 45 min stop

Eclipse $1,001 fuel cost, the PC12 $1,322, CJ3 $1,523,at $3.50
If you add maintenance, and reserves the CJ3 costs less to operate.
I can do this trip and have 1,800 lbs of payload available.

Based on this kind of performance, I believe there will be a lot of Eclipse owners moving up in the next 3 years. With the numbers of SE turboprops, and light jets delivered in the last 4 years, and with the ones which will be delivered in the next 3 years, this pool (class) of aircraft constists of over 3,000 planes. Were talking about aircraft valued between 2M to 4M that are mostly operated single pilot. A used CJ3 three years from now shouldn’t be a stretch with this market.

The CJ3 even operates for less than the cost of a CJ1 on most trips. I think the resale market on the CJ3 will be strong for a while. The only single pilot competition with similar performance will be the Grob or Phenom 300. These aircraft are still years away. Go ahead… make the move… you wont regret it.

cj3driver said...

The Flight planning guide for the Mustang from Cessna says;
Typically equipped EW 5,350
MGTOW 8,645
Max ramp 8,730
Fuel 2,580
Full fuel payload 800 lbs

Sorry Stan, for all the cessna talk.

WhyTech said...

Execlipser, you seem to have far lower expecations for what one should get from one's $1.5mm, together with all the answers. What can I say?

WT

cj3driver said...

RE:

My calculator says:
HOU-LAX 1,100 nm 80kts headwind


If you load the Eclipse with 6 people or (5 and luggage), The Eclipse will need 2 stops for this trip.

Eclipse 2,259 lbs 6hrs, 4 min.
Mustang 2,574 5 hrs, 14 min.
PC12 2,531 lbs 6 hrs 1 min.
CJ3 2,916 lbs 3 hrs 26 min.

Eclipse has (2) 45 min stops
Mustang has 1, 45 min stop

Based on this performance, the only thing Eclipse has going for it is the entry price. There are a lot of choices if you have 2-3 million to spend.

ExEclipser said...

WT: What should one get for their $1.5Mil? Where can he get it?

ExEclipser said...

BTW, congrats to Cessna for their EASA Certification!

WhyTech said...

execlipser said:

"WT: What should one get for their $1.5Mil? Where can he get it? "

An acft free of defects which meets the published specs. Not from Eclipse.

WT

ExEclipser said...

Congratulations, WT. You have the makings of a fine politician. Asked a direct question, you can't give a direct answer.

What can outperform the Eclipse 500 for $1.6 Mil?

WhyTech said...

cj3driver said:

"You will love the CJ3,"

What's not to love! Beautiful acft, superb performer, probably the best overall value in the Citation lineup.

Can hardly wait! (Jet fever, you know.)

WT

WhyTech said...

execlipser said:

"What can outperform the Eclipse 500 for $1.6 Mil? "

Who knows what the specs will be? We'll have to wait til the airplane is finished to provide a meaningful asnwer.

WT

Gunner said...

WT-
I suspect eclipser is talking about the Paper Airplane; not the current unfinished aircraft that are being delivered.

The answer to the question is just One Click Away
Gunner

airtaximan said...

"What can outperform the Eclipse 500 for $1.6 Mil?"

apparently, according to you, the eclips!

cheers!

JetProp Jockey said...

Relative to the topic of Emotions vs Ligic when it comes to purchases/investments.

Most people who are considered "wealthy" are able to spend or invest 5% - 10% of their wealth without incurring the wrath of their accountants and lawyers. The amount could go a little higher if the prospect of the investment being a winner is higher.

Some of these guys buy a sports team or big boat. Airplanes are another choice.

When Eclipse came out with the prospect of a jet for $800,000, a whole new bunch of guys could enter the vanity world of jet ownership. This was less than 1/3 of what it traditionally cost to be able to take your friends out to the airport for a trip in "My Jet".

I personally was not impressed. When I was doing my initial training for my JetProp at Flight Safety, I was paired with another guy who was planning of flying his JetProp for a couple of years until his Eclipse was delivered and then was going to sell his JetProp for more than it cost to take delivery of his new jet.

I wasn't interested. My JetProp cost me about $1,000,000 and was perfect for my missions. I can get in and out of my little airport as well as most every airport around. Most of my missions are under 500 miles (most of ours are if we are honest) and for my longer trips I might need a fuel stop.

Anyway, the guy I trained with blew his ITT limits within the first month of ownership and had to have an inspection done by PW. If that's the profile of alot of the depositors it will be interesting.

Anyway, those guys who couldn't buy a jet until Eclipse came along will be amazed at the cost of ownership of their toy. Hopefully most will at least be able to find a qualified pilot to fly for them.

I also believe that these factors affected early investors. I know a guy who owned a Cessna 414 as a Corporated aircraft with a professional single pilot operation. It sat with him at an event at our local club and he was all excited to tell me about his Eclipse the he had ordered and his investment in the company.

I asked him if he understood the limits of the small jet as compared to a 414 relative to payload. He didn't, but the new technology had him all excited.

He later sold his position, hopefully for enough profit to help cover his investment.

Last, WhyTech and I have both opined about the difficulty the Eclipse will have raising additional capital or going the IPO route. I continue to believe that money will be a bigger issue than fixing the airplane. If I was a 60% depositer, it would be doing everything I could to get an airplane and if I wasn't at 60% I would do anything to avoid making my payment. The worst place to be if the company has to Ch 7 is an unsecured depositer at 60%.

highfloat said...

Gunner and Jetprop-Jockey,

Guys just want to tip my hat to both of you re: your professional attitude toward flight training and aircarft ownership/operation.

Wish the skies were full of owner/operators like yourselves.

Gunner said...

JPJ-
Can I ask what you're flying?
Personal interest as I see more and more serious flyers on this site with great info.
Gunner

cj3driver said...

ExEclipser said;
Looking for certified aircraft that can carry 700 lbs at full fuel for 1250 NM at 370 kts - all for under $2.5 Mil. Hmmm - only one. Called the E500

....... Or a used Citation CJ... nothing "revolutionary about that"

EclipseOwner387 said...

Gunner,

Jetprop Jock flies a Jetprop. Number 58. I am number 189.

JetProp Jockey said...

I am flying a JetProp which is the STC conversion of a Mirage to a PT6. It was approved about 2 years before the Meridian received a TC.

ExEclipser said...

CJ3: My caveat was 1.6, and there's a LOT out there in the used market, even for under $1 Mil. Is the CJ1 Single Pilot certified? Just curious.

EclipseOwner387 said...

I will also add that a turbine malibu is easier to fly than the piston version. IMHO

The Eclipse has a low stall speed and is relatively slow. You fly over the numbers at the same speed as my Jetprop. I think it will be easier to fly than a twin piston. IMHO

airtaximan said...

question:
I am wondering why your handle is "EXeclipser"?

You seem to be a BIG die-hard.

Die-hard (definition):
A pet name devised by Vern Raburn and the Eclipse Aviation marketing department for the early adopters/depositors for the e-500 VLJ. The name Die-Hard has been publicized/promoted via and extensive and expensive advertising budget over many years. Characteristics of the Eclipse "Die-Hard" includes: A supporter of Eclipse who has placed a deposit for an airplane many years in advance of proposed delivery, and without the delivery slot position which customarily accomplanies a deposit. Ths together with the propensity to leave the deposit with the company even after performance and specification guarantees have been repeatedly recast years after it was (in all reasonability) known nu Eclipse the guarantees would not be met. The die-hard will not ask for the deposit to be refunded even after the revolutionary engine fails, the revolutionary FSW process is replaced on most of the plane with rivits, and even after the advanced cockpit known by e-clips as AVIO is thrown in the garbage after 8 years of promises and hype, only to be replaced by COTS and called (this is not a joke) Avio-Next Generation. The "die-hard" will place an additional 60% non-refundable deposit for their delivery-deposit (not a position) while the company has no track-record of delivery anywhere near the delivery rate advertised by EAC, and it is obvious they are just looking for another means of cheap financing fot their program. The die-hard will accept a plane that needs modifications to meet the revised guaranteed performance, needs frequent inconvenient inspections due to wings problems and windows cracking, and required a whole new avionics suite, together with IOUs in the future for FIKI which seems to have become an unnecessary "option" on this plane. The die-hard will continue to support Eclipse financially even after discovering the orderbook is mostly one customer, a friend of Vern Raburn and which has in all lillihood been given many delivery-positions (anyone's they want, really, in no prescribed order) in order to maintain the illusion they have 2500 orders backed by non-refundable deposits. Finally, die-hards will accpt the plane with only ABQ in place for any maintenance. Die-hards will show a propensity to call industry experts and industry watchers names, and dismiss the evidence provided that there are serious problems with the program, and the airplane. Die-hards will argue by repeating Vern Raburn false or exaggerated statements, and often refer to a promised aircraft instead of the one being delivered, as if it was so, despite a trackrecord of consistent failure for 8 years by their favorite aircraft company, Eclipse.

I think Vern's most proud of this group he has cult-ivated, and well, he should be. They will remain faithful it appears no matter what - hence the appropriate label - die-hard!

Is there an award for this? An Oscar? perhaps a Clio?

Congratulations!

Gunner said...

EO24 said:
"I think it will be easier to fly than a twin piston."
EO-
No doubt in my mind that it will be, in fair weather flight. But that's not what we train for and not what separates the competent pilot from the guy who's just getting by.

Things get tough when ATC throws us a curve, in fast deteriorating weather, with fuel critical, while moving 50% faster than we normally do, followed by a series of audio alerts and blinking lights.

Add to that the fact that you're operating at FL40 and I doubt there's a problem I could experience in a twin piston (short of onboard fire) that'll come close to the handful of tasks you need to accomplish right now in the Eclipse.
Gunner

EclipseOwner387 said...

Gunner,

Proper emergency training goes without question. High flying is an issue that needs to be addressed and understood in any of these FL410 jets. Not to be taken casually.

EclipseOwner387 said...

Yes, but early CJ's "drink enough Jet A to make A Saudi grin!" (TM)

;-)

Gunner said...

EO-
You already know how I feel about your attitude and your skill. I'm not lecturing you, but I really do want to press this point home to all:

Single Pilot jet operation has only been embraced in the last (relatively) few years. Until the Citation SP, it was pretty much expected that you'd have at least of crew of two to handle the tasks.

Now, granted, technology has come a long way in easing our burden. (The difficulties in training on the stripped down Eclipse demonstrate that.) But technology is simply a tool, not a replacement. As difficult as Mike Press is finding the training program? That's how difficult the Eclipse (or any jet) will be to fly when Mr. Murphy meets Mr. Technology...and he always does.

When that happens (except in the case of someone like Ken) there's nobody to help with the workload and, I suggest, the workload is nothing like you or I have ever experienced in a twin piston or a single turboprop.

I could be wrong, but I'd rather be competent and wrong, than incompetent and wrong. Bottom line: jets are jets; FL410 is FL410. The training and mentoring HAS to be extensive.
Gunner

Gunner said...

And stop stealing MY lines!
Gunner

cj3driver said...

Execlipser said;

CJ3: My caveat was 1.6, and there's a LOT out there in the used market, even for under $1 Mil. Is the CJ1 Single Pilot certified? Just curious.

Execlipser,
...Got the "caveat" from your 1:10PM post. But either way, as I have posted before, a comparable eclipse is more like 1.95, ordered new from the factory.
The CJ1 is single pilot certified and has been since deliveries began in 1993 (CJ).

Gunner said...

execlipser:
Just curious...are you a pilot?
Gunner

Joe said...

ATM: That was so well thought out - even after deleting and retyping it - that it'll just HAVE to be the next "The CEO," "A Tale of Two Dinosaurs," or "Paper Airplane or Fait Accompli?".

CJ: So, the answer is a resounding "No". Next delivery position with cost index considered for a base, no option E500 is $1.6. None of the options improve book performance. The standard aircraft is still very, very nice and doesn't really need to be optioned out.

I don't get the facination with needing a potty onboard. There are many models of aircraft out there with a 4-hour flight time that don't have a potty. AirTaxi flights are short enough to "go" before you "go" so you don't "go after you "go". You just about have to be in a Challenger or a Gulfstream to be able to use the potty without grossing everyone else on board out.

If you've ever used the potty on a LearJet, raise your hand.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

FYI - don't confuse 'execlipser' with 'ex_eclipser' - mose definitely not the same.

Execlipser, without specifically identifying yourself (which has been known to be hazardous to Kool Aid Factory expatriates), what, approximately, did you you (e.g., engineering, manufacturing, quality) and when, appproximately, did you do it?

This message brought to you by the J. Wellington Wimpy Aircraft Company, where the motto is "We'll gladly deliver someday, the jet you pay for today."

ExEclipser said...

Hmmm... Don't have a CLUE how that last post was attributed to JOE. I take full credit.

While I'm here, yes, Gunner, I am a pilot - CFI, Commercial, Instrument. Low timer, haven't flown anything bigger than a 172.

cj3driver said...

EO,
The Saudi's love us and we love them! keep the oil flowing....XXOO

I'll add the CJ to the list

HOU-LAX 1,100 nm 80kts headwind

Eclipse 2,259 lbs 6hrs, 4 min.
Mustang 2,574 5 hrs, 14 min.
PC12 2,531 lbs 6 hrs 1 min.
CJ3 2,916 lbs 3 hrs 26 min.
CJ1 3,284 lbs 4 hrs 46 min.

cj,mustang make 1 stop (45min)
eclipse makes 2 stops

assumes 5 persons + luggage

Yes the CJ at HSC burns 150 gallons more fuel than the Eclipse, but you could pull the power back.... still make the trip with one stop, and still beat the time of the eclipse, and still burn close to the same fuel. You could do all that, and, add three more people in the cabin.... with a potty!

ExEclipser said...

CWMOR - I'm happy where I've been, I'm happier where I'm at. Would like to keep it that way.

Gunner said...

execlipser said:
"Hmmm... Don't have a CLUE how that last post was attributed to JOE. I take full credit.
Wonder just how many Sock Puppets Vern owns? You know, the guys who have different login names for different sites; or different login names to agree with themself on the SAME site. They consider the tactic a "Force Multiplier"; I think it always backfires. My Twit Filter is now vibrating.

I call that B-U-S-T-E-D!
Gunner

WhyTech said...

Guys,

No doubt that safely operating a turbine acft in the flight levels as a traveling machine requires some knowledge and skill. But, lets not make it harder than it is. Consider that this is something that humans have demonstrated a capacity to do, and that 20 somethings are sent out solo by the military in F14s, 15s, 16s, 18s with what, 200 - 250TT?
I realize that the military has a rigorous screening process, but its also true that a light jet is a bit less demanding to fly than these airplanes.

Dont get me wrong. I am a strong advocate of the idea that more training is better and run my aviation life that way. You have to know enough to stay out of trouble, and thats going to take prior experience, good instrument skills, a type rating and mentoring to the tune of 50-100 hours depending on experience, together with appropriate recurrent training, but it can be done by ordinary mortals who are committed to do it well and safely.

WT

Gunner said...

WT-
Don't disagree with your basic point; it's hardly Rocket Science. Remember though, Mil Pilots can also punch out when they've totally screwed the pooch.
Gunner

cj3driver said...

WT,
True, true.... but why be a "test pilot" in an Eclipse after spending 1.8M ('06 price). They really should have waited on deliveries untill the plane was ready, capable as advertised. I mean No IMC, no FIKI, Next Generation avionics waiting on a plane without the first generation? come on.....

WhyTech said...

gunner said:

"Mil Pilots can also punch out when they've totally screwed the pooch."

Havent you heard? E-clips announced today a 'chute option. Will be cut in right after FIKI and NG!

WT

Gunner said...

Will be cut in right after FIKI and NG!

Let's me out. I'll be too old.
Gunner

WhyTech said...

cj3driver said:

"They really should have waited on deliveries untill the plane was ready, capable as advertised."

Complete agreement, however, they cant wait due to financing/cash flow issues.

WT

cj3driver said...

Joe said;

CJ: So, the answer is a resounding "No". Next delivery position with cost index considered for a base, no option E500 is $1.6. None of the options improve book performance. The standard aircraft is still very, very nice and doesn't really need to be optioned out.

Joe,
One can simply go the the Eclipse website, click on "build your Jet", and get a quote. The reason I used a fully optioned jet is because you need to "fully option" it to make a decent comparison to other aircraft (even then its lacking). You also assume if you order a jet, you will get it in 08 or 09 without inflation adjustments. If you belive that, then you must believe you will be behind 2,500 orders, and you must believe Eclipse is capable of delivering 500 to 700 jets per year. More realisticly if you order one now, and Eclipse gets thier act together, you will hopfully get it in 2010 (assuming Eclipse builds "realistic" orders at the same rate of the "dinosaur") Even the positions less than 100 are advertized over 1.8 million. So..... 1.6 "No"

cj3driver said...

Joe,
Who buys a base model anything?
I'll bet there will be NO Eclipses sold with zero options. Just look at Controller and check SR22, C182 for piston, or look at any of the Turboprop or Jet ads. Do you ever see a no option base model? Heck, the only way you can buy a new Mirage is with all the options.

Gunner said...

CJ-
Save your breath for REAL players. joe/execlipser's been B-U-S-T-E-D. He's not likely to return...at least not in one of those incarnations.

It's called, Trolling.
Gunner

ExEclipser said...

Gunner: Why would I immediately admit to who I am? Where else has Joe posted? I swear it was a blogspot anomaly. I couldn't repost as Joe if I wanted to. To say I'm "B-U-S-T-E-D" is pretty dumb. Point to any other post by Joe. It's hardly trolling when I continue to use my chosen moniker. Only reason I wouldn't return is because someone like you bothers me. Sorry. You're not that lucky.

CJ: My point is that you can buy a perfectly capable Eclipse without going for all the options. I've bought cars with "0" options, and I know for a fact that the majority of E500 buyers are buying with options. Doesn't mean a zero option aircraft isn't available. Show me ANY aircraft with the same performance [either current or promised] for $1.6 Mil. Ergo, there's a market. Ergo, there will be sales. Doubt if a dozen or so Eclipse-Haters is going to change that. Even when Stan hit the big time with the grievance bit, it didn't result in the mass cancellation of orders.

If this isn't the plane for you, fine. I get it. I would be so lucky to afford an Ercoupe. My only vested interest is the few shares I own - not enough to make me rich, nor enough to break me if they fold. Other than that, the same team that awarded the Collier to Gulfstream for the G550 is the same team that recognizes that there's something about that li'l E500...even with its flaws.

ExEclipser said...

Gunner, I had quite a bit of respect for you - even when we disagreed. Honest communication is always possible with intellectual respect. You've lost that. You've made personal attacks against me and others for Z E R O reason. You've lost all integrity with me. All along, I've admitted when I was wrong. I've not attacked any single person directly. So... why be such a jerk?

Gunner said...

execlipser-
I am TRULY sorry if I gave offense.

Hopefully the Eclipse computer system is not subject to the same random anomalies. Hopefully this post doesn't get posted under the moniker Happy the Clown.

B-U-S-T-E-D

Go from me now and sin no more.
Gunner

cj3driver said...

Ex,
Dont get me wrong... I was merely pointing out for comparison purposes, the Eclipse is not really a "bargain" nor is it a "revolutionary" product. I do not doubt there will be many buyers. I fact I hope there will be many more.

I am an aviation enthusiast, not an "Eclipse Hater", and do not wish the demise of Eclipse. I'm merely pointing out that in this price range there are many less risky options. I agree with many here that the management and/or marketing arm of Eclipse tends to be less than forthright. I dont see Embraer, Diamond, Adam or other companies using those tactics, so it makes Eclipse an easy target when they don't make or meet promises, while collecting money from depositors.

ExEclipser said...

I still don't understand why you say I'm busted. If I'm using two monikers, where are the other posts by "Joe"? If I were lurking, why would I be posting? By definition, trolling is coming on to stir up dissent. Since the post by "Joe" was in response to an earlier post that I made, and seeing that I immediately addressed the anomaly, your attacks are nothing more than an attempt to create havoc where there is none. I hope you enjoy your D-Jet. I sure hope it's easy to type rate in. Be careful at your next medical, though. Irrationality and tunnel vision are grounds for denial.

ExEclipser said...

CJ: You're right in that Eclipse isn't the first to come up with the VLJ concept. In fact, as mentioned before, much of FoxJet's marketing seems to have been lifted by Eclipse. The only thing Eclipse is missing are the "Zip-Seats".

I'll just have to agree to disagree with you that the aircraft is a bargain. You can get a prop job that can carry more for less, but at the cost of speed. You can get a larger twinjet for less, at the cost of being new or fuel efficient.

As I've said over and over again here, Eclipse is still very much a baby. I believe that a major overhaul in management is on order, but it'll never happen until the board replaces Vern. Until then, major growth will be limited.

airtaximan said...

execlipser,

thanks for the compliment...I appreciate it.

My question was serious - why the moniker EXeclipser?

You seem to be more like Joe? OK, kidding - seriously why execlipser?

Did you leave the company?
Did you ask for your deposit back?
Is Vern your ex-wife?

What's the nature of your ex?

You seem to agree with the company on most everything...perhaps you are giving them a grade of EXcellent?
What gives?

highfloat said...

I have relieved myself several times in my capacity as crew on the LearJet 60 - and have enjoyed each and every elimination...immensely!

Happy The Clown said...

Joe-
I'm truly sorry I confused you with execlipser.

execlipser-
Same to you. I think I now understand that these random anomalies occur. BTW, are you a pilot? You claimed, before Joe appeared, that you were a "CFI, Commercial, Instrument. Low timer, haven't flown anything bigger than a 172."

That's pretty disingenuous and makes it pretty difficult to take your presence here seriously. Now, you don't have to be a pilot to be taken seriously here; but you do, pretty much, have to be HONEST.
Best regards-
Gunner

errr, I mean, Happy.
No that's not me!
Hey, somebody take this handle off me!

Gunner said...

Happy-
That's not nice.
Gunner

Stan Blankenship said...

highfloat,

You reminded me of an event that happened back in the 70's.

A Learjet 25 charter flight, Copenhagen to Morocco carrying the Queen of Denmark her aide-de-camp and a couple of others. En route home, the aide fell ill with a bug, yeah the kind tourists pick up traveling in foreign countries.

He knew there was an emergency toilet on board and asked the crew how to use it. They told him it was just aft of the crew seats and there were curtains in the armrest that would provide some measure of privacy.

The aide located the curtain storage compartments but no curtains. With a growing urgency and sweat beginning to appear on his brow, he again asked the crew about the curtains.

About that time the co-pilot banged his palm on his forehead and said "_&^%@#$*_" (can't translate, my Danish is not that good), "The curtains are at the dry cleaners, I forgot to pick them up!"

The poor aide had to do a command performance in front of the queen.

Black Tulip said...

With the healthy discussion on aircraft performance versus price, one machine has been overlooked - the Twin Commander (former Turbo Commander) 1000:

295 knot cruise speed in the mid-twenties.

35,000 foot ceiling with a 9,800 foot cabin altitude.

1,800 nautical mile range at FL350.

700 pound full-fuel useful load.

All glass panel and digital autopilot by Meggitt (not advanced, but very servicable).

Excellent short field and high/hot/humid performance.

$800 per hour direct operating cost.

Price tag a little over $2 million. Values run up and down with the stock market and disposable income. The trend has been good. To paraphrase Will Roger's comment about land, "They ain't makin' 'em anymore. Not since the early '80s." Beech is still making KingAirs but that is 'a passenger's airplane, the Commander is a pilot's airplane'.

The high-wing multi-turboprop configuration is durable. The U.S. military could operate most anything they wanted. And they have wanted to operate the C-130 for a half century or so. The Commander is a scaled-down version - a workhorse if not a show horse.

Excellent factory support from Twin Commander.

Several training choices - flight simulator, flight training device or experienced instructor.

A good insurance market with reasonable transition for pilots with multiengine experience.

New thick windows greatly reduced the beat of the props. On most trips passengers are conversing without headsets... very jet-like.

Enormous baggage space both pressurized and non-pressurized.

Two relief tubes - one stowed under the front left seat and another all the way aft, behind a curtain, and next to the potty.

And best of all... the aircraft is not vaporware. There is no debate over actual perfomance versus predicted specifications. No waiting required and probably a reasonable investment as the VLJs will never have the range, payload, cabin size or short field performance. About a hundred 1000s are flying worldwide. Check out 'AC95' on FlightAware on most any day.

For those mainly concerned about airplane envy and bragging rights, consider the following. At FL 340 or 350, you cross the path of an Airbus or Boeing airliner. You see that the jet is dragging a contrail and realize that your Commander is too. The airliner asks ATC, "What kind of plane was that...with props?" ATC replies, "An Aero Commander, RVSM approved." This conversation occurs about once a year.

Yeah, yeah I know that anything other than Eclipse is off-topic, but many pilots require a real aircraft today, while awaiting a paper aircraft tomorrow.

Think about how many years of flying each of us is allocated.

For the faithful, how long can you hold your breath waiting for the Eclipse 500? If not for this question, why would this web log exist?

Black Tulip

ExEclipser said...

ATM: Former Employee. Left for a job at a 40% pay increase and compensation for overtime. Which airtaxi are you the man of?

BT: Eclipse was naive when they published guarantees. Foolish to think they could get laminar flow with second-rate manufactured deice boots. You take the plane that David Crowe and Mike Press are flying today, without the aero mods and without the bugs infecting AVIO and told people 8 years ago that it could be had for $1.6 Mil, there would still have been a line of folks willing to put down a deposit.

There have been plenty of opportunities for folks with deposits to have backed out with a refund. They've chosen not to. Speculation sales are back up to a premium after a slump that never actually left the position holder without equity.

The biggest problem with the company is the overhype and underdelivery.

Yeah, the Commanders are nice. Vern has one.

highfloat said...

Stan,

Great story! Those early series Lears were hell on privacy.

Reminds of a time when I was flying KingAir's single pilot and was caught short in a big way on the way to Aspen for a pick up.

Telling ATC you'll be 'off frequency' for a few minutes - $150

Thinking about how it will look if you're found on the aft potty with your pants down by the NTSB - $250

Explaining to accounting why there was a $75 dollar lav service in Aspen when you flew there empty - PRICELESS.

Just a dispatch from the front lines - sorry to drag us down that far...

flyger said...

ExEclipser said...

Looking for certified aircraft that can carry 700 lbs at full fuel for 1250 NM at 370 kts - all for under $2.5 Mil. Hmmm - only one. Called the E500


Nope, the 500 can't do 700 pounds payload, 1250 nm, and 370 knots. I think it would have a hard time doing the last two individually, especially the speed. We don't yet know if it can make the first since we have no weight numbers on any delivered airplane.

Also, your numbers are the claims, unverified, of a future model not yet delivered or certified. Eclipse fanatics always talk about how good some future airplane will be, not what they are getting now. Then when the future arrives, it falls short and then there is yet another carrot on a stick about some future airplane being better. How many times does it have to happen?

With any jet purchase, the three big vendor questions are: who makes the engines, who makes the avionics, and who will provide the training. I think Eclipse is 0 for 3 on their original choices. They did achieve being "disruptive", to themselves.

airtaximan said...

"Speculation sales are back up to a premium after a slump that never actually left the position holder without equity"

Umm...YUP, the speculators are making some cash, but the market is still flush with sub "factory price" offers. Check out controller (I know, not definative, but indicative of the market) - there's more listings today than a few weeks ago - this IS a surprise.

The ads are looking more and more like the discount IS the thing people are after. "lowest price"... "below factory"...Lowest deposit" language all over the place. Many 2008 deliveries in the 1000-1500 positions being offered as well...

I still question why anyone would place a deposit (except for a museum who wanted to guarantee an e-clips echibit no matter what) when you will be able to buy a plane "off the tarmac" in a few months, based on the delivery schedule promoted by Vern. They run out of orders pretty soon. Why not wait and see, and just buy one, they HAVE to produce a lot of them, or they are priced out of the market...

g'nite

cj3driver said...

Stan, Highfloat,
I love those stories, I'm still laughing...... Reminds when I was learning to fly, first solo cross country and on the return trip I learned not to drink too much Iced Tea when ordering the $100 hamburger. On my way home I'm in my trusty 172 when I realized I'm not going to make it. The more you think about it, the worse it gets. I found a red plastic flash lite, emptied the batteries and filled it with great releif. Screwed the top back on and felt like a King. I'll be damned if there wasnt a tiny hole in the bottom of the flashlite. So there I am, one hand on the controls and the other covering the pinhole on the bottom of the lite. Now what.... I'm not going to be able the land the plane this way. So, I slowed the plane to 65KTS and opened the window. I was over the El Toro marine base and was able to empty the contents through the tip out. I can honestly say " I learned about flying from that".

forward-observer said...

Cessna invented the VLJ.

Lest we forget.....

cj3driver said...

Thanks Fwd
There you go Ex,
over 700 lbs payload, 423 KTS and 1350 NM. Wonder what the projected price was in 1959?

WhyTech said...

f-o said:

"Cessna invented the VLJ."

The Paris Jet gets my vote for first VLJ. First flight 1954, actually made it into production, and you can still buy one.

WT

HiFlyer said...

It looks as if the natives are beginning to get a little restless. The 5/19 post on the owner's web asking Eclipse why there is only going to be one pilot per week trained has not been answered by Eclipse. That post also mentioned very little activity in the manufacturing area observed during a recent plant visit.

Apparently only two mentor pilots have been trained and the first 20 deliveries can expect to wait up to 60 days after delivery for their training. I was under the impression that there had been quite a few mentors trained and was quite surprised to see Eclipse admit to ony two.

BD5 Believer said...

Stan has asked on several times for someone to provide real empty wieghts and CG locations for some of the delivered a/c.

I remain curiuos why we have not seen any real data yet?

Forget the fact that none of the "deliveries" have left the nest for a moment - have not the owners had a chance to even see the full delivery paperwork, which includes the actual W&B for that a/c along with the AFM for that aircraft. Can't have an Airworthyness Cert without the W&B....so why have we not seen this data?

Gunner said...

hiflyer-
Well that certainly flies in the face of information that Ken Myer has provided in the past weeks as concerns the number of owners trained or in training. Perhaps Ken will explain.

bd5-
I'm more than willing to be corrected by The Faithful on this; but I believe there was a comment sometime back that the actual AFM's were released to owners with a non-disclosure agreement.

EO, do you recall anything to that effect? Ken?
Gunner

JetProp Jockey said...

One thing that will be interesting to observe is what level of service do Eclipse owners recieve both during and after the garantee period.

Several of the poster on this blog own JetProps and have received the highest level of support from JetProp both before and after our money was paid and after the Darwin was not longer responsible to fix anything.

On the other hand, Piper is not all that great at supporting the fleet of older aircraft.

airtaximan said...

hiflyer,

your comment:
"and the first 20 deliveries can expect to wait up to 60 days after delivery for their training"

If they are training, and I believe they must be training some pilots, a "priority" customer comes to mind. "Priority" regarding amount of deposit place for each aircraft, timing of deposits and progress payments, the rubber delivery positions tailored to their needs, "delivery" date flexibility according to their needs, schedules for mods, fixes, upgrades and NGs, MRO service and of course training....

Dayjet.

Lloyd said...

CJ3

Your numbers are in error for the PC-12 HOU-LAX, 5:05 No stops and 2,075 lbs fuel at high speed cruise. These numbers are from our flight planner and typically beat the numbers by 10% or better.

Lloyd

cj3driver said...

LLoyd,
Did you plug in the 80 kt headwind?
With out the headwind I get 1969 lbs and 4 hrs 38 min.

cj3driver said...

Numbers I get for a no wind trip.

HOU-LAX 1,100 nm (NO WIND)

Eclipse 1,694 lbs 4hrs, 35 min. *
Mustang 1,896 3 hrs, 33 min.
PC12 1,969 lbs 4 hrs 38 min.
CJ3 2,530 lbs 2 hrs 55 min.
CJ1 2,503 lbs 3 hrs 18 min.
Jetprop 1,158 5 hrs 15 min. *
TBM 1,515 lbs 3 hrs 45 min.
B200 2,164 lbs 4 hrs 10 min.
Premier 2,437 lbs 2 hrs 45 min.

* Jetprop and eclipse makes 1 45 min. fuel (and potty!) stop
assumes 5 persons + luggage

Throw in the westbound wind and the numbers will change drasticly for the slower planes.

cj3driver said...

The Eclipse numbers are derived using the projected numbers by Eclipse, I have not seen actual information published. If anyone has the actual, I would love to play with the numbers.

Lloyd said...

CJ3

Sorry did not catch the 80kt headwind. Makes more sense now.

Lloyd

ExEclipser said...

N110DJ is out of the nest enroute to Gainsville through Rogers, AR.

Ken Meyer said...

CJ3 driver wrote,

"Numbers I get for a no wind trip.

HOU-LAX 1,100 nm (NO WIND)...

The Eclipse numbers are derived using the projected numbers by Eclipse"


Then I think you must have entered them wrong. First off, neither KHOU to KLAX nor KDWH to LAX is 1100nm.

And the Eclipse (final version) is demonstrated to fly 1125 nm in no wind with NBAA IFR reserves using 1302 lbs of fuel.

The heavy headwind would split the group of planes into those capable of making the trip and those not, but the extra range of the CJ1 comes at a high penalty in ongoing expenses.

BTW, what year CJ1 do you think you can buy used for $1.6 million?

It's an interesting comparison. I'd like to see us put together some real numbers and work it through properly. I don't think you've done that judging from the quick check I did of the numbers I have readily available.

Ken

gadfly said...

WhyTech

You never explained about that "chute option". When the crew bales, is the chute for the pilot? . . . or the plane?

'Just carry a long drop cord . . . it's bound to catch on something.

gadfly

highfloat said...

This just in...

Just got off the phone with 'Damon' who was the PIC of N110DJ that landed minutes ago in Rogers,AK for a fuel stop on the way to Florida.

Introduced myself as a DayJet member (which I am) and asked him point blank why they did the flight at FL270 (outside of RVSM airspace.) Damon stated that "no, we couldn't fly in RVSM airspace" had "No LOA" and most interestingly "we're not even gonna bother with all of that because the plane and fuel burns do just fine at FL270." This of course is on a flight that lasted almost 2.5 hours.

Wow! Not gonna bother with it - that's great. Why bother with flying above weather, fuel efficiency, or mountain wave turbulence, etc. Translation - by the time this flying laptop is rebooted DayJet will be long gone so let's just get DayJetting!

I submit to all that we need to up the ante for Vern and Co. by interviewing and debriefing pilot's ourselves to cut through the fog of war so to speak. It would be great to have a separate section of the blog devoted to in-flight analysis and commentary.

Thoughts?

highfloat said...

Also interesting to note that if you go direct from abq to gainesville you go NOWHERE near Rogers, AR.

Of course if you can't fly over or make small deviations around weather due to altitude and navigation equipment restrictions then you most certainly fly all over the sky as long as it is blue and you can pick up a VOR and you wet your pants.

Gotta love this plane!

airtaximan said...

highfloat:

nice intel..

I imagine FIKI is an option as well?

Pretty pathetic.

Ken Meyer said...

The DayJet pilots are just validating what Eclipse has been claiming for a long time. Whenever the argument has been made that the Eclipse might wind up relegated to the twenties, the company has countered with the extraordinarily (for a jet) fuel efficiency that the plane has.

And it actually is pretty efficient. At FL270, the final version EA500 gets .76 nm per pound at longrange cruise (270 KTAS) and .61 nm per pound at highspeed cruise (365 KTAS). For reference, a TBM700 at intermediate cruise gets about 272 KTAS on 305 pph, which yields .89 nm per pound.

Translation--when held low, the Eclipse 500 can be operated at single-engine turboprop speeds with efficiency that is pretty close to a single engine turboprop (and better than a twin-engine turboprop). Or it can go fast and still get the same fuel efficiency as a Mustang all the way up at FL380. Pretty efficient.

So, yep, I can see why DayJet might decide they're not all that interested in flying high when their hops will tend to be 500 nm or less.

Ken

airtaximan said...

Ken:

heck, cars do may of these flights at sea level.

You and your plane (I now refuse to call it a jet) are both a complete joke.

Pathetic joke, I might add, as well as a hoax. Promises, promises...

Keep up the die-hard support...the laughs are worth reading your pathetic justifications.

enjoy your plain.

airtaximan said...

hifloat,

do you have any intention of using Dayjet? or are you just one of the 600 folks who signed up to their website?

Niner Zulu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gunner said...

That's "the beauty of" Le Petit. It flies in clear skies at turboprop altitudes just as well as it will soon fly in IMC at jet altitudes. It's not one, but Three Planes in One! It's a Jet, it's a Turboprop, it's an Experimental.

"Eclipse Aviation:
Choose your spin flavor and GO!"
Gunner

airtaximan said...

Gunner,

"Three Planes in One! It's a Jet, it's a Turboprop, it's an Experimental"

Depends, of course which paper you are looking at:

The PR
The Guarantees
The Promised Fixes and Upgrades
The TC

take your pick... but under no circumstances may you look at the actual airplane being paid for and (not really) delivered.

sorry folks...this IS a non-starter.

Niner Zulu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gunner said...

The sound NinerZulu has just dropped on us is, I believe, the second wheel coming off this train.

From these posts, it appears that Eclipse has been BandAid-ing deliveries, training and service for some time in order to keep the Press Releases flowing out and the Progress Payments flowing in. Everything they promise is right around the corner; every thing thy delivery takes way longer than that and is hannded over, half finished. This apparently includes their Training Program.

How many times must it be said? Le Petit really is not ready for Prime Time. Period. They REALLY REALLY REALLY need to hunker down, get the design finished, get the training in place, get the maintenance in place and THEN start delivering aircraft. To continue doing things this way is simply an insult to the Aviation Community; and borders on fraud against the Depositors and Investors.
Gunner

airtaximan said...

"Ken's World"

(er,

I hade the exact same thought while reading your post, PLUS:

E-clips should hire Ken as an official rep (if he is not already being paid for his time, creativity and undying support for e-clips on this blog) becasue he does a tremendous job for them. He is a better advocate, salesman and advocate than anyne except Vern himself!

What I am reading nowadays, plus the quantity and discounts still available on Controller, even for positions in the 1000 range, is really, really telling.

Sad.

anonymous avionics engineer said...

I am sitting in another Avionics company's facility, when I get a Microsoft emergency update that will install in 2 minutes. Then I get the mandatory re-boot message. 4 reboots later, I haven't gotten another in about 3 minutes now. In other words, the fix had errors in it.
I am just wondering how long it will be before someone is sitting in IMC to the deck, at no higher than FL270 when this happens to their Avio NG - Not Generally working.
ROFLMAO ...

Gunner said...

AT-
I'm not gonna kick Ken when he's down. This is actually bad news for all of us.

But Vern really HAS TO STOP. Of course he's the target of constant ridicule and derision by the Aviation Community; that's what you reap when you treat that Industry as though it's members are dolts.

Come to think of it, Ken, Alexa and others, I think there's a lesson in there for you also. ;-)
Gunner

cj3driver said...

Ken Said;

....Then I think you must have entered them wrong. First off, neither KHOU to KLAX nor KDWH to LAX is 1100nm.

Sorry, Ken,

I should have said “LA area to Houston area”, but regardless, the numbers are correct for 1,100 nm. If we make it real world, and use the actual 1205 plus 40 nm for routing and add fuel for typical low altitude for departure and arrival procedures used at those actual congested airports, use typical WB(90kts@410) winds, max payload, (to keep it even remotely comparable to the completion), then the Eclipse will require an additional stop… making a total of 3 stops for this trip. That’s assuming it will make the paper projections. None of the other aircraft in the comparison need more than 1 stop under this scenario.

cj3driver said...

Ken said;

……BTW, what year CJ1 do you think you can buy used for $1.6 million?

Ken,

I don’t think you could buy a used CJ1 (‘00-04) for much less than 3 mil, but I have seen strait CJ’s (‘93-99) advertised for just under 2mil.

Do you think you can buy an actual “flying” Eclipse for 1.6 million? ...I mean…. could I write a check for 1.6 million and fly away in an aircraft tomorrow the same way I could paying two mill for a CJ? No position, no promise of delivery, no promise of performance, no promise of service and parts,….. sometime in the future? I’ll bet not.

Maybe there will be a resale of a “flying” Eclipse in the coming months, but, I think if Eclipse makes good on its promises, and the plane eventually performs as you say, even the resale prices will be more than 1.6 million. If the company goes TangoUniform, you may be right. I could probably pick one up for less than 1.6M.

Gunner said...

cj3-
You'll soon learn to be VERY precise with your words when Ken's around. His favorite past-time here is picking up on non-essential phrases in a post and attacking them tooth and nail; I think he believes the obvious and clumsy slight of hand goes un-noticed. But then, he HAS spent too much time in Vern's World.

I'm no longer put off by the nit-picking style, especially as he obviously believes such comebacks are substantive. Some people are just wired that way (usually women I date). I find them amusing, if allowed to turn my head and privately roll my eyes.

Ken-
No personal offense intended. Simply catching the FNG's up.
Gunner

cj3driver said...

BTW Ken,

One can be typed in a CJ in 10 days at a huge number of locations throughout the country, by a huge number of instructors and signed of by a huge number of Examiners. ....There is a huge number of pilots already typed, if you would like a mentor to help you fly to a huge number of service facilities. And... as you can see from my previous post the differace in fuel burn is not that Huge.... considering....

Black Tulip said...

Ken,

If your going to get typed in the Citation or CitationJet go to Mitch Ange of Arizona Type Ratings of Scottsdale. He's tops and uses both the aircraft and SimCom's Citation II simulator next door.

Black Tulip

Black Tulip said...

A PARABLE

Some years ago our company founder was selected Inventor of the Year by the Museum of Science. Several of us took turns manning a booth at the Inventor's Fair held at the Museum.

A nearby booth contained an interesting but unfinished machine. It was a four-foot diameter wheel festooned with capacitors, inductors and switches around the rim. Magnets were mounted on a stationary frame. It was attended by an elderly gentlemen who was proud of his soon-to-be-completed Perpetual Motion Machine.

A young engineer examined the gentleman's invention and began to ask penetrating questions about the laws of thermodynamics. As the hotshot bored in, the old man began to get uncomfortable. Just then another man stepped over and asked to young engineer to step away for a minute.

I followed them and heard the man give the 'kid' this advice, "Don't be too hard on him and his Perpetual Motion Machine. What would an Inventor's Fair be without such a machine? He can dream. We want the old gentlemen to come back to the next Fair." The chastened young man moved on.

With this in mind, I suggest we be nice to Eclipse Aircraft supporters, depositors or investors who contribute to this blog.

Black Tulip