Tuesday, May 01, 2007


Time for Some Sunlight on the Order Book

A reader of this blog was surfing with google and discovered some interesting material - minutes of an August 25, 2005 meeting of the New Mexico State Investment Council.

At 9:55 am Gov. Richardson showed up late for the meeting but in time for the discussion on New Mexico's $20 million investment in the Eclipse program. From the transcript:

"Mr. Denker (speaking on behalf of Eclipse) discussed the market. He said Eclipse is now beginning to receive orders in the fractional marketplace and expects to receive an order for ten corporate aircraft by the end of this year. He stated that their largest customer, Day Jet, has ordered 1,400 aircraft and plans to initiate an air taxi service in the Southeastern U.S.
"

"Governor Richardson commented on the impressive number of orders Eclipse has written up to date (2,260+) and spoke to New Mexico’s pursuit of more aircraft presence through legislative tax initiatives and the fact that Eclipse is well known in Europe and Japan."

Denker's statement conflicts with what is reported by others and repeated on the Eclipse web site. These reports claim 239 firm DayJet orders with options for 70 more.


And there is even greater conflict when considering DayJet has only raised $50 million to fund what many believe to be a highly risky venture.

Perhaps the August 25, 2005 represents outdated information; minutes for the April 25, 2006 meeting provided an update:

"Mr. Birk (presumed to work for the SIC) reported that Eclipse Aviation is currently on track for a second quarter certification for the 500, and their order book remains very strong. He said they are currently working through the last remaining issue on certification."

For copies of the full minutes go to www.eclipsecritic.net

UPDATE: May 2, 2007 9:00 pm

Ed “George Jetson” Iacobucci & DayJet’s 1,400 Eclipse 500 Orders by Karen Di Piazza

http://www.charterx.com/resources/article.aspx?id=2733

286 comments:

1 – 200 of 286   Newer›   Newest»
mirage00 said...

Ughhhh.... This is so tiresome.

Stan, first the airplane isn’t going to make the performance numbers promised, next the airplane won't get certified, next the airplane can't be built correctly, next the airplane is not safe to fly; and now we question the orders size. When does it end?

Ken, E387 - Again, thanks for keeping it real.

Observer said...

From AIN online, not really United....

Two Pilot Training Partners Join Eclipse Program
Eclipse Aviation selected two companies-Higher Power Aviation of Dallas and Flight Simulation of the Netherlands-to run the model 500 VLJ pilot training program. Flight Simulation will oversee the Eclipse 500 training program, and Higher Power instructors will train U.S. pilots at Eclipse's Albuquerque, N.M. headquarters and eventually at Eclipse's new training facility at nearby Double Eagle II Airport. Flight Simulation will train European pilots and might eventually be responsible for Eclipse 500 pilot training in other regions. Pre-training flight skills assessments and type rating training will be done using flight training devices made by simulator manufacturer Opinicus, which also makes the Eclipse 500 full-motion level-D simulator. The level-D simulators are expected to be ready for training later this year. In 2004, Eclipse had signed an agreement for United Airlines' training division to run the Eclipse type-rating program, but that agreement was terminated in early March.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

So Eclipse reported to the State of New Mexico in August of 2005 that 62% of their order book was held by ONE customer? Seems strangely close to the figure Vern reportedly gave when asked to define the 'air taxi' market as a portion of the order book at EAC.

Even being generous as to a volume discount, that would require north of $1.4B JUST for aircraft, PLUS parts and spares and any GSE, PLUS ground infrastructure, PLUS aircrew (I understand DayJet was figgering 5 per plane or 7,000 pilots which would be over half a Beeeeeelion dollars JUST for pilot salary and bennies at a paltry $50K\yr).

Yes, you read that right, 7000 pilots, and $525,000,000 for salary and bennies at ONLY $50K\yr - for comparison, that is more pilots than Delta Airlines employs.

Just follow the numbers - they do not add up.

Hmmmmmm. Curiouser and curiouser.

I do know that at one point it was reported that internally the total order book was discussed as being over 4000, including a lot of options ~ circa 2003. This was, of course, almost entirely fleet orders, with less than 900 private individual customers.

That figger included fleet customer names which have yet to be announced publicly - at least as far as signing with Eclipse.

What do you say when it is cold outside ;^).

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

What is tiresome is seeing the same peron, oops I mean persons, regurgitating the same lame Vern-approved defenses of the indefensible.

Eclipse lied about not being at NBAA, period. Wing bushings, windshields and cockpit side windows problems were only revealed several WEEKS later.

Eclipse is lying about the size and makeup of the orderbook - either to you, their customer, or to the State of New Mexico, an investor that ponied up tens of millions of dollars in direct investment and many millions more in tax abatements and bonds.

Eclipse knowingly delivered aircraft that were not usable for GPS nav or in RVSM airspace 28 days after delivery because the GPS database expired and there was no certified or installed means to update it. This is SHAMEFUL.

Eclipse is delivering a $1.5M aircraft with limited autopilot functionality, no FIKI, no IMC, and no FMS functions and a person, oops I mean persons, congratulates himself, oops I mean themselves, with a big pat on the back and a hearty laugh.

Eclipse says it has delivered a series of aircraft but they remain in ABQ for the most part and do not appear to have been certified or registered like normal aircraft.

Ughhhh indeed.

And with each calculates press release or attempted defense against the concerns raised here and elesewhere, some person, oops I mean persons, cry foul and run home to momma calling the other guys 'haters'.

Thanks for keeping it UNreal, but really funny.

It ends when Eclipse is delivering aircraft that, at the time of delivery, actually do all the things they said it would do.

It ends when Eclipse has a track record of meeting its admittedly lofty goals on time, on budget, and safely.

It ends when you, and Ken and EO24 and hundreds of others are safely enjoying the little jet and finding that it, hopefully, costs what they said it would to operate and does what they said it would do.

mountainhigh said...

FYI, seems that two people can post under the same name. I just noticed that "observer" posted an AIN article. I've been using the "observer" handle since Aug 06, but the last two posts by "observer" were not made by me.

Enough of the housekeeping details. Easy fix, just changed my name.

Stan, by the way, Brian Birk, does not work for SIC. He used to be the point man for Washington Mutual (at the SIC). The company was overseeing the SIC investments (due diligence, etc). State of NM fired Fort Washington because they wouldn't rubberstamp what the state wanted to invest in, for example, some spaceport companies, etc. I believe State of NM sued Fort Washington (issue has been settled, I believe). B. Birk, left Fort Washington, and formed his own investment management company. Interestingly, when bids were let by the State of NM to replace Fort Washington, Birk's new company was chosen. This appeared to be some type of sweetheart deal. "Business as usual" in New Mexico, I guess.

Another interesting tidbit. Other aviation companies have wanted to relocate to NM. The Guv has said he wants to make NM an aviation mecca. However, one company was told by the NM State Investment Council, that they represented competition to Eclipse, and therefore the SIC would not consider economic incentives for the Co.

Guess the state has decided to back one horse and ride it all the way (hopefully not into the ground).

Forgive me for going way back to a topic. The origin of the term air taxi. Chris Finoff (spelling?) was one of the original marketing folks for Eclipse. He coined the term (at least that's what he says). They (e-clips) had an idea for a product but needed a market that could generate a lot of hype (and the money which follows hype). I believe he left Eclipse some time ago and is now living in CO. Last I knew he was working as a consultant.

FlightCenter said...

Here is an interesting quote from Vern. Found on the Eclipse website.

http://www.eclipseaviation.com/index.php?option=com_newsroom&task=viewarticle&id=977&Itemid=51

"When you fail, failure's not bad in itself," he said. "I came out of an industry where failure is, in reality, sort of expected. You actually kind of get rewarded for failure. But when you lie about it or when you try to cover it up and you try to claim that it's not your problem, that's when problems occur."

hummer said...

It seems to me the less orders Eclipse has at this point, the better. Uncontrolled growth in a business (especially manufacturing) is about the same as uncontrolled growth in the body (cancer). . .they both will kill you. So forget the hype and consolidate operations so they perform smoothly and highly efficient. Go to Europe and hype sales and orders to secure more cash.
After that go global to secure more cash. Put out deliveries slowly and quiet the critics.
Get the bugs ironed out and training working well. 135 approval is critical.
just my 2 cents.
I'll buy one. . .on the secondary market at a discount.
And if any are sale for a large discount. . . . let me know!

mirage00 said...

It's amazing... I wonder what you guys would have said when Kennedy promised to put a man on the moon by 1969. Stans blog would be titled "Mooncritic"

It's so sad how the "can't do it" mind thinks.

FlightCenter said...

Here is an interesting article in AIN (October 17, 2006) in which Vern is quoted on various topics recently raised in this forume including the number of aircraft in production and the Eclipse order book.

He states that he will build 525 airplanes in 2007.

He states that the order book is over 2,500 aircraft and over $3B.

The first 160 aircraft will be delivered for less than $1M.

The company currently has 26 aircraft in production.

The final quote is quite interesting given the discussion on this forum.

“There are some people who think I am insane about the size of the marketplace,” Raburn said. “But since Oshkosh we’ve sold 100 additional aircraft,”

FlightCenter said...

Here is another article dated November 10, 2005 on Eclipse orders.

Eclipse order book is quoted as 2,350 orders.

http://ain.gcnpublishing.com/content/news/single-news-page/article/eclipse-citation-avanti-fleet-orders-announced/?no_cache=1&cHash=27cf748b9a

FlightCenter said...

For those who have asked for some links to industry VLJ projections from Honeywell and Rolls-Royce. This is from a December 2005 AIN Article.

"Honeywell sees potential for sales of 800 to 900 such aircraft to corporate flight departments through 2015. This is in addition to the 3,700 to 4,600 ultra-light/personal jets to be spoken for by owner-pilots."

"Rolls-Royce last year referred to very light jet contenders (aircraft with mtows of 5,000 to 10,000 pounds) as “microjets” and called for deliveries of some 8,000 aircraft in the next 20 years,"

http://ain.gcnpublishing.com/content/news/single-news-page/article/honeywell-rolls-royce-forecasts-predict-several-more-good-years/?no_cache=1&cHash=c1438b9842

If the links don't work, you can go to ainonline.com and search for Eclipse. There are 30 articles listed. This particular article is the last one listed on page 2 of the search results.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Somebody wake me up when Mirage has something cogent and interesting to say.

To compare Eclipse to the Apollo program is the single most inane, assinine and delusional thing I may have ever heard in all my time on this pale blue dot.

As one who defended Eclipse receiving the Collier trophy (about which I am rethinking my position), and knowing many of the good people at Eclipse, this is simply pure drivel.

Going to the moon had not been done, period - the technical challenges were truly monumental and even with the best minds on earth working on it, it killed 3 good men and almost killed 3 more, in less than a dozen launches.

By comparison to the wonderjet, we have been building airplanes for over 100 years, jets for over 40 years, bizjets for over 30 years, and we have been flying behind EFIS for over 20 years. Hell, FSW has been used in Delta rockets and non-structural airframe parts for over a decade.

This airplane was revolutionary, 15 years ago (yes, BEFORE it was envisioned), today it is an also ran at best. Perhaps it will be a decent family jet or ego-booster for the middle-aged bidness man if they get the bugs worked out - but a mini 737 it ain't.

Disfunctional management and nonexistent internal communication ensured that years ago, constantly moving design targets ensured that years ago, and the monumental ego in the corner office overlooking the flight line ensured that each and every day since the concept began.

This little plane in commercial service is equivalent to parking all the school buses in LA and taking the kids to school one or two at a time in a Yugo - that is the reality of it all.

Those of us who have 10, 15, 20 or more years in industry are not a bunch of backwards looking luddites you dolt, we simply know what it actually takes to design, build, certify and deliver aircraft, which is more than can be said for the head-shed in ABQ.

If feel-good press releases and inspiring rounds of koombaya led by our favorite napoleonic CEO are enough for you to risk your finances and your family's safety on a turbine powered pipe-dream so be it - just don't point that little lawn-dart in my general direction and don't clog up my airspace or cause me to have to pay user fees to support your ego's Jet-A habit.

You seem to miss this every time someone says it Mirage (as does Ken, you guys are a lot alike) but we keep trying to tell you - we do want to see Eclipse succeeed, we do want to see you and Ken and EO24 and others actually receive a jet in exchange for your unsecured investment in a questionable start-up, we want to see you safely and reliably enjoying your little jet.

But at the same time, we see troubling indications about transparency and commitment to safety (lack therof), we see disconcerting news from inside the FAA, and we see Vern telling all the 'dinosaurs' that after literally hundreds of thousands of airframes and billions of miles flown that they do not really know how to design or build planes.

We share our concerns about the design and fabrication of the wonderjet because they will be sharing the skies with us.

We share our concerns about the safety culture at Eclipse because if they DO succeed in enabling a new air-taxi concept thousands of people will be travelling on the wonderjet.

We share our concerns about the nature of the company and its' management because aviation is always in a risky position with the general public and every misstep, no matter by who, can have massive implications and be subject to the law of unintended consequences (read that 'user fees' thanks Vern, you @$$hole).

FlightCenter said...

I found a Honeywell news release summarizing their market forecast. It is dated October 15, 2006.

http://www.aia-aerospace.org/stats/resources/Honeywell2006-Outlook.pdf

"Total demand potential over a 10-year period is estimated to be in the range of 4,000 very light personal jets. When combined with new-generation low-cost aircraft carried in the Very Light segment of the Business Aviation Outlook, the total deliveries exceed 5,000 aircraft over the next 10 years and fall directly in the range predicted by the 2005 survey."

Honeywell states that these numbers do not include the air-taxi market.

Stan Blankenship said...

mirage00,

If you would like me to change the subject, I could write about other things, readers send me plenty of ideas.

Here is a recent example:

"I had the nice task of spending $10 million to build a factory to manufacture these parts at automotive rates.

We were good at it and have thousands of parts in stock that the company cannot deliver to Eclipse as they cannot keep up with the delivery's."

mirage00 said...

Ok, my apologies to all comparing the Apollo mission to Eclipse. I was merely trying to make a point.

Nobody rises to low expectations.

redtailhawk said...

Fishguts: "Those of us who have 10, 15, 20 or more years in industry are not a bunch of backwards looking luddites you dolt, we simply know what it actually takes to design, build, certify and deliver aircraft, which is more than can be said for the head-shed in ABQ."

you yutz. you may not like the company management, but get real. the same engineers that you praise having 10, 15, 20 years of design experience and wonderous know-how, are the same ones that designed the eclipse. do you think these were new engineers just out of college?

airtaximan said...

hummer,

they already have 1200 employees, and have promised their suppliers big orders in return for discounted prices.... I think your reasoning is correct, but NOT in the cards...

...and I do not use the "Cards" analogy loosely

thebigriper said...

mirage00

Apology accepted. My apologies for mishandling your handle. I regretted it after I sent it and should have rescinded. Here's to good future discussions that are civil and courteous from both sides.....yeah, right.

EclipseOwner387 said...

I am sure you guys saw Capricorn One. Our moon mission was all a scam like the Eclipse program. Now they have something in common!!

;-)

For any newbies to the blog - I AM JOKING!

airtaximan said...

redtail,

you know nothing...

you say: "the same engineers that you praise having 10, 15, 20 years of design experience and wonderous know-how, are the same ones that designed the eclipse."

This is not even close - this plane is the outgrowth of an abortion from Burt Rutan called the V-jet. The undying desire to remain faithful for years, has resulted in a bastard plane. All of this is directed from the TOP DOWN at e-clips since 1998.

In today's day and age, and with all the expereince and money e-clips has burned, there's NO ENGINEERING REASON for the stupid 5/6 seat plane, with all the performance misses, quality problems, CG and other problems...EXCEPT Vern and his executive team of "die-hards".

Sorry hawkster, you are WAY off on this one...and Maisefield off in the corner is proof. He tried...they did not listen...they knew better.

Ask youself one simple question: no one would pay Williams for the FJX-2 technology, except VErn. It was scrapped. No one would make the rediculous move and trust Avidyne with a "revolutionary" glass cockpit, and pay them, except Vern...How arrogant and dumb can one be? He listened to no one... nice moves, all in the garbage, now.

You are way off...

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Fishguts, it's like a childish play on my moniker, oh you kill me redtailhawk, that is really funny - you are surely one cunning linguist - so clever.

If you have to ask, you don't know who did the design - many younger engineers and a slew of contractors from what I understand - at least the first two three times it was designed.

Many have left and few of the ex-Eclipsers I know have much nice to say - unlike say ex-Gulfstream or ex-Cessna or ex-Boeing folks I know.

You may not know what it takes to design and certify so read my post carefully - I was criticizing the head-shed, in airplane terms that is the same as mahogany row, the ivory tower, the management team.

Nice try but you are the weakest link, good-bye.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Mirage, apology re: the space program accepted - stand up thing.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

EO24, that was funny, I don't care who you are, that was funny right there.

Major props (sorry fan blades)!

thebigriper said...

The rhetoric from both sides gets pretty grating a lot of the time. The frustrating part is that I can see some real promise of very interesting discourse that is all too often disrupted by really petty comments and then an extremely rapid escalation to the point that no further civilized discussion can be accomplished. Both sides are very guilty of this. Too bad because there is some real hope of very enjoyable discussions surrounding differing viewpoints and I have often found that these are the kinds of discussions where one can learn the most. Won't happen here though. Too much polarization and not enough courtesy.

I would like to make a point though. I know that the die-hard Eclipsers are very skeptical about the motives of many of the critics. I can't speak for those critics that are here because they were potential buyers but I think I can offer a viewpoint from someone who has been in the business for quite a while.
I don't resent Eclipse for their daring to do something new and great. I do, however, question their integrity. I have been involved with businesses and organizations in this industry that misrepresented themselves for their own personal gain. It is extremely damaging and I have little respect for those that do so. Eclipse is too much in this vein. I watch this blog to see how this will play out. I believe that Eclipse will get their comeuppance and will have to reorganize at some point in the near future. The house of cards just can not stand as it is. Mr. Aboulafia recognizes this and I have learned to have great respect for his judgements.
Sorry for rambling. Hope to read some good discussion soon.
Won't be surprised if I don't though.

airtaximan said...

EO,

Ken's calling Vern again...


"uhh, Vern...Uh..."

"K-K-K-k-e-e-e-n-n-n, WHAT now???...Andy, one minute, its Ken again...Ken, what?"

"Vern, the blog is still active, and sssooommmone, a position holder just said the whole Eclipse program is like Capricorn one..."

"Ken, hold..Andrew...apparently, we havea real problem now...someone is saying we made the whole thing up, like the moon visit in the movie Capricorn one.. NNOo you fool - the blog, not the press...."

"ken, it's cccoooo-ellll...we're not like Capricorn One....uh, what happend with the dayjet orders thing?"

"Vern, its bad. It looks like they came up with some official meeting in ABQ whereby your people claimed Dayjet has MORE THAN 1400 orders...."

"Ken, it's OK. Man, I WAS worried until now...they are flat out WRONG. Andrew's taking care of it -Dayjet hasn't put down any real deposit money, so anyone who says they have orders, doesn't know a fu_&ing thing..whew!"

"Vern, back to the CApricorn One thing - OH, don't lose sleep - they picked up on our new fund-raising campaign - from the days back in the computer industry. I'm makng a movie, and its true, some folks reminded me it LOOKS like Capricorn ONE...but I said "Naw...this is revolutionary...it only looks familiar as a trick...its disruptive - do you feel disrupted? We're going to make a mint off this..."

"Vern, what about MY plane?"

"OK Andy, fire away... NO No NO...Not YOU"RE FIRED, fire off the Press Release, you foool...man, I wish Dottie...never mind...Ken, you still there...

"Yes Vern...

" Mean, you still in for the 60% progress...

click...

"Ken, I'm not in for half the Dayjet bet....you know this right??... Ken...ken..."

EclipseOwner387 said...

Hey Mirage,

Do you fly a Malibu Mirage? Have I asked this before? Sorry if I am repeating myself.

EO24

EclipseOwner387 said...

AirJordan,

That was pretty good! Still laughing!

redtailhawk said...

atm: This is not even close - this plane is the outgrowth of an abortion from Burt Rutan called the V-jet.

nice try. the v-jet was simply a testbed for the fj-22 comissioned by williams. there is nothing common between the v-jet and eclipse, except that they are both twin turbofans.

hummer said...

So it's all in the "Cards"
Let's suppose for minute this whole thing is an ego trip for Vern. He has with intent and malice screwed everyone concerned. Now the "cards" collapes and the rests are similar to Enron.
What happens?

airtaximan said...

redtail,
you know nothing about this obviously...NOTHING

"Eclipse Aviation was founded in 1998 to further develop and produce the aircraft" refering to the VjetII.

do you know about the failures encountered along the way forcing re-design after re-design... no one except Vern "bought " the plane hook, line and wallet - he even paid Williams to make the new plane, called Pronto for a year or so, then re-named when Vern took over the failing program from Williams - the aircraft program... he was paying Williams to finish the plane design and productionize it...hahahah!

READ:
"The production Eclipse 500 is the product of a conceptual design evolution which began with the Williams V-Jet II, which was designed and built by Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites in 1997 for Williams International to be used as a testbed and demonstrator for their new FJX-2 turbofan engine. The aircraft and engine were debuted at the 1997 Oshkosh Airshow.

The V-Jet II was an all-composite structure with a forward-swept wing, a V-tail, each fin of which was mounted on the nacelle of the one of the two engines. Williams had not intended to produce the aircraft, but it attracted a lot of attention, and Eclipse Aviation was founded in 1998 to further develop and produce the aircraft.

The prototype and only V-Jet II aircraft was obtained by Eclipse Aviation along with the program, and was donated to the Experimental Aircraft Association AirVenture museum in Oshkosh, Wisconsin in 2001.


Adaptation of V-Jet II design

Eclipse CEO Vern Raburn was one of the first business executives at Microsoft. Subsequently, Bill Gates became a major stake-holder in the Eclipse project. The VLJ concept has been pursued by a number of manufacturers, and because the V-Jet II had been designed around one of the primary VLJ engines, Eclipse believed it was an ideal design to refine and market.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_500

You've been nasty, arrogant and WRONG...calm down, read, listen and be open... there's a lot of history here...much of which you seem to be ignorant of...despite your arrogance.

airtaximan said...

ring, ring..ring...

"What K-E-N? What?..your damn number identifies you on my phone now...WHAT now? Andy, hold..."

"Vern, uh, do you know anything about a Vjet?"

airtaximan said...

eo,

thanks, It a little levity for all this crassness...

I'm just pissed that dispite how "Sure" Ken was regarding the orderbook, he never took my wager...

He's quite an opinionated guy, insulting, too...just no real backbone I guess...

thanks for the laughs...

Stan Blankenship said...

If I send you some documents with "ECLISPE COMPANY PROPRIETARTY AND CONFIDENTIAL" marked on them, can you post them anyway?

ATM, do you think I am stupid?

Even your comments could jeopardize the blog and should be deleted

redtailhawk said...

ATM, have you seen the v-jet? forward swept wings, v-tail, composite, round spaceship-one type windows, proof of concept for the fj-22. wrong? not hardly. no similarity tothe 500.

EclipseOwner387 said...

Stan,

I was thinking the same thing. He should have used email to ask that question. Me thinks ATMAN did that to intentionally put controversial info on the blog knowing you would never print it.

airtaximan said...

hummer,

Its a good question...but I don't think that's what happened.

I think Vern began with the best of intentions, I really do. He hit roadblock after roadblock, and kept trying.

The initial design and plan did not work. He took the aircraft development over from Williams...then their engine failed, and the whole thing became a mess.

A 5 place was not selling... the "6-place" sold better, but still not enough...then the air limo market...nimbus, and it was all downhill from there.

Puffery and deception took over, and the whole thing became a mess.

As time goes by, it gets worse and worse, not better and better, though. Its like the mouse in the snake's throat - plastic_planes.

I am not a beliver in e-clips failure, but I cannot even imagine how to fix this mess. I think Vern will continue to have belivers, and raise money. I give him that.

I honestly think that this will change aviation for ever, but not the way everyone thinks.

FWIW, I think there wil be disclosure guidelines for aircraft deposits from soon, on. I think the fraud here really is the orderbook. I just do not see the orders. From there, there's no case for e-clips, and the whole thing is a lie.

Someone might go to jail..I do not know. Vern himself said it a long, long time ago - "there's no standard for what constitues a deposit (sale) in aviation" (I'm paraphrasing, but it went someting like this...) and I think he took advantage of this fact, and used it to:

Take depositors money.
Take advantage of suppliers.
Take investors money.

Just my opinion, which is not worth much. Good pont and good question. Thanks

airtaximan said...

Stan, pls delete...sorry

airtaximan said...

redtail,

yup - a lot of promise in that design! NOT.

But, this is the origin of your favorite mini-jet. Its changed, and changed and changed over the years...and ask someone who knows about jet design...

this is NOT the way to develop a plane...

sorry...

Ken Meyer said...

Cold and Wet and Wrong has said this several times--

"Eclipse lied about not being at NBAA, period"

Let's make sure we have this right--it's important.

Cold and Wet says Eclipse wasn't at NBAA.

Cold and Wet says Eclipse lied about not being at NBAA.

But guess what???

Cold and Wet is WRONG!!!!!!!!!

Eclipse was at NBAA! In fact they had more than one aircraft there, displayed right on the convention floor. I was there. So was Eclipse. I remember the night the Highway Patrol closed the Freeway to let them bring the planes from the airport to the convention floor.

COLD WET, you are FOS on this one.

Perhaps you were talking about the AOPA convention in Palm Springs in November? That's the one they missed. It seems you just don't know what you're talking about, do you??

What a surprise.

Ken

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

I have heard that the current Eclipse wing is actually very slightly forward swept (less than 2 degrees, but actually forward swept).

The V-Jet was most definitely the precursor to the Eclipse 500. I have seen photos of a 'scaled' up V-Jet airframe with Williams and Eclipse staff and Rutan present - reportedly at Williams facilities in Michigan. The mockup looked like it was made of cardboard and tape, no BS.

Burt Rutan and John Roncz were both reportedly involved in the early Williams International managed Eclipse program (under another 'quick' name) until the arrival of Dr. Masefield from Pilatus (they were not involved after his arrival from what I hear).

For the record, I am a big fan of Rutan's creativity and really like his experimental designs but he does not typically create manufacturable designs, just ask Visionair and Beechcraft to name a few.

Under Masefield's guidance, the design was re-worked to be more utilitarian and more produceable. The wing moved from a shoulder mount to a low mount, the basic shape was changed to more like the current design.

bill e. goat said...

Governor Richardson... spoke to New Mexico’s pursuit of more aircraft presence through legislative tax initiatives

(Aug 25, 2005)
"Mr. Birk (presumed to work for the SIC) reported that Eclipse Aviation is currently on track for a second quarter certification for the 500,... they are currently working through the last remaining issue on certification"

(October 17, 2006)
“He (Vern) states that he will build 525 airplanes in 2007”.

CWMOR:
Eclipse lied about not being at (AOPA- thanks Ken), period. Wing bushings, windshields and cockpit side windows problems were only revealed several WEEKS later.

Flt Center:
“I (Vern) came out of an industry where failure is, in reality, sort of expected. You actually kind of get rewarded for failure. But when you lie about it or when you try to cover it up and you try to claim that it's not your problem, that's when problems occur”.

Fellow Blogger:
“Ughhhh....
This is so tiresome...
When does it end?...
thanks for keeping it real”.

Goat:
Ughhhh....
This is so tiresome...
When does it end?...
Reality really IS stranger than fiction sometimes. :)

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Sorry Ken, you are correct, it WAS AOPA not NBAA that they lied about why they were not there - it was at AOPA in Palm Springs, that old human memory thing.

They did lie about that right?

You remember, too busy flight testing was the reason I remember they gave. Truth was there was NO flying going on at all, the ENTIRE fleet, all 5 flying planes of it, were GROUNDED at that time.

Remember?

They only came clean 2 or 3 weeks later and announced the wing bushing, windshield and cockpit side window cracking issues, right?

Your petty attempt to capitalize on a memory error as to which show they lied about not being is telling.

I am man enough to correct my memory error.

When I said NBAA I meant AOPA. So damn many lies and so much confusion out of Albuquerque it is hard to keep it all straight.

Are you man enough to admit you are disingenuously trying to use it to obfuscate the FACT that Eclipse LIED about not being at the AOPA show?

How about the LIES about the order book? They are either lying to you or to the State of New Mexico, which do you suppose it is?

FlightCenter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
bill e. goat said...

Hmmmm,
Model 115, Starship, Rutan.
Vjet2, E-500, Rutan.

I think Raytheon invested around $0.5B +/-, back in the '80s.

And built 53.

Will Eclipse will beat that?

I think so. (?maybe this year?)

Still, a somewhat providential milestone if/when it happens...

Oops, I forgot 402 this year.
Or was that 525.
I'm confused :)

bill e. goat said...

Flight Center,
The spreadsheet is an outstanding post.

Now, if you can make one for the monthly length of Vern's nose, since 1998...

(You might have to use a logarithmic scale to make it usable though).

FlightCenter said...

BEG,

I'm pretty sure Google doesn't have logarithmic scales in their spreadsheets yet. ;->

But we certainly don't need it for the chart of their orders...

It's looking pretty flat right about now.

gadfly said...

Goat

You silly critter. That would make the man some sort of “Nostril-damus”. . . going to great lengths predicting future sales of the little jet.

gadfly

bill e. goat said...

FC said:
...Google's logarithms don't work.

Goat sez:
That's okay; Eclipse's algorithms don't work yet either.

Or is that Dayjet...

Regarding counting sales with the spreadsheet, I can take off my shoes, and I think we'll be okay for the rest of this quarter, or more.

I might need some help from Alexa or ATM though :)

bill e. goat said...

Hi Gadfly,

I think Vern is growing to great lengths too, lately...

I mean, going to great lengths too, lately.

The "European" trip...I expected him to jump out of the cake with PC last week. I guess he's still just half baked.

Maybe half cocked too, though he does seem to be plenty cocky.

Got to admire his pluck and verve.

Verve: "Energy and enthusiasm in the expression of ideas, especially in artistic performance or composition".

Hmmmm, same goes for Andrew Broom I suppose... :)

airtaximan said...

Another Ken call...

"good morning Vern, Ken here...it's a great day..."

"Ken, (spit, spit, turns tap off) -goreat day, OK...what's up?

"I'll sell the bald spray to you if you need it, but..."

Click...

redtailhawk said...

HolyMackeral: Under Masefield's guidance, the design was re-worked to be more utilitarian and more produceable. The wing moved from a shoulder mount to a low mount, the basic shape was changed to more like the current design.

The 500 was a clean sheet design starting with Masefield. The aircraft specification was carried over from the vjet, but the design started anew from the ground up wit Oli.

ATM, the Pronto name was given as a proposed company name by greg williams, it was not the aircraft. vern later changed the name of the company to eclipse. you know not what you speak.

redtailhawk said...

cold, wet and wrong: Your petty attempt to capitalize on a memory error as to which show they lied about not being is telling.

on this blog, incorrect details tend to snowball into incorrect "facts". it's not petty at all. why don't you try and get it right?

Stan Blankenship said...

To put the order book post in better perspective, read again what flightcenter wrote (from the April 15 post):

8) We do know that the vast majority of Eclipse's orders come from the air taxi market. 2 years ago, Vern told me that his estimate of the percent of orders that were coming from the air taxi market was about 80%. At the time, there were about 500 orders from individuals. So that meant that about 2,000 of his orders were attributed to the air taxi market.

9) We do know that the air taxi market will only succeed if someone is willing to finance all those planes. The facts are that it has been extremely difficult for DayJet, Pogo and other air taxi companies to secure the financing for the aircraft they need. We do know that DayJet has recently secured financing on the order of $50M. Clearly not enough to buy thousands of airplanes.

10) We do know that the air taxi market will succeed only if customers love the service. Customers are not going to love a service where DayJet lands to pick up another customer while I’m on the plane waiting to get to my destination. I wouldn’t share a cab on the way home from the airport if the service was free. Why do you think no one car pools to work? You want to leave when you want to leave. The whole DayJet model of not committing to the customer when he’s going to be flying until the last possible moment, in order to aggregate other customers on to that flight, is not going to be a winner. Trust me.

11) We do know that the whole air taxi market concept was based on Vern’s promise of a direct operating cost of $0.52 per mile. (not $0.52 per passenger mile, but $0.52 per aircraft mile). The idea was, if air taxi companies could make 50% gross margin, and charge $1 per mile, there would be unlimited demand for air taxi service and huge profits. And you know what? They would have been right!

However, those projected costs are history. It is looking a lot more likely that air taxi services are going to need to charge closer to $6 per aircraft mile to make the profit needed for a sustainable business. This translates to much lower demand.

12) We do know that the Eclipse air taxi order book does not include a firm commitment to buy more than a few hundreds of aircraft. The rest are options, with very little deposit money backing them. The fact is, if the customers aren’t delighted, and the financiers aren’t willing to put up $4B (2,000 orders times $2M per airplane) to finance the air taxi companies, those options are going to be worthless paper to Eclipse.

So what does that mean?

Anyone who is building a business plan that requires the establishment of a large, high growth air taxi market for success, is building a house of cards.

Flightcenter

airtaximan said...

redtailhawk,

I'm really beginning to like you a lot more now...

when you say:
"ATM, the Pronto name was given as a proposed company name by greg williams, it was not the aircraft. vern later changed the name of the company to eclipse. you know not what you speak"

The "Pronto" name was for the "COMPANY" -

OH, I get it now.

You mean like the "Eclipse" name is for the AIRCRAFT.

Thanks.

airtaximan said...

redtailhawk:

read, and wep. Stop making things up..

"The VLJ concept has been pursued by a number of manufacturers, and because the V-Jet II had been designed around one of the primary VLJ engines, Eclipse believed it was an ideal design to refine and market."


"ideal design to refine and market"

- sounds like you believe some story about clean sheet... look back on the pictures from day 1 until today... account for weight growth, engine replacements, marketing failures, and also, failed concepts like avoiding birds by positining engines aft and low...which did not work either.

All the iterations, which are on-going with mods, etc...are the result of beginning with a concept plane, and working from there - not a clean sheet.

I am sure that we will continue to see CG issues, performance problems, etc... which result from the approach which was not "clean sheet" based on the market.

They began with the engine (which failed) and developed the airframe from there...V-jet to "E-clips 500_NG_5.3"

FlightCenter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
airtaximan said...

- serial number 4 was reported to be delivered, but as of today the FAA website does not show that the aircraft has been issued a C of A and it still shows as being registered to Eclipse.

- Of the three DayJet airplanes, all three still show as being registered to Eclipse and only one shows a C of A date.

Anyone want to stab at how this could be?

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Hey Redtailhawk,

Your mom called and told you to get off the computer and do your homework.

Either the V-Jet had nothing to do with the E-500 as you first said, or it did, as you said the second time.

You are giving me John Kerry flashbacks - the V-Jet WAS part of the Eclipse program, before it was NOT part of the Eclipse program.

If my one memory slip up re: which show it was that Eclipse LIED about not being at is all you got you ought to pack up and go home right now - and I would ask for my deposit back (assuming you are a customer).

I like the public data Eclipse-Wiki idea.

ATM - the logical explanation would be that the aircraft do not in-fact have a Standard CofA and have not been transferred from Eclipse ownership, OR the FAA only takes care of Van's Aircraft and Cessna registrations quickly - and for some reason Vern is at the back of the line.

Occam's razor says the simplest explanation is most likely, so I vote for those planes not having a Standard CofA and still 'belonging' to EAC.

I explained before that IF Eclipse or DayJet intends to develop and prove and certify the third AI for 135 Ops using any or all of those aircraft, they might just pink slip them as Experimental R&D instead of Standard but that should still show up I think, check your search terms.

If EAC is doing the development, their ownership would facilitate getting the R&D pink slip so maybe that is why it does not make sense.

ExEclipser said...

A couple of points:
1) Eclipse has a backlog of over 2350 planes. The majority are not disclosed simply because those that have placed the orders have absolutely no desire to disclose the fact that they have placed them. These are most likely orders over a period of 5-10 years which allows for plenty of position buying in the interim.

2) There is NO forward sweep on the leading edge of the wings. The entire leading edge of both wings is on a single plane. Just trust me.

AeroObserver said...

The FAA's online database lags behind by about 3-4 weeks.

News on the air-taxi front: Point2Point has suspended operations. However, P2P was trying to use an airplane that isn't certified for FIKI in an area that has a lot of icing. Don't think DayJet will have the same problem in the Southeast, even if FIKI approval for the E500 doesn't come until later this year...

Stan Blankenship said...

eclipser,

A couple of points:

1) How valid is a 2,350 unit order book be when 60% of the orders are held for one company with somewhere around $50m capitalization?

2) Sweep on a wing refers to the quarter-chord, or an imaginary line running from the wing root to the wing tip and one-fourth of the distance between the leading and trailing edge. Wikipedia probably explains it better.

The Eclipse leading edge may be straight. However, the trailing edges has a lot of forward sweep resulting in a modest forward sweep of the quarter chord.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

aeroobserver,

Care to explain how the FAA database would SELECTIVELY lag since all 3 planes were supposed to have been CofA'd and 'delivered' within the same day or two?

How did one show up almost immediately (like the recent Cessna Mustang delivery for example), and the other two don't show?

Sorry to hear about P2P, I would be happy if the travelling public would engage with smaller planes and smaller airports, I think it is good for all of us - but it does go to show the importance of picking the right equipment for the mission and the market.

Reminds me of all the parked Beech 1900's around the country - great plane but a regulatory change re: maintenance and the travelling public's discomfort with such a 'small' airplane (seats 19 plus 3 crew, goes 290 KTS, weighs 17,000 lbs, and is 57 feet long, 15 feet tall, and has a 58 foot wingspan) and bam, instead of an aluminum overcast, we have an aluminum fog at airports around the country.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Stan,

Thanks for the simple quarter-chord explanation, I was trying to figure out the easiest way to 'splain that but you beat me to it.

I seem to recall the forward sweep was said to be somewhere between .5 and 1.5 degrees which would be impossible to 'see' anyway.

flyger said...

AeroObserver said...

The FAA's online database lags behind by about 3-4 weeks.


Doesn't seem to be true for Cessna airplanes. Mustang N600DE had CofA issued on 4/20, was on the web site 4/26. Mustang N245MU had CofA issued on 4/25 and is on the FAA web site 1 week later. Seems to take 1 week for Cessna.

Eclipse N126DJ had CofA issued 3/28, was on the FAA web site by 4/15, perhaps earlier. N109DJ and N110DJ, supposedly CofA at the same time (or certainly before "delivery" on 3/31), still no CofA date on web site. Curious.

It is now close to 5 weeks since DJ airplanes supposedly got CofAs, only 1 of 3 is reflected on the FAA web site.

Of the first 10 Eclipse, only 3 have normal category CofA listed on the FAA web site. Eclipse has claimed several deliveries, more than 8?

Of the first 10 Mustang, 5 have normal CofA listed. This, despite having only claimed one retail delivery last week.

At the very least, this shows sloppy paperwork somewhere between Eclipse and the FAA web site that Cessna apparently knows how to avoid. I could even understand if all three DJ airplanes had no CofA listed on the web site, but to have one up in about 2 weeks or less and the other two not in 5 weeks seems inexplicable. This doesn't prove something is wrong, but it is consistent with some problem with the CofA of those two airplanes.

AeroObserver said...

I'm just working off of previous experience with the FAA online registry database. Does anyone know if Cessna is filing electronically and Eclipse via paper?

airtaximan said...

eclipser,

you say:

"1) Eclipse has a backlog of over 2350 planes. The majority are not disclosed simply because those that have placed the orders have absolutely no desire to disclose the fact that they have placed them. These are most likely orders over a period of 5-10 years which allows for plenty of position buying in the interim."

Q? - 2350? I thought it was 2500 - over 2500 since a few months ago? (some indications, "years" ago)

Q? - "The majority are not disclosed simply because those that have placed the orders have absolutely no desire to disclose the fact that they have placed them." really? why? EAC says that Dayjet has 1400 orders...and they admitted to 300 or so...sooo? explain why? what purpose does it serve anyone to keep these orders that will bedelivered way into the future a SECRET? Unless you WANT people to think they are more recent deliveries (claims of 2500) to mask an anemic order book after spending $millions and $millions on shows, ads, tours, PR, and promotions, etc..??


thanks

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

aeroobserver,

Eclipse has been delivering almost everything electronically for cert and other things from what I remember so paper applications on CofA would seem a step backwards for them, but I cannot say.

Pretty sure I recall seeing something in print about how Eclipse was filing electronically for 8130's, test plans and everything (as an example of their 'new-age' approach to Cert) but that would have been a few years ago probably.

Do you not admit it could simply be because the 2 airplanes still 'belong' to Eclipse and are being used to develop the 3rd AI installation, requiring R&D pink slips? That is not a sinister thing, not even indicative of a problem.

Hell, if EAC and DJ decided to forego Normal CofA knowing the planes would need to be R&D for the development and cert of the 3rd AI, it actually shows some forethought and that is a GOOD thing.

Now the whole 'delivery ceremony' thing is another kettle of fish entirely, insofar as giving the impression the planes were 'complete' and 'certified' when 'delivered' to DayJet.

EclipseBlogger said...

It's pretty common in business not to announce your intentions before you are ready to execute them. The same would hold true for an air taxi operation. That would give potential competition advanced knowledge into intended markets.

One of the biggest faults I have with Eclipse was them announcing all of their intention early in the program. They should never have been as open as they were in the beginning. They should have put out some spec, taken orders, and kept their mouths shut. It probably would have worked out differently.

airtaximan said...

EB,

announcing a fully functional, airline qualityhigh cycle reliable air taxi plane for $779,000, deliverable at high rate in 2003?

Sounds like a scare tactic to me! Sounds like Microsoft puffing functionality, delivery etc., trying to foreclose competition...

Just my opinion about their tactics.

What's the harm in letting everyone know your orderbook? None, really...you have the only high rate production plane, designed for air taxi operations, AND you have the largest customer who claims to be "the best financed startup in airline history"... what's the big deal?

Seems like e-clips thohgt Dayjet was a qualified fleet buyer...why are they embarassed to reveal their orderbook is mostly them, and mostly off in the future?

I'd be curious to know, since Dayjet has claimed they own 50 of the first 100 e-planes, and there's been a call for the first 200 planes worth of progress payments... that places Dayjet's bill at around...say:
$1 MILLION PRICE x 50 planes x 60% +($100k/plane initial deposit) = $35 million...HAVE THEY PLACED THIS DEPOSIT? If not, this could be pretty embarassing, as well....places doubt on whether they are seriosu about the order, serious about deliveries, and really a steadfast customer.

this could be the crux of the merky order book disclosure. The fact that they've attributed only 300 or so orders plus options to dayjet of a 2500 jet order book "all backed by non-refundable deposits"...makes me think the Dayjet orders are not as rock solid as e-clips would like everyone to think...

(perhaps they have 50% or more of the first 200, 300, 500 or 1,000 planes... imagine the funds required for 60% on these when they are due... mindboggling...)

flyger said...

AeroObserver said...

I'm just working off of previous experience with the FAA online registry database.


Registrations take longer, particularly for used airplane sales. The FAA has to check chain of title before listing the new owner, "inspect" the new title. This takes time and special expertise to have legal standing.

But, CofA doesn't have to go through that process. The plane has it or not without regard to chain of title or other issues. This means you can't necessarily take how long registration takes and think that airworthiness stuff takes as long. Filing a CofA takes no special effort at the registry.

Cessna's CofAs get there in a week. Eclipse CofA for N126DJ got there within two weeks. N109DJ and 110DJ haven't gotten there in 5 weeks.

Electronic filing or not, one wonders. It will be quite interesting when/if N109DJ and N110DJ do show up in the FAA registry and the CofA dates are later than 3/31.

gadfly said...

A gadfly has a very small brain . . . a few dozen grey cells. But if I wanted an aircraft to go 370 knots, fly to 41,000 feet, carry six people, etc., I don’t think I would be too concerned about how many others wanted to purchase such an aircraft. I would rather expect to receive the product promised, at the price promised, in the time-frame promised, with verification that the product would meet each and every promise. And know that the manufacturer would be around to supply replacement parts, a proven track record of having done it for others, and absolutely honest in every dealing.

In my business, that’s how I buy a new machine . . . and although I could spend the same money on a “jet”, I choose to deal with people who fulfill their promises, and keep my business in the black. That’s a simple enough approach.

‘Seems to the gadfly that we have a group of people that are more concerned about personalities, how to trip up another person on what they said, or what they didn’t say. How many “other” people are buying this product, etc.. What’s the point?

In the case of the aircraft, as in my business of design, invention, and manufacturing, it is my responsibility to keep my profession, including my competition, honest and above board in all that we do. There are enough problems with taxes, and foreign competition . . . we don’t need the moral and safety issues. As an industry, aircraft manufacturers have fought a long hard battle over the past century . . . we do not easily give up our integrity to someone who claims great things, and fails at every turn. Honest mistakes are normal . . . to be expected. This has exceeded anything before.

The gadfly suggests asking the right questions of Eclipse. Continuing a mob brawl in the courtyard of the “castle” makes everyone look stupid . . . nothing will be gained.

Eclipse, you have made great claims. Either “put up” or “shut up”. Get that jet into the hands of the people that have purchased it, complete, and nothing lacking. Stop polluting the industry with phoney promises. If you cannot do it, get off the tarmac.

Do you question my right to speak? I do have a right. My “governor” has taken my tax dollars (and I have payed plenty to this state) and invested them in Eclipse. Beyond that, I have spent most of my life in the industry . . . since a child in WWII. I resent what I see taking place, with a pretense of a legitimate approach to aviation.

gadfly

anonymous avionics engineer said...

Heart attack, I think you may have one 387 when you are a bit high, coming in a bit hot, a bit heavy and on final in IMC and your PFDs and MFDs re-boot, or after you land and your FADECs go into the fail-safe (i.e. re-boot while running) mode and you can’t slow down for a short runway.
It is pretty simple to see that Vern is pulling the Microsoft classic in delivering something that isn’t quite ready (if it were, he would have let the FAA perform all their inspections) and let they buyers fund the remaining development and upgrade costs (when was the last time an OEM funded a fix for an AD?).
So Mr. I have a jet for 1.5M, 387, by the time you figure out the total costs, if you don’t kill yourself first, it will most likely be nearer the 3M to 3.5M that most other OEMs are aiming at. What is the difference between builders? Most OEMs want their own test pilots to do the test flying, not a bunch of inexperienced well off people. Yes, most of the development will be done by the time these other VLJ’s sell their first aircraft and that will be reflected in the asking price, but the accident/incident numbers will tell the complete story.
I’d be willing to bet that by the time the deficiencies become public knowledge that Vern, Bill, and most of the Eclipse Executive and management structure will have indemnified themselves with the IPO by selling off as much stock as possible. The only losers will be those unfortunates that tried to get a bargain jet. Enjoy!
As far as being mean spirited, yes you are, but I am willing to overlook that for now. I'll be watching from the sidelines.

gadfly said...

Disclaimer:

The gadfly did not pay the "anonymous engineer" to put emphasis on my comments . . . he spoke his mind on his own(. . . talk about serendipity)!

(Come by some time, I'll pay for lunch.)

anonymous avionics engineer said...

Gadfly: You probably already have. It is all good entertainment fun, except for those whose butts will be on the line while the design is being ironed out.

EclipseBlogger said...

ATM Said... Seems like e-clips thohgt Dayjet was a qualified fleet buyer...why are they embarassed to reveal their orderbook is mostly them, and mostly off in the future?

Perhaps DayJet and other fleet customers didn't want their competition, or potential competition, to know their plans. This may not be totally the doing of Eclipse.

gadfly said...

AAE

Whatever . . . 'how 'bout prime rib at Paul's Monterrey Inn!

And what's this "the design is being ironed out"? You convince me of a "design" and I might think Darwin had a viable hypothesis. 'Enough already!

gadfly

(I haven't laughed so hard since the hogs ate my little brother.)

airtaximan said...

EB,

the e-clips part is staing they have 2500 orders backed by depsoits, and dayjet is their largets customer with 300. E-clips says this all the time...

dayjet has no competition, and if they do, they have cornered the market on the only high rate production air taxi plane in the market - what's the problem?

Do you think there's an advantage to claiming only 300 e-clips ordered? even if you claim your ordered 300, can't you order MORE later?

I'm a little confused... it does not seem like anyone is surprised Dayjet - an e-clips sister company would want to build the largest fleet possible... no real surprise here...

am I missing the point?

Stan Blankenship said...

Gadfly, you may have missed the fine print in the 08-05 minutes:

"Mr. Birk also stated that Fort Washington modeled out some of the potential returns for a $95 share price through 2010, “and our assessment is that if Eclipse achieves plan, it is probably a 3X to 4X return for shareholders coming in at a $95 per share price. That would likely be realized in two to three years, and that is actually a reasonable return given how far along the certification program is at this point…. From everything our due diligence uncovered, it indicates that the program is really progressing along quite nicely.”

New Mexico invested $20m and has a population of just shy of 2m. So you and every other man, woman and child resident plus a few stray dogs anteed up a ten spot hoping for a $60-80 return. Didn't even have to drive to Vegas, you had a sure bet at home.

mountainhigh said...

It indeed appears as if Eclipse has received unprecedented assistance from the FAA, including agreements to "not" pull panels for inspections, etc. The motives may be as simple as issue the TC by Sept 30 (end of gov fiscal year) so bonuses could be received by FAA Executives or there may have been, in addition, undue pressure from unknown sources.

This raises several questions:

-- Will the FAA continue their preferential treatment of Eclipse related to STCs, audits, etc.?

I think the FAA will have to continue the preferential treatment in order justify the hasty TC. Once they started covering for Eclipse and colluding with the PR stunts (ie Admin TC at Oshkosh) they will continue. Doubt if the FAA will "blow the whistle" on itself.

-- How many other programs have entered into "partnership" with the FAA for certification? And will continue to "partner" with the FAA going forward as referenced in the article on the PC?

Can't think of one.

-- How many other programs have received this type of unprecedented, special assistance from the FAA?

Can't think of one.

-- How many programs, OEMs, etc. have been told by the FAA that there was not enough personnel to address their Certification needs in a timely manner? and had product delays (and financial hardship) due to this?

Yep, can think of some here.

In summary, is the FAA setting a new precedent? Will ALL programs and OEMs now receive this special treatment... FAA personnel on-call and the right to dismiss/replace FAA personnel as needed to "Git-R-Done"?

If Eclipse turns out to be the only "favored" FAA company ... [guess it's like "favored nation status" ].... in business, this would be dealt with as restriction of trade, probably under anti-trust laws.

Any lawyers out there? Are there any laws/regulations prohibiting a gov. agency from favoring one company to the detriment of others?

It just seems sleazy! and unAmerican. Guess that's why several programs are choosing to certify in Canada and elsewhere. Seems like a very bad trend for American aviation.

gadfly said...

Stan

You cannot believe how wonderful it has been to start up and keep a business going for the past thirty-one years in New Mexico . . . everyone should be so blessed. And by the way, when someone mentions Las Vegas, we think of a little town to the northeast of Albuquerque, that still conducts politics according to rules of the “old west” . . . not exactly the other “Lost Wages” out in Nevada.

With Bill Richardson’s “reduced taxes” we’ll be a suburb of Beijing before you know it. (Note: the “Gov” drives a Cessna Citation, revealing his faith in Eclipse . . . also with my tax money.)

Obvious question: Why did we come from Santa Ana, California, in the spring of 1970 to New Mexico in the first place? God created a beautiful place, that cured our childrens’ problems of ear infections related to smog. It was a good move, for health, but not a great place for a business. But like the “Eclipse”, you cannot correct all problems with a single design . . . or move. The business began five years or so after we came here . . . 1 January 1976 . . . difficult, but no regrets. But a good life does not come cheap, or easy.

Unfortunately, various businesses like Sperry and Honeywell and others . . . Eclipse, for instance, come to New Mexico looking only at the incentives promised by a political system dating back hundreds of years . . . before the US of A was established. These folks seem simple, but they have been at it a lot longer than the political machine in Chicago . . . and little gets by. The spider and the fly come to mind. Eclipse is just another fly in the web . . . easy come, easy go. ‘Sorry, but Eclipse will learn the hard way . . . and New Mexico will be just a little bit fatter when it’s all over. In case you didn’t know, New Mexico gets back $2 for every $1 paid in Federal Taxes . . . second to nobody. And yet, most of the state is owned by the federal government.

And, Stan, for the record: I don’t play the stock market. When I began getting a sizable royalty for my inventions, I turned it over to my wife . . . and let her do whatever she wished. To her credit, she has done quite well. But I do not work for money . . . couldn’t care less. Enough rice in the pressure cooker (7,100 foot altitude you know), some chicken in the microwave . . . and I’m happy.

Inventing, designing, manufacturing, solving real problems . . . that’s my life. Who get’s credit? . . . who cares! But when folks come along with great and mighty promises, . . . that’s a problem when they don’t deliver. And that’s why I came to pay close attention to your blog.

Well, enough for now. These folks have had ample opportunity to prove themselves. As far as I can tell, they have all the freedom in the world to prove their claims . . . far more latitude and money that anyone else, of which I know. These folks are skating on this ice . . . legally and morally . . . ‘interesting to watch how it all plays out.

“Deja vu” . . . ‘once worked for a company like “Eclipse” . . . not at liberty to relate the final episode . . . not pretty!

gadfly

airtaximan said...

mountainhigh,

welcome.

smart guy, nice post...makes perfect sense. Die hards will claim yu are dead wrong.

Who cares...

"Seems like a very bad trend for American aviation...."

may I add:

..unless you can afford it!

with $1 billion, many years and many talented people, you would think they could have accomplished all this, WITHOUT CONTROVERSY?

Frank Castle said...

"They should have put out some spec, taken orders, and kept their mouths shut. It probably would have worked out differently."

I believe you may have quipped a quote from me.

I heard thru the GV that Piper was the company that the State of NM told "thanks but no thanks"......

What a bunch of stooges, starting at the top. Bill "Curly" Richardson.

Hey, it has a certain ring....

gadfly said...

MountainHigh

Welcome to the discussion.

Our politicians some time back already sold out to the foreigners with revised patent laws. At one time, the US of A had the best. But under pressure the politicians “caved” and now our patent laws have been “dumbed down” to match the foreigners. If you invent something, today, you better have deep pockets and a battery of lawyers at your disposal . . . and kick in those regular payments, to keep your patent protection in place. The age of a couple brothers inventing an airplane are over.

And, Yes, it’s all un-American!

gadfly

gadfly said...

Notice:

Any Eclipse flying around over Albuquerque, just now . . . better get on home. With night approaching, it’s raining . . . as you clear Sandia Crest, you will be flying into “known icing conditions” . . . not good! Get down quick . . . there aren’t many spares these days . . . don’t need a spectacular event in the news just now. And we’ll leave the light on for ya’.

mountainhigh said...

ATM,

Thanks.

I think some time back you asked why United walked. A United insider indicated that Eclipse broke most every contract term. SOP for them, unfortunately.

Looks like there have been a few Co's who have gotten the "might be competition for Eclipse" treatment from NM after what Frank indicated. ATG was going to move to Double Eagle. This was announced in the media. In the end, the deal faltered and ATG did not move. I heard through the GV that the state put up some roadblocks. I expect that the boys at Eclipse had a hand in it.

In one way I can understand the state wanting to keep all competition out. They are into Eclipse for 20mil (from SIC), $45 mil IRBs and other assorted stuff.
However, in the end this is usually an unsuccessful strategy!

Eclipse is starting to look like Airbus. A quasi-govermental Co. especially given that the state is blocking competition within NM and the FAA is giving preferential treatment. Again, a type of governmental restriction of trade.

I think R. Aboulafia wrote about this type of issue regarding econ. incentives.

Using the government as a barrier to entry and maneuvering the gov. to restrict or pressure others is a known Microsoft tactic. It seems to have been quite successful for Eclipse.

I just hate to see these tactics used in small aircraft manufacturing. I do think the FAA has embarrassed itself by falling for these tactics. The agency has been so easily manipulated by the Eclipse/Microsoft tactics (of course there was a profit/bonus motive). Not a pretty legacy for Blakey!

airtaximan said...

mountainhigh,

I;m going to do some digging, but Dayjet has already started these shennanigans in Florida. They got some tax relief for their category of plane. I'm not sure of the details or how confined...perhaps "jet aircraft under 7,000lbs" - I really do not know but I will find it and post it.

-so now this is a special category of plane worthy of sales tax relief in Florida...

Hmmm...

I think I know why the Citirx guy started his air taxi business in Florida... after all his computer modelling, ant farmers, Russian rocket scientists and research institutes work, the virtual operating system's thousands of simulated runs, and $20 million spent since the 2002 timeframe... Florida was the perfect place to begin air taxi service - only if Dayjet obtained... new special
tax breaks!

flyger said...

FlightCenter said...

So here is a link to a collaborative Google spreadsheet I put together which is intended to track Eclipse aircraft deliveries.


Some errors:

N816KD was reported to have been delivered on March 12th.

N126DJ was reported to have been delivered March 31st.

Both N109DJ and N110DJ are still registered to Eclipse, not DayJet, as of today. There are only two Eclipse registered to owners: N508JA and N816KD.

N941NC and N500VK do *not* have CofA in the "normal" category, they have experimental CofA which doesn't "count", the airplane hasn't passed type conformity until it gets a "normal" CofA.

Right now the data only has serial numbers 1 through 10 in the spreadsheet. I've filled in as much data regarding the first 10 serial numbers as I could find from the FAA N number website.

To find all Eclipse in the FAA web site, go here:

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/acftref_inquiry.asp

Type in "Eclipse" and then it will show you all the Eclipse the FAA knows about, the serial number, and the N number.

Generally, registrations (change of owner) are slower to be displayed (but again Cessna is faster, much faster, for some reason). CofA should be much faster than registration.

Eric said...

On the user fee side of things...

Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Trent Lott, R-Miss., plan to introduce a bill this week that would change the funding of the air traffic control system. The FAA would be authorized to "impose a surcharge of $25 [per IFR flight] for air traffic control costs," according to the April 27 staff draft. Exemptions to this surcharge would be given to traditional propeller planes, the vast majority of which are single-engine, and some of the larger turbine-powered propeller planes. Additionally, The Hill newspaper reports the bill would phase out a fuel tax paid by airlines, increase a fuel tax from 21 to 49 cents per gallon for smaller turbine-engine planes, and not include any tax or fee changes to planes that run on piston-fired propeller engines. Unlike a bill backed by the FAA, this proposal would not replace a ticket tax paid by passengers on commercial airlines with the new user fees and taxes.

http://thehill.com/business--lobby/rockefeller-lott-bill-seeks-to-lighten-burden-on-airlines-2007-05-01.html

I don't know if this will pass or how much it'll get changed but it's not as bad as the FAA's user-fee proposal. Of course, it's not good either. I'm assuming fractional, charter, and air-taxi operators wouldn't enjoy the JetA fuel tax hike. I wonder how this would affect the Theilert engine folks (like those flying the DA42 TwinStar). It's a piston engine that runs JetA... so is the tax on the fuel, or on the engine? I was thinking that one of those engines would be great on the kitplane I want to build someday.

redtailhawk said...

Killer Kastle: "I heard thru the GV that Piper was the company that the State of NM told "thanks but no thanks"......"

normally i wouldn't respond to a post that killer kastle has made, but i couldn't let this one go. you guys could find a conspiracy in a jar of peanut butter. the idea that government in albuquerque or the state of new mexico said "no" to piper is ludicrous. the fact that albuquerque was on the list of cities being considered for the piper manufacturing plant says something about the incentives that were offered by the city and state to ATTRACT piper to new mexico. Hey, your posts of corruption and conspiracy may make a good blog, but it doesn't make it true.

airtaximan said...

redtail,

most of these incentive programs require a "competition"...so the companies go fishing for offers and special incentives etc from as many candidate locations as possible. They need to create a competition, and more importantly, make a case for leaving, if they are already established somewhere.

I'd agree that if ABQ offered anything good, which I guess they did since they made the short list, there's no real smoking gun here. You are probably right.

Piper will likely remain in Florida, although there seems to be some issues with that too. If they were to move to ABQ, wages would probably go up a bit for aerospace, which of course, no body really wants!

Kidding of course.

airtaximan said...

http://www.meyersaircraft.com/Current%20Projects/AGATE%20SATS/Eclipse%20Twinjet.html

Nigell Moll on Eclipse - circa, I'd say 2000?

Smile and wave... you are Daydreaming... smile and wave...

airtaximan said...

Aviation Week, March 2004

"The first wave of these designs made their appearance at the 1997 National Business Aviation Assn. show. Visionaire displayed its single JT15D-powered Vantage. Century proposed its $2-million CA-100 Century Jet, which almost received backing from Taiwan. The Promavia Jet Squalus trainer was reinvented by Canada's Alberta Aerospace as the Phoenix Fanjet.

Williams International, meanwhile, introduced a smaller turbofan, the 550-700-lb.-thrust FJX/EJ22. It built a prototype FJX-powered twinjet, the V-Jet 2, made entirely of composites. Safire proposed its S-26, an FJX-powered twinjet, and as recently as late 2001 claimed 841 orders. Most notably, Eclipse began promoting its Eclipse 500, originally using the EJ22.

Since the 1997 NBAA show though, most of these proposals have floundered. But the S-26 and Eclipse products persevere, the latter now powered by Pratt & Whitney Canada engines. And the past year has seen a resurgence of new concepts. Cessna's Mustang, launched at the 2002 NBAA show, is a new entry-level product, capable of carrying six passengers up to 1,300 naut mi. At $2.3 million, the Mustang is the lowest cost business jet yet offered by any of the five big manufacturers. It has been joined by Diamond Aircraft's D-Jet, Aviation Technology's Javelin, Adam Aircraft's A700 and Israel Aircraft Industries/Avocet's ProJet.

To succeed, the new light jets have a choice of two paths. They can try to be part of a new air taxi service partner (like Nimbus, proposed for the Eclipse jet). Yet this is a difficult prospect. Any such service would need to start with hundreds of airplanes and scores of bases to avoid money-losing "deadhead" flights--nonrevenue trips incurred by the need to fly clients to locations where there wouldn't necessarily be another customer waiting for a plane.

The alternative is for the manufacturers to re-gear their cost assumptions to cater to the more modest owner-operator market. But if they pursue that path, they might find that their advertised prices (in the range of $1 million for the Eclipse, D-Jet and S-26) would rise considerably. The current prices assume mass production, which would not be achievable with a reliance on the owner-operator market alone. The $1-2-million segment is historically a no-man's land--customers either need a real business jet (starting at around $4.5 million) or they are hobbyists, who own part shares of $180,000 Skyhawks.

If investors succeed in creating an air taxi service, one or more light jet designs could succeed, helping the bizjet market to resume its once impressive growth rate. But it's also possible that despite all of the publicity and attention, the very light jet market will result in almost nothing."



interesting look back to 2004...

Stan Blankenship said...

CharterX confirms the 1,400 orders with DayJet.

http://www.charterx.com/resources/article.aspx?id=2733

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Wow. That stupid blog full of 'old dinosaur' funded liars and haters predicts the future accurately, AGAIN.

VP of Strategic Operations for DayJet confirms 1400 aircraft for DayJet.

How about them apples, a company with a $50M capitalization has $1.4B in aircraft on order, and will ultimately need more pilots than FedEx and USAir combined.

Now about those compressor stalls, twisted wings and premature brake and tire wear.....

Congrats again Stan and fellow bloggers on scooping the story.

preacher said...

Well, incentives and all that's just fine. Oklahoma City is in the running, too. From what my contacts say, there is still a good chance. Especially if the hurricane forecast holds out. Not good to have a 2+ mil aircraft blown away before it's sold.

I might even think about moving to OKC for that. It's a good looking plane. and I like the advertisement.

"Speed. Range. Utility. Guaranteed.

Speaks volumes to me.

airtaximan said...

Ken on the phone again...

Hello, Ken.

Ah, Vern...

Click.

airtaximan said...

Man,

I WONDER what else we're right about?

Does anyone think this becomes a problem for E-clips? Do depositors care that e-clips has been saying they have "2500 firm orders backed by non-refundable deposits" and "Dayjet has ordered 239 e-500s plus 70 options" AND now it is confirmed, Dayjet has 1400 orders.

My guess is we'll soon see something from e-clips stating they have come under attack by "the older aviation companies"...

**you know there has been so much argung and insulting between the die-hards and the skeptics, I wonder if this will end up changing anything...will it make them take pause?

Nice job, Stan. You are definately delivering on your stated goals for this blog, which is more than I can say for...

How do we find out what Dayjet put up as a deposit for their 1400 e-clipses? What do they have down, today, on their portion of the first 400 that have been called... they have sadi they have 1/2 of the first 100 planes, this required around $35 million based on the "normal" requirements, based on a $1 million jet price... Hmm...

Cash flow could be an issue if they do not have the deposit requirements...plus they lose money on every plane at $1 million... nowadays, a lot of money.

Last thing, you think the SIC will be SICK?

EclipseOwner387 said...

ATMAN,

I think I was pretty clear that I didn't think the order book added up. I even questioned Eclipse about it. But quite frankly, I don't care unless Eclipse has broken a law. I think most of the holders will feel about the same as I. We will see.

Gunner said...

CWMoR-
The sad part is, few will note how handily you won your argument regarding the Order Book dependence on the DayJet "orders". In almost cult fashion, the Eclipse minions have personally savaged you ten ways to Sunday, such that few can even hear the message above the shrill din of attacks on the messenger.

But some of us wade thru and follow the well worn strategy of personal attacks and note just how many times this Blog has revealed truths before they became common knowledge. (And, lately, how the mainstream aircraft press has come to embrace the questions being asked here.)

And so it is that the 2500 "firm and deposited" orders are made up of at least 1,400 DayJet reservations. Anyone who believes that DayJet had to deposit or even commit to more than a couple dozen of those aircraft has obviously never started a business on their own money.

Eclipse was going to market with or without Ed Iacobucci. That was a fact. When Ed placed his order he was holding ALL the cards. Unless he's a complete and utter moron, why would he take financial risk for 1400, 400 or even 100 aircraft when his business model will be proven or disproven with a couple dozen?

So, back to square one we go: Analyze the business model from its fundamentals. The Eclipse model depends on mass production; mass production depends on mass demand; mass demand depends on Air Taxi success.

As AT has repeatedly stated: No Air Taxi; No Business Plan.

Of course, this won't matter to some of the faithful. They only know they're getting a $2+ mill jet for a deep discount. They believe, once its in their hands, "something will work out" to assure company existence, retrofits, a parts network, JetComplete, training and maintenance service.

They have to believe this. Without the belief, there is no Con.
Gunner

FlightCenter said...

I've made the changes to the aircraft delivery spreadsheet suggested by flyger.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p6sMZZhQxJ6PguqQ3m0X_cg

There are 54 aircraft that have N numbers assigned. 14 of which end in DJ and are assumed to be DayJet airplanes.

Serial Number and N number for those aircraft have been added.

For the aircraft with an Experimental C of A, that is noted in the notes column.

flyger said...

During an interview with Traver Gruen-Kennedy, vice president of strategic operations at DayJet, he told CharterX on May 2, although DayJet has ordered 1,400 Eclipse 500s, DayJet plans to operate 300 aircraft within a 24-month period.

Assume Eclipse does have 2,500 orders. Assume the above is true as well. That means 1,100 orders are not DayJet airplanes, the rest are. DayJet also says they aren't going to use more than 300 airplanes in the next 24 months.

Eclipse says it will make 400 airplanes this year, then 1,000 airplanes in successive years. 24 months from now, that adds up to 1,733 airplanes Eclipse is going to build (400 this year, 1,000 next year, and 333 in the first 4 months of 2009). Of those, only 300 airplanes are DayJets. That leaves 1,433 airplanes that go to other parties, but the order book only has 1,100 such orders.

In other words, if Eclipse actually meets their production quota, they will end up exhausting the 300 airplanes DayJet wants, and the 1,100 airplanes everybody else wants, by end of 2008. Then for four months, there are no orders. Then the entire rest of the production run is at the whim of DayJets demand which isn't likely to be 3 airplanes per day.

Of course, I don't think anyone really expects Eclipse to meet the production numbers they have stated. They probably won't do 100 this year. So this order exhaustion problem will "go away" and be replaced by the production ramp up problem.

How can all 2,500 orders be backed by deposit? If that was $100K per airplane, DayJet is out $140M. It doesn't have that kind of money. It doesn't have the $300M to get the first 300 airplanes, either.

Can somebody explain this to me?

cj3driver said...

DayJet sould take thier deliveries and private label them. Heck, Eclipse claims to have sold over 800 of them at 1.500K per unit.....lets see Dayjet buys the from Eclipes at 995K sells them for 1.5.... a profit of 500K X 1,400 options and orders, = $700,000,000.
Not quite as much money as it cost to design and engineer the product....that was Eclipse, but a pretty good return on the cost to make the "air taxi" software. Just re-label the jet DJ500, finance them yourself with 25% down 6% on the balance, and presto, more money than they would ever make selling taxi seats.... less liability, much quicker return. Of course finding the 1400 owner operators to buy the planes is another story.

airtaximan said...

funny thing is...the 1400 plane order Dayjet now admits to... has been on the e-clips orderbook for a very long time...

They've been building the orderbook for years since this order, so imagine how small the orderbook was back then - if not for "Ed's friendly order".

If they have 2500 orders today, imagine what percentage the Dayjet order was when there were only 1,800 orders!

I think this mess needs to be cleared up even further... some of it still makes no sense...

airtaximan said...

EO387,

yup, you always doubted the orderbook, and always said you didn't care.

does this make you feel differently about e-clips aviation?

sometimes there's no investigation, no lawsuite and no judgement - but, everyone can see there's been misrepresentation, misleading statements and wrong-doing... so, whether it is "illegal" or not, may never be settled..

Does not change credibility, reliability, integrity, honesty and trust.

This IS a matter of trust - safety is trust in this industry.

bill e. goat said...

Fellow blogger:
"But quite frankly, I don't care unless Eclipse has broken a law. I think most of the holders will feel about the same as I".

I'm not accusing anyone of unethical behavior here. But simply, a rational consumer is just trying to get his airplane as cheaply as possible. Eclipse's legal problems, who cares- that's their problem- just g'me my jet.


Such rational consumer behavior anticipates either:

1) enjoying it forever if it works out well, or

2) taking advantage of "teaser" prices and making a buck by buying below production cost and selling at the market value. (Presumably higher, unless the company implodes due to "cooked books"- THAT is the only time a rational consumer worries about Eclipse's legal situation).

(When Delta buys a 767, do they care if Boeing got busted on the 767 tanker program- nope, not as long as it doesn't threaten 767 production. Not saying it ought to be that way, just that's the way it is...).

bill e. goat said...

cj3driver:
Interesting proposal...

Eclipse gets greedy, and buys "exclusive rights" to unproven "revolutionary" engine. Gets burned.

Dayjet gets greedy, and buys "exclusive rights" to unproven "revolutionary" airplane.
Gets burned.

Well, guess Dayjet and Eclipse both have wiggle room here. (Think, like a greased weasle :).

bill e. goat said...

Flyger,

Production, probably 200 to 300 airplanes per year during peak deliveries (maybe in 2009). Sustainable demand, probably not, production dropping to around 150-200 per year in 201x.

"How can all 2,500 orders be backed by deposit?".
I think several hundred are “legit” (more than I can say about the airplane- ha! Just kidding).
The large 1400 Dayjet order? Easy, maybe 10 bought with 10 % down (around $1M total). Then, maybe 230 bought with 1% down (around $2.3M total for these “?firm?”, but deferred deliveries...Vern ought to use that term...). And the rest of the Dayjets? maybe $1/plane down- I don't doubt Eclipse has some legal CYA paperwork like this. After all;

We've heard "2500" (or so) often enough,

and "backed by non-refundable deposit" often enough.

And we've heard 10 percent down often enough.

But we've never heard "ALL 2500 are backed with 10% down" before.

And if we did hear “ALL 2500 are backed with 10% down”, the unspoken catch would something along the lines of “2499 have a purchase price of $19.95, subject to “inflation adjustments".

Waskally Wabbits, they are :)

airtaximan said...

bill-e:

Boeing's been 'round forever...e-clips is still just a startup...and here's the difference:

E-clips used the mischaracterized orderbook it to:

Take depositors money.
Take advantage of suppliers.
Take investors money.

Besides the ethical issues, there's a real legal issue...

Head's may roll, changes may happen...there's real dammage control on this one...and the IPO may require someone to take the "blame"...

cj3driver said...

Eclipse seemed to lure investors, "depositors", to thier program by making thier positions transferrable. Nothing wrong with that as long as they deliver, but, I wonder if DayJet's fleet order has the right to transfer thier positions?
Cessna does not allow position transfers. This is in effort to try to limit speculation (although transfers happen "outside" Cessna) I know first hand that Cessna "screens" customers to try to prevent such occurences, however, since there is such a backlog (even at cessna...look out Eclipse) sometimes the customer curcumstances change and the position is transferred. Eclipse seems to encouage it. One would NOT think Eclipse promoted it for more deposits (cash up front) since the deposits make up a minor percentage of the development costs. It may be they wanted to bolster the order book. (Ya think?) It would be interesting to find out how many total orders have been transfered in the last few years. How many multiple orders by individuals (speculators other then taxis, charters) and brokers.
I still hope they are sucessfull, and if they deliver on thier promises I think they will give single engine products like TBM Meridian, DJet and Cirrus a run for the money. I cant wait to see the real world numbers and a reports from actual operations.

flyger said...

bill e. goat said...

Production, probably 200 to 300 airplanes per year during peak deliveries (maybe in 2009). Sustainable demand, probably not, production dropping to around 150-200 per year in 201x.


I find these numbers to be more believable, but that makes the Eclipse production rate not that much different than Mustang despite the much touted high volume production methodology.

It is a contradiction to believe the production forecast and the DayJet order schedule. I wonder which is more real?

bill e. goat said...

Flight Center and Flyger,
Thanks for doctoring up the delivery spreadsheet- I think that is going to be really neat, especially the "count down (or is that count up) to 54 (the Starship production number+1).

FC: "There are 54 aircraft that have N numbers assigned".

Goat: Hmmm, 53, 54...Very Mysterious...

It would be nice if someone could get numbers out of Eclipse; I'm especially curious about cummulative fleet hours (not that that means to much with all the development going on, still, presumably a comforting number with all the sales and marketing trips, ah, and ongoing development flights- in fact, it would be interesting to see a "per ship" cum hr chart, or at least the "high time" hours).

Could Eclipse PR be helpful and honest?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :)

EB: They should have put out some spec, taken orders, and kept their mouths shut.

Goat: Vern?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :)

ATM:
"fully functional,
airline quality,
high cycle,
reliable,
air taxi plane,
for $779,000,
deliverable at high rate,
in 2003?

Goat:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :)

("I haven't had so much fun since my little brother was eaten by pigs" .)

gadfly said...

Say "Goodnight", Gracie!

bill e. goat said...

Flyger:
"It is a contradiction to believe the production forecast and the DayJet order schedule. I wonder which is more real?"

Goat:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :)
(Where'd those greased weasels get off to... :)

...Actually, I'd go with plan C; 53 or 54, eventually. I think plan A (1000/year) and plan B (1400 for Dayjet) are in the same folder with plan 9.

They're all “From Outer Space”- lots of action and suspense, but the script is unbelievable, and features poor directing. Lots of special effects though.

...Robbie the Robot does FSW...hmmmmm. Wonder if Vern gave that a try. (“Damn thing doesn't gripe about working holidays, and doesn't drink any soda!”).

BTW, I thought Vern wasn't at the PC ceremony- but looks like he made it just in time- I think Mrs. Billson was overcome either with emotion, or disbelief (me too).

Particularly nice shot of Vern (Peg's no sow's ear either). I told you he was photogenic. Looks like the trip to Europe helped him work on his tan, too.

I think we can see the new Eclipse HQ building in the background, to the right.

(Ken, why didn't you send us these pictures?)

http://tinyurl.com/2s92lu

Niner Zulu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
anonymous avionics engineer said...

9-Z
But Vern NEEDS at least 1000 test pilots (er, sucXXX er, ugh, private buyers). How else can they finish development if no one is willing to risk their lives?

bill e. goat said...

ATM:
(regarding IPO) "Head's may roll, changes may happen...

Goat:
Well, I think a lot of eyes are rolling, every time a PR comes out...

ATM:
"there's real damage control on this one...and the IPO may require someone to take the "blame"...

Goat:
ATM, I'm beginning to think IPO might be some kind of ruse? Not sure- I think you're right about legal liabilities with a bogus IPO launch.

Do you think maybe the BoD is hoping for a buy out from someone, say, Northrop (I'm a bit suspicious of Kent Kresa's involvement in all this, and Avio-NG sounds a lot like Avio-Northrop Grumman...).

Right now, I'd say it's too speculative to make a good investment. But, I could see some larger company (or foreign pseudo-governmental agency, say Taiwan, Singapore, or Indonesia) buying it.

Heck, maybe even Bombardier or whatever Raytheon Aircraft is called now days. Seems like that would offer the original investors "instant relief", and minimal liability. In a couple of years, maybe when it looks like deliveries are surging to a peak, the IPO might happen- I'd guess the way things are going, they will put it off for a while (and not because they want to).

CJ3driver,
I gotta admit, for hauling two guys, no bags, 400 miles, it can't be beat (once it has reached maturity). The $64B (well, maybe not quite that much) question is, how big is that market...
Will be interesting to see how it works out...

9Z,
Good point about the low level of protest about delays, limitations, and price increase. I had wondered too why there wasn't two or three times more protest. Maybe as you suggest, there might be two or three times fewer orders than we are lead to believe.

bill e. goat said...

Gadfly said:
"Enough rice in the pressure cooker (7,100 foot altitude you know)"

Goat:
I think the rice burners are going to put the pressure on Eclipse (43,000 foot altitude, you know :)

The Hondajet is going to cert at 43K, and their website mentions "air taxi" configuration several places (6 pax+2 crew; scads of baggage).

Gotta go find some cans to munch or "consume"- maybe ones with some hops inside :)

airtaximan said...

9erZ,

it's funny to see Ken accuse anyone of havng a big mouth and NOT having a wallet to back up their opinion...

I offered a simple wager of $10,0000 on the Dayjet/orderbook issue, and HE NEVER TOOK IT.. Too unsure of his loud, arrogant opinion, except to post nasty things here. His wallet is SO big, that he couldn't even wager $10k.

Hello, Kettle...

Anyhow, ponder this. Some more anecdotal evidence.

Mike Press claims 100 e-clips positions have already changed hands (Circa January/February?)... what percentage of the order book is this... what percentage is this of the earliest position holders when there were only 200, 300 or so...

Pretty scary orderbook.

Considering most of the sales were at a discount from the retail price...its even scarier.

Just my opinion.

airtaximan said...

for anyone who thinks an IPO is not imminent,

you must explain how e-clips will remainin business.

1200 employees, plus, plus, plus, "8 deliveries" since production began in earnest almost a year ago.

Plastic_planes says 20 or so planes in production in Sept 2006 (gotta begin including the year to be clear) and David Crowes plane was initiated in May... That's may 2006...its now May 2007...

The PR regarding PC seemed to try to sed an idea that the CofA inspection process led to tremendous delays, and comments like "we're going to begin cranking" and "the FAA does not work 24/7, e-clips does"...are telling.

They will never cover the nut, or make any money on these planes for a long, long time...

IPO = remain in business. They need to create a positive environment, deliver some planes quick, get more planes into production, claim they will deliver 300 or so this year - this number WILL be revised soon, no doubt - and raise at least $500M-$1 billion or so.

I welcome anyones math skills to show that e-clips can sustain the business in the short term without a huge influx of cash.

Maybe the die-hards and Dayjets will pony up $60% payments, but, these go pretty quickly when it takes months and months to get planes delivered. It will never be less than a few months per plane in the short term. Fnally, dayjet probably has immunity from the $60% payments - anyone see their $35 million for their share of the first 100? This makes the deposit scheme less likely to save their business.

mouse said...

Squeak, Squeak, IPO, now that's funny how this can still be discussed. As before, for there to be a public offering there has to be a legitimate investment and PAYBACK opportunity. No matter how you look at Eclipse the orderbook and promises are all based on scams. They may not have started that way, but that is in fact what the company is. Heads will roll, and they will roll all the way to a federal country club for those caught holding the bag or pulling the strings.

As for the comapny it self, lets understand who really controls everything now, it's the vendors. Only they can deliver the needed parts, systems, Etc. Eclipse builds nothing, it only assembles other suppliers parts. There is nothing to sell, nothing to invest in, and no contract with vendors that any buyer would ever be interested in purchasing.

If the dream to provide a plane that people like Ken would buy and fly (personal jet) the program would be a brilliant success some day. The goal to become a air taxi fleet airplane is all trumped up to substantiate the mass production lie which was needed to explain the high cost of development.

Gunner said...

Mouse-
I'm not nearly as skeptical of the possibility of IPO as I once was. UBS did a huge private placement for this company last year; it was oversubscribed immediately. All this on the hype of TC. Obviously, UBS isn't in the business of lending money; their exit strategy is an IPO.

Since then Eclipse has a wonderful story to tell people who don't look past the Press Releases:
- We have 2,500 orders (nobody defined what that really means, therefore nobody has lied).
- We are certified
- We have PC
- We are delivering planes
- DayJet is gearing up for operations
- The EPA just gave us the 2007 Stratospheric Ozone Protection Award for PhostrEx


All the food groups for a jump-on-the-band-wagon IPO direct out of the DotCom book. But it has to happen sooner rather than later. The news for Eclipse can't get better once DayJet tries to perform, owners start flying the jet, retrofits have to be certified, maintenance is required, JetComplete pricing is announced and AVIO NextGrift is due for cert and install.

Their window for the IPO is now thru the fall, I think. They just might do it; but this will not change the end result, nor does it mean the company is viable. Either there is enough demand to support the lofty claims of manufacturing, training and JetComplete or there is not.

Gunner

flyger said...

Ken Meyer said...

Flyger wrote,
"Are you saying the third AI is installed? "

Yes.

Ed Iacobucci publicly reported the timeline for the third AI in mid-April and indicated the first three DayJet aircraft would have the installation completed by the third week in April.


Um, those are promises that it would be done. Do you actually know that N126DJ, N109DJ, and N110DJ have a third AI installed? It's a long way from "they said it would be done" to "they did it", particularly with Eclipse. I simply don't have the faith that you do that what they say they will do is what happens.

flyger said...

Ken Meyer said...

The static testing ended when the test machinery broke at 193% of design limit load. It's a pretty strong design, and pilots can feel very confident of the plane when they're bouncing around in turbulence.


Contrary to the general intuition, this doesn't necessarily mean the plane will survive overloads better. Also, this means the plane is heavier than it needs to be. Usually, they shoot for failure around 155% or so, a little margin over the 150% required by the regs.

Given that they didn't build a test fixture to handle the load, this suggests they missed their objective failure point. Now that starts to raise questions about whether they know how to build aero structures properly or not. Or they don't know how to build a test jig properly, one or the other. If Boeing had a wing fail at greater than 193%, that would be a terrible embarassment. Boeing's 777 wing failed at 154%.

airtaximan said...

Gunner,

Where have all the die-hards gone?

I think you are correct about the IPO... no matter what, they will raise more money, and they need it.

Even the SIC was OK with the idea that Dayjet has 1400 orders.

I belive the accountants and SEC lawyers will play CYA a little more with this offering, and there will be more open disclosure of Dayjet's order, what orders have options, and what deposits are placed and required progress payments.

The stragest thing about this story might be some details that revel that E-clips claimed 600 or so orders from individuals in 2002. Since 2002, there's been a lot of show and tell, billboards on busses, and tours... hardly any more orders though. Maybe 200 or so. This has to be tough to swallow - its been 4 years.

Another thing, Dayjet is NOT the only fleet order customer with "questionable deposits/progress payment requirements"... a bunch of others (like Aviace, OURPlane, Pogo soon, LinearAir...) have the same sort of arrangement for 25 or 50 planes at a pop... these services need to be proven, and their deposits are very, very risky.

An IPO will couch everything as you did to make a point, BUT, disclosre of risks and deposits WILL be differernt this time. It magnifies how thin the business case is, how risky the investment is, and places them in the very hard to believe category - IMHO.

..but, I'm sure they need money very, very soon...

Ken Meyer said...

Flyger, what's the matter, you don't think anybody saw your messages the first time around??

And you've made this same argument in yet another venue, haven't you? You must think it's a really good argument 'cause you keep making it.

I happen to think it is a bad argument. Pilots like the idea of a over-designed wing spar like the Mooney demonstrates with 30 people on its wing in this great picture:

Mooney picture

A normal category aircraft must withstand about +3.8G, but the Mooney wing took 9.3G in static testing. And that correlates with the superb resistance to in-flight breakup Mooney has demonstrated over the years. Mooney and Eclipse pilots alike will have one less worry when they're in bad turbulence.

As to the weight of the Eclipse main spar--they've got one on display at the factory. Go pick one up; honestly it doesn't weigh much. I think your argument that they've wasted weight on it is completely spurious. You're nitpicking.

Ken

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Ken,

You really ought to quit while you are behind re: weight, really.

The MZFW is now higher than the original MTOW, the plane weighs 1 TON more than originally designed.

Unless the structure is somehwat flexible, just being strong is a BAD thing as that leads to failure instead of deformation\bending.

This is especially true for negative loads on wing spars, just ask Beechcraft or Piper.

Think of windshields and windows, or attachment fittings as places to see unexpected wear or premature cracking if there is too much stiffness or too much flexibility. Structural design is a very complicated discipline and you need to get to a balanced design.

For an airplane that was supposed to weigh what, 4800 lbs at takeoff, that now weighs 6900 lbs at takeoff, how anyone could suggest weight is NOT critical, even in terms of a few ounces here, or a pound there, is truly beyond me.

Weight is ALWAYS critical, on ANY airplane. OEM's have entire departments dedicated to weights\mass properties whose sole purpose is to control weight either during the design (best practice) or after the fact (bad practice) - care to guess when Eclipse started paying attention to weight? Within the last year or so insofar as design impact - previously, weight concerns fell on deaf ears, and a heavy jet is the result.

A good design is one which is optimized for the mission and that meets or slightloy exceeds the requirements, anything else is dead weight along for the ride and that impacts fuel costs, wear on tires and brakes and landing gear components, etc.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Lloyd said...

I've been at several of the "Eclipse Events" and have personally seen them complete 3 to 4 sales at each event. I'm sure there were more that completed following the event. I'm sure that some of the previous sales have requested refunds, but from my perspective Eclipse sales have continued despite the delivery delays.

I remember in ~2002 that Eclipse said that they were no longer going to publish sales numbers, although some form of numbers had to be released to investors, and new prospective customers. My point being that all of this post is based on "guessing" as to what Eclipses numbers actually are, and what Day Jet's actual orders are. Get some more facts for this to move forward.

I believe that Eclipses fleet contracts have wording in them that the aircraft cannot be resold in the open market for several years. (don't know the exact verbage) They recognized that if Day Jet went TU then the sale of their fleet would saturate the used market and affect new sales

Eclipse needs to continue some form of continued sales to keep the business plan operational, thus the europe tour and others.

Lloyd said...

Cold and Wet Said:

"For an airplane that was supposed to weigh what, 4800 lbs at takeoff, that now weighs 6900 lbs at takeoff, how anyone could suggest weight is NOT critical, even in terms of a few ounces here, or a pound there, is truly beyond me."

Get your numbers right! You are 875 lbs off!!

airtaximan said...

lloyd,

you are so right when you say we need more facts.

what happend to the orderbook last year when Aviace went TU?

One thing is clear, if you are right, a few orders signed at each event, and the order book not ballooning over the last 3 years or so, is a BAD sign.

maybe filling in gaps?

who really knows?

I have seen a presentation whereby e-clips was stating "coming soon" Ifly...now called Pogo...making an order for 1700 or so planes... plus other fleet orders, including the Dayjet 14XX order... more than 1400, really. At that time there were only around 500 individual orders.

This leaves a lot of room to fill in, if they were claiming 2000, 2350, 2500 orders...orders.

One last thing, what happened to the "bidders club"? This was a marketing tool invented by e-clips whereby for $5k or so, you buy the right to bid on an "early" position... apparently e-clips was going to reserve positions for this "bidders club" - any clue how it was received? How many people forked over $5k for the right to bid? How many positions were left open in the order book for this purpose? How the open positions were dealt with if no one bids, or no one joined the "bidders club"?

Lloyd said...

Airtaximan said:

"Considering most of the sales were at a discount from the retail price...its even scarier."

Not true. Most of the sales were sold at a premium, giving the sellers a very decent profit on their resales.

See Mike Press's sales page: http://www.spjets.com/positions.htm

Lloyd said...

Airtaximan Said:

One last thing, what happened to the "bidders club"? This was a marketing tool invented by e-clips whereby for $5k or so, you buy the right to bid on an "early" position... apparently e-clips was going to reserve positions for this "bidders club" - any clue how it was received? How many people forked over $5k for the right to bid? How many positions were left open in the order book for this purpose? How the open positions were dealt with if no one bids, or no one joined the "bidders club"?


Bidders club was cancelled many years ago. Eclipse gave the bidders club people the opportunity to have their 5K refunded or convert it to a confirmed order.

airtaximan said...

lloyd,


I can get the Mike Press reference to the actual planes sold, not the one's listed or currently listed. The sales occured primarily discounted from the retail price... that is below $1.53 plus, plus, plus...(CPI, options, etc...) but higher than the speculators paid for their positions.

I believe this has been made clear. anyhow, the listing prices mean little (almost said "nothing"), just like the listinh prices for homes.

airtaximan said...

Lloyd,

thanks for this intel on the bidders club..

"Bidders club was cancelled many years ago. Eclipse gave the bidders club people the opportunity to have their 5K refunded or convert it to a confirmed order."

- any clue as to how they determined who gets which delivery position?

- why did they scrap this?

- how many bidders were there?

thanks

airtaximan said...

coldfish:

did this plane really grow 40% in weight?

man...

Lloyd said...

I don't know exactly how many there were, but I don't believe that it was any great numbers. It was not recieved as well as Eclipse wanted. By cancelling this program, it gave them some early delivery positions for fleet buyers, and allowed the rest to move up in the production #'s if they so desired.

Lloyd said...

air taxi said:

"I believe this has been made clear. anyhow, the listing prices mean little (almost said "nothing"), just like the listinh prices for homes."

In my discussions with Mike who runs this site, most all of the sales have ocurred either at or very close to the asking price.

airtaximan said...

lloyd,

thanks on the Bidders Club -

here's an exerpt from the latest Mike Press (April 3rd) report... judge for yourself:
"Market Prices

Prices on the secondary market bottomed out in mid-March and started to rebound towards the end of month as Eclipse started announcing good news. Some positions were actually sold for less than $1.4M but most sold between $1.45M and $1.55M base price before options.

Again, as I quote these sale prices, they are the list price (usually in 2000 dollars) plus CPI through projected date of delivery plus the seller’s equity. As this pricing comparison is the most confusing part of the secondary market, I will again try to simplify it with a sample comparison of a recent secondary market sale to a factory sale. This sale was for a position in the serial number 300 range with a November 2007 delivery.

(can't post a nice table, sorry...check out his report at:

http://www.spjets.com/news.htm

In above example, the buyer purchased the November 2007 Eclipse at a $65,000 discount below factory price and also will receive the aircraft a year earlier than the factory position.

There is still a large supply of positions for sale on the secondary market, but the sentiment has shifted and instead of being a buyers market anymore, it is now becoming a sellers market. The sellers have noticed this and now are more willing to wait to get their asking price.

The prices have still not come back up all the way to factory prices or higher, but if the news keeps being positive and more of the low hanging fruit gets picked, prices will climb up to $1.6M or higher."

So, what do you think?

airtaximan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lloyd said...

Mike has the best feel for the 2ndary market. Here is his latest report.

Secondary Market Analysis: April Update

The Eclipse secondary market is picking up momentum and prices have started back up. The market prices bottomed out in mid-March, but sentiment started shifting towards the end of March and has now turned positive. In the last two weeks, sales have picked up as have prices. With Eclipse delivering 3 DayJet airplanes the end of March and promises for another 10-15 deliveries in April, it appears that Eclipse is starting again to create positive media attention. This has helped the secondary market and buyers are now coming back into the market. News from Eclipse continues to be positive and their marketing presence has picked up significantly. Fleet buyers and European buyers have also added to the increased demand. This up-tick in the secondary market should continue if Eclipse continues to perform and continues to provide good news to the media and its customer base.

Market Forces

Delivery and Production Issues

As of this writing (April 4th) delivery of five production aircraft has taken place. The first 3 DayJet airplanes were delivered on 31 March 2007. The FAA is still in Albuquerque inspecting each production aircraft individually and will provide each with a Certificate of Airworthiness (CofA) until Eclipse receives its Production Certification (PC) around the end of April. At that time, Eclipse will begin ramping up production and begin delivering airplanes at a faster rate. Eclipse still projects delivering approximately 70 airplanes total by the end of the 2nd quarter 2007 and 400 total by the end of 2007. The schedule published last month is still the current schedule.

Eclipse serial numbers; projected delivery by month 2007

Mar 5
Apr 6-20
May 21-46
Jun 47-69
Jul 70-99
Aug 100-136
Sep 137-182
Oct 183-239
Nov 240-312
Dec 313-402

2008 deliveries at 80-90 per month.

As I mentioned last month, the realism of this delivery ramp up and production schedule is still suspect and whether Eclipse can meet it won’t be known for another few months. It is highly dependent on Eclipse receiving production certification in the next two months and whether the suppliers can keep up with this schedule

Avio and Technical Issues

The technical issues continue to get resolved. AvioNG (Next Generation) development and testing is progressing with current projections of production cut-in around serial number 150 in the September time frame. The aero enhancements have completed development testing and are currently being tested for certification by the FAA. Their production cut-in is projected around serial number 39. Airplanes produced before the cut-in date will have to return to Eclipse factory or service center for retrofit.

Eclipse released a draft performance section 5 of the AFM and it clearly supports the exceptional fuel economy of the jet. These draft performance numbers also support Eclipse claims on climb, cruise, takeoff and landing performance. There were no surprises and most customers are content that Eclipse will fulfill the performance promise of years ago. Once the FAA completes certification of these numbers, then Eclipse can formally publish the updated performance charts

CPI, Financial and Europe

So far an expected moderation in inflation has not occurred. For the first two months of this year, consumer prices are rising at an annual rate of 3.3 percent, up from a 2.5 percent increase for all of 2006. Core inflation, which excluded energy and food, has been rising at an annual rate of 3 percent over the past two months, far above the Fed's comfort zone for gains of 1 percent to 2 percent in core prices. Last year, core inflation rose by 2.6 percent, which was the highest reading since 2001. Even with this rise, it would still be prudent to use 2.5% as a CPI-W number going forward. This 2.5% percentage CPI-W has been the historical average for the last 6 years.

Last month there were questions raised by critics and some customers about the financial viability of the company. Eclipse did address this issue with their customers by providing incentives for early payment of deposits. Eclipse also was reported to have secured additional bridge funding in the neighborhood of $50 million, until deliveries start bringing in the required cash to maintain a positive cash flow.

The European market has picked up considerably, especially in the secondary market. A fleet buyer in Europe snapped up some good buys for late 2007 and early 2008 delivery slots. This helped balance the supply/demand equation on the secondary market. Eclipse announced that they will be taking a marketing airplane over to Europe in April for a two month marketing tour. This marketing tour will help generate further demand from European buyers, both for factory purchases and purchases off the secondary market. EBACE, the European equivalent of NBAA will held the end of May in Geneva and Eclipse will have a strong presence there with the marketing airplane giving demonstrations. Rumors are that EASA certification will start in September with the goal of completing certification by first quarter 2008. In the meantime, European owners are receiving waivers from European authorities to operate the Eclipse on a U.S. “N” number. One European customer with a serial number in the first 10,is planning to operate his jet in Europe all summer and even fly it to the Moscow airshow in May. A major issue with European owners is flight into known icing (FIKI). Eclipse has promised to have this certified before next winter. Finallly, Eclipse is going to spend the next couple of months picking a service center location for Europe.

Market Prices

Prices on the secondary market bottomed out in mid-March and started to rebound towards the end of month as Eclipse started announcing good news. Some positions were actually sold for less than $1.4M but most sold between $1.45M and $1.55M base price before options.

Again, as I quote these sale prices, they are the list price (usually in 2000 dollars) plus CPI through projected date of delivery plus the seller’s equity. As this pricing comparison is the most confusing part of the secondary market, I will again try to simplify it with a sample comparison of a recent secondary market sale to a factory sale. This sale was for a position in the serial number 300 range with a November 2007 delivery. The current factory delivery price and schedule is taken from the Eclipse website: www.eclipseaviation.com/configurator. Here are how these prices and delivery schedules compare for a base model before options are selected:

Factory Price Secondary Market Price

List: $1,520,000 (June 2006 dollars) List : $1,040,000 (June 2000 dollars)
CPI: $ 84,000 (Nov 2008 delivery) CPI : $ 200,000 (Nov 2007 delivery)
Seller’s Equity: $ 300,000
__________________________ __________________________
Total $1,604,000 (base price) Total: $1,540,000 (base price)

In above example, the buyer purchased the November 2007 Eclipse at a $65,000 discount below factory price and also will receive the aircraft a year earlier than the factory position.

There is still a large supply of positions for sale on the secondary market, but the sentiment has shifted and instead of being a buyers market anymore, it is now becoming a sellers market. The sellers have noticed this and now are more willing to wait to get their asking price. The prices have still not come back up all the way to factory prices or higher, but if the news keeps being positive and more of the low hanging fruit gets picked, prices will climb up to $1.6M or higher.

Conclusions and Forecast

The secondary market prices for Eclipse reached an all time low in February and early March but now are climbing back up to factory pricing. Eclipse has started delivering airplanes and will soon secure their production certificate which will allow them to deliver more and at a faster rate. Media news has been positive and the buyers are coming back into the secondary market. Prices for late 2007 and early 2008 deliveries have climbed back above $1.5M

The forecast for the secondary market is bullish. Sentiment has changed with sellers and they are more willing to wait for their asking prices. With more Eclipse deliveries in the coming months and Eclipse forecasting their production certificate soon, the secondary Eclipse market should continue to accelerate with prices rising.

Until next month--regards,

Mike

airtaximan said...

a thought on the order book, and the secondary market dynamics:

let's say the initial crop of secondary market buyers had a substantial number of speculators...enough to trade 100 or so e-planes before PC.

let's say the new crop of secondary market buyers still have some speculators, but as many - they obtained their positions at a discount from the "retail" price, so there IS room left for the price to go up.

Let's say someone notices that except for the Dayjet 1400 orders minus the 300 due in the next 24 months, there are only around 1,300 planes to be delivered by eclipse in the next 24 months.

and finally, lets assume e-clips continues the fable that they will produce 400 in 2007 and 1,000 in 2008...

...seems like they are out of orders pretty soon.

... and this accounts for all the other fleet orders and options are in fact taken by the customer in the first 2 years. This is a big IF... if there are a number of options for delivery later than end of 2008, the drought comes sooner.
If speculators bought an early position at a discount on the secondary market, and they expect to be able to trade it for a profit, they could be in for a real surprise.
What happens to the market when supply outstrips demand...which might happen as early as next year?

I think this is a realistic scenario...

Just one airtaximan's opinion...

airtaximan said...

lloyd,

so?

what do you conclude, are secoondary prices below full factory, or not?

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Sorry Lloyd, thanks for the correction.

MTOW in 2000 was 4,600 lbs

http://web.archive.org/web/20000610080946/www.eclipseaviation.com/sub_eclipse_specs.asp

MZFW for the forthcoming "A" Model will be 4,992 lbs acording to Vern's customer communication March which was repeated here.

MTOW for the forthcoming "A" Model will be 5,995 with a Max Ramp Wt slightly over 6000.

ATM, the plane has seen about 1,400 pounds of weight growth since 2000, which is about 30%.

airtaximan said...

coldfish;

I guess having a requirement that engines run for more than "first flight" increases weight?

also, unless a total redesign is done...

- limits range
- limits useful load
- probably screws up your CG
- screws with BFL

anything I forgot?
maybe..

weight reduction programs lead to durability issues..

anything else..

Ken Meyer said...

AT wrote,

"did this plane really grow 40% in weight?"

If you have to ask something basic like the weight of the aircraft, one wonders if you are truly qualified to offer so many opinions on the aircraft, the company, it order status, and its future.

That said, the aircraft was substantially redesigned around the PW610 engines years ago when the Williams engines didn't pan out. Many aspects of the design were changed during the standown, not just the engines.

It really isn't appropriate to compare the weight of the pre-P&W design to today's aircraft any more than you would do it for other redesigns like the F/A-18 Super Hornet (whereby the E model weighs about 30% more than the C model predecessor).

The gross weight of the PW610-equipped plane went from 5640 lbs up to 5995 lbs, representing an increase of 6.3%. Empty weight went from 3390 lbs to 3629 lbs, a 7% increase over the initial PW610-equipped design.

Ken

airtaximan said...

Ken welcome back. Its so nice to have your informative and cheery personality come shining through on this blog.

To clarify, which IS requred regarding all thing e-clips these days...

I was questioning coldwetmac's description of the weight growth, becasue it made no sense. It was corrected by Lloyd and by him...

So, thanks for showing your spineless self back on this blog. We appreciate your constant attempt to screw with the facts.

Funny how you can question my knowledge of the plane and program, based on a simple question I asked...and somehow, despite innaccuracies, misstatements and deceptive practices for 8 years, you cut e-clips all the slack in the world.

You wouldn't take an honest wager on your beloved E-clip's trumped up order book - despite your nasty and arrogant remarks..

your credibility is now...

ZERO

ZERO

I feel another Ken call to Vern coming....

lumar said...

Delivries, delivries...?

As I understand not only ONE, unique private owner-pilot has actually flown ONCE a Eclipse-Jet. Why?

anonymous avionics engineer said...

Why? Most people that can affotd these may be well off, and they may at times cite foolish statistics and misquote facts quite well here, but they are not STUPID.

PubGrubber said...

ATM
"So, thanks for showing your spineless self back on this blog. We appreciate your constant attempt to screw with the facts."

In this case, Ken's statement of comparing the "Williams" version to the "PW" version I agree with and would consider correct. In addition to redesigning for the new engines, they also optimized some other systems based on previous lessons, such as moving the VCS from the Aft Fuse to the Nose.

lumar said...

Worst case for eclipse would be a fatal crash, certainly. But ONE DAY somebody should fly a eclipse, sole on board.

Who would buy a aircraft that can't be flown without a safety-copy?

I can not see a issue for that giant project!

flyger said...

Ken Meyer said...

Flyger, what's the matter, you don't think anybody saw your messages the first time around??


Discussion moves to the next main posting, I just move it.

And you've made this same argument in yet another venue, haven't you? You must think it's a really good argument 'cause you keep making it.

Like I said, I move it from the previous blog post to this one. I didn't realize this was that annoying. I apologize if I violated blog ettiquette.

A normal category aircraft must withstand about +3.8G, but the Mooney wing took 9.3G in static testing. And that correlates with the superb resistance to in-flight breakup Mooney has demonstrated over the years. Mooney and Eclipse pilots alike will have one less worry when they're in bad turbulence.

There's only one problem, virtually no in flight breakups are caused by main spar failures. Bonanzas failed because the tail came off. 210s failed because the pilot lost orientation. Mooneys fail for the same reason. Very, very few in flight break ups start with the main spar. So all these pilots that want gratuitously over designed spars are just ignorant of the basic principles of aircraft design. It may give them psychological comfort, but that is actually dangerous if you think about it.

I think your argument that they've wasted weight on it is completely spurious.

Did Eclipse set out to design the wing to greater than 193% strength? Then why did they not build a test jig to handle their design point? Or did they design it to more conventional design point and the wing didn't do what they expected? Is this "its strong for turbulence" argument just a cover story for them not knowing what they were doing?

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

Sorry, but I don't agree with Ken and some of the others on this weight growth.

Per Oliver Maesfield, the airplane was designed as a point design.

The aerodynamic configuration was frozen in 2000 when the takeoff weight was 4,700 lbs and the projected stall speed was 62 kts.

In seven years the aero configuration has not changed but the takeoff weight has grown 28%. Takeoff weight is eventually projected to be 5,995 lbs and they hope to keep the stall speed under 70 kts as I recall.

I can assure you, had anyone expected the airplanes as delivered would be weighing nearly 6,000 lbs, they would have added more wing from the start.

Weight affects a lot of details in an airplane. Take the wheels and brakes for instance. There are already reports of problems and now they are upping the weights which ups the takeoff and landing speeds. As far as I know, wheels and brakes are the same as spec'd in 2000.

And I would add one more point, the "B" mods have yet to certify, we are still talking about a paper airplane.

Green-or-Red said...

IMO, static testing to 193% of design limit load is a moot point until the successful completion of the fatigue test. I believe that the Eclipse is a high "G" airplane, somewhere around 6 or 7 G's for limit load, whereas a typical Boeing airplane is around 3.5 G's. With max fatigue load about 60% of limit load, E-clips could be in a precarious position to sucessfully complete the fatigue test.

Stan Blankenship said...

g-o-r,

I would suspect the limit maneuvering "g" load on the Eclipse to be closer to 3.8.

Unfortunately, g-limits are not listed in the TCDS but Ken or EO387 should have it in the AFM. Maybe they can advise.

The latest issue of Av Week did a pilot report on the Mustang. Ed Phillips did the review, a short flight between Wichita and Indy (KS). Twice he mentioned objectionable noise levels during takeoff and initial climb.

The article answered a question of mine. The Mustang is qualified to the Commuter Category of Part 23 bird strike requirements on the windshield. Hitting a two pound bird at the max flap speed. Pretty anemic compared to Part 25, a four pound bird at sea level max cruise speed.

Operationally, it was reported to be easy to fly and had a very high level of fit and finish.

Production level currently one per week and Cessna hopes to increase the rate to two a week by the end of the year.

gadfly said...

It is near impossible to help people that do not want to be helped . . . or, think they have all the answers.

The gadfly left the submarine service, and went to college . . . taking among other things, “Life Saving” at Orange Coast College, Costa Mesa, California. One thing we learned was to grab the drowning victim in such manner that they could not drown the both of us. That was “then” . . . today I suppose that a “saved-from-drowning” victim, would sue the socks off the lifeguard for some insult to their self esteem . . . whatever!

There are many folks that will fight Stan and others over issues . . . as if they have a handle on airworthiness subjects . . . to their own demise.

The gadfly has said this before: The discussion centers on an “aircraft” that does not yet exist. Sooner or later, someone is going to take this thing into conditions beyond its capabilities. And a few of us are trying desperately to “grab hold” of your understanding, that this “paper airplane” (as Stan has so well described it) cannot perform in a manner that is acceptable. And yet, the people that have at least a moderate understanding of the problems are treated like imbeciles.

Sometime, we might sit down and discuss the compromises made to accommodate the “new engines”, the strange (almost unnoticeable) dished-in fuselage, near the engines, a contribution to drag . . . and the “weight gain” over time. And many things that contribute to an inefficient little aircraft that will never be what it “claims” to be.

The gadfly is amazed at the extremes to which people will go, to believe in something that has little basis in fact. And for what end? . . . to own a “jet”? And then what?

gadfly

(Next time, maybe we can discuss the simple task of designing and building a “test device” that is stronger than the part being tested . . . that will not fail under any test conditions. “ ‘Been there, done that!” You’re puttin’ me on, right? . . . the test fixture failed before the spar? . . . do I laugh or cry . . . or just moan and groan?)

airtaximan said...

Pubgrub,

I took issue with Ken's rediculous characterization of me, that I know NOTHING, since I questioned CWMR statement the plane grew 40%.

The issue of the fact they claim they "substantially redesigned around the PW610 engines years ago"

begs the question:

What was NOT redesigned? Normally, one could argue the new engine was so different, in order to remain "cutting edge" and "revolutionary" and to maintain a competitive advantage long term... it would require a "redesign"... the word "substantial" seems a little merky - typical, but merky.

So Vjet, to E-500, to new e-500 with PW engines... nice design.

The word Kluge comes to mind.

any wonder we have:
- range issues
- useful load issues
- CG issues
- BFL

anything I forgot?
maybe..weight reduction programs lead to durability issues..
anything else?


Puber: it would appear that a redesign could have resulted in a differrnt plane, one that met the guarantees...no?

Lastly, do you think with $1 billion and all the time in the world waiting for the new PW engines e-clips could have "sunbtantially redesigned" the plane so that larger tip tanks and new aero mods, would not be needed? At least, they could have been done and completed during this period?

If someone tries to say "they didn't know they would miss the guarantees and require mods after TC and PC to make good on revised guarantees... I call BS. if they really did not know the performance of the plane years before certification, this is really, really sad. Again with all the talent, computers, resources and money and time...I call BS.

Pub.. this holds no water... it makes no sense. It feels like they did as little redesign as possible, and to state it was "substantial" smacks of Vernacular... and Ken-tucky-fried- arguing as well.

IMHO

gadfly said...

A long, long time ago, while working with high-energy (2.5 Megawatts) plasma generators and high vacuums, we had a sign posted in our facility:

ACHTUNG!!!

Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch das blinkenlights!!!

More and more, I’m thinkin’ that this should be a “placard” mounted above the instrument panel on the Eclipse . . . especially on the “export version” to Europe.

Lumar . . . what’s your opinion?

gadfly

bill e. goat said...

ATM to Ken:
"I offered a simple wager of $10,0000 on the Dayjet/orderbook issue, and HE NEVER TOOK IT.."

Goat's observation:
I'd say ATM's opinion isn't worth $10K to Ken. How much, I wouldn't speculate. Maybe a drink somewhere...in ABQ at gala 2500th delivery party. I think the wine will be well aged by then... Hope we're all still kicking and ticking by then (and not kicking each other! :)

bill e. goat said...

ATM: "Considering most of the sales were at a discount from the retail price...its even scarier".

Lloyd to ATM:
"Not true. Most of the sales were sold at a premium, giving the sellers a very decent profit on their resales".

Goat: I think ATM is referring to the financial health of Eclipse, not the resalers. I don't see how Eclipse profits at all from this, and concur with ATM that Eclipse is being harmed by selling below market, and probably below cost.

Frank Castle said...

Hell, I'd kick in a clam or two, just to make Mr. Bigmouth Kenny Bass take the bait.

C'mon, kenny, you know you want to make liars of us all. And the 10k is icing on the cake.

"Or are you just ~yella~ ??"

lumar said...

Gadfly,

''Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen.''

I love it!

Ken Meyer said...

Frank Castle wrote,
"Hell, I'd kick in a clam or two, just to make Mr. Bigmouth Kenny Bass take the bait."

Are you speaking again in an official capacity for Cessna? I'll pass on your comments to the company when I take my Mustang test flight in 10 days.

I've been so impressed with your comments on behalf of the company that I've compiled them so they can see what a good job you're doing representing them.

Ken

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Ken that is such a pathetic bully tactic I am reminded of our favorite naked emperor in ABQ and his intimidation methods.

You are truly one vile individual.

Frank is entitled to his own opinions and beliefs and has made it very clear he is not here in any official capacity for Cessna.

That you would be so petty as to try and either cause trouble for Frank or to attempt to shut him up by insinuating you will tell his employer about the criticisms he has shared about your wonderjet is very illustrative of the lack of character many of us have already seen and experienced.

That your belief in the wonderjet can be so easily shaken that you seek to quell any opposing opinion is as interesting as it is sad.

If you don;' already work for Eclipse you should call Vern and ask for a position in management, you'd fit right in.

I understand you have his number on speed dial, but you might try using someone else's phone, Vern is probably screening his calls.

Why are you even flying a Mustang anyway - I thought you couldn't afford it, it was too big, too slow, too thirsty, too certified.

Pathetic.

Ken Meyer said...

"Why are you even flying a Mustang anyway - I thought you couldn't afford it, it was too big, too slow, too thirsty, too certified."

Oh, not at all. I think it's a nice plane. I'm sure it would suit my purposes just fine.

You may know my wife is a pilot, too. She really likes the nicer interior of the Mustang, while I prefer the more advanced features of the Eclipse. I also appreciate the fact that the Eclipse is more efficient and comes from an innovative new company.

So, it might be that our best solution is to go back to being a two plane family as we were for many years. His and her jets :)

Ken

Gunner said...

Ken-
Not for nothin' but that really is beneath you. To threaten a Blogger with any weapon you can find is really low and I can't believe you mean that.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, though, because I think you're basically an honorable soul who doesn't need to "run back to teacher" to fight his battles.

If I'm wrong, well then I'm wrong....and you have lowered the bar here to an unimaginable nadir. To which someone might respond in kind, by considering it their solemn duty to expose every historical wart in your life; and they just might have the resources in AZ and CA to do just that, with little effort.

Your next response (sidestep) here just might be real important, Ken. Weigh it carefully.
Gunner

Gunner said...

Ken-
Oh, and by the way. What were your "two planes" before you "consolidated" to a 27 year old, crashed in its first year, $250K value Cessna 340? Perhaps they were Citation SP's?

This kind of condescension, absent the ability to go the distance, continues to remind me of that High School kid. Always first to fight; always first to the pavement.

Back up just a bit now, please. Nothing good can come of this.
Gunner

anonymous avionics engineer said...

All this infighting is almost as much fun as watching Vern taxi out in his twin for the first flight a few years ago with his stab trim locks secured to the tail. It might have been all over but for a sharp marshall signalling the first E-500 out of ABQ and his quick remarks on the radio (albeit, very politically correct). Really people, let's keep this to the subject at hand, a mis-managed aviation hall of shame.

bill e. goat said...

Boys, Boys, Boys...

I have admired Ken's cheerful and enthusiastic spirit, and graciousness in sharing information with us, both favorable and unfavorable to Eclipse.

I have not been pleased with the generally brutal response he receives here, and can understand his frustration.

But, as they say, what happens on the blog, stays on the blog. (Or something like that, in regard to the gambling capital of the world, or at least of aviation :). Thus, unless Uncle Frank makes a spectacle of himself in person, which I'm sure he is too refined to do, I'm sure this will amount to nothing. (The blog is a great place to rant, or “bleat”, and although we are generally sincere here, we are also generally much more civil in person. I think a little more civility would be appropriate “on-line” as well...).

So Ken, I commend you for your patience and long-suffering tolerance, and am quietly (ha- pretty rare around here) confident that you will continue demonstrate to the rest of us your noble spirit, and give Frank a “pass” while at Cessna.

I am as equally confident and appreciative that you will give us an honest appraisal and comparison of the Mustang.

Thanks for your kindness, humor, and forbearance- I'm sorry it isn't appreciated by all. Hang in there man! I think I'm one of many that can understand your frustration in posting here, and appreciate you for sticking with us. With some of the animosity you've been liberally doused with, I don't blame you for pointing out what you could do, but I am certain it is not in your character to do so. In fact, I'd put $10K on it!!! (I'm sorry those who can't discern your character, are also the ones who can't discern irony and satire...).

A good word for all of us...
Forbearance: “a refraining from the enforcement of something (as a debt, right, or obligation) that is due...Patience, Leniency”.

And, as much as egos allow, I think it would be nice if Frank and Ken actually met and shook hands.

To me, that's a measure of a man, not who "wins a bet"...but who is willing to take the gamble of being pleasantly surprised by his fellow man...

BTW, I wouldn't bet $10K on that one :), but hope it happens. And I would by a round of frosties at the 2500-th delivery party (THAT one's a pretty safe bet, at least in this decade... :)

redtailhawk said...

Killer Kastle said...
Hell, I'd kick in a clam or two, just to make Mr. Bigmouth Kenny Bass take the bait.

C'mon, kenny, you know you want to make liars of us all. And the 10k is icing on the cake.

"Or are you just ~yella~ ??"


Gee, Frankie. Then you'd be an A-hole and a liar. Go home...

redtailhawk said...

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...
Ken that is such a pathetic bully tactic I am reminded of our favorite naked emperor in ABQ and his intimidation methods.

You are truly one vile individual.

Frank is entitled to his own opinions and beliefs and has made it very clear he is not here in any official capacity for Cessna.


Holy Mackarel. Interesting that you don't see Uncle Frankie for the vile individual that he is. I have my doubts about you.

airtaximan said...

it's nice to know that Ken can afford 2 jets...

There seems to be some confusion regarding the wager I offered.

Ken, who has been nasty and took positions that were the party-line at e-clips many many times, was emphatic that dayjet did not have most of the e-clips orderbook...

...so, I offered a wager, so he could put his money where his open mouth is...

this is particulary relevant for Ken, as he has tried to discredit me since I do not have a deposit on an e-clips, so according to him, I guess one needs to buy an opinion around here these days.

Anyhow, I offered that we both put up $10k...he would be betting against my contention Dayjet has more than 1,000 orders at e-clips.

HE NEVER TOOK THE BET.
- this from a guy who can afford 2 jets.

He was confident enough in his claims that dayjet did not have 1,000 orders, to be nasty, and argumentative and rude for many posts on this - just, I guess, not sure enough to put up only $10k to show he has some balls, not just a big mouth.

Sad.

I personally call BS on his contention they will buy two jets - I think its all BS.

-Lastly, Frank Castle's name is on his posts, so I strongly believe he couldn't care less what anyone at Cessna thinks of what he writes here. To say, "nananananana, I'm telling on you" is indicative of the nonesensical childish behavior we can expect from some folks here... sorry to say.

_ I can just see Kenny, showing up for his ride in the Mustang, with a bnder of Frank Castle's posts on this blog... saying "I have something really important to discuss beofre I buy a Mustang to go along ith my E-clips...you have an employee you need to know about , who's been writing all this bad stuff on a blog about e-clips...I LOVE E-clips, and if you want me to buy a Mustang too...well, I suggest you inform your upper management of Mr. Casles behavior, and have him dealt with accordingly. You know...Vern told me he would FIRE him on the spot for saying these things! Whatareya going to do about it..." ring, ring, ring, Ken meyer here...OH Hi Vern... yup, I told them you would fire Castle...yup...OK.. I can take delivery of the mustang in 2009... up, sure I'll give you a ride.. don't worry, I'll post that it was really noisy compared with...."

Ken Meyer said...

AT, you seem to be pretty fixated on convincing everybody you have $10,000 to bet. OK, here's the deal--

I challenge you to put your $10,000 into something useful.

Click on this link and put your money where it will actually do some good. Put it into the AOPA PAC and joing the fight against Aviation User Fees.

I did. Now it's your turn. Then people won't keep thinking you're just making stupid boasts all the time.

Ken

airtaximan said...

Ken:

Thanks for the advice on what would be a good charity for my $10k. I'm glad to see you made a donation to such a worthy casue, too.

It has nothng to do with the point, here - you have said I should put my money where my mouth is.

My position was Dayjet had more than 1000 order with e-clips.

Your emphatic position was, I was wrong.

I said: Let's place a wager, and both send $10,000 to Stan. whoever is right, get's the other guys money.

You suggested I put my money where my mouth is - which has nothing to do with your new suggestion, which is "put your money in this charity".

Maybe not a bad idea... BUT it has nothing to do with the "placing your money where your mouth is" which you refused to do. Why? despte your insulting an emphatic posts, were you afraid that maybe I was right? I was...you would have lost the $10k...but I suspect, you knew that.

Ken = Die-hard, blow-hard.

It is possible to:
1- stick to the point
2-leave personal insults out of the argumnets
3- have a position which you acknowledge may or may not be 100% supported by facts
4- have a healthy skepticism for e-clips
5- not make stuff up
6- provide valuable information, insight, opinions and remarks, and engage in discussion on this blog

You give a bad name to the other die-hards...

and, if you are going to state that my opinions are wrong and hollow becasue I have no skin in the game, you should be wiling to take a bet...especially when you are so SURE of your position and SO SURE I am wrong.

Nice try with the charity... it has nothing to do with the point, here.

Ken Meyer said...

But AT, your chant was...

"There aren't 2500 orders. There aren't 2500 orers. There aren't 2500 orders....Please, Lord; there aren't 2500 orders, right?"

You can chant all day (and some days you have), but they still have more than 2500 orders. Orders come and go--Eclipse made it clear at the start that they understood the fluid nature of their orderbook. That's why they didn't want to reveal total orders initially; that's why they don't detail them by buyer now. Remember Nimbus? A thousand plane order. Here today; gone tomorrow, but the company still has over 2500 orders.

So your chant goes on, but nobody is listening:

"There aren't 2500 orders. There aren't 2500 orers. There aren't 2500 orders....Please, Lord; there aren't 2500 orders, right?"

Did you say you donated the money to AOPA PAC?

Ken

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Redtail,

On that glorious day when you actually contribute anything of value to this blog beyond your scoftic and ascerbic drivel I might concern myself with your opinion of me, but until then I could care less.

The sooner y'all face up to the house of cards you are defending and actually be a stand-up man, like EO387, the better.

IMO, your caustic bile is better directed at the mismanagement team in ABQ who has created the NEED for this blog, and FUELED its' growth, by LYING to you and everybody about their order book, their certification status, the utility of the wonderjet as persently delivered, the list goes on and on and on.

airtaximan said...

Ken:

You provided that chant as a way to discredit what I was saying, instead of taking the bet, or discussing the issues in a factual and concrete manner.

If I were you, I would delete your last post, as it show how nasty ad deceptive you are. I never "chanted that" and that was not the subject of the wager...you know this.

Why lie?

Keep the faith...

Ken Meyer said...

AT wrote,

"I never "chanted that"

Oh, but you did. Maybe not so eloquently as I wrote. But chant you did. Here's a sampling:

"Was it doubtful that E-clips really has 2500 orders... yes."

"They really do not have the "orders"."

"Why the spending on ads and marketing tours at this stage, IF they have 2500 legit orders?"

"BS orderbook"

"Unless you really believe [Vern] has 2500 "orders"."

"Was it doubtful that E-clips really has 2500 orders... yes."

"E-clips DOES NOT HAVE 2500 'orders'"


So perhaps we should all join in with you now and sing together:

"There aren't 2500 orders. There aren't 2500 orers. There aren't 2500 orders....Please, Lord; there aren't 2500 orders, right?"

Ken

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Ken, can you kindly post a PDF copy of the check or receipt for your donation to the AOPA PAC, as a gesture of good faith?

You know damn well ATM said that the order book was mostly DayJet, and you know damn well you said it was only 300 planes.

You should also know that the VP of Strategic Operations for DayJet only yesterday or Tuesday CONFIRMED they have 1400 aircraft on order at Eclipse, that is 62% of the ENTIRE order book Ken.

6 out of every 10 Eclipses supposedly on order, is SLATEd for DayJet Ken, 6 out of every 10.

They have $1.4B worth of aircraft on order, and have raised a whole $50M, only $1,395,000,000 to go, JUST for aircraft.

Of course, they still have to hire about 7000 pilots to fly those jets (a minimum of half a Beeeeeellion dollars in pilot payroll alone). That is more pilots than Delta has. More pilots than FedEx and USAir combined.

The numbers do not add up, the do not make sense.

If DayJet accounts for 1400 of the 2300 or so orders, that means ALL OTHER CUSTOMERS COMBINED have about 900 aircraft on order. Vern says 400 this year and 1000 next year, that is 1400 deliveries. Trouble is, DayJet is only taking 300 planes in the next 24 months according to them, now that leaves 100 deliveries with no customers apparently, and with ALL non-fleet customers served by the end of 2008.

If DayJet took ALL of their remaining aircraft the following year, what does Eclipse do in 2010 and beyond? There simply are not 1000 to 1500 individuals and small companies to drop $1.8M on the wonderjet EACH AND EVERY YEAR.

The numbers do not add up, they do not make sense, that is not DISRUPTIVE it is DELUSIONAL.

The business model is fundamentally flawed and has been since day 1.

Original estimates were that the development program would cost $300-350M, they are closing on $1B. They were only off by a factor of 3.

If they COULD eek out $50K capital recapture on EACH AND EVERY airframe, it would take 20,000 to recapture the $1B development cost. 20,000 planes Ken. That is like the sum total of 182's delivered by Cessna, ALL OF THEM, from introduction until the cessation of production in '85 - ALL OF THEM delivered over 30 years.

The numbers do not add up, they do not make sense.

Eclipse said operating cost would be $.44/mi, then $.57/mi, then $.69, then 'about $1', and have since stopped saying. Operating cost will prove to have been off by a factor of 5. They were off by 500%.

Eclipse said the jet would cost $775,000, then $835,000, then $1M, and now are about $1.6M. Purchase price will prove to have been off by a factor 2.5. They were off by 250%.

Eclipse said range was going to be 1400 miles, it is now 1100 miles. They were off by 20%.

Eclipse said the jet would weigh 4600 pounds, it will weigh 6000 pounds. They were off by 1400 pounds, or about 1/3.

The numbers do not add up, they do not make sense.

EclipseBlogger said...

Cabbie said... Ken = Die-hard, blow-hard.

and then in the next paragraph...

It is possible to:
1- stick to the point
2-leave personal insults out of the argumnets


Typical, how typical.

airtaximan said...

Ken:

You say:
"Eclipse made it clear at the start that they understood the fluid nature of their orderbook. That's why they didn't want to reveal total orders initially; that's why they don't detail them by buyer now."

This is not accurate:
Vern stated clearly that he would not revel the number of orders, "because there is no standard for what constitutes and order in aviation" (paraphrased, I can dig it up...if you don't believe me) - so it was not fluidity of the order book...

- we could debate this all day long, but IMO, until Vern decided to screw with the definition of "order" there was an industry wide standard for what an order is. If Boeing, Cessna, embraer, Piper, Honda, or Raytheo, ever touted their orderbook as "firm" when half or more were options...or if they repeatedly stated one customer has 300 orders when they had 1400, there would be hell to pay, folks would lose their jobs, and the SEC would be involved, you can bet on it - well, since you wouldn't bet on it, in your case, I guess you could just rant from the rooftops insultingly but very sure of yourself.

Later, Vern did reveal his orders (why, the fuidity problem was gone somehow? BS...BS...BS...), clumped them together with options, redefined what a "deposit" is and recharacterized Dayjet's order as 239 + 70 options in an orderbook which is 2500 orders secured by non-refundable deposits. 1400 of which are now revealed (first on this blog, then a day or so later n the press...)as Dayjet's, which include an untold number of options, and which may have almost no deposiut or which may have a huge deposit - who knows? My guess is...little deposit.

You re all required to place 60% progress payment - where's the Dayjet progress payment? It would be $35 million for their claimed 50% of the first hundred planes...any ideas? You think perhaps THIS is related to the fact that Vern will not disclose who has which positions?

when you say:
"Remember Nimbus? A thousand plane order. Here today; gone tomorrow, but the company still has over 2500 orders."

I agree with you, the Dayjet order may be a lot like the Nimbus order..poof..gone just after $200 million ws raised..tomorrow

- there was worthless stock offered for the order as a deposit, and after a news story broke about the shady deal, the stock was somehow returned and the order was, as you put it "gone tomorrow".

Ken: without call ing Vern on the phone to find out your opinion, do you really agree, based on your knowledge of the industry, what constitutes an order, and option, etc...that eclipse has over 2500 orders secured by non-refundable deposits?

airtaximan said...

EB,

This IS the point.

Ken is a "die-hard" and "blow hard"

"Die hard" is Verns advertising term for the eclipse customers

"blow hard" is my term for Ken, as he would not put his money where his mouth is - he invented this concept, as an insult directed towards me. I want to be clear on this.

Ken dismissed my opinion as irrelevant becasue I had no money on the line...when offered a chance to put some money behind his position - he couldn't stomach it...

makes him a blow-hard...

He should put up, or at least not dismiss other people opinions becasue they have no money on the line...

Stan Blankenship said...

Have a new post written and ready to go up just as soon as my webmaster can get the attachment up on the eclipsecritic.net site.

It's probably wishful thinking on my part, but I'm hoping we can leave some of the personal attacks behind and focus more on issues.

airtaximan said...

Ken:
Do you really still believe, based on your knowledge of the industry, the pre-eclipse industry conventional definition of what constitutes and "order" and "option" etc...that E-clips has over 2500 orders secured by non-refundable deposits?

Do you really still think this?

flyger said...

FAA web site today was updated with CofA dates:

N109DJ: CofA 3/31/2007
N110DJ: CofA 3/30/2007

So it appears, at least on paper, that all three DJ airplanes did have CofA by 3/31/2007.

I wonder how many CofAs are signed on Saturday? I don't think Eclipse can complain about the FAA being accomodating!

Still only two airplanes registered to owners (N508JA, N816KD), five airplanes have listed normal CofA.

N229BW took to the air for the first time visible to FA today.

Eric said...

Ken, I would like to thank you for donating to the AOPA PAC. User-fees are going to be a tough fight, and we're all glad you're helping to stop them.

airtaximan said...

From one of the e-clips supporters... this is one of the funniest things on this blog...looking back after the real order book has been revealed:

(it's so arrogant, insulting and filled with e-facts, I almost want to believe it!)


"ATM… “I've been trying to piece together the e-clips orderbook (sic), which I have said is mostly Dayjet orders and options..”

You have a propensity for inaccurate information. Day purchased 239 and has options for 70 additional over 5 years.

New Mexico Business Weekly (5/25/2005)- The five year contract with DayJet Corp. calls for the company, which was launched Monday, to buy 239 of Eclipse's twin-jet planes during the first 24 months of the deal. DayJet has options for 70 additional planes, Eclipse said in a news release.

NBAA- November 11, 2005…”This includes 1,592 firm orders with 765 options; all 2,357 aircraft are secured with non-refundable deposits…”

Back to elementary (like elementary school) math ATM: In November 2005 out of the 1592 firm orders DayJet accounted for 239. How many firm orders does that make without DayJet. Hint 1353.
Hint #2 239 out of 1592 is not “MOSTLY.” "

Sad...

Bonanza Pilot said...

Was reading through Rich Kargaards blog today

http://blogs.forbes.com/digitalrules/2007/05/i_love_jets.html

In the comments section he gives a nice detailed report of his flight in an Eclipse...also says Vern told him there are 1000+ deposits from owner pilots and 1200 from air taxi guys..here is the report, it is very positive!

Posted by: Rich Karlgaard | May 03, 2007 at 11:00 AM

Here is a quick-take report on my Eclipse 500 flight yesterday. Warning: It's written in pilot-speak

--------------

Flying the Eclipse 500

Yesterday I spent an hour flying the Eclipse 500, certified model #10.

All hand-flying below 18,000 feet. I wanted to know how the Eclipse felt from a VFR-, stick-and-rudder perspective even though pilots will not fly it this way.

With test pilot Terry sitting in the right seat, I took off from Sunport’s Runway 8. Rotation speed was 85 to 90 kias with T/O flaps. I climbed at a leisurely 2,000 feet per minute at 175 kias to 17,000 feet. We did some airwork, including a near stall to demonstrate how the stick automatically goes forward at 5 kias from the stall. Then we flew to Double Eagle and landed. I held 90 knots down final and pulled to idle at about 50 feet AGL. Terry wanted to show me that the jet could land without flaring. So I didn’t flare. The landing was firm but well within control. Trailing link gear is a nice thing!

Then we flew a couple of patterns for Runway 22. At 800 AGL I turned crosswind and pulled power way back. Terry had me fly downwind at 150 kias. At the numbers I pulled power to idle, dropped the gear and first notch of flaps. (Gear and T/O flaps can be dropped at 200 kias!) The idea was to hold altitude and slow to 115 kias, which happened fast. This plane really slows down in a hurry.

At 115 I started my base turn and dropped the landing flaps. The idea was to roll out on final at 90 kias. I needed to add some power to hold 90 kias – good news is: No spool-up lag. Power is instant. I held 90 kias down final, pulled to idle at 50 feet AGL, got into ground effect (which you can feel in your butt in this plane), then flared ever so slightly.

Rolled it on!

We did another pattern. Rolled it on again. Wow.

Then I hand flew it back to ABQ. ATC vectored us around to land on Runway 3. Ten miles out, tower told us to slow up by 30 knots for spacing (a Cessna 210 was ahead of us.). I dropped gear, dropped T/O flaps, then landing flaps, and slowed to 100 kias. Then slowed to 90 kias and rolled it on once more. Amazing. Very ego gratifying!

The Eclipse is an incredibly easy plane to fly. I won’t comment on the avionics, because other than airspeed, heading and VSI, I didn’t use any. I flew it like a VFR pilot, like I fly my SR22.

I would say I flew well enough to solo VFR, even though that's not how jet training works.

Good:

-- Very easy to take off, fly, slow down, and land. The slow down bit is simply amazing. This is a jet that can mix it up with the big guys at LAX or fit into the pattern at a tiny GA airport.

-- Top end speed is now up to 370+ ktas. Eclipse has accomplished this with some cleanup, including a wing-to-body fairing, and by boosting thrust by 3% over 20,000 feet.

-- Economy cruise speed is 330 ktas. Eclipse claims 330 ktas at the upper altitudes can be done with a fuel burn of only 55 gallons per hour, both sides. That compares with a TBM 850, though of course the Eclipse has to go to the high 30s, low 40s to get this economy.

Bad:

-- Cockpit ingress and egress is not easily done. Eclipse needs to make this far, far easier. The clumsy ingress and egress won’t affect their air taxi orders, but could clip some the owner pilot orders. That said, once seated, the cockpit was comfortable enough, though not as comfortable as a Cirrus cockpit. More like a Mooney.

-- Eclipse is still working out its avionics issues. This has been well discussed and I have no more to add.

By the way, the Eclipse factory had 57 airplanes in some phase of construction. Raburn says he’ll ship 250+ jets this year. He says Eclipse will be the “world’s volume jet leader” in 2008.

He says he has 1,000+ deposits from owner-pilots, and 1,200 or so orders from air taxis and air charters.

Posted by: Rich Karlgaard | May 03, 2007 at 11:02 AM

Bonanza Pilot said...

Flyger,
thanks for the tip about an Eclipse being on Flight Aware...what happened though?? I checked the tracking on N229BW and minutes into the flight when it was at 13200 feet all data stopped coming in? I really wanted to see what altitude it was going to go to and what speeds it would get. They were flight planning for FL270 and 369 knots.

Frank Castle said...

Well, Fine.

For you, Stan, I will not only go below the radar, I will delete my account and personal blog.

I was backing up Airtaximan, because he was right, and Ken is the biggest craw-dad I know. Besides that, well, nevermind. 'nuff said.

I am entitled to my opinions. Yes, many have been deleted, and that's the price you pay for posting on someone else's blog. I had no First Amendment rights here, as Gunner misunderstood me to say.

It's been enlightening. Very.


If the Kenster wants me fired so bad, well, get-r-done, fella.

RedTailHawk said...

Alpha Mike Foxtrot, Uncle Frankie.

EclipseBlogger said...

Bonanza Pilot said... Flyger, thanks for the tip about an Eclipse being on Flight Aware...what happened though??

I'm just guessing, but they are doing scenario based training. It looks like they flight planned for Little Rock, but diverted to Amarillo for some reason, perhaps simulated weather blockage, or engine fire, etc. They did flight plan for FL270 at 369 kts. I don't know whether that ever happened either without looking at the track, which is not displayed.

Gunner said...

"perhaps simulated weather blockage"

For an aircraft that is touted to fly at 41,000 feet? "Weather Blockage"?

That's weak.
Gunner

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Don't forget Gunner,

Currently, the aircraft can't fly IMC due to the incredible freezing pitot trick, so weather blockage COULD be a factor.

Also, unless the TSO'd displays and USB dataloader are installed, after 28 days the plane can't fly at FL410 without a special clearance due the GPS database issue keeping it out of RVSM airspace. So a weather blockage COULD be a factor.

Of course, if there is known icing that too would be a weather blockage - since the aircraft is not approved for FIKI at present. So a weather blockage COULD be a factor.

You must have nipped some of Ken's koolaid and been thinking about the once and future Eclipse, not the here and now Eclipse.

He he he.

Just ribbin ya' bro.

Gunner said...

CWMoR-
You're right. What WAS I thinking?

Seriously, though, we all know that each of these issues has already been resolved or will be within the next couple of months; Eclipse has told us so. So why practice for an eventuality that is not an issue?

BTW, just what IS a "weather blockage"? The term is new to me.
Gunner

Niner Zulu said...

Ken,
I Hope you will post comments on your test flight in the Mustang. The Mustang is my 2nd choice for an airplane, right behind the Phenom 100, but I can't justify either because a couple hundred thousand a year in operating expenses just to fly 120 hours or so doesn't make sense. So I'm concentrating my attention further down the food chain - like the Piperjet, Djet, Cirrus, and who knows maybe even an Eclipse if the factory gets their act together.

FlightCenter said...

I've updated the delivery spreadsheet with flyger's new data.

On the order spreadsheet, perhaps we ought to track "firm" orders and deposits?

What do you think?

EclipseBlogger said...

Currently, the aircraft can't fly IMC due to the incredible freezing pitot trick, so weather blockage COULD be a factor.

Alright, poor choice of in-flight training scenarios. You get my point. Ouch.

Plastic_Planes said...

By the way, the Eclipse factory had 57 airplanes in some phase of construction. Raburn says he’ll ship 250+ jets this year.

Not 402?

Gee what happened?

Don't pick on me - I truly feel 200 or so a/c a year is probably a realistic number. I've always said this.

/s.

Gunner said...

EB-
That's good enough for me.

Damn, I love it when we're honest, even in retrospect! Didn't really hurt that much did it? ;-)

Thanks-
Gunner

airtaximan said...

flightcenter:

when you say...

"On the order spreadsheet, perhaps we ought to track "firm" orders and deposits?"

I say, are you on crack? (kid, rib...) Man, you gotta be kidding, right?

The entire e-clips orderbook stratgey has been designed to avoid any kind of transparency.

How do you propose to do this?
I would venture to say it goes in the impossible category. No?

Until a few days ago, we had more than 2500 orders with deposits... and 239 dayjet orders plus 70 dayjet options... now we have 1400 or more Dayjet orders/options...WHO THE F___K knows what is in the "order"book...and I use the word "order VERY loosely...

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 286   Newer› Newest»