Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Another Milestone

Eclipse Aviation Brings Airline-Quality Safety Program to General Aviation

Company establishes first FAA-approved aircraft manufacturer FOQA program

ALBUQUERQUE, NM -- October 31, 2007 -- Eclipse Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first very light jet (VLJ), today announced that it has received approval of its Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA - pronounced foh-qwah) program from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Eclipse Aviation is the only aircraft manufacturer that has received FAA approval for a FOQA program that includes flight data monitoring capability consistent with the advanced programs used by commercial airline operations (FAR Part 121), the safest demonstrated flight operations in the world.Until now, FOQA was implemented only within resource-rich commercial airlines, and was largely unheard of in the general aviation and small corporate-fleet world. Eclipse's FOQA program is breaking new ground, and is largely enabled by the next-generation integrated avionics and data collection systems designed for and incorporated in the Eclipse 500 very light jet. "

At Eclipse, challenging general aviation norms and going beyond what's expected is a daily imperative," said Vern Raburn, president and CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "This FAA-approved FOQA program reflects our commitment to live up to these ideals by introducing a world-class flight operation strategy to general aviation that will deliver airline-quality safety to our customers. FOQA is a perfect addition to our progressive safety management system (SMS), which gives us the tools to proactively ensure the highest level of safety across all Eclipse 500 operations."

FOQA, used by most major airlines around the world, employs sophisticated software to capture and analyze recorded flight data. The information gathered by this system is used to proactively identify, assess and correct high-risk operating conditions before they cause an accident. FOQA programs are frequently cited as contributing to the impressive safety record of U.S. airlines over the past decade. FOQA initiatives have been used to identify and improve everything from deficiencies in pilot training programs, manuals and processes, to aircraft design issues and hazardous air traffic control procedures.

Eclipse Safety Management System (SMS)Consistent with the internationally-endorsed SMS philosophy, Eclipse has built a SMS that does not treat aviation safety risk management as the responsibility of a reactive independent group, but rather as an all-encompassing proactive safety culture. Instead of waiting for hazards to be identified through accidents, Eclipse's SMS creates a process and culture for pinpointing risks so they can be managed in advance of an incident or accident. FOQA is central to this process, using objective flight data and powerful software that allows Eclipse to understand what is actually happening with the Eclipse 500 in the field. Eclipse is currently developing a complementary program, called the Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP), which will provide insight into why events are happening. Through ASAP, Eclipse 500 pilots will voluntarily identify and report on issues encountered while operating their aircraft. This system will correlate this subjective information with objective FOQA data, creating a comprehensive awareness of hazards and risks never before achieved by an aircraft manufacturer.

FOQA is the cornerstone for identifying, assessing and analyzing flight-related hazards within the Eclipse 500 fleet. A key enabler of this technology is the Eclipse 500's highly-integrated avionics design, Avio NG, which allows Eclipse to capture virtually everything that happens when an aircraft is operated. Once this data is collected, it is processed by sophisticated software created by Austin Digital, Inc., an industry leader in airline FOQA analysis systems. This software uses complex algorithms to continuously churn through thousands of hours of flight data, while highlighting and reporting abnormal events and trends across the fleet. This enables Eclipse to investigate and determine root causes, develop strategies to mitigate risks, and implement corrective actions. Finally, the FOQA system provides a mechanism to monitor and adjust the effectiveness of corrective actions, thus closing the loop on the process to ensure optimal operational safety."

FOQA programs are not new, but are today considered state-of-the-art in the airline industry," said Eclipse Aviation's Manager of Flight Safety Chris Solan. "Our program is revolutionary because as a general aviation aircraft manufacturer we are essentially taking on the role and responsibilities of a sophisticated airline, aggregating large amounts of data so systemic trends can be easily identified. When this trend data is combined with our Eclipse 500 aircraft design knowledge, pilot and maintenance training program oversight, aircraft manual and procedure authorship and tight-knit FAA working relationship - we can bring a tremendous improvement in safety to our customers, particularly individual or small-fleet operators."

Thanks to eclipseobserver for the update.

221 comments:

1 – 200 of 221   Newer›   Newest»
Redtail said...

It looks like John Travolta has begun type training...

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N218JT/history

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Fascinating timing, today was the latest predicition for certification of Avio NfG. No certification of Avio NfG. Instead they announce a draconian data gathering system and spin it as a 'safety' program.

In case HAL running the whole show was not bad enough, now he is acting as Celebrity Mole for every overspeed, TFR boundary touch, or other real or imagined violation or infraction.

Wow, a FOQA.

Wonder how many would-be jet-pilots recognize the level of data safeguards to try and protect their anonymity while still gathering operational and training data in the background of Avio NfG.

Speaking of which, wonder how the FOQA was approved since the 'cutting edge' avionics that supposedly make the FOQA possible are not even certified yet?

Yet another 'baffle them with BS' attempt to separate unknowing neophytes from their coin - like LRU, designed for maintenance, high-cycle, and assorted other verbal canards.

FOQA was adopted by FAA to try and increase airline safety yet the desired result has not been seen - airline safety remains damn good but there have been no radical improvements - there is however a whole more data about operations.

Worse, NASA has just agreed to release presumably private information to the interlopers in Congress - what kind of data? You guessed it.....voluntary safety information.

airtaximan said...

I would be wary of THIS manufacturer having any part in the data collection and analysis regarding safety or potential litigation regarding the aircraft or its operations. In fact, the manufacturers involvement with the collection/management of the data, in this manufacturers case, would rasie a big red flag.... reconcile this with the FACT that transpaprency and honesty are required for a successful FOQUA, please: Mike Press was forced to sign an NDA at the last conference, so that no data could be transmitted regarding the sorry state of affairs at e-clips. If they are hiding program issues, what else would they hide? What else have they hidden?

It has been described that the data collected by the e-500 plane's computer systems is signed over and belongs to e-clips when delivery is made, not the airplane owner. If this is in fact true, I cannot even imagine the legal issues regarding trying to defend against or pursue a manufacturer for negligence or fraud, when they have and own the "data" from your "flight". Under the FAA approved program, this data (it might be argued) cannot be used in litigation. I can imagine e-clips liking this opportunity, especially since they control and might even own the data.

Finally,
"A non FAA-approved FOQA program in the hands of a safety conscious operator, who employs prudent document retention and destruction procedures, within the bounds of the law, and de-identifies data under a fair agreement with its pilots, may be able to benefit greatly in terms of safety without taking on the exposure that might exist with disclosure to the FAA or more importantly the manufacturer of the airplane. The disadvantage in terms of safety, is that the data would not be available to help other operators. I wonder what the disadvantages are when a company such as e-clips owns the data, and does with it what they wish? The legal advantage is that the operator and its own attorney can control access to its digital recordings of its deviations. Because the FAA allows privately run FOQA programs, each operator should evaluate, in consultation with its attorney as to legal issues, whether they will benefit from an FAA approved voluntary disclosure program. This is especially relevant where the manufacturer seems to want to control the data...I wonder why?

Is any of the FOQUA "technology" special: NOPE:

"An operator purchases a Quick Access Recorder and obtains the necessary Certification to integrate the recorder with various sensors on the aircraft to measure the flight parameters. A FOQA Quick Access Recorder is not limited to the same data as a Flight Data Recorder ("FDR"). A QAR can collect more than four times (4x) as much data as an FDR. Moreover, a Flight Data Recorder is normally limited to only 25 hours of flight time, whereas a FOQA Quick Access Recorder can be programmed to record for an extended period of time.

FOQA data is processed through a Quick Access Recorder by a variety of means:

1. Memory Cards or PCMIA Card can be utilized to record data;

2. Recording media can be used to collect data;

3. Data can be transferred by radio via a data link at the time of landing. Encryption software can be used to protect against security breaches.



Regardless of the technical method employed to collect or transmit the data, the FOQA objective is the same. The recordation of flight parameters to capture deviations from "norms," followed by computerized evaluation of trends, which suggest safety hazards.

FOQA programs can focus on interesting parameters such as the number of overly hard landings performed in one month, the duration of engine over temperature conditions, or how many times an unusually high descent rate was used on an approach. Let's say, for example, that data collected reveals that one out of five flights involved an unnecessarily high rate of descent or deviations below the prescribed flight path on a particular approach. The collection of such data can lead to improved training resulting in procedures that are less susceptible to deviation. Sounds great?

Heck, I can see the data used to deny an operator replacement tires under warantee for "excessivly hard landing" backed up with "data" supplied by the manufacturer... same with, say brakes that have worn prematurely... perhaps some prematurely cracked windshields, or even some wing bushings that need replacement... due to (insert excuse here) which is backed up by "data" that is owned and controlled by the manufacturer...

This is a very interesting topic...many potential issues, for sure.

gadfly said...

FOQA? FOQA? Are you sure it's not pronounced Farquaad? . . . as in Lord Farquaad, of the Kingdom of Duloc? . . . as in "Shrek"?

More and more, this is becoming a computer generated cartoon. All the characters are certainly in place.

Sorry . . . but it is most difficult to treat this as a serious exercise.

gadfly

rcflyer said...

Cirrus Design had a problem with brake fires a while back. The brakes were overheating, which would destroy the o-rings on the calipers. Brake fluid would leak onto the hot rotors and catch fire.

Since Cirrus planes have a castering nosewheel, loss of brakes could also mean loss of control while taxiing.

Cirrus conducted extensive testing, and determined that the only way to overheat the brakes was to taxi at excessively high speed and drag the brakes.

After a brake fire incident, they questioned the pilot, an ATP, if I recall correctly. The pilot categorically denied taxiing too fast or dragging the brakes.

As it turns out, the MFD in Cirrus planes records the GPS position, time, and engine parameters every few seconds. This data can be downloaded via a USB port.

When Cirrus downloaded the data, they discovered that before the fire, the pilot had been taxiing with the engine at 1700 RPM for some time. Normal taxi speed is 1000 RPM. At 1700 RPM, it takes considerable and repeated braking just to keep the plane on a centerline, let alone turn it.

I am glad that Cirrus had this data to confirm their research and exonerate their design. I will be glad if any aircraft manufacturer can use such data to keep from paying out on a lawsuit when the problem was clearly pilot error. I will be glad if it helps keep my insurance rates down.

By the way, Cirrus added temperature indicators to the brake calipers so that you can detect that the brakes have been overheated and replace the o-rings.

The latest Cirrus models, the G3's, have a digital data recorder in the tail. Cirrus claims ownership of all data within the recorders.

R.C.

planet-ex said...

According to case law involving Event Data Recorders (EDRs) in automobiles (GM cars have these), the data recorded can be used against the driver in court.

So...it is most likely that the data recorded in an Eclipse can be used against the operator (i.e., warranty claims, accidents and incidents, etc). Imagine if the FAA and NTSB got a hold of the data...

EclipseOwner387 said...

SN70 Delivered today.

Joe Patroni said...

Having this system on your airplane will open up a 55-gallon-drum sized can of worms. I honestly wonder what people are thinking by VOLUNTARILY agreeing to let someone record this data.

If you.....
-Don't think that this data won't get supeona'd by the product liability/trail attorneys, or .....

-That it won't be subject to a "Freedom of Information Act" request, if the Government receives the data, or.....

-That it won't be used by Eclipse or it's Vendors to determine fault in the event of an accident, incident or exceedance, or to void Warranty coverage,....

then you are a far more trusting individual than I am.

Keep the Faith, bro's.....

Metal Guy said...

This is the biggest smoke and mirrors baloney I have ever seen. Hey, come listen to the orchestra – never mind that gurgling noise of the ship sinking.

Eclipse is toast and they keep pumping it out.

Simply amazing…

Niner Zulu said...

Gadfly, you crack me up! Now I can't talk about FOQA without thinking of Lord Farquaad being lifted from his horse.

It would be discomforting and distracting to have your "Nanny Jet" recording your every move, ready to tattle on you if you put one toe out of line. That's not freedom of flight. That's big brother, scowling at you while your every move is studied, analyzed and second-guessed by some moron somewhere. No thank you!

I just have to shake my head and wonder what the FOQA they're going to come up with next. No don't tell me, I've heard enough!

Metal guy, I wonder what that song is that the orchestra is playing as this ship sinks.

Shane Price said...

NZ,

By tradition, it was 'Nearer my God to thee'

If you are talking about Titanic, that is.

Eclipse is a different case. How about 'Jailhouse Rock'?

Shane

bill e. goat said...

Hmmmm,

"Breaking new ground"

"FAA-approved"

"Never before achieved by an aircraft manufacturer"

"Complex algorithms"

"State-of-the-art"

"Revolutionary"

Uh huh.

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

Another one of my particular favorites, that makes me smile and feel better inside everytime I read something like it:

"Tight-knit FAA working relationship"

airsafetyman said...

Vern is a guy delivering turbine airplanes without weather radar, anti-ice, de-ice, anti-skid, ground spoilers, ground flaps, a decent autopilot, or windshields that stay glued in - and he wants to talk about flight safety?

Redtail said...

You guys are a bunch of ninnies. I suppose we should also outlaw the use of RADAR and ADS-B since both monitor position, speed and other parameters that can be used to determine what stupidity you guys are up to. How about taking responsibility for one's own actions?

RCFlyer is right on target.

flightguy said...

Ya, let's talk responsibility. Eclipse has not been responsible for any events to date.

"It was their fault!!"

Redtail said...

Like I said, Ninny!

Black Tulip said...

I have on good authority that FOQA will be easily implemented thanks to the genius of Pratt & Whitney. They have added a disc of magnetic media to the compressor/turbine string of each engine. The left engine contains the main hard drive and the right has the backup.

ExEclipser said...

I wonder if anyone has considered using an EA500 for cargo - especially FedEx/UPS rural runs.

They are fast, relatively inexpensive to operate and if you take the three back seats out, you can have a payload of over 640 lbs - that can be 10 50-lb boxes and 140 lbs of little stuff.

You could probably do the routes of three Caravan/404 routes in the same amount of time. Plus it can go around (or over) weather and is pressurized.

flightguy said...

Anyone have any numbers for depositors wanting their money back due to default on FIKI?

JetProp Jockey said...

The indication that additional capital/debt funding is required to provide needed cash flow will create some interesting situations in the near future.

For one, up until 6 to 9 months ago, the money being spent was being treated as development costs and put on the balance sheet as assets to be depreciated in the future. Now they are an operating company and overhead and direct expenses are charged against revenue or added to work in process. You can not value a plane in process at a higher vlaue than the selling price.

Thus, I assume, the company is showing losses that have been accumulating at a rapid pace. Actually showing these losses to the investors causes some very uneasy investor relations.

Also, any additional funding from the outside will require priority treatment in the event of a business collapse. This pushes the current equity investors down the feeding chain. Any of the prior investors that provided senior secured debt will be ahead of any new debt financing, which will make it tougher to attract more bond holders.

If worse comes to worse, a new group of capital providers could come onto the scene and demand something like the following in exchange for their funding:

1. Control of the Board and the termination of Vern.
2. Cancellation of all current contracts for aircraft at the contract prices providing a full refund to anyone who will not accept a $500,000 price increase.
3. If the turnaround is successful, the group will hold control of voting shares of the corporation.

Naturally, such an arrangement would need the support of board and investors - If they feel like things are desperate enough and that they have heard enough stories, they might just be willing to accept such terms and conditions - what do they have to loose?

Note that these are just my personal opinions based on my knowledge of what happens in the business world, without any specific knowledge of what the financial information provided to the investors might be.

planet-ex said...

execlipser said: I wonder if anyone has considered using an EA500 for cargo - especially FedEx/UPS rural runs.

They are fast, relatively inexpensive to operate and if you take the three back seats out, you can have a payload of over 640 lbs - that can be 10 50-lb boxes and 140 lbs of little stuff.

You could probably do the routes of three Caravan/404 routes in the same amount of time. Plus it can go around (or over) weather and is pressurized.


So it would take 5 EA-400's to haul the same amount of freight that a Caravan does (3,000 lbs/350 nm). Every pilot requiring a type rating in the EA-500 while the Caravan doesn't require a type rating.

Bad economics using an Eclipse.

Dave said...

Actually showing these losses to the investors causes some very uneasy investor relations.

When is Eclipse going to publish this to it's millions of investors? The taxpaying public who are investors in Eclipse has a right to know. The public also has a right to know about these politicians who spent taxpayer money on this "investment."

The Mayor running for Senate who announced his candidacy at Eclipse and who has touted the Eclipse investment reminds me of the "Jobs for the Boys" episode of the BBC comedy Yes Minister:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_for_the_Boys
Compared with Mayor Marty:
http://joemonahansnewmexico.blogspot.com/2007/10/pearces.html

airsafetyman said...

Maybe Vern's latest toy project will also include cockpit voice data:

"Gee that looks like a big cell up ahead, see what the wx radar is....ooops.... see if Center is painting anything really bad"

"Hey, Charlie, think I am getting a little ice build-up on my side. See if you can unscrew the electronic circuit breaker on the boots while I can see if Center will give us lower."

"Well, Charlie, the ATIS just said nil braking action on ice, thank goodness for the thrust reversers, ground spoilers, and the anti-skid....oh, forgetaboutit!"

gadfly said...

9Z

“I just have to shake my head and wonder what . . . they're going to come up with next. No don't tell me, I've heard enough!”

Sorry, friend, but there’s more! Since manufactured parts are traceable from start to finish, and all flight operations are going to be recorded, it’s only right and fair that the “assembly” process is recorded in “real time” as well.

So, with video cameras and non-volatile memory becoming so cheap, it’s a simple thing to record each and every step in the Eclipse factory, from the instant the “wings” are off-loaded from the truck, until the last inspection cover screw is painted over . . . in living HD video and 5.1 surround sound. The “chip” would be permanently imbedded at the CG point, and would therefore most likely survive anything that might happen from then on . . . with easy access by a lawyer, should the occasion warrant.

‘Now it’s a “flyin’ talkin’ donkey!

gadfly

gadfly said...

"I wonder if anyone has considered using an EA500 for cargo - especially FedEx/UPS rural runs."

It's already in the works . . . a joint venture called "FedUps".

gadfly

JetProp Jockey said...

gadfly - they can't use that name - already taken by a growing group of depositors and investors.

gadfly said...

JPJ

Yeh . . . that's the group!

gadfly

anonymous avionics engineer said...

That's it! I knew there was something wrong, now I know what it is. Eclipse is all FOQA'ed up.

BCT said...

Could someone please point me to the FAA COA database that has been referred to?

Thank You


BCT

FlightCenter said...

EO387 said serial #70 was delivered.

Do we know if Eclipse met its plan to cut in the pitot static fix into production aircraft on serial #65? (And presumably allow aircraft to fly away from the factory with RVSM approval.)

Eclipse had also announced that they would cut the windshield mods into production with serial #74.

Are you aware if that is still the plan of record?

FlightCenter said...

Here is the link to the FAA's registry database. This is updated weekly and contains all registered aircraft.

FAA Registry Database

Niner Zulu said...

You guys are too funny!

Eclipse MUST survive. What other sinking company can provide me with this kind of ongoing daily comedy? Laughing is healthy - and Eclipse is adding years to my life!

Dave said...

Eclipse MUST survive. What other sinking company can provide me with this kind of ongoing daily comedy? Laughing is healthy - and Eclipse is adding years to my life!

SCO has been very entertaining for me. My expectation is that first SCO will fold and then it will be Eclipse and then DayJet (though DayJet might have a future as they don't *need* Eclipse aircraft to be air taxis or they could morph into something else entirely). By the way SCO is connected with DayJet because Iacobucci headed up SCO's litigation committee. When you understand SCO's ethics and business practices, you'll understand Eclipse's ethics and business practices.

http://www.groklaw.net/
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=1911&pt=m
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070812-sco-never-owned-unix-copyrights-owes-novell-95-percent-of-unix-royalties.html

gadfly said...

What’s in a word . . .or a single letter or two. The man says a “sinking company”, and a reader thinks “stinking company”. Someone else thinks a “thinking company”. ‘Interesting thing: All three are correct! The “humorist” has been playing with your grey cells . . . getting you to think something that he didn’t really say . . . but he did it intentionally, to expand your thinking. Quite frankly, it’s a powerful tool, and a most enjoyable pastime . . . playing with someone’s mind. (I confess! . . . it’s a blast!)

Humor is great. A word . . . a phrase . . . a play on words brings people together, as nothing else. The man telling a joke, or a funny story, is to be taken seriously . . . as he is expressing things from his deepest convictions. Never, ever, take lightly, a funny story . . . for in that moment of time, you will learn far more about the “man” (or woman) than anything else you will hear from their lips.

A few minutes ago, I learned much, as I clicked on the various names of people with whom I have recently referenced or addressed. I was both impressed, and disappointed with at least “one” . . . and I will avoid further contact with that “one”.

Why does it matter? Because a person’s integrity means everything in listening to their opinion. And in this discussion of the Eclipse, the final result, quite frankly, comes down to “INTEGRITY”. “Even a “comedian” must maintain his integrity.

Some contributors have nothing to contribute . . . and we somehow manage to simply “skip over” their comments . . . ignoring them. Others have something to say, ‘maybe not to our thinking, but worth the “reading”, at least to understand the opposition.

If my supposition is correct, and I were an investor, or someone who financed this operation, or who had placed an order for a “little bird”, I would be most concerned.

Almost every major subject may have been covered, although at times with little understanding by the contributors of the comments. Some were correct by “accident”, and a few, at least, had some basic understanding to support their argument, . . . if “pressed”, but I suspect they might have needed some coaching . . . not to change their observation, but to understand just what they had observed.

Why should I care? I shouldn’t, from a business sense. I’m too old to be of any value in this dog fight. But my kids and grand-kids will have to battle the atmosphere that is being created, even as we speak. In time, this little jet will probably be viewed as an “anomaly” . . . a “hiccup”, a “glitch” . . . but it will have some effect, politically, and for safety . . . in the world in which my grand-kids must live.

An aircraft manufacturer in Albuquerque would be most welcome. Many of us would benefit. It is an ideal location to enter into such an operation. So what is the problem?

The problem is not “location” but the political climate and claims made at the highest level of those who would settle here . . . and for today, we’re out of time.

gadfly

(NinerZulu . . . you made my day, realizing you benefit from the humor of this blogsite . . . assuming I may have contributed to your longevity . . . may you live forever (yes, I mean that), but the present issue is far more serious than our clever comments . . . however, life is a lot of fun, regardless . . . and God so intended it to be!)

Shane Price said...

Gad,

Might I add a comment?

I was a 'child' in the '60's, but your post is so up to date that I feel the need to add this.

Right on, brother

Shane

airtaximan said...

congratulations!

ANN reference (dislaimer for not being sued, pls apply- fair use?)

OurPLANE Delivers First Eclipse 500 VLJ For Fractional Use
Thu, 01 Nov '07

"Let The VLJ Revolution Begin!"
Light aircraft fractional ownership company OurPLANE recently delivered the first Eclipse 500 very light to operate under Part 91 fractional ownership.

OurPLANE delivered its first Eclipse 500, S/N 66, to SheltAir at Jacksonville, FL for a corporate customer -- launching the company's new nationwide fractional VLJ aircraft service.

The company says the Eclipse complements its current, piston offerings. OurPLANE started operations in 1998 with new Cirrus and Cessna aircraft.

"OurPLANE pioneered fractional light aircraft eight years ago and today, this historic day for OurPLANE, we again solidify our leadership with the launch of the OurPLANE fractional Eclipse 500 VLJ," said company president and CEO Graham Casson. "Let the VLJ revolution begin!"

OurPLANE has a fleet order of Eclipse 500s worth $40 million... and plans to add additional VLJs to give their customers additional freedom to choose the right aircraft for their needs.

"OurPLANE customers are pilots and non pilots, executives and businesses... everyone looking for their own, new aircraft at a fraction of the cost. Our business model is low cost with great customer service so that business travelers can avoid the hell of commercial travel," Casson added.

The company says the Eclipse is geared towards executives of small- to- medium-sized businesses, who may now own a fraction of their own private jet for as little as $759 per hour... less than the cost to charter an aircraft, or flying commercially (nevermind owning their own large corporate jet.)

"OurPLANE customers can own their own private Eclipse 500 share for as little as $521,000 with fixed costs of $3,999 for 150 hours of annual flying time," Casson added.

"We are excited to start delivering OurPLANE's fleet of Eclipse 500 very light jets," said Eclipse Aviation CEO Vern Raburn. "The fractional aircraft market provides a valuable opportunity for more people to experience and own an Eclipse 500."

OurPLANE offers a nationwide network of factory new aircraft at several locations. In addition to Jacksonville, the company also has operations in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, Dallas, Salt Lake City, St. Paul, Orlando, White Plains, and Toronto.

or...

http://www.hotelinteractive.com/
index.asp?page_id=5000&
article_id=6199

mirage00 said...

SN 66 delivered

I remain amused

double 00

gadfly said...

Let’s see . . . “Fractional” . . . “Fractus” . . . “Broken” (Latin).

Yep! . . . that ‘bout sums it up!

gadfly

Old Troll said...

mirage00 said...
SN 66 delivered

I remain amused

double 00


Hey double zero,
Every time I read "I remain amused" I laugh so hard I almost hurl. Really, I couldn't agree with you more. Eclipse is an absolute joke of an aviation company. What they call a "delivery" is absurd. My favorite was the Dec 31st delivery. "We delivered it but the customer can't have it until next week."

Please keep 'em coming. Don't forget to invite Reverend Ken back. Or is he too busy taking "delivery" of his Eclipse? Tell him not to forget his complementary 496. I've heard he might need it.

bill e. goat said...

I think ATM nailed the FOQA gig for what it is; CYA for Eclipse, a noose for the operators. Still, perhaps some benefit.
-----------------------------
I was rather expecting a lame-o "it's certified" on Avio-NfG, as Old Troll put it yesterday:
“It wouldn't surprise me if they "certified" NG tomorrow. In fact, I would expect it”.

I guess this rather flaccid announcement regarding FOQA is the disappointing- even by Eclipse “standards”- Stunt Of The Quarter, coming as it did on – hey- wait a minute- it's NOT the end of 2007Q3- it's a month past that. STILL no Avio-NxG !! (Guess FOQA is just the Stunt Of The Month, a lame-o substitute for the Avio-NG proclomation 9Z mentioned being due Oct 31).
--------------------------
Thanks to EO387 for the news on SN70 delivery. Thanks to M00 and ATM for the info on SN66 and OurPLANE.

FC- nice link to the FAA registry database, but since my computer skills, and patience, are considerably lower than a 9 year olds', I give up: How many E-500's have been delivered? (66, 70, 13 ? :) Thanks.

gadfly said...

Shane

It’s people your age that need to keep up the good work for the next generation. When I was first learning to run a machine, we were in the middle of a war . . . and Lockheed “Hudson” (Ventura) bombers were flying over the house with British markings. We’re all glad that it didn’t take eight or ten years, back then, to get a new design flying . . . or we’d all be speaking the same language as “Herr Schicklgruber” . . . but then, maybe the Airbus 380 wouldn’t be having so many problems getting the design correct. Nei?

gadfly

hummer said...

Deliveries
Aircraft deliveries are going to get more interesting very soon. Aircraft No. 70 was reported delivered by EO387.
The next sequentual numbers are:
71 - 152D7
72 - 153DJ
73 - 156DJ
74 - 158DJ
77 - 160DJ
78 - 161DJ
79 - 162DJ
81 - 163DJ
So of the next eleven aircraft, eight are for DayJet.
Checking the production numbers,
eleven aircraft represents about
a months production.
Be interesting to see what DayJet does regarding acceptance of eight more aircraft at this time.
Will this also put a strain on training?

Shane Price said...

Hummer,

The real laugh is what DayJet are 'paying' for these 'aircraft'.

If 75% of production each month is generating between $9 and $11 millon ($1.1 or $1.2 million per unit), and they employ 1,500 people costing about that amount in salary ALONE....

.... how can 3 units at $1.5 million each pay the rest of the bills?

Suppliers should be getting really REALLY worried.

When will the market wake up to this madness?

Gad,

As I recall, the problem that really delayed the A380 was the wiring layout. Legend has it that the French and German factories were using 'incompatible' CAD software which meant that the first 6 aircraft have had to be reworked, largely by hand.

Shane

flightguy said...

Additional info:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/11/01/219075/eclipse-hits-quality-assurance-target-as-deliveries-continue-to.html

ExEclipser said...

DayJet should spin off an EA500 Flight Academy business.

AeroObserver said...

Eclipse should spin off PhostrEx and unlock its financial potential. Doing that might actually save Eclipse. Tick tock -- the clock is ticking, Vern...

Niner Zulu said...

Shane,
I believe the other 3 jets being delivered are at similar pricing to Dayjet's. Remember, the early buyers got in really cheap.

Microjet Positions just sent me an email offering s/n 82 for December delivery for "best offer over $1,775,000". Looks like it was a spec position.

I think this company, like all the spec sellers of the Eclipse, are taking a big risk selling an incomplete jet. Certified or not, it doesn't have fully functioning systems on board. These sellers may find themselves sitting across the table from a widow's lawyers someday, trying to explain to an unsympathetic jury how they profited from the sale of a jet that was really not ready to be flown how/where jets are normally flown. Risky business, IMHO.

hummer said...

For Sale - Controller:
Position 69
Position 73
Position 76
Position 80
Position 82
Position 83
Position 88
Position 90
and six unknown positions.
This along with DayJet's position
must tell us something?

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Where did our Lemming friend who assured us Ken Harness was 'moving up' not moving out go?

Where is Cardinal Ken of thye Church of Flyantology assuring us that everything is just around the corner?

Curious what anyone else thinks of the Cessna offer for Columbia. Appears that after inventory, warranty reserves, partial payment of monies owed to Garmin and such, Cessna is only offering $1.5M for ALL the tooling, ALL the intellectucal property and ALL the TC's and PC's that Columbia posesses COMBINED - presumably the 'most valuable' assets they have.

Does this bode well for a post BK Eclipse next year?

hummer said...

Off the next sequentual 21 aircraft,
(8) are going to DayJet and
(8) are for sale on Controller,
and as reported for about 1 mil
each to Eclipse of which contain a strong liability for retrofit- avionics, type training, FIKI, etc.,Eclipse could shut down thru Christmas, do nothing and make
money. Talk about a "black friday"
If it were not such a pathetic scenaro, it might be considered funny.
Hopefully, Santa will come early
with a sack full of new money.

gadfly said...

Shane

“. . . the French and German factories were using 'incompatible' CAD software”

That’s why I insinuated that they could have been using a common language software . . . German! It also emphasizes the problems when everything depends on “software” . . . even with the “big boys”. There’s something to be said for a set of steam gages and “old” technology.

gadfly

ExEclipser said...

Frankly, if you look at most of the order numbers that have been on the books for 4ish years, you'd have to believe that 90% of the aircraft on backlog are going to sell for between $995K and $1.225M.

Hummer - sorry, but I can't find ANY of those positions on controller. I don't see any of them selling for $1 Mil. The cheapest a/c that I see right now is $1.34M + 60K for a total of $1.4M for S/N 872.

hummer said...

execlipser
Pardon me for not being clear.
Eclipse company is receiving about
1 mil for each of the specified
aircraft of which there are cos
and contingent liabilities giving
a loss. The position holder as
shown for sale on Controller is
going for 1.6 to 1.8 mil, and upon sale is certainly making more money (1.6 minus 1.0 = 600K)
than the company.
So the moral of the story is: it is more profitable being a speculator than being a manufacturer/producer? Works with oil.

Redtail said...

hummer said... For Sale - Controller: S/N's 69, 73, 76, 80, 82, 83, 88, 90 and six unknown positions. This along with DayJet's position must tell us something?

Yeah, this is what it tells me... Three S/N's (82, 90, and 88) are for 1/2 shares, and S/N 73 has a contract pending. Did you "choose" to omit that fact? Several ads are maked as sold or contract pending, since I guess they can't figure out how to remove the ad. S/N 872 is list twice, for whatever reason. There are a total of 10 positions looking for partners or shares. Big deal.

By the way, there are a total of 10 listings for the Mustang - seems to me that that's a much higher percentage of positions and deliveries than those available for the Eclipse.

bill e. goat said...

Hummer,
Thanks for the Dayjet delivery info.
Good point about training.

The Dayjet thing (lots of people, airplanes, no profit) reminds me of Eclipse. Similarly, I wonder how much loss Dayjet can absorb before the bubble bursts.

It might benefit if Dayjet does go belly up- that might free Eclipse to deliver airplanes at market prices.

Exe;
Re- training academy. I think there were several good posts a week or two about the E-500 being used as a training device.

I think a sharp stick would make a good training device for Vern, but somehow I don't think he'll ever get the point (but maybe the boot?).
-----------------------
Better hurry with Avio-NG and FIKI:
Christmas: 52 days
2008 Q1 : 59 days
2008 Q2 : 150 days
2008 Q3 : 242 days

My prediction (NOT my hope, just realistically observing what -little- we can):

It won't matter after 2008 Q3.

Shane Price said...

NZ,

I was trying to be fair, at $1.5 million. However, the real point is the cash hemorrhage per month.

We might be a bit old fashioned about business basics over here, but at that rate of cash burn, the padlocks will shortly be on the gates in ABQ.

When did the 'really cheap' positions end? I thought I read it was around s/n 60 (ish) and also that in one of the price rises there was a 'put up the 60% progress now' or you got stuck with the higher number.

Scarlet Tail Feathers,

Maybe people feel there is a real value in the Mustang positions, as you are quite liable to get a complete and functional jet from Cessna.

Shane

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

The comparison to speculators in oil is a great point but I think incomplete without also including a comparison to housing market speculators or the NASDAQ bubble.

Oil speculators are dealing with a product for which there is guaranteed, daily, insatiable demand. And they make money while also artificially increasing the underlying price of the commodity (oil).

Housing speculators and the NASDAQ bubble speculators on the other hand are dealing with a much more limited market, much more limited demand AND far more limited availability of qualified buyers. This resulted in the sub-prime mortgage collapse issue we have been dealing with in the States for many months now.

Additionally, in the rush to 'get in on the action', many homes were built of low quality but high price - causing significant warranty costs to the builders who rushed their work - the result is bankruptcy of builders and lenders alike.

The Eclipse speculators have far more in common with the housing speculators than the oil speculators in my opinion. Their market is also limited and the quality of the offering they are betting on is significantly lower than that of the competition.

The result for Eclipse speculators will be the same as those who stayed in the housing market too long - I predict between the end of this year and first quarter next year we will see Eclipse delivery position pricing drop to limited premiums (sub $50K) when Eclipse announces they will only make a fraction of the deliveries NEXT YEAR that they promised and demanded payment on LAST YEAR.

That is, of course, assuming they can borrow another quarter billion bucks from Kent and Al to remain afloat another 3 months while losing probably $500,000 a copy for each and every aircraft that rolls out the door.

The Eclipse Business Model of course calls for making up the $500,000 loss on every aircraft by selling in VOLUME.

And don't be too hard on redtail, it appears to be the natural result of long term interaction with Vern, someone is gonna take it in the rear.

hummer said...

retail
Big Deal?
The big deal is that the entire equation is turned upside down.
The next (21) aircraft sold by
Eclipse company is at a loss.
The speculators are receiving
more gross dollars per unit than
the company.
Smiley Vern is going to have to
go hat in hand to the credit/capital
markets and try to explain this
situation along with how he is going to make some future profit
with a production company of 600
production people building aircraft at 12/mth with a breakeven point of 50/mth. The other 900 in the company just came up with a big brother flight recorder to justify their existence for the past three years.
Disruptive. . .Yea
Big Deal . . . .Yea
I call it "insane".

cj3driver said...

Mike Press has posted the November update on his website, www.spjets.com.

Very interesting and informative.

Redtail said...

Shane said... Scarlet Tail Feathers, Maybe people feel there is a real value in the Mustang positions, as you are quite liable to get a complete and functional jet from Cessna.

And that would be why they are selling their positions?

hummer said...

coldfish
Very well put.
Tell me, if Vern can pull off the next round of financing. . .where
do you think he is going to get it?
Capital markets?
Current Investors?
Wall Street Financial Institutions?
Federal Reserve?
FAA?
Tooth Fairy?
Stan?
All of the above?
None of the above?

airtaximan said...

Hummer,

aren't you the one who ticked off a whole list of risk items that have been satisfied by e-clips, so you can now move ahead with your plan?

Juat asking, becasue it seems as if today, there's more risk than ever...

airtaximan said...

redtail:

"By the way, there are a total of 10 listings for the Mustang - seems to me that that's a much higher percentage of positions and deliveries than those available for the Eclipse."

perhaps a good point - percentage of "what"? please enlighten us regarding the basis for the statement - the math.

Thanks

hummer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Press continues to fail to address overall stagnant sales numbers ('about' 2700 for what two years now?) and the inability of Eclipse to demonstrate, let alone expect sustained sales at the level Eclipse itself reports is needed to breakeven, let alone be profitable and begin to create an ROI for $1.X Beeeeeeellion Dollllllars, right Mini-Me?

gadfly said...

When the little bird first took off, struggled around in the sky for an hour or so with overheating/underpowered engines, landed, and “the man” got the deposits out of escrow, that should have been a clue of what to expect from that day forward.

Has anything really changed?

gadfly

hummer said...

ATM
I plead guilty.
BTW, what was plan "B"?

Shane Price said...

Scarlet,

You said, in response to an observation of mine about the Mustang positions for sale

And that would be why they are selling their positions?

I think that is good business. Sell something you have not paid for yet, at profit.

Unlike The Great Raburn.

He sells everything he makes, at a LOSS....

Something wrong with that business model, don't you think?

Shane

Shane Price said...

I've just reviewed the Mike Press newsletter.

Before I start, I know that a number of you have a high regard for Mike. So please don't take this personally.

Would you buy a used jet from this man?

Especially one made by a company he has invested in?

Hiding behind the non disclosure agreement is not really a runner, especially when selling futures. In his position, the last thing he should be aware of is how bad the situation really is.

Rose tinted glasses (his term) won't help when the 'what did you know and when did you know it' questions start flying round the court(s).

Shane

gadfly said...

Shane

Most great inventions down through history came at great cost to the inventor. Few came from inventors who used other’s money, and took little personal risk. The “Eclipse” is not likely going to change that trend. And as if to put the final nail into the coffin, from the start it did not pass the “smell test”. It appeared “DOA”.

Great things have had a day or two, when everything seemed to be going according to plan . . . yet shortly began to go awry.

Even in Albuquerque, certain individuals set out to do it right, and one of our best business associates is known “world wide” as honest, and at the leading edge of technology in precision manufacturing, investment casting, and tool design for the jewelry industry. They are as honest as the day is long . . . a privilege to work with, with a “hand shake”. ‘Would that a local aviation company could have such a reputation.

Wilbur and Orville invested only their own money . . . a total of about $1,200 to fully investigate, test, and fly their first “Flyer” in December of 1903. A few more years went by, to refine their invention before they sold it “abroad” and to the US government. Make what you will of all this, but history repeats this scenario, over and over . . . history has a strange habit of leveling the playing field for those who abide by the rules.

For history’s sake, we must mention Igor Sikorsky . . . a man who would not allow another to take the risk, as he tested his own inventions, himself, before allowing another to fly in his helicopters.

And, as a disclaimer . . . I admit to prejudice . . . it was a Sikorsky helicopter that first proved my own father’s inertial restraint system (in flight, after Bill Vukovich’s death, . . . and the death of my father’s high-school classmate, “Rex Mays”, . . . when a Sikorsky helicopter crashed in the Swiss Alps, and all members of the crew were without injury . . . (my Dad had died months before, and did not live to see the results of his invention and design). And, yes, I did indeed help machine, and assemble test equipment on which all inertial restraint systems are calibrated, for use in Boeing /Douglas aircraft.

You see, there was a time when inventors, designers, manufacturers really had an “altruistic” attitude about aircraft design and production . . . when the safety and well-being of the user far out-weighed the investor. Today, it’s all about the almighty dollar . . . and the “ego”. Sure, there were many exceptions to the rule . . .but God help us!

You approach it from the financial side . . . I approach it from the technical side. Either way, things don’t look good in “River City” (Albuquerque, the city that straddles the “Rio Grande”).

‘Them are my thoughts for today!

gadfly

Old Troll said...

Good evening Mr. Redtail,
Since you were harping on the sold/fractional Eclipse positions I thought I should clarify your Mustang comparison. Of the ten mustang positions available, two are fractionals and one is already sold. We do want to keep it real, don't we?

I also noticed that three of the Eclipse's for sale on controller are delivered aircraft, not positions. S/N 5, S/N 17, and S/N 32 are currently for sale. These are also outright sales and not fractionals. By comparison, not one delivered mustang is for sale. Maybe people do recognize the "value proposition" of a complete aircraft vs. a list of promises.

I also noticed that one of the Dayjet birds is for sale on controller. N156DJ in the FAA database is listed for sale on controller as S/N 73. Maybe Dayjet won't be taking deliver of all their options.

I am disappointed that AvioNG wasn't "certified". That would have given us quite a laugh. Well... I would have been laughing. At least they came through with the lame FOQA announcement. Instead of announcing NG certification, they played the same old song of "airliner reliability". Who else thinks that was an amazing coincidence?

Regards,
Old Troll

airtaximan said...

Hummer, is there a plan B? Did it involve better thinking than plan A? By better people.. or more informed due to plan A, or there was always a plan B?

The judgement used to tick off the risk items would indicate a lack of understanding of the risks, and alck of insight into the truth behind the FACTS which led to the incorrect ticking... Perhaps plan B is better? Perhaps it is based on the same criteria and thinking by the same guy?

Smart "investors" believe the people is the most important ingredient in a deal or in business.

Experience, integrity... track record.

Which brings me to the main point -Vern. He has attained the confidence and trust of millions of people and billions of dollars. It is due to his personality, connections and certain abilities, that Eclipse even exisits today, and yet one thing amazes me more than anything else... everyone I talk to hates him. The more people I talk to, the more I find folks who just dislike this guy. Everyone is saying that the problems at Eclipse are due to him, and him alone.

The way I see it, the reason there is anything left there at all, is probably due to him and him alone -he brings money. Double edged sword, perhaps, but he brings tons of money.

From an aviation perspective, he produced a very small twinjet, undersold it by a wide pricing margin, and told everyone he sold thousands, when in fact, its beginning to look like he sold hundreds, plus Ed, Euro-ed and some other fleet customers, who thought they could generate revenue with this plane. The mission they are using the plane for is almost always better served by a prop. Do people reject props? That's the premise, thats the "revolution" - but SATSair and 10,000 other prop planes in operation today under part 135 make this argument look silly.

The little jet is so small, that anyone who really won't fly in a small prop plane, likely won't fly in THAT jet either. Just a hunch.

So, should we trust Vern?
-the business case, based on the jet vs prop argument is very thin - I'd say, very bad judgement...
- He's finally admitted he's been wrong so many times, he's not predictiong any more... and he's been wrong by a wide margin... so, I'd say on cost and schedule, no way.
- Avidyne, and EJ-22 failed miserably to deliver any value, so I'd say a lot of time and money wasetd for nothing. COTS was the way to go for a low cost/price plane - BIG mistake here.

- The overall cavalier attitude for industry norms like "certification", "delivery", "orders" etc., make me cringe - cannot trust his ability to stay within the lines of acceptability regarding accepted industry norms.

I guess we can trust him to raise more money - this he seems to be able to do. Exactly how? Well, I guess that's the beauty of e-clips. Somehow, it has attracted a host of investors and customers that see things differently than what I have described here. I only hope that eclipse's failure does not taint the suppliers and financial markets, in the event they are presented with a viable plan. Perhaps "insiders" will understand the resons why e-clips failed, and see a good solid plan for what it is, if presented.

Hummer, would this be your Plan B?

Old Troll said...

I forgot to add that S/N 73 is listed with "contract pending" on controller. Even so, the point still stands that maybe Dayjet won't buy all of their options. And poof, half of the Eclipse backlog is gone.

Troll

Dan Swanson said...

After reading this latest release, I finally realized that the E499.2 and M$ Vista are related products!

I can hardly wait until the "Necessary Engine Firmware Update Reboot" message happens on a night takeoff, even though you have put the electronic "collar" on the Automatic Updates circuit breaker.

bill e. goat said...

After reading numerous references to our blogging chum Redtail, I was prompted to scrutinize what set off the series of, ah, accolades, directed his way (hang in there man!). One in particular caught my attention, an endorsement of R.C.'s interesting post regarding the utility of flight data recordings:

"I am glad that Cirrus had this data to confirm their research and exonerate their design. I will be glad if any aircraft manufacturer can use such data to keep from paying out on a lawsuit when the problem was clearly pilot error. I will be glad if it helps keep my insurance rates down.

"By the way, Cirrus added temperature indicators to the brake calipers so that you can detect that the brakes have been overheated and replace the o-rings.

"The latest Cirrus models, the G3's, have a digital data recorder in the tail. Cirrus claims ownership of all data within the recorders."
----------------------
I appreciate the post, and although I agree completely with ATM and others assesment that the primary intent is for the manufacturers to acquire data to defend themselves in court: and hence, to use AGAINST the owners, in re-reading it tonight I started writing this post with the intention of embracing the assertion that it might help lower insurance rates.

However, as I re-reconsidered it, I realize that the insurance companies don't care squawt about what caused an accident- they figure if it happened to A it can happen to B, even if it is human error in both cases. What the insurance companies care about is: what can be done to prevent that accident from happening again?

In the case of the Cirrus brakes, this translates to lowering insurance rates by reducing brake fires.

Not by having devices onboard that produce recordings to prove that it was human error.

(To wit: the brake temp displays are what will reduce the incidents, and thus lower insuarnce rates, rather than the recorders, which indeed are useful to the manufacturer for improving their design- or put another way, in correcting their product's deficiencies).
--------------------------
So, thanks to R.C. and Redtail, but you're playing to a tough crowd :)

I hope Ken, EO, 387, and others will continue to provide diverse viewpoints for this forum to consider.

FlightCenter said...

DayJet's fleet utilization this week is down 26% from their peak of 117 flights last week.

They flew 86 flights and 68 flight hours this week with a fleet of 15 aircraft.

That works out to an average of one flight per day per aircraft and .8 flight hours per day per aircraft.

The hardest working aircraft flew 10 flights during the week.

DayJet flew 380 flights and 314 flight hours during their first month of operation (10/3/2007 through 11/2/2007).

(This excludes flights on the weekends, which according to DayJet are not revenue flights.)

The average aircraft flew 25.3 flights during the first 23 business days of operation or about 1.1 flights per business day.

bill e. goat said...

FC,
Thanks once again for the as-ever informative stat's.

I think there has been a lot of discussion about load factors and "profitability" at Dayjet.

In considering the utilization numbers, it occurs to me that most of the discussion has really been about what it takes to keep from losing money on a given flight (distance, no. passengers), rather on what it will take to make Dayjet profitable (no. flights per month, in conjunction with the per-flight margins).

I'd be interested to know what informed speculation would suggest. I can't imagine one short flight per day per airplane being a satisfactory business proposition.

(Although I think Vern would be quite pleased to reach "one per day" status... :)

FlightCenter said...

The real question to be asking in addition to how many flights they are flying is how many revenue passengers are on each flight.

Then the next question to ask is what is the average fare per mile paid by those passengers.

If you assume that each flight was a revenue flight (no positioning or dead head flights and no diverted flights) and each flight had 3 passengers and each passenger paid $4 per mile, you would get the absolute maximum revenue for the month.

If you assume a reasonable percentage of the flights were positioning, training, or dead head flights and each rev flight had one passenger and each passenger paid $2 per mile, then you get the lower bound on revenue for the month.

Then best case would be 3 passengers per flight x $4 per mile x 314 flight hours x 220 miles per flight hour x 100% revenue flights =$830K for the month.

The worst case would be 1 passenger per flight x $2 per mile x 314 flight hours x 220 miles per flight hour x 66% revenue flights = $92K for the month.

As with anything, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Let's split the difference and say DayJet had $460K in revenue for the month.

According to Eclipse it costs $424.75 per hour in operating costs. That would be 314 flight hours x 424.75 = $133K in direct cost per month.

Interest expense of financing 15 aircraft would add let's say roughly another $100K per month.

If you had one and a half crews for each aircraft, that would be 45 pilots at $60K per year - works out to another $225K a month.

That's $458K in expenses per month vs. $460K of revenue.

This doesn't include expenses for management, administration, russian scientists, training, facilities, wheels and brakes or marketing and advertising.

I'm open to constructive critiscm on any of these assumptions.

For example, I don't recall what the max and min fares are for the BCT - GNV route. Perhaps someone can refresh my memory.

Another area for improving the assumptions, would be if anyone has a handle on the pilot's salary range and how many pilots per aircraft they are hiring.

I seem to remember Ed quoting some very high numbers for pilot to aircraft ratio about 6 or 9 months ago. Any one have the inside scoop on how many pilots are on board at DayJet?

Fire away!

airtaximan said...

Bill-e:

Calling on the die-hards to return might be falling on deaf ears...

Somehow, I suspect they are running around frantic at this point, like folks who came out a lake after a skinny dip, only to find their clothes missing...

For those who find all THIS amusing, he's still around here - I'm not sure why he's laughing, or who he's laughing at, but somehow I suspect its "laughing at you" instead of "laughing with you" self-amusement.

I suspect no one is laughing at Pogo these days... well, I mean, no one at Pogo is laughing.

airtaximan said...

ON DAYJET

http://www.canada.com/\topics/travel/story.
html?id=c75d31d9-a1c0
-4884-a4e1-23d85899463
f&k=61315


Flying past lineups

Private jet company DayJet gets customers directly to destinations
BY:Scott Deveau Financial Post

Todd Dettor runs a small tennis court construction company in Pompano Beach, Fla., with his brothers and is just the kind of person DayJet Corp., an innovative Florida-based private jet company, wants as a customer.

Customers of Fast-Dry Courts have Mr. Dettor zigzagging across the state, from one small city to the next. His travels often take him to places that are too small to be serviced by major air carriers, which meant, up until recently, if he wanted to fly there, he had to choose between either hiring a private jet or driving to the nearest airport, where he paid for parking, waited in line for security, just to make the short hop to the next major airport, where he had to rent a car and drive to his final destination.

The Dettor brothers have about US$10-million a year in annual sales, so chartering a plane or buying into a fractional ownership program, like NetJets or FlexJet, are out of the question.


View Larger Image
Emmy Burlinson, a customer care professional with DayJet, takes care of a passenger's luggage after they arrived at the Boca Raton airport October 3, 2007 in Boca Raton, Florida.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

(my comment: there's a dolly with a ton of baggage - take a looksee)

Printer friendly
Font:****"It wouldn't have made financial sense to do that," Mr. Dettor said. "My main alternative would be to drive."

This is music to the ears of Ed Iacobucci, DayJet's founder and chief executive, who recently signed the brothers up as clients. Mr. Iacobucci is betting big that there are a lot more people like the Dettors who are willing to cough up a little extra cash to fly directly to their intended destination.

After receiving federal approval at the beginning of September, DayJet was cleared for takeoff, and had been running test flights for three weeks ahead of its official launch last week.

"The people that we're getting as customers are not people who were flying," Mr. Iacobucci said in an interview last week in Atlanta. "Ninety-five percent or more of the customers we've signed up are people who do their business driving."

DayJet is not quite a taxi service, even though its three-seater, three-ton planes are not much bigger than a taxi cab. Mr. Iacobucci calls DayJet a "per seat, on-demand" airline, which means it offers much of the flexibility of a private jet without the price tag attached. In doing so, Mr. Iacobucci is turning the popular notion that private jet travel is reserved for the rich and powerful on its head.

DayJet operates a fleet of 12 very light Eclipse 500 jets, and has signed up more than 1,700 people and 250 different companies, including Florida Public Utilities, for its services.

Mr. Iacobucci says he's pleased with the first few weeks of DayJet's operations and is flying up to 30 flights a day, between Boca Raton, Lakeland, Gainsville, Tallahassee and Pensacola. He said he plans to add at least two other cities by year-end, but that is just the beginning of DayJet's ambitious expansion plans.

The Delray Beach-based airline plans to add 16 more aircraft by the end of the year, with another 170 Eclipse 500s coming next year as the airline spreads across the Southeast, into Georgia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi. In all, DayJet has ordered 310 Eclipses over its first 24 months of operation.

Mr. Iacobucci said he is confident about the expansion plans after running numerous demand models over the past few years.

"We're very comfortable with the expansion," he said. "We've got all the customers we need for the fleet size we have. I'm cautiously optimistic."

Demand for private jets has been robust in recent years as delays and security precautions plague commercial airlines.

For an annual fee of US$250, DayJet customers can buy a seat to fly directly from one small centre to another for a fee that is dependent on how flexible they are about when they fly.

For example, a flight between Boca Raton and Pensacola could cost US$1,710 if the customer wanted to fly within a 2 1/2 hour window, but if they were willing to fly within a larger window, say between 7 a.m. and noon, the same flight would cost about US$625.

The reason for the price discrepancy is that DayJet's schedule is not set in stone. It develops it on the fly based on demand using an advanced reservation system that is continuously updated to determine the best times for its customers to fly, at the same time ensuring DayJet remains profitable.

Mr. Iacobucci, a former computer whiz with Microsoft Corp., has spent five years and more than US$20-million developing the reservation system, which is based on complex algorithms.

While the system may seem a little complicated, what is really confounding industry observers is how DayJet expects to make any money.

"I'm a little baffled," admits Richard Aboulafia, an industry analyst with the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va. "I really don't see the magic that would justify the numbers they're talking about."

Mr. Aboulafia said these kind of services have failed in the past, and even NetJets, which has a far wealthier customer base, has struggled with profitability.

"It's an extremely untested air company with a very troubling business plan," he said.

Mr. Iacobucci argues that the key to differentiating DayJet from its predecessors is the type of plane its using. The Eclipse 500s, which use an engine developed by Canada's Pratt & Whitney, is a new very light jet that costs only about US$1.5-million.

The Eclipse, which has yet to be certified in Canada, costs about US$425 an hour to run, compared with other entry-level jets like Bombardier's seven-seat Learjets, which cost about US$11-million to buy and about US$1,424 an hour to operate. While the Eclipse lacks the amenities of the larger planes, including a washroom, no DayJet flight will be longer than two hours, Mr. Iacobucci said.

He said the economics of the Eclipse means he only needs to fill on average 1.3 seats to be profitable, "and if there's less than one person, we don't fly," he said.

Mr. Dettor, who has never flown in a private jet before, but was one of the first DayJet customers, said he was happy with the comfort and the price.

"It was fantastic," he said. "I'm willing to pay the extra money to not have to go park, do the security checks, and wait in those cattle lines."


I'M WILLING TO BET THE REPORTER GOT SOME FACTOIDS WRONG - LIKE ED SAID, IF THERE'S ONLY 1 PASSENGER, WE WON'T FLY...

DayJetStudent said...

On the internet, no one knows if your a dog or human, but I would like to know what led to this posting.........
http://flyingjoey-bemygalcom.blogspot.com/2007/11/dayjet.html

...
The only thing that make this float
will be brainwashing the public into thinking this product is the real thing. This is
of course only temporary until the hype dies out and in the meantime get as much
money as possible. I think the company can last maybe a year if they fire customer care director Bill Brown a really incompantant bloke along with John Staten. I have
nothing good to say about this ***** company...

airtaximan said...

correction, Ed said "less than 1 passenger, we won't fly"... I missed that, I guess becasue its common sense with on-demand charter.

bill e. goat said...

ATM,
"a very troubling business plan"

Hmmm, that about sums it up- for both Eclipse, and DayJet.

Nice idea, in both cases, though.
-------------------------

I'm not sure how deep Big Ed's pockets are- I don't seem him being in an enivable situation, other than perhaps opening Big Ed's discount VLJ's mart. (Possilby turning E-500's at markup. I would think Eclipse built some sort of protection in to their sales agreements with DayJet to prevent that, but...).

Vern, on the other hand, might be able to unload Eclipse on some unwary conglomerate, although the deeper the hole becomes, the bigger the player must be to buy them out. And the bigger the player, the more resources they will expend to investigate the soundness of Eclipse's business plans.
-----------------------------
Regarding DayJet, many folks will be as enthusiastic as this guy:

"It was fantastic," he said. "I'm willing to pay the extra money to not have to go park, do the security checks, and wait in those cattle lines."

I think many folks will express similiar enthusiasm with their E-500's.

The only fly in the ointment is, how many is "many". I think 250/year for Eclipse- maybe, or maybe not, enough to keep Eclipse in business.

For Big Ed's Aerocab, I think it will be a matter of reaching a balance point, between jets available for dispatch, and customers wanting rides. I don't see Big Ed's service needing more than 50 jets in the next couple of years.

Disclaimer:
IMHO, speculation, WAG, gut feel, etc.

thebigriper said...

Hey, where's Ken been at lately? Is he hanging out with Gunner or something? They have so much in common after all.
My prediction is now that real airplanes are flying on a regular (somewhat) schedule that the underlying issue of robustness will be revealed. Vern always stated that this bird would be inexpensive, technically advanced and reliable. Reliability is achieved through simplicity and solid design. This airplane is far from simple. It has very complex systems for a plane of this size. It is also built very light which is counter to the concept of robust.
Dayjet can't operate at a profit if the airplanes are broke. If Eclipse shuts down where will Dayjet get service and parts?
The house of cards is getting shaky.

Max Cruise said...

I think the key will be operational costs. Assuming they can ship in volume, buyers will compare overall prices of used aircraft to Eclipse and their operational costs. If those costs are not lower, then the volume of sales will not be high enough to sustain operations. Then a downward spiral may occur.

http://www.aviongoo.com

Niner Zulu said...

A "troubling" business plan is a bit of an understatement when referring to Eclipse.

Even under the rosiest of scenarios, I cannot foresee a time when Eclipse is going to make a profit, much less be able to pay back those who have invested in the company.

If Eclipse can't make money, and so far they have proven they can't, then who in their right mind is going to continue to subsidize their production of light jets, sold at a loss, so that people who normally wouldn't be able to afford a twin jet can now afford one?

Eclipse started out as a good idea, but circumstances have turned it in to what amounts to a food stamp program for the wealthy, only instead of food it's jets. The program is destined for failure.

Old Troll said...

Am I the only one that thinks Dayjet's sale of their aircraft is a big deal? Of course, you can interpret this in several ways... maybe DJ needs to raise some quick cash... maybe they don't have the demand that was initially predicted. Either way, it's bad news for DJ. If DJ goes tango uniform, it may be a blessing for Eclipse. This would eliminate many money-losing positions.

Many on this blog have equated Dayjet's success with Eclipse' success. This would be true if Eclipse could profit on every DJ delivery. That doesn't seem to be the case since DJ got in early. Every DJ delivery is a loss (or near loss) for Eclipse. Losing all of the DJ positions may be the best thing that could happen to Eclipse.

Old Troll said...

Coldfish made a statement about "sub $50K" premiums. S/N 872 is listed for a 60K premium. Is the bubble beginning to burst?

Metal Guy said...

"and if there's less than one person, we don't fly," he said.

And each and every person they leave out to dry will never, ever, ever, ever fly Dayjet again. They just missed an important business meeting with their most important client.

They just got screwed by Dayjet and the relationship is over.

Dayjet is done before they have started if they are serious about this attitude.

airsafetyman said...

"and if there's less than one person, we don't fly," he said.

This is dumb on DayJet's part. What if they cancel a flight and then 30 minutes later there is a pick-up scheduled at the destination airport of the trip they just cancelled? Now they have to dead-head to the same airport they could have been taking a paying passenger to. Do they call the first guy back up and say: "Ooops, we can take you now"? Then if second group cancels do they call the first guy BACK up and cancel again?

Redtail said...

ASM, are you really that dumb?

airtaximan said...

redtail,

you gota ask yourself another question. How come aviation folks seem to misunderstand what Ed meant when he said "if there's less than 1 person, we don't fly"...

I first thought he was saying if there's one person... less than 1 person is no one, so it makes sense that every charter company will not necessarily fly if they have no passengers - that IS on demand charter.

I would bet Dayjet could do a little better, if they had the customer concerns first - like explaining what they are doing in a way that is very easy to understand, instead of trying to be "cute".

The again, if Ed thinks he's more like an "Airline" than "on demand" charter (which I suspect might be the case given his route system)... maybe he's trying to tell someone that he has an adcantage over the airlines, in that he does not have to fly if no one shows up - probably something he's realizing happens more than he thought.

In any case, probably not a brilliant thing to say... what he seems to mean is, "when we have no customers, we do not have to fly".

airsafetyman said...

"ASM, are you really that dumb?"

I guess I am. I read the quote as meaning "If there was only one person, we won't fly."

But tell me Redtail, why would any sentinent person even make the statement that they won't fly if there are no passengers?

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Call me crazy but I have a suggestion for Vern and the Church of Flyantology:

Stop wasting time and resources you DO NOT HAVE on FOQA's, speed records, concept jets, and 'quashing' rumors about buying Columbia and try this instead.....

FINISH THE DAMN PLANE AND DELIVER THEM TO YOU PATIENT CUSTOMERS

The more I think about the time and money this company wastes having big 'me too' presence at SNF, OSH, NBAA and AOPA, not to mention the 'Total Eclipse' tour, when they have not demonstrated the ability to deliver even a fraction of the planes they already claim to have on order, when the plane design is not done, when they are hemorraghing cash by the truckload DAILY, it is insulting to their customers, their investors, their employees, and the rest of us who care about aviation.

Stop redefining industry standard terms like sale, order, option, certified, etc.

Stop spending time and money on ANYTHING that does not take you closer to delivering a fully functioning, safe and certified airplane.

Finish the damn plane.

I won't even charge them my going rate for that advice - they can't afford help like me.

AlexA said...

ASM said “But tell me Redtail, why would any sentinent person even make the statement that they won't fly if there are no passengers?”

Maybe he was trying to say that since they do not have a schedule to keep like a regular airline there would be no need to relocate the aircraft. Can’t be that makes too much sense.

Dave said...

But tell me Redtail, why would any sentinent person even make the statement that they won't fly if there are no passengers?

Maybe what Ed was thinking of was Eric The Half A Bee. His comment really makes no sense unless he's talking about partial people because DayJet by its own admission flies back to DayPorts with or without passengers per their business model. Then again that doesn't make sense either. Maybe Ed changed his business model and now all DayStops can also be DayPorts if there's no passengers to fly back to the home DayPort.

Metal Guy said...

Oops – I read it the same way that ASM did, just because that’s they way that phrase is normally used in the English language.

Ok, so if they have no passengers, they don’t fly, and if they have less than one, they also don’t fly. Got it.

And they just confused a major portion of the flying public by implying something that they did not mean.

Cute.

airtaximan said...

Alexa:

good point..

"per-seat on-demand" air taxi service provided under part 135 needs to faithfully remind everyone they are not on a schedule, and do not have to fly when (I almost said IF...that's funny) there are no passengers.

So remember everyone, when there are no customers, we do not have to fly! This is exciting.

Dave said...

So remember everyone, when there are no customers, we do not have to fly! This is exciting.

DayJet can probably make more money *not flying* and simply flipping the planes at a discount of the current retail price. That's their single most valuable asset is that they are getting these jets at an ever increasing variance from the retail price. Maybe Eclipse will pay DayJet to go away so that it doesn't have to deliver all those jets at a loss. Ed could even make a profit while the taxpayers are left holding the bag due to Eclipse.

Ken Meyer said...

Dave wrote,

"their single most valuable asset is that they are getting these jets at an ever increasing variance from the retail"

I'll bite. Precisely what is the price DayJet is paying for each plane? What is the variance from retail today?

Ken

airsafetyman said...

Alexa,

Thanks! An air charter service only flies when someone charters their service. Unless they are dead-heading. Which they might be. Sometimes. If they don't have less than one passenger, that is. Unless they don't. Think I've got it now.

cj3driver said...

Albuquerque Journal - May 2004

Eclipse Price Increases

by Andrew Webb

Eclipse Aviation announced Thursday that it had reached a previously announced cutoff point of 2,100 advance orders and would increase the price for its business jet to $1.175 million, effective immediately.

The company said in January 2003 that it would sell 100 more planes at $950,000 before upping the price to reflect design changes and an engine swap.

Though the firm does not release information relating to the pace of orders, spokesman Andrew Broom said potential buyers were aware that the cost was about to go up by $200,000 as the cutoff point neared.

"We definitely had interest under the lower price," he said.

The firm currently has 2,100 advance orders for its six-seat business jet, which is still priced significantly lower than existing models, which start at more than $2 million.

Eclipse had previously reached that number of advance orders, but about 100 customers asked for their money back when engine troubles pushed the program back by about two years.

Eclipse now plans to begin delivery to customers who placed the earliest orders in early 2006. Customers who place orders today can expect delivery in the third quarter of 2008, Broom said.

The deposit price for the Eclipse 500 will remain $97,500, Broom said.

"We'll always take deposits from people who want to get in line," said Broom, speaking by telephone from an Eclipse air show exhibit in Switzerland.

Originally, the plane was priced below $900,000; but the firm increased the price to about $950,000 last year.

The latest price increase reflects, among other things, changes to the aircraft to accommodate engines from Pratt & Whitney Canada, which were ordered to replace the original Williams International engines the plane was designed around. Those first engines proved unreliable in early flight tests.

The Eclipse 500 is still the least expensive of the bunch compared to the half-dozen or so competitors aiming to enter the so-called very light jet market.

The next-cheapest proposed aircraft would be the similar Safire Jet, to be built by Opa Locka, Fla.-based Safire, which is priced at about $1.4 million. Safire says it plans to begin flight tests soon. Other competitors include the Cessna Citation Mustang, at $2.3 million, and two planes priced at $2 million, the Adam A700 and the Avocet Projet.

None of these aircraft has been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Eclipse is building seven test aircraft and expects to take to the skies again late this year with the new engines.

cj3driver said...

Forbes - January 2005
Cheap Jet Update

by Rich Karlgaard


Certification and delivery of the Eclipse 500 is now expected in 2006. Here's the revolution: The Eclipse 500 will cost about $1.3 million--about half the cost of the rival four-passenger Cessna Mustang, also due out in 2006. There's no question that the Cessna Mustang will be a first-rate jet in quality and safety. These are traditional Cessna attributes and the reason (Cessna will say) the Mustang deservedly costs twice as much. I've sat in both prototypes and prefer the Mustang for comfort and styling. Indeed, the Eclipse is so tiny as to be cramped for my stiff back and long legs. But its performance--in speed, range, short-field utility and direct operating costs ($0.67 per mile)--trumps Cessna's, at half the price.
Eclipse's Low Break-Even Point Can Eclipse make money selling a new jet for $1.3 million? I think it will succeed, for three reasons.

-Eclipse has gone to the trouble of certifying a new manufacturing process called friction-stir welding. Sheets of aluminum won't be riveted by workers, but welded by robots. I've seen these robots at Eclipse's Albuquerque assembly plant; they look like something from the floor of a futuristic Japanese auto manufacturer. Robots will cut the man-hour labor in an Eclipse jet from 3,000 (the industry average) to 700.

-Because of the lower costs, Eclipse says it will break even at 500 airplanes a year. At rival Cessna the assumption has always been that Eclipse will need to sell several thousand jets a year to break even, which is why Cessna executives haven't taken the Eclipse threat seriously. Better check that, Cessna.

-Eclipse sees several new markets it believes will expand the market for bizjets: air taxis, hourly logistics (e.g., when a remote factory is losing money for lack of a part) and newly affluent countries, such as China. Eclipse now has 1,400 orders.

cj3driver said...

Ken said;

"... I'll bite. Precisely what is the price DayJet is paying for each plane? What is the variance from retail today? ..."

Ken,

Albuquerque Journal - April 2005


Eclipse Announces Sales Agreement for 239 Airplanes


by Associated Press

Eclipse Aviation, which is developing a small twin-jet airplane, will sell 239 of them to a Florida company for $227 million.

Eclipse, based in Albuquerque, signed the deal with Delray Beach, Fla.-based Dayjet Corp., which will offer the airplanes for corporate travel.

The first two years of the five-year agreement, signed in July 2002 and announced Monday, includes orders for the 239 Eclipse 500 airplanes and options to buy 70 additional aircraft, Eclipse said Monday.
Eclipse plans to sell the six-seat airplane for $1,175,000 million each.

The company originally planned to sell the aircraft for $837,500 each, but a redesign with a bigger engine drove the price up to $950,000 when Dayjet inked the deal. The deal extends through 2010.

The airplanes will be sold to Dayjet for $950,000 apiece, said Vern Raburn, Eclipse president and chief executive officer.

AlexA said...

C3J,

Nice story dating back to May 2004 on the Albuquerque Journal. Too bad it has nothing to do with the price DayJet is paying for the aircraft. The first announcement of a DayJet purchase was made in May 2005 (after at least one price increase). Check Eclipse’s web site under articles-2005-May.

Ken is right you guys have no idea what DayJet is paying for the aircraft. Wishful negative speculation on your part;-)

cj3driver said...

Quick Alexa,
Hit the delete button!

Dave said...

Ken is right you guys have no idea what DayJet is paying for the aircraft. Wishful negative speculation on your part;-)

Nice to see that even faithful don't believe Eclipse Press Releases or even Vern himself:
http://www.eclipseaviation.com/index.php?option=com_newsroom&task=viewarticle&id=783&Itemid=51 (the initial announcement)
http://www.eclipseaviation.com/index.php?option=com_newsroom&task=viewarticle&id=1226&Itemid=51 (Eclipse reconfirming in 2007 that DayJet is paying $950K)
So since Eclipse press releases are to be treated as "wishful negative speculation," how much is DayJet *really* paying Eclipse?

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

$1,175,000 - $950,000 = $225,000

$225,000 / $1,175,000 = 19% discount.

Just in case people were having trouble with the math.

Wonder if that is precise enough?

AlexA said...

Dave & C3D,

Please share with us if the DayJet contract had CPI or had CPI been capped. Seven years of CPI would make a significant difference. Was the 3rd AHRS included, what about co-pilot, Stormscope, etc.

Ken is STILL right you guys have no idea what DayJet is paying for the aircraft.

cj3driver said...

AlexA said...
CJ3,

"Nice story dating back to May 2004 on the Albuquerque Journal. Too bad it has nothing to do with the price DayJet is paying for the aircraft. The first announcement of a DayJet purchase was made in May 2005 (after at least one price increase). Check Eclipse’s web site under articles-2005-May.

Ken is right you guys have no idea what DayJet is paying for the aircraft. Wishful negative speculation on your part;-)
4:44 PM, November 04, 2007"

Alexa,

Check Eclipse’s web site under articles-2005-APRIL.

Albuquerque Journal - Eclipse Announces Sales Agreement for 239 Airplanes

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


Alexa, I posted the ’04, '05 articles to show that there are definetly misrepresentations about pricing, deliveries and orderbook status in Eclipse’s recent history.
Direct quotes from Eclipse as reported in those articles and posted on the Eclipse website:

1. Oct 04 … “Raburn said the company holds firm orders for 2,126 Eclipse 500s, with about one-third going to “classic owner/operators,” about 10 percent to “others” and the balance to air-taxi operators"

--- I wonder what Vern's definition of "firm" is. (see below)

--- That makes about 700 owner-operators.

2. Oct 04 … “Over the first 12 months of production, the company plans to build 260 aircraft. During the second 12 months, it will build 880 aircraft. This translates into earlier deliveries for 99 percent of its current customers.”

--- This is 1,140 total aircraft, … my guess on "firm" orders, total (oct 04)

3. May 04 … “The company said in January 2003 that it would sell 100 more planes at $950,000 before upping the price…, spokesman Andrew Broom said … The firm currently has 2,100 advance orders for its six-seat business jet”

--- probably meant to say “2,100 advance orders and options”

--- Did they really sell 2,100 at $950K? or were most just options and not “platinum”.

4. Jan 05 … “Robots will cut the man-hour labor in an Eclipse jet from 3,000 (the industry average) to 700”

--- more speculation?

5. Jan 05 … “Eclipse says it will break even at 500 airplanes a year.”

--- is the market there?

6. Jan 05 …“direct operating costs ($0.67 per mile)”

--- really?

7. Jan 05 … “Eclipse now has 1,400 orders”

--- This is possible given that Andrew Broom said 100 more at $950K about 9 months earlier.

8. Jan 05 … “The airplanes will be sold to Dayjet for $950,000 apiece, said Vern Raburn, Eclipse president and chief executive officer.

--- From Vern himself.

John said...

Day Jet Six Week Operational Data

I have filtered the FlightAware records of Day Jet to include only flights that have a different destination than take-off. This will include a number of non-revenue flights, and flights that show circling behavoir midflight.

The pre-commercial week of Sept 24-31 doesn't show exceptionally aberrant pattern (and higher flight hours than recent) so I include it to lengthen the reporting period, and help the improve the averages.

Total flight hours: 393.4
Total non-weekend: 378.35
Average flight hrs/week: 65.6
Average flight hrs/weekday: 12.6
Average Aircraft in use/weekday: 5.4
Average hours/active aircraft: 2.35

Most recent week: 66.9 hours
average aircraft in use /day: 5.4
Average flight hour / active aircraft/day: 2.47

cj3driver said...

Alexa said;
“… Please share with us if the DayJet contract had CPI or had CPI been capped. Seven years of CPI would make a significant difference. Was the 3rd AHRS included, what about co-pilot, Stormscope, etc….”

Alexa,

Assuming CPI increases from 2000, This places the current base price for the DayJet E500’s at $1,150,206 for a 2007 delivery. The current factory base price is $1,595,000.

The difference in base price is $444,794 for 2007 and will continue to increase as deliveries go.

If we assume options are the same price no matter what the base price is, this is the difference in cost. …Unless Vern lied, or was mis-quoted.

The gap widens by another $200K, to 644K, if there were no CPI.

cj3driver said...

John said;
Average flight hrs/week: 65.6
Average flight hrs/weekday: 12.6

John,

Interesting info;

DayJet's fleet now consists of 20 aircraft (thru s/n 62). If I understand your calculations correctly,.. 65 average revenue hour per week, this put the fleet utilization at .5 hours per day (each aircraft).

Selling some of the aircraft at a 500K profit each, would seem a viable option at this point.

airtaximan said...

Ken, Alexa:

a few years ago, Dayjet arranged (3 lobbyists) for advantageous tax exemptions, and represented to the State of Florida that they were paying $1.1 million per plane. I remember seeing a calculation going out some years, and the number rmeained constant. Just FWIW.

Also, I think this whole question about what Dayjet PAID is going to be moot pretty soon - what they will be agreeing to pay, in the future, will be the next interesting point. For their sake, I certainly hope the low, low, low acquasition cost was not an important part of the equation.

Someone is going to have to determine whether its worth it to suplly 1430 low, low, low priced planes, or perhaps just chuck the order.

Any way you dice it, there's around $500k left on the table, and IF this makes a lot of difference for Dayjets model, their model is doomed anyways. Do the math... financing $500K per plane might be another $50k per annum in cost.

This could easily be dwarfed by reliability or maintenance issues, let alone no customers resulting in low load or low hours.

cj3driver said...

John said;

Average flight hrs/week: 65.6
Average flight hrs/weekday: 12.6

John,

Interesting info.

DayJet's fleet now consists of 20 aircraft (thru s/n 62). If I understand your calculations correctly,.. 65 average revenue hour per week, this put the fleet utilization at .5 hours per day (each aircraft).

Selling some of the aircraft at a 500K profit each, would seem a viable option at this point.

… Of course, DayJet also has 7 more planes coming in the next few weeks (thru s/n 81). So, if DayJet put its planes on the market, there would be 40 (or so) of the first 90 planes on the market.

This wouldn’t be good for Mike Press, current owners, position holders, speculators or Eclipse themselves.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

A tale of two companies:

There has been a lot of talk on the blog about fuel economy, DOC’s, company stability, investment outlook and fund raising – comparisons between VLJ’s and single-engine turboprops – and many offerings from folks with varying degrees of experience as owners, operators, engineers, business owners and more.

Much of the talk has centered around utility and economy and it is here I will focus today.

I had the opportunity recently to observe firsthand the utility and economy of one of the aircraft that has occasionally been brought up in this blog while on a trip with a consulting client and friend of mine. I also had the opportunity to observe firsthand the company that makes this airplane, the people who craft it, and to meet the driving forces behind it.

Like Eclipse this company found its’ start in the EAA world, and like Eclipse was announced at OSH.

Like Eclipse, the company I visited claims to be able to deliver a very high-performance turbine aircraft for about $1.6M.

Like Eclipse, the company I visited has reported strong sales and is making deliveries albeit with some difficulty.

Like Eclipse this company has set out a goal of blazing a trail in defining new categories of aircraft, setting new price points, setting new performance levels, and creating dare I say new value-propositions.

Like Eclipse this company has attracted the attention, cooperation, and risk-sharing investment of truly world-class partners.

Like Eclipse this company has set out a goal to produce a certified aircraft (or two), and like Eclipse an Experimental model is currently being produced (couldn’t help it – he he he).

Here however the similarities end. Where Eclipse has fallen short, this company has, so far, been reasonably successful and the future looks bright.

Where Eclipse has raised, and spent, well over a Billion dollars, the company I visited has raised all the money it appears to need at this point and that is well under half-a-billion dollars.

Where Eclipse recently laid off roughly ten percent of its workforce with perhaps more to come, the company I visited is hiring in production, engineering and administration.

Where Eclipse has yet to deliver a single, fully functioning plane, this company has delivered over a dozen, fully functioning aircraft offering outstanding performance and utility, that meet or exceed every promise made.

Where Eclipse has repeatedly tossed world-class vendors under the bus in sacrifice to Eclipse’s own failures and mismanagement – this company continues to attract new partners, and new vendors without any drama.

The company I visited in fact has strong relationships with the certification authority as well as with several world-class vendors, some presently on the Eclipse program, some formerly on the Eclipse program, and some which smartly ‘no-bid’ the Eclipse program.

What did I observe?

The plane shows a great deal of attention to detail. It is by no means perfect. I observed some interference fits on fairings on at least one early aircraft that I verified were not present on later aircraft.

The quality of the airframe was good – the interior components were remarkably consistent in appearance and quality – on par with any entry to mid-level production luxury car or aircraft and easily equivalent to that seen on the flying Eclipse’s at various shows and public displays.

I had the opportunity to ride right seat for a couple flights covering almost four hours including a little stick time, and as passenger for another 3+ hour 1000nm flight. For two of the flights we had five adults, bags, and full fuel onboard.

Takeoff at 75% power yielded ground rolls under 2000 feet (density altitudes over 4000), with enroute climb rates of 1500-2200 fpm. We saw ground speeds as high as 350 kts with a slight tailwind, 285 kts when fighting 70-80 kt headwinds. We flew as high as FL280 (still climbing 1000 fpm), and we covered non-stop legs over 1000nm - landing with over an hour’s reserves. 1000nm only burned about 1160 lbs of Jet-A. The plane penetrated moderate turbulence with good ride quality due to good wing loading and a generous CG envelope.

Handling qualities for this early aircraft were good but not as well balanced as I would prefer. Aileron was quite a bit heavier than pitch (due in part to being at MTOW and an aft CG, also due to control gearing since remedied on later aircraft) but more than manageable single-handed. Trim authority was adequate although the speed was a bit high making fine adjustment a bit tricky until I acclimated to it.

The six-place cabin was very comfortable, nearly 3 feet longer than the Eclipse, 5 inches more headroom and nearly 4 inches wider with more than enough room for 5 adults and all the bags we needed (with room for more). Noise levels were a bit on the high side for my taste (reportedly a 10+dB reduction has been achieved with better noise insulation in later aircraft), but Bose ANR headsets made it quite comfortable, as did XM radio.

On 1000nm trips like one we ourselves flew, the actual DOC’s are about $.89/mi. Not predicted, not calculated and simulated, not extracted from flight test or C&dD, but real world numbers, from real world aircraft, flying real world missions (fuel at $4.25-$4.55).

In case you haven’t guessed it by now, the plane was an Epic LT. The company’s facility in Bend OR is just down the runway from troubled Columbia. The factory is well laid out and chock full of airplane parts, high-quality CNC machined molds, and a very large oven for curing the composite parts. The production tooling is on par with that seen at visits to Eclipse and other OEM’s. I counted no less than a dozen LT’s in varying stages of completion, with at least three waiting on engines plus four in the flight hangar, along with the Victory single engine VLJ, and the Elite twin engine VLJ.

In short, I was very impressed with what Epic has built in the past 3 years – they are a real company, with a real airplane. The factory is already working with a consulting firm to certify the first of several of the kit aircraft for RVSM which will allow the planes to fly up to FL330, saving 70pph in fuel flow and pushing range from the already impressive 1370nm to as much as 1500nm at max cruise (up to 350 KTAS), and 1800nm at economy cruise (~290 KTS).

Epic recently announced a major investment ($200M for non-majority interest) from Dr. Vijay Mallya, the head of United Breweries and India’s Kingfisher Airlines. Mallya brings strategic relationships with Airbus and P&WC from his airline to the party, as well as his confident investment towards the companies experimental and certified programs.

Epic has a lot on their plate right now with several planes in development on both the experimental and certified sides, and that is the highest risk area I see right now but deep dive discussion with Epic executives indicates they understand the challenges, that they are committed to supporting the planes in the field.

A hiccup with engine supply from P&WC has slowed deliveries but resulted in P&WC reactivating the -67 engine line (formerly Beech Starship) to provide factory new engines rather than the previously offered factory overhauled powerplants.

We also evaluated the other Epic offerings including the to-be-certified Dynasty, the single engine Victory Jet, the smaller Escape turboprop, and the impressive Elite twinjet VLJ. Each plane was solidly built and displays good engineering practice.

Oh and my friend and client? He bought an LT kit (begins in the Spring) and also took a later position on the to-be-certified Elite Twinjet.

AlexA said...

CJ3D said “Selling some of the aircraft at a 500K profit each, would seem a viable option at this point.”

More rampant unwarranted speculation. It appears (of course speculation but at least with some basis) that fleet buyers have limitations on re-selling aircrafts. Google “Aviace” and do some homework.

Start here: http://www.charterx.com/resources/article.aspx?id=2456

Shane Price said...

What part of No DayJet = No Eclipse do people not fully understand.

It matters not what Ed has agreed to pay Vern per unit, or the 'profit' he could make on selling them retail.

DayJet goes under, Vern has no volume.

Vern with no volume is a bankrupt Vern, big time...

Once Eclipse declares itself insolvent, the E499.5's in the field or awaiting delivery are worth scrappage value, at best.

Unlike the Starship, there is no company behind Eclipse to take them off the market and give the investors (sorry, customers) back their cash.

Shane

Dave said...

Please share with us if the DayJet contract had CPI or had CPI been capped

It's not up to me to do that. It's up to you to disprove Eclipse's statement of saying that DayJet paid $950K. By all means prove that Eclipse lied about that and DayJets costs are actually higher than what's been stated by Eclipse. I've cited my source, now it's up to you to disprove my source - which my source is the Eclipse website.

Ken is STILL right you guys have no idea what DayJet is paying for the aircraft

Wow, you certainly are out to make Eclipse a bunch of liars. Eclipse says it's $950K and you wont accept what's on their website as true.

airtaximan said...

DayJet won't need airline-sized numbers to be successful, Iacobucci says. The concept will fly if DayJet can capture 1.5 percent of business trips in the Southeast made in cars and airliners. That comes to about 3,000 passengers a day."

"It could be successful or it could be wildly successful,'' Iacobucci says.

"In the worst case it will (pay off) like a utility. In the best case, it will be like Microsoft."

Also, Ed says most folks who sat in a mock up, said the plane is smaller than they would like, but better than the alternatives. (Huh??) Only 1 person said they would not fly in it.

Interesting little quotes from Ed... looking back over the last few weeks... naw... give they guy some more time...

airtaximan said...

Shane,

its kinda sticky really.

IF Eclipse makes smoe money on Dayjet planes, the no Dayjet, no e-clips.

If Eclips loses money on every plane, BUT somehow having twice the volume allows E-clips to make a lot of money on the other half, more than they lose on every Dayjet plane... they need Dayjet.

I suspect Dayjet could easily be convinced (for a few reasons) to increase their purchase price, if e-clips asks politely.

"Ed, Yup, Vern here - no more planes for you at $1.1M... its going to be $1.5 from now on... everyone else is going to $2.0 - you still have $500k to play with, otherwise, no more planes for anyone...K?"

cj3driver said...

ATM reported;

“… DayJet won't need airline-sized numbers to be successful, Iacobucci says. The concept will fly if DayJet can capture 1.5 percent of business trips in the Southeast made in cars and airliners. That comes to about 3,000 passengers a day…. "

DayJet is not even coming close.

At 65 hours per week, that makes about 120 passengers per week,… 24 per day on average. (2 per flight, 1 hr flights)

… Ed is about 2,975 passengers SHORT… per day, … so far.

cj3driver said...

"Ed, Yup, Vern here - no more planes for you at $1.1M... its going to be $1.5 from now on... everyone else is going to $2.0 - you still have $500k to play with, otherwise, no more planes for anyone...K?"

I agree, but at $2.0+ million is there still a market? … not for 500 per year.

Mr Press proves that. ... 75 so far this year, at LESS than $1.8

airtaximan said...

cj3,

I agree, there's no market for 500 at that price, but at least he'll have Ed at $1.5 instead of Zip.

At $1.8 or so average price, he might have 300 per year... your 75 Mike Ppess reference PLUS Ed.

Also, there's so much company and program riak in Eclipse (just ask Ken...sorry, couldn't help myself) that the orders are probably low just becasue most pilots are smarter than to try to save a few bucks on a HUGE risk.

Pilots are trained that way.

The real customers who can afford a $1.5 million jet can probably afford a $2 million jet - then again, they can also afford a real $2.x, y or z million jet too - good point.

Its going to be rough competing north of $2 million.

AlexA said...

Dave said “It's not up to me to do that. It's up to you to disprove Eclipse's statement of saying that DayJet paid $950K”

Sorry Dave but you seem to have little clue on the norm with jet aviation contracts. Most position/purchase prices contracts are subject to change (take a look at Diamond D-jet). In addition the “stated” price is usually the list price or agreed upon price at the date of introduction, not date of delivery (Embraer, Cessna). The majority of contracts have a starting price point that is based on the introduction date, not date of delivery. Most of the time one has to add CPI to the quoted price. To my knowledge Eclipse only sold 165 (IIRC) without the adjustable price. After seven year the CPI can add a substantial amount to the cost.

The bottom line is without inside information of what DayJet is actually paying for aircraft is speculation. The same is true for what it costs Eclipse to build the 500.

Dave said...

Sorry Dave but you seem to have little clue on the norm with jet aviation contracts

No, I'm going off what Eclipse is reporting on their own website.

Most position/purchase prices contracts are subject to change (take a look at Diamond D-jet). In addition the “stated” price is usually the list price or agreed upon price at the date of introduction, not date of delivery (Embraer, Cessna). The majority of contracts have a starting price point that is based on the introduction date, not date of delivery. Most of the time one has to add CPI to the quoted price. To my knowledge Eclipse only sold 165 (IIRC) without the adjustable price. After seven year the CPI can add a substantial amount to the cost.

It is up to you to prove your speculation. As you said "most of the time," "the majority," "usually," and "to my knowledge" are all terms of speculation and by your own admission isn't done 100% of the time, whereas it is a fact that Eclipse is reporting on their website as of 2007 that DayJet paid $950K. Even by your own admission Eclipse doesn't follow the "norm" all the time.

The bottom line is without inside information of what DayJet is actually paying for aircraft is speculation

You're right and I'm the one who cited the inside information coming right from the horse's mouth - Eclipse themselves! It is you who has thrown out speculation in response by your own definition.

cj3driver said...

Alexa,

In case you missed it,

$950,000 plus CPI increases from 2000, puts the base price for the DayJet E500’s at $1,150,206 ... for a 2007 delivery.

see previous post for more.

gadfly said...

Possibly the confusion comes from the price of the original six seat E500, which never went into production, to be replaced by the more spacious five seat version.

gadfly

cj3driver said...

The bottom as I see it;

1. Eclipse (by its own admission) needs to produce and sell 500 planes per year.

2. Eclipse is losing money on the first 500 (or so) aircraft and must make up the difference somewhere.

3. DayJet (and other air-taxis) is 50% of this volume.

4. DayJet (by its own admission) is only generating 5% of its projected revenue so its future is very shaky.

5. Eclipse has no choice but to raise prices if it doesn’t have the volume.

6. By raising prices, Eclipse faces disgruntled customers and enters a very, very competitive market.

rcflyer said...

Shane Price said,

"Once Eclipse declares itself insolvent, the E499.5's in the field or awaiting delivery are worth scrappage value, at best."

Just as all Pipers became instantly worthless the moment Piper declared insolvency?

R.C.

Lemmus Eclipsus said...

Cold & Wet -

Just off on a binnes trip. Been watching the blog, but its all be rehash after rehash of late.

Regarding the new COO of Diamond … well serve me up a plate of Crow-of-Hypocrisy. My comments were based upon a conversation involving the man himself, albeit nearly five months ago. At that point, purportedly, the search was on for a new VP of Injun-earings and Ken was PhostrEx bound.

The Real Frank Castle said...

O'lemonus 'edictus sez.....

"Guess I was wrong."

Damn nice to hear the Faithful admit it.

You're noisy when you chew with your mouth open.

The Real Frank Castle said...

And now that I refreshed, I see you retracted your statement.

Truly Faithful.


yea.

FlightCenter said...

The polite way to discuss the relationship between DayJet and Eclipse is to talk about the benefits of "mutual interdependence".

But that got me thinking about another phrase - "mutually assured destruction".

Vern and Ed ought to install a hot line with red phones in each of their offices.

Ed: I need to cancel a few orders...

Vern: Well we're raising your price...

Repeat in any order...

Lemmus Eclipsus said...

Can’t Let The Real Frank Castle Loose the Faith ….

Attempting to fix some grammatical errors I also sliced my mea culpa.

For the record … “I was wrong!”

Shane Price said...

RCFlyer,

Pipers are/were 'simple' propeller driven aircraft with standard parts.

E499.5's are, by the oft repeated admission of the company that makes them, incomplete units with dedicated avionics, a magic bullet method of construction (Stir Frying, sorry, Friction Stir Welding) a jet engine or two and a maintenance schedule so special you have to sign a non-disclosure agreement before you take delivery.

A Piper it is not. Other than the bankrupcy bit. Which Piper did, not once, but twice!

Like I said, post Eclipse, an E499.5 is scrap.

At best....

Shane

Redtail said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Redtail said...

Redtail said...
Lemmus Eclipsus said... Just off on a binnes trip. Been watching the blog, but its all be rehash after rehash of late.

Only of late??? It's been rehash after rehash for a loooong time now. The Critics have nothing new to discuss. Their only purpose in life is to gripe. It makes them feel whole. Sad state of affairs.

rcflyer said...

Shane Price said,

"Pipers are/were 'simple' propeller driven aircraft with standard parts."

Ah, yes, your post brings back memories of the good ol' days, when airplanes were simple, had props, and any A & P could fix 'em. Plain vanilla flying machines like the Piper Cheyenne IV/400/400LS, a 315kt pressurized twin turboprop. Anyone want to count the moving parts in that baby and compare it to an E500?

R.C.

FreedomsJamtarts said...

I liked Mike Press's update.

I really liked the part where he admits that Vern said a couple of month ago that they'd build 200 this year, but that they have only hit 16/month (actually more like 12) and would therefore only hit 105 for the year.

But then Mikes faith cuts through reality, and he make the leap of faith to hitting plane a day in January (nearly tripling the production during the holiday season is pretty disruptive).

He backs this up by stating that Eclipse will build 550 in 2008. A 5X increase in production should be easy for Eclipse, since they are managing a 105X increase this year over 2006. How hard can it be?

Lucky Dayjet is not in Europe. The parking fees would be killing them.

Shame that PartialEclipse will never get an EASA TC, due to the impending bankrupcy.

There are plenty of rich, dumb people over here waiting to get fleeced also. Eclipse still haven't understood the power of what they have - the worlds best database of dumb, rich, easy marks!

Mike says that Fiki certification should start in November. I thought Rev Ken said it had already started ages ago? Lucky it will be certified before winter comes.

I also liked the price increase because Eclipse has reached 2100 orders (again). Maybe the 150 people Eclipse sacked were the marketing department, since they are not necessary with Mike Press and the rest of the secondary market killing any chance of a new sale.

Flightcenter took a good shot a calculating Dayjets revenue vrs burn rate, Thanks. Any one know how big the Dayjet organisation is? You need to add the dispatch, crew planners, office rental, office overhead, management, and especially insurance to the fixed monthly costs.

In my experience, direct operating costs are not linear. Even with power by the hour, JetIncomplete, etc, the maintenance costs per hour tend to increase at low utilisation, as the providers normally set the rate to a utilisation, and will try to claw back money or escalate that rate if you fall outside the contractual utilistation.

Shane Price said...

RC,

I get your point. Piper continue to make and support a variety of aircraft from the various 'ages' of the company.

I trust you get mine. Without Eclipse, HOW can anyone get support on the E499.5?

Remember, there are a number of 'new' companies chasing the VLJ dollar now. Some have history (Piper, Diamond and Embraer) some don't (Honda and Epic) and others are simply doing it.

Cessna, for sure.

Eclipse, for how long...

I want Eclipse to 'make it'. I just cannot, for the life of me, work out how they will.

Now, back to my original point. The value (to DayJet) of the E499.5 they currently have up for sale shows some profit, probably in the nature of $500,000. Not a whole lotta money in the context of the DayJet startup.

Couple of questions arise.
1. Why do they offer this for sale, unless they don't need the thing as quickly as Vern wants to deliver it?
2. If they are having trouble getting custom for the mini fleet they have, what chance them taking up the 279 orders plus 70 options?

I can't think of answers to either of those questions which are good for DayJet. And what's bad for Ed, is poison for Vern.

You think different. Fine. Tell me why...

Shane

airtaximan said...

"actually more like 12) and would therefore only hit 105 for the year."

who projected 105 deliveries in our contest?

Until Vern said this, I thought I might win!

John said...

Flight Tally by Departure
1. Gainesville Rgnl (KGNV) -- 149
2. Boca Raton (KBCT) -- 127
3. Tallahassee Rgnl (KTLH) -- 60
4. Lakeland Linder Rgnl (KLAL) -- 50
5. Pensacola Rgnl (KPNS) -- 24
6. Ocala Intl (KOCF) --10
7. Destin-Fort Walton Beach (KDTS) -- 4
total tallied flights -- 478

Flight pairs
1. KGNV -- BOCA -- 59 + 62 = 121
2. KTLH -- KGNV -- 26 + 27 = 53
3. KLAL -- BOCA -- 27 + 25 = 52
4. BOCA -- KTLH -- 23 + 16 = 39
5. KGNV -- KPNS -- 18 + 13 = 31
Total top 5 pairs --------- 296

airtaximan said...

"Mike says that Fiki certification should start in November."

who said this a little while ago?

Niner Zulu said...

Redtail, it must be nice to live the land of make believe. How are the Teletubbies today?

Eclipse can't hemmorage cash forever. Sooner or later they have to make a profit. That doesn't appear to be any time soon, does it? And it doesn't appear that they are going to make money on ANY of the jets that have been ordered to date, does it?

In their intricate business plan, Eclipse forgot one essential thing - they need to make money to survive. Somehow that got overlooked.

Say Hi to Elvis for me ;-)

airtaximan said...

I would not count dayjet out...

it would appear as if they just need to spread their planes out more, and open more airports.

They are not soing that poorly, and apparently folks have shown up to fly. Amazing, at these prices, but heck - lets give them a chance to spread out and fly more.

Truth is, we have no idea how many people are onboard... one could argue they are flying any flight with any one passenger, or they are flying only the flights with more than one passenger. I would think they would have more flights if there were enough passengers trying the system.

Let's let them work at it, watch the trends, and see if they begin opening up more and more airports. If they do, chances are they are trying whatever they can to overcome a lackluster start - not a failure though.

Finally, they already opened up the booking engine to everyone who will provide contact info, and they are flying to Daystops and Dayports... so they have aircraft availability beyond the membership club and Dayport routes. Just an indication of how things are shaping up.

Redtail said...

Niner Zulu said... yada, yada, yada.

Right, heard it all before. Keep up the excellent cut and paste.

airtaximan said...

I just read Mike Press' report:
Two things struck me.

1-There have been over 70 positions sold on the secondary market this year.
- this together with his contention that there were around 100 sales last year already, and MAN the market for these planes is really like "can of beans"... I cannot imagine any program in history where 170 (or something like this) planes were sold before even 70 were delivered... was the whole initial order book speculators and dayjet? How many folks flew the plane, and then sold it? This is a real FIRST in GA.
2- Mike invested blindly in a previous round of financing at e-clips. "Prior to this report, I was not privy to any financial information regarding the company as I blindly invested in the previous round."
- I wonder which round? Did eclipse replace the guys who wanted control of the board (this past summmer) with private investors who "blindly" gave them money? GEEZ. Why would anyone "blindly" invest in a 10 year old ocmpany reported to be in dire straits in the press, and way, way behind schedule in all apects of their business that matters? This is mighty powerful stuff.

Mike Press speculated the company was in prety tough shape, and he blindly invested. I'm not sure what I think of him, but perhaps "blind" is what you need to be to be pro-Vern and pro-eclips.

Interesting times, unless you are Redtail...

airtaximan said...

one last thoght - Mike says that the Euros are buying up the e-clipses in the aftermarket - I wonder what would be the case if the euro was not at such a substantial discount to the dollar? Who would be the "buyer" for every "seller"?

John said...

Flight pairs -- first six weeks of Operation
1. KGNV -- BOCA -- 59 + 62 = 121
2. KTLH -- KGNV -- 26 + 27 = 53
3. KLAL -- BOCA -- 27 + 25 = 52
4. BOCA -- KTLH -- 23 + 16 = 39
5. KGNV -- KPNS -- 18 + 13 = 31
Total top 5 pairs --------- 296

What strikes me about this is the odd predominance of the BOCA to Gainesville run. The profitable and compelling flight would be Tallahassee or Pensacola-- and should have a larger population base. Are the BOCA to Gainesville flights commuter runs for the Dayjet employees?

The population base is in the greater Miami area -- so flights should predominantly fan from there.

The Boca to Lakeland flight is about 180 miles, and the shortest run. Why is this the 2nd most popular BOCA Raton flight.

What is the population base for the Lakeland destination, one is still scores of miles from Orlando, Disney, St. Petersburg, etc.
What's the advantage of jetting to Lakeland and backtracking for an hour via rented car to Orlando?

Or does this represent a demo flight destination for Miami area investors?

Shane Price said...

Redtail,

But you will say hello to Elvis for me as well?

Shane
PS. NZ. You da man, for sure...

Shane Price said...

ATman,

While there may be interest, or even orders from over this side of the pond, I am very interested in the concept of delivery without an EASA/JAA certificate.

Just a thought. One would imagine that insurance companies would be keen to know that all the regulations were obeyed.

Or that the E499.5 has FIKI, which would be useful here in the winter.

Or a complete suite of avionics.

Or windscreens that don't need replacement every few hours.

But I won't bore you with the facts....

Anyway, after all the above, the real reason there is interest in the little jet is:-

IT'S CHEAP!

There are always people who confuse value and price.

I'm not one of them.

Shane

Redtail said...

Shane Price said... NZ. You da man, for sure...

You two BFF's are too cute. Nice to know you have each other.

fred said...

ATman

the "Buyers" from Europ are the same than empty promises from EA corp.
(may be someone should say to Mike that Jet A1 is suposed to be in the tank , not to be smoked ... :-)) )

as far as i know , there is just a word for such a situation =

"JUST NO WAY"

as for known issues , no EASA and all the like ...
(to believe an airplane can be delivered in that manner on this side of the mare is an offence to cleverness ...!)

i see it as a new bunch of lies , all the promises made before went to the sewage ....
so now it is the Euro value which is going to save EA Corp. ?

(very good , it's far away , so deposit holders have to rely on what is said in the temple of the flying circus? after europ what is next ?? zimbabwe or turkmenistan?)

laughable !

(by the way , i have been out for a few months , came back just to see about nothing has moved , rate of delivery is still a christmas wish and production almost going backward ...!)

fred said...

shane you are right !

even if we (europeans) can buy E449.5 for something like 45% cheaper than a mr anybody in USA ...

it doesn't make it work any better !

i allways doubt of gifts , free coupon and cheap offers ....

when something is really cheap or free , you very often end-up paying twice for it ...! :-))

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

Niner . . . don’t give up your day job, but keep up your humor on the side . . . and speaking of Bankruptcy, Eclipse could only wish that when it comes (and it will), they would have the problems of Piper . . . thousands of “real” airplanes, and folks standing in line to purchase them. ‘Last time around, I understand that Piper was having problems with frivolous lawsuits, dating back to events decades old . . . and the government finally put a cap on the lawyers going back over eighteen years. (Eclipse would want it changed to eighteen weeks.)

Shane . . . when I was a kid we sometimes had a “redtail hen”, . . . laying eggs that were too big for the chicken. ‘Seems that the “faithful” are busy laying oversized eggs.

And for those who don’t like “criticism”, last time I checked, the title of this blogsite had something to do with “criticism”.

Thanks for “info” from the other side of the “pond”.

gadfly

(If there were an “Eclipse Aviation Support Site” open to the public, would anyone sign on?)

Shane Price said...

Fred,

Welcome back.

I belived that the dollar weakness is actually a problem for Eclipse.

The engines come from Canada.

The wings come from Japan.

Most of the tail comes from England.

Sundry other bits come from all points of the globe.

So, suppliers who were 'sold' a high volume, in return for bidding the lowest price, now find themselves with a low volume at an even lower price.

This cannot last.

I don't know what your experiences are, but in Ireland we find that a lot of business closures are done in the New Year. It's a combination (I guess) of the 'winter blues' with the reality of poor cash flows in January.

Plus, The Great Raburn is looking for extra cash to 'fill the gap' between now and the time they finally get into high rate production.

In the aftermath of the sub prime mortage meltdown at major US banks, I think he will have a harder time than EVER.

Gad,

Any take on the Precision Airmotive news? I know that carbs have been bit long in the tooth for a few decades, at least in terms of technology, but to actually have to shut down due to insurance costs sounds a bit odd.

Still, Eclipse won't have to worry about insurance claims. Won't be around to defend any....

Shane

gadfly said...

Shane

“From a Scot to an Irishman” . . . I can’t help you on this one. All I know is that you can’t hide a beautiful woman, and you can’t hide a quality product . . . or airplane.

But the picture we see is almost like the early days along Highway 66 (Central Avenue) in Albuquerque . . . the closer you get, the more pathetic the display.

Eclipse has been flirting with a lot of people, claiming to be something “she ain’t”.

It’s a sad story, and watching it come to an end is a long drawn-out process, but the final chapter was written almost before the introduction was composed.

gadfly

rcflyer said...

Shane,

I agree with you that should Eclipse fold, any existing jets would be worth less. My quibble was with your statement that they would be worthless.

There are a lot of orphaned airplanes still flying. If there is money to be made doing it, someone will manufacture parts and do service on them.

If Eclipse bellies up, there will be a sizeable pool of ex-employees qualified to work on them (in fact, they may be pre-loading on that one!) The vendors who produced all of the components will still be around. The flight instructors will still be around for type rating and recurrent training.

At my base price of $995k, I believe I could still sell the jet and make a profit, post-epocalypse. (I hereby trademark that term. You have to give me credit if you use it :) )

R.C.

gadfly said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

After the e-pocalypse (credit RCF)the Faithful will attend E-A meetings.

Eclipsaholics Anonymous.

gadfly said...

Bah, humbug! Let's try this again. The word is "post-epocalypse . . .", according to RC, who claims to have trademarked it . . . next time, make it easier to spell!

You may have a “hard sell” distinguishing between “post-epocalypse” (TM) ('hope I got it right this time) and “Apocalypse” . . . but either way, it speaks of “the end”. (Yep, I think we got it this time!)

You say “If”, but should say “When”. In either case, it is a most difficult scenario to bring the components together. Remember, they “rallied” around a personality . . . not an idea nor complete concept, in and by itself.

And, as they say, “Once bit, twice shy!” So, it is highly unlikely that you could bring the many elements together, for a second “chance”. If the idea does not work the first time, why in the world would it work the second time?

With vast amounts of money, the dream doesn’t work the first time, how will it work the second time, with almost no money from speculators, who have already been “burned”? The original dream has been modified many times . . . and what dream survives after the dreamer awakes? The coffee has been served . . . the dream is finished. It is time to be fully awake, and face reality!

Note: Here we are not attempting to place “blame” . . . it could be that the motives were all well and good. But the fact remains, the dream has become a nightmare.

Here, we have the age-old dilemma . . . to “Walk” or “Talk”? History declares, loud and clear, “Walk . . . and walk fast! . . . write it off, and get on with life.” The dreamers . . . or rather the ones who “think” they have a dream, but really have nothing but a fast disappearing “investment”, will grasp any straw, hoping against hope, to recover everything, anything . . . something, and will end up with nothing, and a bitter attitude, looking for something/someone on which to place the blame for their misplaced investments.

All these words will be ignored. But I feel a responsibility to put them into print. The little jet was not bad, but neither is it great . . . nor even revolutionary in any sense of the phrase. In fact, it isn’t even up to “average” on any account. But so be it. It actually “flew” . . . big whoop! So what!

A few more months . . . and the “faithful” will say, correctly, that we, the “critics”, have run out of things to say. Both will be correct . . . because the “critics” have said from the beginning that this entire enterprise is a loser . . . and what more is there to say?

Enough . . . gadfly! . . . coming up on December, 2007 . . . RIP

rcflyer said...

Critiquing the Critics
----------------------

Just kidding about the trademark. Youse guys can say epocalypse or e-pocalypse all you want, with or without credit.

I read all of the posts. While I agree with few of the critics, I try to understand what they are saying, and why they are saying it. While much of the criticism is based on indisputable facts, and is therefore justified, I part company with the critics on the conclusions they draw.

I also usually disagree with the proffered solutions to Eclipse's many problems. In fact, no one could agree with all of them, because they are contradictory.

For example, Vern's resignation or removal has been called for loudly and often. Yet, seemingly in the same breath, the pundits say that Eclipse is a cult of personality around Vern, and that Eclipse only exists because of Vern's facility for fundraising. You can't posit that Eclipse would be better off without Raburn, then complain that he's the only thing keeping it going.

Another example: People complain that the E500 is overhyped. As evidence, they say that there is nothing revolutionary about it, despite Eclipse's persistent claims.

Yet, when Eclipse announces something that could be considered revolutionary, like FOQA for a general aviation aircraft, it's dissed and dismissed, mocked and minimized.

But, please keep bringing on the funny. I'm not talking about sophomoric, mean-spirited puns (if I read "e-clips" or "E499.x" one more time, I may hurl), but genuine wit. Niner Zulu's line about "Nearer to Bank-rupt-cy" made me chortle.

Thanks for reading my rant.

R.C.

gadfly said...

RC

The focus of Eclipse should be to keep their original promises. Early on, it was obvious that they were looking for excuses, and distractions. To a certain extent, they achieved the “distraction” thing, but they have not, and probably will never fulfill their first promises. And it appears that they do not even intend to apologize for their failure, nor to make things right, financially, with those whom they have failed . . . including the taxpayers of the State of New Mexico, of whom I am one. Am I offended? Yes, indeed, I am . . . most assuredly.

gadfly

airtaximan said...

RC,

You might want to check things out a bit…
Start here - it’s a 2004 ISBAO conference, referencing the GA FOQA program.

http://www.ibac.org/
is-bao/support/
NewsletterSep04.pdf

I'll be surprised if you still agree with your remark: "Yet, when Eclipse announces something that could be considered revolutionary, like FOQA for a general aviation aircraft, it's dissed and dismissed, mocked and minimized."

GA FOQUA is nothing new - I even posted a long blurb why a voluntary FOQA program could be better, especially considering E-clips' penchant for stiffing its customers, than letting the manufacturer get involved with the data. If it’s true, as I have been told, that when you buy an e-clips, you relinquish rights to the flight data to e-clips, I'd check with my attorney before buying one. This is a major problem under many circumstances, and no aviation attorney worth their salt would let an operator agree to this condition, or even have the manufacturer in the middle of flight data collection and analysis. What did Vern invent? FOQA for GA - NO... grabbing the data, YES.

You can install and certify proper flight recorders and have your own FOQA - many operations have this. I'd leave the manufacturer out of it, if I were you.

Lastly, I find it curious you would offer this:
"Eclipse only exists because of Vern's facility for fundraising. You can't posit that Eclipse would be better off without Raburn, and then complain that he's the only thing keeping it going.... You can't posit that Eclipse would be better off without Raburn, then complain that he's the only thing keeping it going."

I personally have never said Vern should be gone - I personally do not think the company would be better off with him gone - it would be gone, a long time ago. Would this be a good thing? Nope, just a market reality.

Someone can say both things at the same time - "Kick Vern out, He's the only thing keeping the company going". It means without him, the company would take its natural course, and be gone.

Look, they guy is the master: he has somehow convinced investor group after investor group (after his buddies) to pony up MORE and MORE cash. Governments, Ed, Ed's investors, 800 or so unsuspecting Ken's or speculators, some newbie fleet operators, and even Mike Press to "invest".

Perhaps they all wanted to see a novel GA plane, like a novel FOQUA
for GA?

Great promoter, great salesman... great connections, and terrific story teller.

Chickens come home to roost, and RC, like there's nothing special about the GA FOQUA except Vern gets the data, there's nothing special about the little cheap jet based on unrealistic production volume called the perfect revolutionary air taxi plane, except Vern gets the money.

There is and has been so much BS in this program, its astounding... if you are inclined to look under the hood, read, listen and apply some critical thinking. One hint, if e-clips uses the word "revolutionary"... chances are, its been done before, just not at THAT cost or HYPE.

Just one taxman’s opinion, observation and rant - thanks

FlightCenter said...

In case anyone was wondering, ATM was in fact the person who predicted that Eclipse would ship 105 aircraft in 2007. So it would seem that ATM and Vern do in fact agree on something - just not at the same time.

You can look at the all the predications made by the entire blog as well as a running history of Eclipse's own official plans here.
Eclipse Aviation Projections

It is interesting to see the trends in black and white. (There are tabs for aircraft deliveries, avionics and certification milestones.)


Here is a list of the folks who are above the shipments to date, but below Vern's current projection of about 105.

buckerfan 68
big jim 70
sparky 73
mouse 75
coldwetmackarelofreality 84
bonanza pilot 90
hiflyer 97
black tulip 99
airtaximan 105

I was clearly way too optimistic - predicting 131 aircraft would be shipped in 2007.

I'll take solace in the fact that the other half of my projection, that not one of the aircraft shipped in 2007 would come equipped with Avio NG - is looking highly likely.

FlightCenter said...

RC,

Epocalypse - Now that is really, really good.

Is that defined as what happens when Eclipse customers start switching to Epic?

Or is it when Vern and Ed start calling each other on their red hotline phones?

Ed: I'm having a little trouble getting my next round of financing... We may have to push out some of those orders...

Vern: Your contract says you have no choice... you have to take them as scheduled...

Ed: Ok, but then I'll have to sell them on the aftermarket...

Vern: Your contract says you have no choice... you can't sell them...

Ed: Did you hear what I said about not having enough money to buy them?

Vern: Your contract says you must take delivery...

Ed: You can send them if you don't mind that payment may be a bit deferred... I promise I'll pay you for the planes just as soon as my next round of financing comes through.

FlightCenter said...

The latest update from the FAA database shows that 1 additional E500 aircraft was registered during the past week for a total of 55 aircraft delivered.

The "in process" website shows an additional 7 aircraft for which Eclipse has submitted registration paperwork, bringing the total registered and in process aircraft to 62.

3 DayJet aircraft were registered on Halloween. 142DJ, 146DJ, and 148DJ. (147DJ was skipped for some reason).

A lot of folks have suggested that perhaps the FAA database is not an accurate reflection of actual shipments.

However, this week we were able to check EO387's data that serial #70 shipped on October 31st. In fact, the FAA "in process" website shows the exact same date that EO387 provided. So it would seem that the FAA data is quite reflective of what is actually happening in the field.

On the topic of Halloween, 10/31/2007 seems to have been a very busy day at Eclipse. Eclipse submitted paperwork on 10/31 to register 5 aircraft. Fully one third of all the aircraft delivered in October were delivered on the last day of the month.

If that's not a scary thought, I don't know what is.

Any chance there was just a little bit of pressure to make the numbers for the month?

Folks used to say that you didn't want to buy a car that was built on Monday... but I wonder about the wisdom of taking delivery of an aircraft on the last day of the month at Eclipse.

It is an increasingly common event that Eclipse delivers aircraft out of serial # order. As of today, no paperwork has been filed to deliver serial # 53, 59, 62, 63, 65, 66 or 69.

Interesting to consider why this might be when serial # 70 has been delivered.

Gunner said...

Rumors of my demise.....
Well, never mind that.

Speaking just for me, the most salient post in this particular Blog entry came in the form of CWMoR's report of the Epic trip. It went completely unnoticed, in favor of debate as to Vern Raburn's veracity and whether Ed Iacobucci, with 1400 orders, got a better deal than Ken Meyer, with two. Gee, ya think? ;-)

In any case, it's instructive to this somewhat jaded, though personally interested aviation enthusiast that Eclipse and Epic do not look, today, like twin sons of different mothers. The difference is, I suspect, in the seeds of their fathers.

Gunner

Turbine Power said...

gunner said--"Eclipse and Epic do not look, today, like twin sons of different mothers. The difference is, I suspect, in the seeds of their fathers."

Actually, Mr. Gunner, the difference is that one of those companies has a certified product that it is delivering in record numbers (73 at last count).

The other hopes one day to maybe have a certified product from it's large collection of "could be, maybe, one day" offerings.

I find it amusing that the only ones left on this blog seem to be a collection of sorry-assed nobodies who apparently have nothing better to do with their life than pat each other on the back and say how wonderful it is that they aren't associated with Eclipse any longer.

All the while, the planes keep rolling off the assembly line, the customers are enjoying the remarkable performance of the jet that costs the price of a piston, and you guys just don't get it.

Will the last sorry-assed nobody left here please turn the lights out?

Gunner said...

Ouch.

Sorry assed nobodies? Here's to raising the bar on polite discourse.

Eclipse is what it is. Epic is what it is. Broad brush insults fail to change the realities of the day.

Had Epic "promised" to deliver 112, err 74, umm 35, oops 4 fully functional experimentals in 2007, it would evidently deserve the exact same accolades as Eclipse receives today.

I'm starting to warm to Mirage's position. Highly amusing.
Gunner

SunVillage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fred said...

thanks shane ....

the dollar weakness IS a problem for EA.corp. !

at the time being , most peoples (in USA) understood "goldilocks" is complete BS ...

with a barrel at 100US$ (believe me , it's only the beginning ...!) i wonder how many of the ones whom thought "why not having our own jet" are going to see Vern as a wisdom sayer ...!

i agree with you ( i am an economic analyst by profession...) the rough time(recession) coming is going SOMETHING if not THE THING to swallow ... ! it's a million dollars question = to try to help economy recover , the fed is lowering interest rate ...but each time it is lowered $ loose value compare to others currencies , making oil even more expensive , stabbing the purchasing power of US citizens (oh what a good idea to rely so much on oil...!), making economy getting worse , in reaction = interests rate are lowered once again , and so on ... ( some collegues of mine say the 1929's black friday will look like a kid's joke compare to what's coming !it's probably not going to be so sudden , but very lasting and very deep)

i wonder how many "supposed to be rich" being as well "deposit holder" are going to find out pretty soon "owning a jet is not in the trend anymore" especially a jet that would probably never be finished ...

as i very higly doubt vern is going to find the "extra-cash" in order to reach high production rate (what a laugh...!)

now banks already understood printing money like mad , make the money worthless and the peoples in the Fed (even if they never acknolegde it ) have already lots of problems to keep theirs job , so to heal the economy ....it's out of sight ...

the "Friends" with big pockets ,it's even more simple , if they keep on lending backed by promises,broken schedules and disruptive whatever , they just deserve to loose all their money ...!

as i stated before , few things seems never to change ...

the waiting list for delivery looks like one of them ... ;-)

and the weakness of $ is never going to be a competive argument for EA.Corp. as the $ value is not ONLY for E500 ...

when E500 can be purchased at a discount price because of $/€ exchange , so a mustang can be in the same way ...!! and even if we pay our oil at a much lower price than US (crude oil is paid in $ , if you have Euro , the price hasn't changed that much ...) we still have lots of energy taxes which gave us the opportunity of getting rid of our addiction to oil , long ago ...! (even if it's very far from being enough!)

FreedomsJamtarts said...

THe comparison between the Piper bankruptcy and the Epocolyse (tm) misses the point that Piper went under because the product got too expensive, whereas Eclipse will go under because the product is too cheap.

Pipers millstone was a large historic liablity. Eclipse's millstone is a large underpriced order book going forward (Actually its Vern, but we'll stick to the symptoms here).

Pipers position (large installed customer base, large demand for service, low demand for excessively priced new A/C) made for a resonably simple business case. New piper dumped some TC's, reduced unprofitable activities, trimmed a high cost labour pool, ceased production of low margin products etc. The products could also be largely supported without a TC holder. The bankrupcy was needed to shed unprofitable diversions, while refocusing on a profitable core business.

Eclipse has large demand for underpriced product, small installed customer base (holding very expensive IOU's), and strong competition from their own customers. They can't shed the unprofitable part of their business because it's their core.

If I was Vern I would be off to Venezuala on the first plane. Hugo Chavez has a good track record of backing projects using eclipsonomics. He would be the perfect investor.

Redtail said...

Turbine Power said... I find it amusing that the only ones left on this blog seem to be a collection of sorry-assed nobodies who apparently have nothing better to do with their life than pat each other on the back and say how wonderful it is that they aren't associated with Eclipse any longer. All the while, the planes keep rolling off the assembly line, the customers are enjoying the remarkable performance of the jet that costs the price of a piston, and you guys just don't get it. Will the last sorry-assed nobody left here please turn the lights out?

Now that's funny, I don't care who you are. It's also just as true as anything else written here. Not even Stan hangs around anymore.

mirage00 said...

Turbine Power said... I find it amusing that the only ones left on this blog seem to be a collection of sorry-assed nobodies who apparently have nothing better to do with their life than pat each other on the back and say how wonderful it is that they aren't associated with Eclipse any longer. All the while, the planes keep rolling off the assembly line, the customers are enjoying the remarkable performance of the jet that costs the price of a piston, and you guys just don't get it. Will the last sorry-assed nobody left here please turn the lights out?

I love this guy!

Redtail, I beleive Stan is still reading through the AFM. ;)

I remain amused

double 00

airsafetyman said...

"the customers are enjoying the remarkable performance of the jet that costs the price of a piston, and you guys just don't get it. "

No anti-ice, no deice, no thrust reversers, no anti-skid, no ground flaps, no spoilers, no autopilot to speak of, no weather radar, no proven back up flight instrumentation, no range, and no payload. Maybe that's why they have sold so many lately?

airtaximan said...

"The latest update from the FAA database shows that 1 additional E500 aircraft was registered during the past week for a total of 55 aircraft delivered."

After a flurry of finishing up planes that were started a long, long time ago, or, in the case of number 70, started a long time ago... e-clips deliveries have ground to a halt with one single delivery in a week.

Official deliveries stand at 55 or so, and someohow, things are so screwy that many planes in the sequence go undelivered... waiting for parts, to be fixed, finished... whatever.

EPIC is more like Cirrus, only 10 years ahead of where they were after the first few years. E-clips is more like Sapphire only 1 $billion dollars ahead of where they were just before they went TU.

Redtail said...

Turbine Power said... I find it amusing that the only ones left on this blog...

Two just chimed in.

airsafetyman said...

"Turbine Power said... I find it amusing that the only ones left on this blog...

Two just chimed in."

No, Redtail, I have never been associated with Eclipse in any manner. I am, however, embarrassed that the aviation regulatory agencies of my country haven't shut them down. Yet.

airtaximan said...

redtail,

Me neither...never had anything to do with eclipse and am not a manufacturer in the industry of anything.

Just an operator, and enthusiastic about the industry in total.

I think you will find that with the exception of a few former e-clips employees (less than 6) no one on this blog was ever "associated with eclipse", really.

It's a convenient thought though. Part of the mentality it takes to see and hear what you want... instead of "reality".

Y'alls track record is pretty shabby for "insiders" - especially compared with someone on the outside... with only lines to read between to actually see the truth.

Redtail said...

OK, but you're still sorry-assed nobodies.

airtaximan said...

Yes, we all are, even without this blog... SO?

Dave said...

OK, but you're still sorry-assed nobodies.

I heard those same types of comments following the SCO case, which Iacobucci has been intimately involved in. Now look at SCO. It's an entirely counter-productive comment to make and it neither helps the bottom line at either Eclipse or DayJet. Perhaps you have some personal attacks for me in particular as it is not *I* who would be hurt by you making them.

expilot said...

TP whats your arrogant sorry assed excuse for being on this blog? Oh...that's right you supply the materiel to try and clean up the mess from all the BS spewed by Vern etal. I am not, nor have I ever been associated with epocalypse{tm}. Death pool prediction:Chapter 11,May 1,2008. Ultimately Adios epocalysooo!!! RT I wish that Vern had kept his promises. I would be in line to purchase the sub million dollar wonder jet. ex

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

Gunner,

Welcome back to you as well.

I hope that the 'stay in the trunk' was comfortable, and that there won't be a warranty claim on Mercedes this time....

RCflyer,

OK, I'll drop the E499.5. Its a pain to type anyway.

My point on the value of the jet, in the post Eclipse environment, is twofold.

1. In it's current state, with the limits imposed by the IOU's which are outstanding, there is little or no hope of FIKI. For a JET that's pretty limiting.

2. If they get that far, Avio NG is tied to the company. No Eclipse = no updates, patches or technical support of any sort. Those programmers will be off, and won't be interested in supporting the exisiting jets.

Yes, it will be worth less than current market values. I contend that it will be worth a LOT less....

Shane

Gunner said...

Shane-
Never said it was "me" in the trunk. Only that I had "first hand knowledge" of the event. The Google Girlz should be able to dig up the details of the event if they try real hard.

Not much going on these days regarding Eclipse. That in itself is pretty telling, I think.
Gunner

Redtail said...

Gunner said... Not much going on these days regarding Eclipse. That in itself is pretty telling, I think.

Translation... Eclipse has fulfilled their promise on performance and range with the "b" model aero-mods, training simulators are coming online, service centers are being staffed, hardware for AVIO NG has been certified and software is in flight test with the FAA, FIKI ice shapes has been completed and they are awaiting testing in natural conditions, manufacturing is almost up to one per day, and the Critics' Blog has little more to discuss of any consequence.

FlightCenter said...

Redtail,

AvioNG hardware can not be certified independently of the software. AvioNG is an integrated hardware/software product.

If the software is in flight test, then by definition the hardware is not certified.

Now it is possible that the hardware has passed the DO-160 environmental tests required to conduct flight tests, but that is a long way away from being certified.

As for manufacturing "almost" one aircraft a day...

The FAA records show that Eclipse delivered 11 aircraft in September and 10 aircraft in October and 1 aircraft so far in November.

It seems that your definition of "almost" is approximately 30% -33% of the target.

I'm not sure what happens at your company, but my experience is that any employee who delivers only 30% of their targeted level of performance is shortly looking for another job.

Another interesting point is that Eclipse has not notified the FAA of any Eclipse 500 aircraft starting production since 10/18/2007.

That's 18 days without an aircraft start. If they were on track at one a day, you would expect that Eclipse would have notified the FAA that they've started 18 aircraft.

That is indicative of a problem.

They typically inform the FAA of aircraft starts on Thursdays. We'll see if they miss a third week in a row this week...

Stan Blankenship said...

Mutual traffic over Western Miss.

N561EA NW Bound
FL 360 - G/S 295 kts

DJS148 SE Bound
FL 330 - G/S 410 kts

Niner Zulu said...

One wonders how Eclipse can build a training simulator to simulate a panel that doesn't exist yet.

Redtail, what are you smoking? Go back and re-read Mike Press's latest report. Read recent interviews with Vern. Read Ed Iacobucci's latest comments. Read between the lines - they are all telling you that Eclipse has serious problems. Problems that are not easily solved without lots and lots of money. Your money, borrowed money, but certainly none of Eclipse's money because they aren't going to be making any now or in the foreseeable future. Will it be enough? My guess is BK within 18 months.

But if you want to roll the dice, feel free. It's your head that Vern may be handing back to you on a platter.

rcflyer said...

Shane,

I agree that if an epocalypse should occur, and if it happens before FIKI and a more complete Avio, that the value of delivered jets would diminish.

But even Niner Zulu gives them 18 months to live. If they can't finish FIKI and AvioNG in that time, then they deserve to go Tango Uniform.

R.C.

mirage00 said...

Redtail, what are you smoking? Go back and re-read Mike Press's latest report.

Tidbits from Mike Press - Part Eleven

AvioNG (Next Generation) has started the certification testing and all hardware is already certified. Production cut-in at serial number 105 has already started down the production line. This airplane as previously stated should be delivered in December or first of January. All airplanes produced before AvioNG production cut-in will be sent back to the Gainesville service center for retrofit also starting in December. The retrofit is a 10 day job. Flight Into Known Icing (FIKI) testing and certification will start in November and hopefully complete by the end of the year or early 2008.


So far they still have not demonstrated that they can get into high-rate production, although all indications are that they should make it by year end.



Once production at rate is sustained for a couple of months and AvioNG gets certification, then sales should increase significant enough to drive up prices. Prices are fairly stable now as they have been for the past few months. The airplane continues to be a joy to fly as I have been flying it around the country. The reliability is fantastic and the support excellent.


I remain amused

double 00

Shane Price said...

RCflyer,

Plenty of steps before final bankrupcy.

Lets start with a reduction of the workforce.

Oh, Vern's already done that one.

Make an investor statement that more cash is required, in a hurry, 'to complete current plans'

Darn, he's done that too. Twice.

Change production targets.

Guess what? I've lost count...

Now things get interesting.

Call 6 month progress payments from the next 150 suckers (sorry, customers)

BUT

100 of them walk rather than put more money at risk.

The banks get shirty about overdrafts and working capital facilities.

Suppliers want higher prices or payment for goods already supplied.

P&W Canada cut their exposure.

After that we will have Chapter 11 type activity, followed by lots of talk about shadowy 'friends of Vern' who are about to produce a magic $100 million or three to 'put Eclipse back on track'.

The final stages will not be pretty. Lots of angry political types holding committee meetings and demanding answers. Suckers (sorry, customers) looking for someone to pick up the warranty and service bills. Suppliers licking their wounds and muttering about getting hoodwinked.

You know the sort of stuff I mean.

I give them 3 months, for progress towards serious 'waste product from horse impacting propellor' stages. Say about the middle of January.

Men wearing sunglasses inspecting the factory, mid March.

End game, midsummer.

Could be wrong. Have been before. But older, and wiser, I think I've seen this type of scam before and I've sure seen the end of a few of them.

Gunner,

Just glad you are in one piece.

(And out of the trunk....)

Shane

cj3driver said...

Mr. Press said:

“… Prices are fairly stable now as they have been for the past few months…”

Many postions and planes have had significant price reductions in the last few weeks. #69, #76 and #872 just to name a few. Many ads now read “make offer”.

15 (or so) of the first 58 planes (non-DayJet) are advertised for sale. 52 listings total. ALL at substantial discounts over a new factory order.

“Fairly Stable”? … I guess that depends on your definition of “fairly”

gadfly said...

Shane

What is it, with you, my friend? . . . bringing all this bad news and facts into the discussion? These people don’t want to hear this sort of thing . . . it makes them most irritable . . . and they call others bad names . . . and all this just before Christmas.

Question: Why does Chapter seven come after Chapter eleven? . . . ‘always been a mystery to me, but then I was never good at numbers. Our business had this strange philosophy that “when your outgo exceeds your income, your upkeep will be your downfall” . . . but what do I know? And we’ve only been in business for about thirty-two years, come January 1, 2008.

gadfly

airtaximan said...

"So far they still have not demonstrated that they can get into high-rate production"

Everything you write about as positive seems to depend on this statement, and the realities regarding THIS are horrendous.

Someone tried to tell you the picture on this latest promise of "one-a-day, then two-a-day" is about as far off the mark as the EJ-22 or Avio-Avidyne was.

The first 55 planes or so were "started" manufacturing (non-manufacturing, whatever) in early 2006. Say a year ago to be extremely polite. They are currently not even finished the planes that were started a year ago. You might want to think that they are delivering planes but, they have not finished all the planes in sequence...so it’s not possible to tell any longer how long it takes to make a plane, all planes in the "line" considered. This is important for "high rate" production, unless of course you wish to conclude that a short spurt of "deliveries" constitutes some "rate".

In reality, this is a company of fits-and-starts, regarding production. None of this is predictable, except that planes will go unfinished and planes could be delivered out of sequence in bunches. Some weeks you will see one, or none, some you might see a few.

As I wrote around a month ago, when the die-hards were jubilant and celebrating the demise of this blog, when Vern was declaring victory and high-rate-production achievements of one-a-day were imminent - the planes you are seeing have taken around 10-20 man years to produce, each... or more.

Going from this reality, planned over 10 years, and coordinated with the world’s finest suppliers, with unlimited funds and a lot of time to get it right... has resulted in THIS FIASCO as a best effort at e-clips.

Getting better, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, Much better in a very short timeframe is not going to happen.

Especially NOT with the financial realities expressed by Mike Press and echoed by Vern in September. Heck, with years and unlimited resources, they ended up with this mess. No one could have predicted THIS.

So, you can believe what you wish, but some things are clear.
- They are further behind in their one-a-day today than they were a month ago.
- The planes have come out at a tremendous labor cost, so far.
- Everything is still amiss... no better than it was, regarding milestones or predictability, which is everything in this business.
- The company is trying for silly speed records, and data-control under the pretense of safety, and built a con-jet in the middle of the nightmare this summer.
- Dayjet's numbers are getting worse, not better.
- for some reason, no plane after the aero-mods as a CofA

What's not amusing? I guess you would have to be amused by all this… or you could not try to parse a positive spin to this grim reality.

airtaximan said...

15 (or so) of the first 58 planes (non-DayJet) are advertised for sale. 52 listings total.

Someone predicted this a while ago

PS. 52 is an all time high...indicative, not definative. The noraml number of listings on OCntroller for a year was around 35

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 221   Newer› Newest»