The blog moves from strength to strength. More posts, from more people, are attracting attention. Try using Google to search for Eclipse Aviation and see how high up we rate. Most times, we are just a few lines below Vern's home page, so that anyone doing the simplest of research on the aircraft is bound to find 'us'.
Thank you again Gunner. We've offered to send more lawyers, guns or money, and so far you've said you don't require additonal assets. Please let the bloggers know if we can assist in this noble effort.
I have a feeling that it's the little things that will cause meltdown in EAC. I suspect that the little ROUND things with air in them might, just might, be the excuse the FAA need to 'review' their position on the FPJ.
2. SUMMARY:
An Eclipse 500 pilot recently experienced a dual engine control failure after applying forward force on the throttle levers resulting in exceeding the design throttle range of operation. This situation resulted in an inability to control engine thrust through normal means. Eclipse is working with the NTSB to investigate this occurrence, but is issuing immediate guidance to Eclipse 500 pilots to avoid excessive forward throttle force against the throttle stops.
3. BACKGROUND:
Following a reported windshear encounter on final approach, an Eclipse 500 pilot applied full throttle using enough force against the forward stops to result in exceeding the design throttle position signal maximum range. This out-of-range position signal for both throttles subsequently activated the ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message for both engines. Since this fault mode was caused by invalid position signals, the system logic held the engine thrust settings at the last known throttle position, which was maximum.
Following a balked landing, execution of the L(R) ENG CONTROL FAIL checklist, and shutdown of one engine, the pilot was able to return around the pattern and land the aircraft with no injury or substantial damage, although both main tires were blown during the event. Initial throttle quadrant testing indicates a force in excess of 30 pounds against the forward stops is required to cause the out-of-range condition.
4. ECLIPSE ACTION:
After becoming aware of this occurrence, Eclipse immediately notified the NTSB and FAA. An Eclipse Safety Investigation Team was dispatched to the aircraft and is currently participating as a party to the NTSB investigation. In accordance with NTSB rules, we cannot divulge details of the investigation, but we are aggressively working to determine the root cause and implement permanent corrective actions. We are also working on an immediate Temporary Revision (TR) to the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to address this situation. In the meantime, we have determined that communicating this issue to operators now is essential in preventing a similar occurrence.
5. RECOMMENDED OPERATOR ACTION:
Eclipse 500 operators should avoid applying excessive force to the throttle levers against the
forward throttle stops.
Oh, how I love to watch a cash arsonist at work.
So Shane, if you knew about the incident of both engines on the Ecliplse getting stuck wide open upon a FADEC failure, then that means Vern knew about it before he made the special offer. Of course, he notified his customers of this incident and the possible AD that might be issued prior to sending in their $650,000.00 non-refundable deposit, right?
I think was all know the answer to that.
By the way, position holders I know say they had almost no time to think about the offer due to the sense of urgency that was created. Now we know why.
Things are a bit darker down ABQ way. The 'Midway Incident', which the thought police at EAC initially attempted to hide, has grown into a full sized crisis for the Vern. Deep questions are being asked about the control systems and some pretty fundamental design issues are being dragged (kicking and screaming) into the open.
I've been tempted in the past to make an entire headline post out of your comments, but felt I was being lazy just for thinking along those lines. However, the quality of some recent posts is just too high to ignore. I also think it right to plot a path through recent events, as recorded on the blog. The selection below is by no means comprehensive, and I apologies in advance for those of you I could not include. My comments, highlighted in black, are intended to provide some (limited) context for those new to the blog.
From 'Dave' June 8, 2008 11:16 AM
I think we've got front row seats to watching something hitting the fan...and that something isn't piles of money reaching the rafters due to Eclipse's profitability. Owners and position owners have got to wonder what Vern is hiding from them given how Vern seeks to silence any talk of problems with the Eclipse.
That just about sums up what the blog thinks of Vern's wasting what little cash remains chasing bloggers through the courts.
From 'Black Tulip' June 8, 2008 2:24 PM
Thank you again Gunner. We've offered to send more lawyers, guns or money, and so far you've said you don't require additonal assets. Please let the bloggers know if we can assist in this noble effort.
Just a reminder that Gunner has stood up to the plate, big time, against nosey egotists who don't like critical oversight. I like the bit about sending more lawyers and, especially, guns...
From me, June 10, 2008 12:46 PM
I have a feeling that it's the little things that will cause meltdown in EAC. I suspect that the little ROUND things with air in them might, just might, be the excuse the FAA need to 'review' their position on the FPJ.
I was of course aware of the Midway Incident when I wrote this. The time stamp is therefore important. Checkout the following, which came from a 'one time' poster.
From 'airjet' June 12, 2008 4:04 AM
2. SUMMARY:
An Eclipse 500 pilot recently experienced a dual engine control failure after applying forward force on the throttle levers resulting in exceeding the design throttle range of operation. This situation resulted in an inability to control engine thrust through normal means. Eclipse is working with the NTSB to investigate this occurrence, but is issuing immediate guidance to Eclipse 500 pilots to avoid excessive forward throttle force against the throttle stops.
3. BACKGROUND:
Following a reported windshear encounter on final approach, an Eclipse 500 pilot applied full throttle using enough force against the forward stops to result in exceeding the design throttle position signal maximum range. This out-of-range position signal for both throttles subsequently activated the ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message for both engines. Since this fault mode was caused by invalid position signals, the system logic held the engine thrust settings at the last known throttle position, which was maximum.
Following a balked landing, execution of the L(R) ENG CONTROL FAIL checklist, and shutdown of one engine, the pilot was able to return around the pattern and land the aircraft with no injury or substantial damage, although both main tires were blown during the event. Initial throttle quadrant testing indicates a force in excess of 30 pounds against the forward stops is required to cause the out-of-range condition.
4. ECLIPSE ACTION:
After becoming aware of this occurrence, Eclipse immediately notified the NTSB and FAA. An Eclipse Safety Investigation Team was dispatched to the aircraft and is currently participating as a party to the NTSB investigation. In accordance with NTSB rules, we cannot divulge details of the investigation, but we are aggressively working to determine the root cause and implement permanent corrective actions. We are also working on an immediate Temporary Revision (TR) to the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to address this situation. In the meantime, we have determined that communicating this issue to operators now is essential in preventing a similar occurrence.
5. RECOMMENDED OPERATOR ACTION:
Eclipse 500 operators should avoid applying excessive force to the throttle levers against the
forward throttle stops.
The lesson here is, read my posts carefully. When I hint at big trouble looming for EAC, the storm clouds are gathering...
'Shadow' on June 12, 2008 12:46 PM
Oh, how I love to watch a cash arsonist at work.
This was in the 'Have they no shame' post, after Vern had pulled the 'DayJet positions' stunt, but before the FAA Emergency AD. It was only a single line, but it summed up the situation perfectly.
'Avidpilot' hit the nail on the head, again, on June 13, 2008 8:37 AM
So Shane, if you knew about the incident of both engines on the Ecliplse getting stuck wide open upon a FADEC failure, then that means Vern knew about it before he made the special offer. Of course, he notified his customers of this incident and the possible AD that might be issued prior to sending in their $650,000.00 non-refundable deposit, right?
I think was all know the answer to that.
By the way, position holders I know say they had almost no time to think about the offer due to the sense of urgency that was created. Now we know why.
So, in just under 3 days, we went from 'blown tires' to 'cash arsonist' to 'emergency AD'. My, how time flies when you are enjoying yourself....
That's a summary of recent, key events. If I have left something critical out, include it in this thread. Let's not lose sight of what we are about here, and keep moving on.
443 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 443 Newer› Newest»Why is Eclipse trying to conflate the Skupa and Does cases? What changes is Eclipse going to be making starting at SN 266 for "full hardware specification"?
20Y said.... Note: Eclipse works 7 days a week with a 4-3 3-4 12 hour schedule. That is 3 days on for 12 hours and 4 days off the 4 days on and 3 days off. All 12 hour work schedules They have an A,B,C and D crew so that it keeps going around the clock.
Thanks for the info 20Y. I had heard that Eclipse was running two shifts of 12 hrs before, but I didn't know for sure it ran continuously.
Still, they may get to 70 or so this quarter - pretty close to 1 a day. And watch out for the press release - "Fastest GA Jet Production Rate in History for a single Model".
I think currently, only Boeing with the 737NG line and Airbus with the A320 line have them beat at 80/quarter. however, if you break the line down by model (736, 73G, 738,739 and A318, A319, A320, A321), Eclipse has them beat as well for a single "model". So Vern may claim "Fastest civilian Jet production rate for a single model".
Quite amazing, given all their reported troubles. Maybe the Ford guys and FSW are helping.
Napverneon Hitburn is losing a two front war. Doesn't he know what happened to the French during the Patriotic War (Napoleonic Wars) and subsequent to that to Germany during the Great Patriotic War (WWII Eastern Front)? Vern just seems to think everywhere he invades that he wont have any competition. Now it turns out that Epic is establishing a plant expressly for aircraft to be used around Russia:
http://finchannel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15511&Itemid=14
Epic might not pan out either, but to think there'll be a market for 800 aircraft (plus the 1000 aicraft for the US) as if the total market will be that size, let alone when you have competition.
Dare I ask if "3/4" aircraft counts as "one"?
gadfly
(The "new math" remains a mystery! . . . 'something to do with "horse shoes" and "hand grenades", I reckon.)
If they do hit one a day (and sustain it) the end of the backlog must start looming ominously!
How many new orders have been announced in the last two years?
If they do hit one a day (and sustain it) the end of the backlog must start looming ominously!
How many new orders have been announced in the last two years?
It is really quite a bind. If they don't produce fast enough, their production costs are really high while if they produce fast their order book shrinks and the real sales from the hyped sales get shaken out. What is Eclipse going to do - sue DayJet to be paid for the 1400 orders? DayJet doesn't have the money to pay for 1/10th its order, so it would be trying to get blood from a stone. Also with ETIRC's 200 orders, is the Eclipse board going to authorize a lawsuit against the Eclipse Chairman? I don't think so. Then there's all these other smaller low quality orders where the most Eclipse could get is the deposit money that has already been spent.
"Eclipse works 7 days a week with a 4-3 3-4 12 hour schedule. That is 3 days on for 12 hours and 4 days off the 4 days on and 3 days off. All 12 hour work schedules They have an A,B,C and D crew so that it keeps going around the clock."
Why? Anyone have a clue as to why their quality is so poor? Anyone who worked 3rd shift at an airline knows it is brutal. Better to have two shifts five days a week and a small (very small) crew on third and weekends. The current shift schedule seems to harken back to the beginnings of the industrial revolution in England.
Good call ASM. I've done 12 hour shifts at an Airline, and four twelve hour nights is brutal. SOme people seem to deal with it better than others. I didn't, nearly cost me my marriage, glad I got the hell out of that.
The quality of work performed just after the break at 02:00 on the fourth shift in a row is CRAP
During WWII, for the reasons just mentioned, Lockheed cut the "graveyard shift" to seven hours (Midnight to 7AM), but paid the workers for the full eight hours. They recognized the limitations of normal humans.
gadfly
I think that the way things are going, the press release would read "Fastest GA Jet Production Rate in History for a single incomplete Model"
I suppose I have to be the lone voice, but I have worked at several companies (manufacturing and process companies) that work the 4-3-3-4. In every facility, as long as the proper ergo and workstation design is used, you shouldn't have any problems. The other thing you need to remember, is that on a true 4-3-3-4, each employee only works 180 days per year. Yep, in the end, you work 1/2 a year to get a whole year's pay.
The main issue (and the issue I'm thinking Eclipse is facing - simply my OPINION), is that in addition to the 4-3-3-4, they are probably working overtime as well. That work, in addition to the normal work causes a lot of problems. But, I'll reinforce again, a true 4-3-3-4 is a very effective way to keep a factory running 24/7 (especially important in continuous flow operations).
P_P
ASM said ... Better to have two shifts five days a week and a small (very small) crew on third and weekends.
I'm sorry ASM, but 4-3-3-4 x 12/ABCD is not unusual at all - it was, in fact, conceived based on the plant asset utilization efficiency AND employee preference. It is actually quite popular with employes that get to spend time with their kids and doing week-day type things in the off days.
It is used in many successful mannufacturing operations and its adoption is increasing.
" But, I'll reinforce again, a true 4-3-3-4 is a very effective way to keep a factory running 24/7 (especially important in continuous flow operations)."
I disagree entirely. If you are doing a critical assembly you might get away with two shifts IF the worker bees can talk with each other during shift overlap. There is NO chance of it being done successfully with four shifts. Which is one reason the quality is so poor at Eclipse. Would you want your kid having elected surgery done by a hospital staff on their forth day of 12 hour day midnight shifts?
Which is one reason the quality is so poor at Eclipse
Something is causing those Eclipse aircraft to break. It seems odd that Eclipse would validate that there are quality control issues at Eclipse by providing the emails from Skupa, but I guess Eclipse wants the buying public to know about the aircraft being broken before even leaving the factory.
Pictures from tire failure damage:
http://eclipsejet.blogspot.com/2008/04/here-are-pictures-of-damage-from-tire.html
‘Having worked in most of the examples under discussion (machinist/designer/inventor/foreman, etc., etc.), and having been an employer for almost half of my life, I have paid close attention to the effectiveness of each of these varied conditions. And have made formal study of “same”.
In highly technical situations and/or positions that require the highest level of creative ability, the human mind “peaks” within the first four hours (five . . . maximum) of a shift. In the sixth through eighth hour (ninth maximum) most employees have exhausted their creative abilities. Beyond that, they tend to be less than effective. If they are “cranking handles” in a machine shop, or “pushing buttons” . . . they work in “auto mode” . . . but tend to be in danger of self injury, or damage to parts, etc. At twelve hours, they tend to be a “menace”, if this is their normal expected routine. Anyone can put in a twelve or sixteen hour day, on occasion, to get over some emergency . . . but for a regular routine, this is not a good thing. For the first few years of our own business, I put in sometimes over 4,000 hours per year . . . but it took years to recover.
Back in “olden times”, we could load or unload aircraft at “UAL” (O’Hare) for twelve or sixteen hours at a time . . . with the carrot of “time and a half”, or “double time” . . . and it worked . . . how much brain power does it take to load or “off-load” about ten or twelve airliners every 30 minutes.
The “rotating shifts” create a serious strain on families and social life . . . one never can plan on a weekend off, etc., in step with “normal life”. But loading baggage, or “air freight” is a far cry from the precision assembly of an airframe.
And actual manufacturing/tool & die/machine work . . . forget it! The man that thinks he can work twelve hours per day, for months at a time, is simply not living in reality. And I question the “management” that thinks otherwise.
gadfly
(You didn’t ask, but the stresses put on the Eclipse employees should be known by those who buy the product. And someone mentioned surgery. Since I have spent many hours attending neurosurgery, in conjunction with a certain system that I invented, “neurosurgery” is a prime example of fatigue on the part of the surgeon. By the time he has gotten down to the level of a tumor, or aneurysm, etc., he has been at it for maybe four to six hours . . . and THEN he is expected to work his miracles . . . when he is almost totally exhausted. The human mind has definite limits.)
Thanks Gad, you can bet that whoever dreamed up the 4-3-3-4 schedule never had to work it. He was doubtless some "efficiency expert" who worked 8 to 5 with weekends off. At Eclipse the workforce is demoralized and angry and now we learn they are walking zombies as well, especially on third shift. The idea is to deliver quality aircraft on time and within budget, not to beat on metal 24/7. The two are not even remotely related. A beer-can plant is an example of continuous production, in that all you can lose is one shift worth of work. Extremely serious mistakes can be made on airframes by overtired workers that may require scrapping of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of partially built assemblies. I used to work as a manager on the overhaul line for Eastern's L-1011 fleet when they all came due for a heavy check within a short time. I worked all three shifts at different times. Finally we brought up to management the fact that the third shift people, including ourselves, were very tired and nothing was being accomplished, really. To their credit they agreed and moved most of the shift back to first and second and only kept a skeleton crew on third. Morale, quality, and productivity improved quite a bit.
safetyman
Here is an “anecdote”: The Japanese understand quality. And most of the machines that we use are made by them (Yamazaki “Mazak”, and “Mitsubishi Electric”, wirecut-EDM’s). The “Mazak” plant is in Florence, Kentucky . . . and runs 24/7. . . producing some of the finest machines on “Planet Earth”, bar none. But “humans” are only there two shifts per day, five days per week. The rest of the time, a “night watchman” checks doors and general security, while the dozens of mighty machines “take care of business”, loading, machining, unloading, changing tools, etc., etc., in darkened buildings . . . with precision and accuracy beyond belief. And we use that same technology, right here in Albuquerque . . . If a machine finishes a job at 3AM . . . only the “cockroaches” will know, until we get there whenever we get to work, and turn on the lights, start the “coffee”, check the “email”, and any recorded phone messages. And the precision of the finished parts will be beyond anything assembled over at “ABQ” . . . for sure.
gadfly
(And this has been going on for the past 27 years . . . is that “disruptive” technology? “Ford” is going to China . . . the Japanese have been quietly doing their thing in the USA for many years. Go figure!)
Dave said...
Pictures from tire failure damage:
http://eclipsejet.blogspot.com/2008/04/here-are-pictures-of-damage-from-tire.html
Thank You,Thank You,Thank You
That is what I wondered.
Now what is the reapir bill on that? $500? 5K? 10K? What needs to be inspected? By who? How long will it take? Other than some sheet metal is there any structural damage? Tank leaks?
High Flyers: How Private Jet Travel Is Straining the System, Warming the Planet, and Costing You Money
If your blood pressure is a little low, or if you just feel like getting pissed off, read this article.
Back to Midway:
I thought I'd read that Karen DiPiazza had interviewed the pilot and it would be posted. Has anyone seen/read that interview?
Gunner
TURD and BURN:
You are a genius!
You have a PRO ECLIPSE answer for everything. You don’t live in ABQ so how would you know what Planes are at what Airport? Everything you say seems to be contradicted buy people that actually own this aircraft. If you want to have a beer or a drink then come to ABQ and I will show you the true facts and I will introduce you to Eclipse employees that will give you the real skinny that is going on inside the Orange Palace. But I doubt you will come out and se for yourself, Its much easier to sit on a blog page and call people a liar.
20 YM
I thought I'd read that Karen DiPiazza had interviewed the pilot and it would be posted. Has anyone seen/read that interview?
I've been wondering about that too. I've checked the website and I haven't seen anything.
Dave said...
Pictures from tire failure damage:
Thanks for posting - BTW, nice pool party and dog ;).
There appears to be even some structural damage to the wing - not your run of the mill blown tire on breaking.
Either this was a hard landing or the plane departed the runway after the tire blew.
Anyone has info on the incident on the pictures?
baron95 said...
I think currently, only Boeing with the 737NG line and Airbus with the A320 line have them beat at 80/quarter. however, if you break the line down by model (736, 73G, 738,739 and A318, A319, A320, A321), Eclipse has them beat as well for a single "model". So Vern may claim "Fastest civilian Jet production rate for a single model".
TRUE, But they produce aircraft that work as advertised unlike ECLIPSE. EAS makes EXPERIMENTAL HULKS that may or may not work all the time as advertised. TRUST ME OWNERS, YOU WILL HAVE MORE FUN AND EXCITEMENT DOWN THE ROAD.
I cant wait to see the fix in the SRM (STRUCTURAL REPAIR MANUAL) FOR A BIRD STRIKE AND HOW YOU FIX IT WHEN YOUR AIRCRAFT IS SPIN WELDED TOGETHER.
20 YM
20yearmechanic said...
TRUE, But they produce aircraft that work as advertised unlike ECLIPSE.
No disagreements there. Quantity is one discussion. Quality is another. It is still amazing that a startup company now has the highest single-model jet production rate in the world.
2YOM said.... I cant wait to see the fix in the SRM (STRUCTURAL REPAIR MANUAL) FOR A BIRD STRIKE AND HOW YOU FIX IT WHEN YOUR AIRCRAFT IS SPIN WELDED TOGETHER.
Can't be any worse than the B787 SRM for a catering cart dent to one of the 40-ft long monolythic composit barrels, right ;)
P.S. No, I am not impying that Eclipse and Boeing are in the same league, but it is an interesting contrast, huh? Maybe someone remembers what kind of product Boeing was putting out at the 10 year mark of the company.
Eclipse published today a "special edition" Eclipse Flyer detailing what they are doing to improve the software for the FADEC/TQA.
No disagreements there. Quantity is one discussion. Quality is another. It is still amazing that a startup company now has the highest single-model jet production rate in the world.
Some here would say they are to some degree one in the same. Eclipse has delivered zero aircraft to specification, while Cessna has delivered dozens. Eclipse could go out of business before a single owner gets what they paid for, while other companies have delivered many aircraft. I'm somewhere in the middle between treating an Eclipse delivery the same as a Cessna Delivery and treating an Eclipse delivery as zero, but I believe the Eclipse delivery count has to be extremely discounted until Eclipse delivers on its obligations.
Eclipse Aviation Readies Change to Software For Eclipse 500 Engine Fault Condition
Eclipse 500 Fleet Fully Operational; Aircraft's Advanced Technologies Allow for Swift Problem Identification and Resolution
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - June 24, 2008 - Today Eclipse Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first very light jet (VLJ), announced that it will incorporate design improvements to the Eclipse 500® software to prevent a rare engine fault that may occur if the aircraft's throttle levers are advanced with enough force to exceed the Eclipse 500's FAA-certified design limits. Eclipse intends to increase the range limit of the Throttle Quadrant Assembly (TQA) to prevent the fault condition, pending approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). These changes will be administered via a software update to all Eclipse 500 owners and operators.
"One of the advantages to having such a technologically-advanced aircraft is that we can quickly isolate the cause of an incident and then rapidly deliver a solution to our customers via a universal software update," said Vern Raburn, president and CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "In contrast to traditional aviation industry approaches, the time and customer inconvenience factor saved is immeasurable."
Earlier this month an Eclipse 500 engine fault occurred during a landing at Chicago Midway International Airport. Within 24 hours, Eclipse had tapped the aircraft's advanced data collection and reporting system to determine that the fault was generated by an exceedance of the Eclipse 500's FAA-certified design limits. The company rapidly issued multiple communications to its customers making them aware of this issue, while providing guidance to help avoid the potential fault and, if necessary, effectively handle this occurrence. These communications were released in advance of the recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and an Airworthiness Directive (AD) from the FAA. Eclipse also updated the Eclipse 500 flight manual and quick reference handbook to provide pilot procedures on how to handle a similar incident.
Eclipse also announced today that of all the Eclipse 500 aircraft in customer operation, more than eighty percent have been inspected as directed by the AD. Of this group of inspected aircraft, seven have reported fault errors. Four of the seven reported faults were determined to be erroneous due to noise caused by normal operation of the TQA.
"Interestingly, an analysis of more than 12,000 hours of flight data from across our fleet collected through the Eclipse Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) system reveals that three Eclipse 500 aircraft have experienced the TQA range exceedance fault, and one was the aircraft in Chicago," said Raburn. "While this tells us there is an extremely low probability of this fault happening, we are moving very aggressively to ensure it will not occur again. We're working closely with both the staff members of the NTSB and the FAA to understand this condition fully, and put the necessary design improvements in place to safeguard our customers and our fleet."
About Eclipse Aviation
Eclipse Aviation is the world's leading very light jet (VLJ) manufacturer, producing innovative, affordable jets that are revolutionizing air transportation. The company created the VLJ category with the design, certification and delivery of the Eclipse 500® - the industry's first VLJ. Eclipse applies advances in technology, manufacturing processes and business practices to create high-performance aircraft that provide the lowest cost of jet ownership ever achieved. By changing the value proposition for private jet travel, Eclipse is allowing more pilots to enter the world of jet-powered aviation and enabling a new generation of entrepreneurs to help business travelers move between cities on a quick, affordable and convenient basis. Contact Eclipse at www.eclipseaviation.com.
b95
If you're serious about wanting to know about "Boeing" in their tenth year, here is a place to start:
http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/history/article.asp?id=741
You'll notice that in 1916, their first year, they built two complete aircraft that were later sold to "New Zealand" . . . and by their "third year", they were building 56 complete aircraft for the US government. This is hardly the same as the "thing" in ABQ.
gadfly
epilot,
Can you summarize the update on the TQA and software issues?
This is of interest since Vern is on record calling anyone who thinks the plane is unsafe a 'liar', apparently including the FAA who issued the emergency AD and the NTSB who evaluated the Midway incident plane.
Thanks if you can oblige.
Eclipse Aviation Readies Change to Software For Eclipse 500 Engine Fault Condition
Eclipse 500 Fleet Fully Operational; Aircraft's Advanced Technologies Allow for Swift Problem Identification and Resolution
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - June 24, 2008 - Today Eclipse Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first very light jet (VLJ), announced that it will incorporate design improvements to the Eclipse 500® software to prevent a rare engine fault that may occur if the aircraft's throttle levers are advanced with enough force to exceed the Eclipse 500's FAA-certified design limits. Eclipse intends to increase the range limit of the Throttle Quadrant Assembly (TQA) to prevent the fault condition, pending approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). These changes will be administered via a software update to all Eclipse 500 owners and operators.
"One of the advantages to having such a technologically-advanced aircraft is that we can quickly isolate the cause of an incident and then rapidly deliver a solution to our customers via a universal software update," said Vern Raburn, president and CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "In contrast to traditional aviation industry approaches, the time and customer inconvenience factor saved is immeasurable."
Earlier this month an Eclipse 500 engine fault occurred during a landing at Chicago Midway International Airport. Within 24 hours, Eclipse had tapped the aircraft's advanced data collection and reporting system to determine that the fault was generated by an exceedance of the Eclipse 500's FAA-certified design limits. The company rapidly issued multiple communications to its customers making them aware of this issue, while providing guidance to help avoid the potential fault and, if necessary, effectively handle this occurrence. These communications were released in advance of the recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and an Airworthiness Directive (AD) from the FAA. Eclipse also updated the Eclipse 500 flight manual and quick reference handbook to provide pilot procedures on how to handle a similar incident.
Eclipse also announced today that of all the Eclipse 500 aircraft in customer operation, more than eighty percent have been inspected as directed by the AD. Of this group of inspected aircraft, seven have reported fault errors. Four of the seven reported faults were determined to be erroneous due to noise caused by normal operation of the TQA.
"Interestingly, an analysis of more than 12,000 hours of flight data from across our fleet collected through the Eclipse Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) system reveals that three Eclipse 500 aircraft have experienced the TQA range exceedance fault, and one was the aircraft in Chicago," said Raburn. "While this tells us there is an extremely low probability of this fault happening, we are moving very aggressively to ensure it will not occur again. We're working closely with both the staff members of the NTSB and the FAA to understand this condition fully, and put the necessary design improvements in place to safeguard our customers and our fleet."
About Eclipse Aviation
Eclipse Aviation is the world's leading very light jet (VLJ) manufacturer, producing innovative, affordable jets that are revolutionizing air transportation. The company created the VLJ category with the design, certification and delivery of the Eclipse 500® - the industry's first VLJ. Eclipse applies advances in technology, manufacturing processes and business practices to create high-performance aircraft that provide the lowest cost of jet ownership ever achieved. By changing the value proposition for private jet travel, Eclipse is allowing more pilots to enter the world of jet-powered aviation and enabling a new generation of entrepreneurs to help business travelers move between cities on a quick, affordable and convenient basis. Contact Eclipse at www.eclipseaviation.com.
Anyone else want to call 'shenanigans' on a 'software' change to address a 'physical' failure mode?
What does SW have to do with a ridiculously low 30lbf design limit on the TQA?
How does SW deal with physical damage to the TQA?
Why is SW needed to address an operational/training issue (if you believe Eclipse's ham-handed pilot theory)?
Why didn't Eclipse training alert pilots to the low damage threshold of the TQA?
See how quickly the FOQA data is turned on the pilot community - exactly as predicted on the blog.
7 failure indications out of 80% of the fleet, say 7 in 150, or about 5% - on flight critical FADEC operation.
4 of those are then called 'false positives' blamed on 'noise in the system'.
How does 'noise in the system' impact a check of applying a certain physical force for a simple TQA Ops Check?
Does the combination of 'noise in the system', reportedly 'false positives', and the flight critical FADEC ring alarm bells for anyone else?
If this is an intermittent issue that is difficult to repeat/replicate under controlled conditions that can result in loss of throttle control, the fleet should be grounded, it is that simple.
I think rather than blame the pilot who landed the plane while HAL was refusing to cooperate Vern should be thanking him - the alternative was far, far worse.
Eclipse Flyer
Issue 2 June 2008
Contents:
» Introduction
» The Incident
» Eclipse Responds
» Media Speculation
» What Eclipse Has Learned
» The Design
» Test Results
» FOQA Data Analysis
» How is Eclipse Improving the Design?
» Immediate Improvements
» Design Improvement Implementation
» Conclusion
Introduction
This is a special edition of the Eclipse Flyer. Due to the extensive coverage of a recent incident involving an Eclipse 500, we felt it was important to release this special edition to focus on our perspective as it relates to this incident.
In this edition we outline the results of our investigation of the engine control fault that occurred on an Eclipse 500® June 5, 2008 at Chicago Midway International Airport. For the benefit of our customers and Eclipse 500 operators, we discuss:
* How we responded in advance of and following the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) issuance of an Airworthiness Directive (AD) for the Eclipse 500 fleet;
* How we worked with the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation;
* Why we are puzzled by the NTSB's public response to the engine fault and the resulting rumors that spread from the early, erroneous reports of the occurrence in Chicago;
* The design of the Eclipse 500 throttle quadrant and Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) logic;
* What we know about the occurrence and the data we have collected from the incident aircraft and the Eclipse 500 fleet;
* The results of our inspection of the throttle quadrant assembly (TQA) involved with the occurrence and your inspections in the field to date; and
* The changes we are implementing to ensure this rare control fault does not re-occur.
Our first concern is the safety of our customers, their passengers, and our fleet. We hope the information we present in this special edition of the Eclipse Flyer clearly explains the factual details of this incident, how we responded, and what we are doing as a result of what we have learned.
The Incident
On June 12, 2008 the Federal Aviation Administration issued an Airworthiness Directive for the Eclipse 500®. The AD was issued as a result of an emergency landing performed by an Eclipse 500 pilot on June 5 at Chicago Midway International Airport. The occurrence was a dual engine fault; the result of an exceedance of the FAA-certified design limits of the throttle quadrant assembly. The two pilots and two passengers aboard the aircraft were not injured and the aircraft did not sustain any damage, although both main tires were blown during the event.
Following a reported windshear encounter on final approach, the pilot applied full throttle, using enough force against the forward stops to result in exceeding the design throttle position signal maximum range. This out-of-range position signal for both throttles subsequently activated the ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message for both engines. Since this fault mode was caused by out-of-range position signals, the system logic responded exactly as designed; by holding the engine thrust settings at the last known throttle position, which was maximum.
The pilot executed a go-around and shut down one engine to reduce total thrust in accordance with the L(R) ENG CONTROL FAIL checklist. After shutting down one engine, the ENG CONTROL FAIL condition was cleared on that side and the throttle position became valid. Since the opposite side throttle was still latched in a failed condition, the system logic utilized the position of the good throttle (on the shutdown engine) to determine thrust scheduling for the operating engine. Since the throttle on the shut down engine was in the idle position, the good engine subsequently rolled back to idle power. Fortunately, the aircraft had excess energy, and the pilot was able to skillfully land the aircraft. The pilot of this aircraft exercised excellent judgment and airmanship, given the lack of procedural guidance provided by the aircraft flight manual. The pilot's resourcefulness and professionalism were certainly a critical factor that enabled the safe outcome of this occurrence.
Eclipse Responds
Within 24 hours, Eclipse dispatched a repair and investigation team, determined what happened, and began communicating the facts and working on corrective actions. Well in advance of the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) recommendation and the FAA's issuance of the AD, Eclipse issued two communications informing all customers and Eclipse 500 operators of everything we knew at the time about the occurrence, including what steps pilots could take to avoid similar occurrences. The NTSB and the FAA were aware of these communications.
As we learned more about the incident, it became readily apparent that the aircraft responded precisely as it was designed and certified to do when responding to an out-of-range position signal from the TQA. In fact, we did not believe that reaching this out-of-range zone was possible, and we never experienced it in more than 6,000 hours of flight testing. As a result of our false assumption, we did not adequately anticipate a dual engine control fault like the one that occurred in Chicago and we did not have an adequate procedure to handle this in the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM). To remedy this oversight, we created a new procedure to instruct pilots on how to clear this fault and regain full control of the engines. This procedure was drafted the day after the occurrence and we began working with the FAA to include it in the AFM and Quick Reference Handbook (QRH). The procedure was released and distribution to Eclipse 500 operators began in advance of the AD being issued.
The AD requires a pilot inspection of the throttle quadrant assembly on each Eclipse 500 in advance of the aircraft's next flight. The inspection can be completed in less than 10 minutes by any licensed pilot and noted in an aircraft logbook. By now, all Eclipse 500 customers and operators should have received a copy of the AD from the FAA. If you have not yet received the AD, an electronic version can be found on the FAA's web site at: www.faa.gov.
Media Speculation
Interestingly, the NTSB chose to publicize this incident to the national press. In an unusual move, the NTSB rushed to issue a press release on June 12, one week after the incident, encouraging the FAA to take immediate action via an Airworthiness Directive to inspect all Eclipse 500 aircraft and to develop pilot procedures to address a dual engine control fault. To this day, we remain puzzled with this action from the NTSB, since the agency issued an urgent recommendation for actions we had already taken, including the approval of new dual engine control fault procedures by the FAA. Additionally, the NTSB press release included speculation by the NTSB that the Eclipse 500 was experiencing component failures too early in their lifecycle. As you will see from the factual data presented in this edition of the Eclipse Flyer, this rare and isolated occurrence is not indicative of premature component failure.
As a result of the NTSB press release, many rumors and untruths have perpetuated that require clarity. First and foremost, the Eclipse 500 is an extremely safe aircraft, and to suggest otherwise is a classic media tactic and quite simply a display of ignorance. This incident was not an aircraft accident, no persons were injured, and the aircraft did not sustain any damage. The occurrence in Chicago was the first report of an engine control fault on the Eclipse 500, and the first incident for an Eclipse 500 in more than 18,000 total fleet hours. The aircraft did not experience "un-commanded thrust" from the engines. In fact, the aircraft provided thrust settings in accordance with the design logic of the dual FADEC and throttle lever positions. While Eclipse failed to provide adequate pilot procedures to address a dual engine control anomaly, the system responded and performed as designed.
The Eclipse 500 fleet of aircraft was not grounded as a result of the AD. The AD required a mandatory pilot inspection prior to the next flight of the aircraft. A successful inspection, which took most customers less than 10 minutes to complete, enabled immediate operation of the aircraft. In fact, all of our Eclipse 500 fleet operators were safely flying their aircraft the day that the AD was issued.
What Eclipse Has Learned
A Thrust Quadrant Assembly exposed.
While the NTSB displayed great urgency in issuing a press release highlighting their recommendation for actions that had already been taken proactively by Eclipse and the FAA, the Board did not take the time to benefit from the evidence on the fully analyzed incident throttle quadrant before making a public statement.
While waiting for the NTSB teardown inspection of the incident aircraft TQA to take place, which occurred on Thursday, June 19, Eclipse conducted a detailed analysis of the TQA and FADEC design and operation, using multiple production TQAs.
Eclipse's determination, independent of the FAA and NTSB, is that the root cause of the engine control fault was high-force Throttle Lever Angle (TLA) movement causing an exceedance of the TLA potentiometers design range limits within the FADEC and subsequent latching fault of all four FADEC throttle inputs. A factor contributing to this issue was the lack of an AFM procedure to address a dual-throttle fault scenario.
The Design
Engineering Model of the Thrust Quadrant Assembly with potentiometers detailed.
The left and right throttle levers control thrust to the left and right engine, respectively. Each throttle lever has two redundant potentiometers, and these potentiometers output voltages relative to the throttle lever position. Each potentiometer voltage is received by an independent channel in the FADEC. There are four FADEC channels - two receiving signals from the right throttle lever potentiometers and two receiving signals from the left throttle lever potentiometers. The potentiometer voltages are converted to digital values in the FADEC and represent a value identified as Throttle Lever Angle.
The FADEC software monitors TLA inputs for setting engine thrust. TLA is an indicator of relative throttle position and does not correspond to actual angular measurement of the throttle levers relative to the TQA.
The FADEC governs engine thrust based on TLA position shown below:
Thrust Rating TLA Position (degrees)
Takeoff 67 to 75
Max Continuous 59 to 68
Idle -4 to 4
Currently, the FADEC monitors the potentiometer inputs and performs TLA input fault detection for range, rate, excitation voltage, open, and short circuit. The FADEC system logic operates in a unique manner to address TLA faults. If a single fault is detected (e.g., one potentiometer exceeds 75 degrees TLA), the system uses the remaining potentiometer to determine TLA. If a dual fault is detected (e.g., both potentiometers on a single throttle), the system generates an ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message for the engine associated with the failed throttle and fixes the engine thrust setting at the last good value received from the TLA.
The ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS remains latched for the remainder of the flight, unless the FADEC is reset during an engine shutdown or by recycling the appropriate side electronic circuit breakers. Additionally, if the throttle from the opposite engine is determined to have a valid signal, the system will hold the thrust on the engine with the engine control fault at the last good value as long as the opposite throttle is positioned approximately at Maximum Continuous Thrust (MCT), or greater. If the opposite throttle is positioned or moved to something less than MCT, the system will command the engine with the engine control fault to a fixed idle thrust setting.
The design philosophy driving this logic was to provide appropriate engine response during thrust-critical phases of flight. For example, during takeoff, both throttles are positioned above MCT, so a dual-channel failure of one throttle will result in continued takeoff thrust based on the opposite throttle position.
However, during landing, when excess thrust may result in runway overrun, a dual-channel failure on one throttle will result in thrust being commanded to idle based on the opposite throttle position. While this logic is unique to the Eclipse 500, our research indicates that other FADECs use only one of the two fault accommodation modes that we employ in our system - they either fix the thrust at the last good value or they drive the thrust to idle.
Eclipse 500 FADEC and TLA block diagram.
In the case of the incident aircraft, the initial condition was a dual-channel failure on both throttles, meaning neither throttle had a signal acceptable to the FADEC, so the thrust was fixed to the last good value (takeoff thrust). After the pilot elected to shut down one engine, the FADEC was reset on that side and the throttle position, which was now in idle, became valid once again. In accordance with the system logic, the operating engine was then commanded to a fixed idle thrust based on the throttle position of the now valid shutdown engine. This resulted in a situation with one engine shut down and one engine fixed in idle with no throttle response. Fortunately, the pilot remained close to the airport with high energy prior to shutting down the engine. The pilot's outstanding skill and training resulted in a successful landing.
The fact that the logic drove the engine to idle in this incident is not a hazardous design condition. In fact, many other industry FADECs would have driven both engines to idle during the initial fault, which may have resulted in landing short of the runway. There is no perfect design to cover all scenarios with a dual throttle fault. However, our oversight was our failure to provide AFM procedural guidance for the pilot to handle clearing the fault without shutting down an engine. The Temporary Revision that Eclipse issued within just over 72 hours of the incident now provides a procedure to allow clearing the throttle faults while maintaining two good engines.
Test Results
Since the incident, Eclipse and the TQA manufacturer have conducted the following testing: Load vs. TLA Testing
Testing of numerous TQAs resulted in the determination that the 75-degree upper TLA limit could be exceeded on most units with an application of force against the forward stops in excess of 30 to 50 pounds.
Human Throttle Force Testing
Using a TQA instrumented with strain gauges and a sampling of Eclipse 500 pilots, it was determined that normal throttle operations would not approach 30 pounds of force. Our testing indicated that it was highly unlikely to exceed the forward TLA limit through application of static force. However, extreme throttle force seen during simulated emergency "panic" responses (throttle slam) could, in rare cases, produce forces up to 65 pounds, and subsequently exceed the 75-degree TLA limit.
Airworthiness Directive (AD) Field Testing
The AD field test was designed to identify two conditions:
1. Normal throttle movement causing a TLA range exceedance on both potentiometers (illuminating the ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message), and
2. Unusual noise or binding during throttle movement.
As of the date of this publication, all but one of the reported test failures were due to noise in the throttle quadrant. Upon further analysis, it has been determined that the noise is not related to the potentiometer hardware in the TQA, and thus not a factor in the engine control fault. Eclipse performed testing on units exhibiting this noise and determined it to be normal operating friction and noise coming from the autothrottle servos. Although the autothrottle system is not yet operational, the servos are installed in all throttle quadrants and, by design, provide a level of friction to hold the throttles.
FOQA Data Analysis
Analysis of fleet-wide historical data through the Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) system revealed that, within the data collected (over 12,000 flight hours), a total of ten aircraft have experienced some kind of TLA fault. In the case of eight of those ten aircraft, the fault was limited to a single potentiometer, so there was no effect experienced by the operator due to the other valid redundant potentiometer. In the case of the two other aircraft, one was a TLA range exceedance on one throttle (both potentiometers) and the other was the incident aircraft that experienced the dual throttle exceedance.
These data validate the AD field testing results. In other words, operational data support the finding that TLA range exceedances on both potentiometers (creating an ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message for that engine) are not occurring frequently in normal operations.
How is Eclipse Improving the Design?
Testing of the numerous TQAs, including the TQA from the incident aircraft, has shown that a high force on the throttle levers can result in TLA values above 75 degrees. The exact force required to cause the out-of-range fault varies from TQA to TQA but typically forces above 30 pounds are required. In normal circumstances, a pilot would not exert this much force. But in emergency situations such as a windshear, a pilot may slam the levers forward and potentially cause the TLA faults.
To eliminate the possibility of a throttle lever slam causing this fault, Eclipse and Pratt & Whitney Canada have determined that the upper and lower TLA range limits need to be extended. The revised range limits will still allow the detection of a potentiometer electrical fault, but the force required to exceed this new limit with a normally-functioning system will be in excess of 70 pounds. To further ensure that the impact of a throttle level slam in an emergency situation does not cause a TLA fault, the TLA range fault will not be latched. This means that, should the TLAs be temporarily forced beyond the upper limit, the pilot will still retain the ability to modulate thrust when the levers are brought back in into normal range.
Immediate Improvements
Eclipse is in the process of finalizing a design improvement with the FAA and Pratt & Whitney Canada. The improvements listed below represent our current improvement plan, and are subject to change pending review and approval by the FAA.
The strategy for improving the TLA and FADEC design is two-pronged:
1. Eliminate or minimize the possibility of the TLA range exceedances and latching ENG CONTROL FAIL events from occurring; and
2. Reduce the severity of any ENG CONTROL FAIL event that might occur.
We have addressed the second piece through the issuance of the Temporary Revision (TR) to the AFM covering dual ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS emergency procedures. This procedure provides the pilot with the ability to clear a latching TLA fault (and thrust frozen at the last good value) without shutting down an engine, thus preventing the loss of thrust experienced in the incident aircraft.
We are immediately implementing three key software improvements to address number one. The first is to raise the upper TLA limit from 75 degrees to 79 degrees. Our data show that it is highly unlikely that this new upper limit will be exceeded, even during extreme throttle force experienced during panic throttle slams. This upper limit has no effect on engine operation, as the FADEC will always limit maximum thrust to takeoff power once the TLA reads above the takeoff power position. The upper limit is in place only to identify a faulty potentiometer.
The second software improvement is to eliminate the fault latching feature. This means that short duration spikes in high TLA readings, such as those seen during the impact following a rapid throttle slam, will not create a persistent fault that could lead to a steady ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message and a fixed thrust situation.
Lastly, although Eclipse believes the unique feature of using the opposite engine's TLA (if valid) for determining which fault accommodation mode to select (high power or idle) under dual fault conditions has beneficial characteristics, in certain circumstances it may lead to pilot confusion. The logic for the dual TLA fault accommodation will be revised to simply use the last good value of the TLA input. This means under the dual TLA fault condition, the engine power will fail fixed at whatever power setting the TLA was prior to when the faults were detected.
Based on our extensive analyses, it is our belief that these design improvements will make it highly improbable for a customer to experience this behavior.
Design Improvement Implementation
Since the incident, Eclipse has been working closely with all involved parties, including Pratt & Whitney Canada and the FAA, to execute on a plan to certify and implement an improvement for the TLA and FADEC logic. These improvements are exclusively software based, and no hardware changes to aircraft will be required to implement this change. When the software change becomes available, a service bulletin will be issued to all Eclipse 500 customers and operators. The service bulletin, expected within 10-12 weeks, will detail how the update can be installed. While we are not yet absolutely certain of how this service bulletin will be implemented, it is likely that this update will only be provided at an Eclipse service center, as the update is unique to the FADEC system software. In the coming weeks, we will have a final schedule that we will communicate to all customers that provides detail of the software upgrade; including how and when it will be provided.
Conclusion
Eclipse is, and always will be, dedicated to ensuring our aircraft and customer pilots are the model for general aviation safety. We have challenged the industry status quo by embracing technology and programs enabling comprehensive data collection, while shouldering the responsibility of continuously and proactively improving the Eclipse 500 and how it is operated. Our proactive handling of this issue is a clear example of our commitment to rapidly identify issues and take action to fix them. We will continue to strive towards making the Eclipse ownership experience the most valuable and safest in general aviation.
Gad,
GREAT link to Boeing....Thanks
Cold Fish
You simply don't get the big picture! There is a tire "blowout" software fix just around the corner . . . you wait and see! Any problem can be fixed with "software".
gadfly
(Ain't "Flight Simulator" amazing?)
..with enough force to exceed the Eclipse 500's FAA-certified design limits..
This implies that they actually had a clue at what force it failed and certified it to that point. Not.
..rapidly deliver a solution to our customers via a universal software update.."In contrast to traditional aviation industry approaches, the time and customer inconvenience factor saved is immeasurable."
Hu? Typically it’s a data card sent by mail that any of the thousands of repair shops can do in a couple of minutes. Some “traditional companies” even load it over the “internet”.
..Four of the seven reported faults (errors) were determined to be erroneous due to noise caused by normal operation of the TQA.
That should make everyone feel good.
said Vern Raburn, president and CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "In contrast to traditional aviation industry approaches, the time and customer inconvenience factor saved is immeasurable."
This quote from Vern just boggles the brain.
Is Vern really claiming that the Eclipse 500 is better from a time and customer inconvenience factor when compared to a traditional aircraft like maybe a Mustang?
Is there anyone, anyone at all, besides Vern, who believes this?
Thanks for the summary airjet.
My questions remain and the thought that the failure limits vary significantly from TQA to TQA is another concern. As is the increase in the number of reported failures between the press release and the Flyer (7 vs 10 total failures, and 1 vs 4 'noise' false positives).
They cannot get the story straight.
10 failures in 12,000 hours is a rough MTBF of 1,200 hrs for failures in a flight critical system - that seems awful low.
Eclipse continues to be unable to admit to the simple fact that whether it performed 'as designed' or not, the engines were, in fact, out of control, the cross controol feature was unexpected to them as evidenced by the lack of procedure in the AFM or adequate training.
How many other similar unforeseen issues are out there?
Who will discover the next 'unanticipated' failure mode?
If it were just the hundred or so guys who bought the plane to have 'a jet' it would be one thing, but there are several companies which purport to offer passenger service in this abomination.
The lack of comprehension of the free lesson (in terms of loss of life) that Eclipse has been offered by this event is staggering - only exceeded by the arrogance of Eclipse in trying to call out the NTSB for its' press release. If that is not the pot calling the kettle black I am not sure I know what is.
Enjoying a taste of your own medecine Vern?
This is just the beginning I think.
A “potentiometer and AD converter” for throttle position? . . . “noise” in the system? . . . I would hope to shout! ‘Hope you “electronics types” are paying attention . . . this official document is far more than “peeking behind the green curtain” . . . this is a real education!
gadfly
(Thanks, airjet, for this excellent document, revealing far more than we could possibly expect. And to think that it came from Vern, himself.)
This seems pretty scary:
As of the date of this publication, all but one of the reported test failures were due to noise in the throttle quadrant. Upon further analysis, it has been determined that the noise is not related to the potentiometer hardware in the TQA, and thus not a factor in the engine control fault. Eclipse performed testing on units exhibiting this noise and determined it to be normal operating friction and noise coming from the autothrottle servos.
So Eclipse isn't fixing the root cause that generated the most failures and in fact the noise resulting in failure is considered normal. So how is anyone any safer by Eclipse sticking its head in the sand by not addressing the primary cause for failures and in fact calling the actions that lead to failures normal operations? This seems really weird. What is Eclipse talking about?
You'd think by now with all this crap talking going on SOMEONE SOMEWHERE would just do everyone a favor and post the pictures of the grounded eclipse fleet. (Like I really want to follow someone's shady instructions on sending an email to a friends email address and having pictures sent to me.) I don't think I am the only person interested in seeing the great numbers of aircraft on the ground; if they in fact really are. As far as the disgruntled employees go, let me tell you a little something. Aviation is not the only field where professionals are supposed to work what normal people would call insane hours and have someone's life in their hands. Can't figure out who I am referring to, they're called Doctors. Yeah they work a great numbers of hours in a row and if they screw up someone is going to get hurt and may possibly die as a result. However the general publics response is not "Oh the poor doctor he/she shouldn't have had to work so hard." It is usually "Show me the money for your screw up. By the way here is my lawyer to collect." As far as crap airplanes, and multiple layoffs at eclipse is concerned, maybe those people should have done their jobs just a little better. As logic dictates: you don't do your job, you get canned. I don't think an entirely illogical company would have made it this far. Just a thought. In addition, it is a sad truth that the E500s are not 100% complete at this point. It is upsetting to see someone set their sights on a different goal ie the E400, when there is still much work to be done on the first product. PS post the pictures, I at least know what the airplane looks like. If they don't show up in link form, I as a reader of this blog am going to just assume the "critics" of the E500 just don't have their facts straight. If the pics show up hey then I guess I was wrong. But until that time quit acting like you know it all. Everybody has their right to speculate, however there is a point when it becomes just that, pure speculation. In regards to this blog I have been reading it for a few months now and it has provided some insight into things and other just stupid things. I would remind you of one thing, people are in those airplanes that you are just dying to see crash and burn just so you will be right. Seems silly to me. I hope for my sake and the sake of others your comments will help bring about a positive change for the aircraft by opening the eyes of people who can actually do something about the problems.
If they don't show up in link form, I as a reader of this blog am going to just assume the "critics" of the E500 just don't have their facts straight
How silly. I never claimed to have pictures. Take it up with TAB for chickening out since you feel so inclined to setting terms.
EP. . .
Don't judge the "many" by a "few". For a couple years, most of us have said, in effect, over and over that "NONE" of these little jets should be allowed to fly, until they are "complete". If we wished for someone to get hurt, we would encourage you and others to go ahead and fly them. But you know the opposite to be the case.
gadfly
(If it were possible, the entire fleet should be grounded until further notice . . . and in the back of your own mind, you know it, too.)
ColdWet,
I'm with you. When the data shows that engine controls are experiencing a 1,200 hour MTBF, that hardly constitutes a "rare" event.
It is hard to believe that Eclipse would try to characterize a failure rate that high as rare. It doesn't do much for their credibility.
That's approximately the failure rate for a mechanical gyro instrument, one of the least reliable flight critical systems in any aircraft. And we all know how much time is spent during flight training learning the proper procedures to handle those types of failures.
My last aircraft, which has a bit more than 4,000 hours on the airframe, has never had an engine control assembly failure.
Come to think of it, that aircraft never had a trim runaway, a servo failure, an autopilot disconnect, a blown tire, or an air data failure in over 4,000 hours.
or an emergency AD.
Ok, I did have to replace the windshield, at 3,300 hours.
A NEW AIRCRAFT COMPANY TO BREAK GROUND IN ABQ.
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - June 24, 2008 - Today SOLARUS Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first ULTRA light jet (ULJ), announced that it will design and manufacture the new SOLARUS 5000® The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is very optimistic that SOLARUS Aviation can receive its TC (TYPE CERTIFICATE) and PC PRODUCTION CERTIFICATE for the US Market by mid 2009. SOLARUS currently has over 300 orders for the new ULJ, the SOLARUS 5000® and has plans for delivery of the first aircraft in September 2010. President and CEO Sum Dum Fuk, a Chinese national and recent Albuquerque resident says “ We hope to deliver 2 a day once we start production and the line starts to move as planned.” Sum also went on to say that SOLARUS does not anticipate any problems finding qualified personnel to make this happen as the Albuquerque is rumored to have many talented aviation personnel.
SOLARUS is incorporating state of the art materials in its construction process including some materials like POLYSTIREEN® (STYRAPHOME) and POLYPROTPLASMA® .
The SOLARUS 5000® will be powered by 2 CCM Pulsejets producing over 5000 lbs of forward thrust and rear vectoring thrusters that will aid in the aircrafts sharp turning abilities.
Marketing Director, Douche E, Bag says ”This aircraft will revolutionize the way we travel around the country, this will be a big hit to most if not all the major airlines in the country. This serves them right for trying to charge the traveling public $25.00 for the first bag and $50.00 for the second.”
"One of the advantages to having such a technologically-advanced aircraft is that we can quickly put the competition, DINASAURS if you would, out of business.”
SOLARUS will break ground at the Double Eagle Airport in July on its 2 Billion dollar facility. What do future employees have to look forward from SOLARUS Aviation? FREE SODA POP whenever you want it, the coolers will be stocked to the gills in the break room said the head of human resources director, Sum Young Hoe.
More news to come.
What strikes me about this bulletin is the blithe manner in which Eclipse has excused the "latched" throttle condition and the matter of fact manner in which they've announced the intent to eliminate this "feature".
Hmmm, now that I think about it, it sure DOES sound like the type of programming cul-de-sac typical of Microsoft's Flight Simulator. No thought given to rectify the condition, but no worries....you can always get it "right" on the next flight [simulation].
Oh, I guess there is one more thing. In fact, it's almost identical in the type of logic employed. I'm referring to the throttle cross-control "feature". Touted in the bulletin as the way things should be done, but then slated for eradication in the upcoming software revision.
What's up with that? I mean, if it was such a carefully designed and valuable "feature", why do away with it so readily? The only hint we're given is that the feature is just too "confusing" for us limited IQ jet pilot types.
Again, it points to a system that was designed by a guy with a pocket protector, a great deal of free Coke and precious little practical flight experience. The "because we can" school of technology features: If the technology allows you to make it more complicated, do so. It'll impress your bosses. Especially if you have a boss like...well, let's not go there.
Gunner
Testing of numerous TQAs resulted in the determination that the 75-degree upper TLA limit could be exceeded on most units with an application of force against the forward stops in excess of 30 to 50 pounds.
In that quote, Eclipse says that their tests conclude that most units will fail when tested as directed.
Then they say In fact, all of our Eclipse 500 fleet operators were safely flying their aircraft the day that the AD was issued.
If Eclipse has determined that most units will fail the test, but asserts that 100% of the TQAs in fleet aircraft tested ok, that certainly raises questions about the validitiy of the tests which were completed by the fleet operators.
Hmmm, now that I think about it, it sure DOES sound like the type of programming cul-de-sac typical of Microsoft's Flight Simulator.
I just love the Microsoftesque its-not-a-bug-its-a-feature with the noise resulting in failures. Actually the whole thing seemed to be written that way while blaming the FDA and whining about the NTSB. Given how Eclipse is now passing the buck onto the FDA for certifying the aircraft, might that not raise a few questions within the FDA that perhaps the previous grievance filed had some truth to it that the TC was rushed? Eclipse will find themselves out of needed friends quick when they attack the NTSB and pass the blame on the FAA.
The exact force required to cause the out-of-range fault varies from TQA to TQA but typically forces above 30 pounds are required.
In this quote, Eclipse is stating that they have seen some TQAs fail with less than 30 pounds of force.
One would be advised to fly with a very light touch on the TQA for the next six months or so while waiting until the service bulletin comes out and Eclipse is able to fit your aircraft into one of their service centers for the retrofit.
When are the service centers in Chicago, the Bay Area, Boca Raton and Van Nuys opening? Last word back in January was - soon.
As of the date of this publication, all but one of the reported test failures were due to noise in the throttle quadrant. Upon further analysis, it has been determined that the noise is not related to the potentiometer hardware in the TQA, and thus not a factor in the engine control fault. Eclipse performed testing on units exhibiting this noise and determined it to be normal operating friction and noise coming from the autothrottle servos. Although the autothrottle system is not yet operational, the servos are installed in all throttle quadrants and, by design, provide a level of friction to hold the throttles.
So Eclipse admits to failure by design. Per the other communication from Eclipse 4 (53%)of the 7 failures werea result of this. Eclipse is only addressing the smaller issue (47%) and saying they wont do a thing about the bigger problem of noise resulting in failures. Over and above that Eclipse says it is only addressing what occures during abnormal operations while blowing off what it says occurs during normal operations.
While this logic is unique to the Eclipse 500, our research indicates...
Yet another unique Eclipse feature which has resulted in truly disruptive performance.
Every
Cockpit a
Lesson
In
Probable
Software
Errors
oh yes ...
i have a suggestion for Vernskii
instead of spending so much(already scarce) money on panel ...
just put a big red flashing push button in the middle of cockpit ...
with on it :
"This N° Reg. plane is going to kill you soon !"
then wait for
passenger :"captain , captain , what is that flashing message ? are we safe ?"
Pilot : " don't worry , it's only noise ...!"
about working hours for shift , i participated in a survey some times ago to qualify the productivity to be gained by "arranging" shifts ...
i agree 100% the one who invented the rotating night shifts had no family or was not interested in trying for himself ...
if memory serve me well , the result was :
only on volunteer basis(for night shift) ; never rotating shifts (so the ones working late are always working at the same hours ...); avoid any too specific work between 01:30/02:00 and 05:00/05:30 at all costs ; allow workers to have a good break (by doing some sports or take a nap of 15/20 minutes) after the fifth hour ; avoid the use of unnecessary noises and /or music ...
off-course , the plant was not an aircraft facility , but the survey was about quality VS quantity of work , and in which conditions was the best equally resulting of good work output and best workers satisfaction ...
sounds strange ? a friend of mine had some problems with staff in his Moscow offices (mainly women)
one of the solution advised was to create a free kinder-garden for worker's kids on the premises and allow mothers to see their kids while on break or while passing by...
the results was extremely good , worker's absentia dropped like a stone in water and best of it the workers started to stop asking for salary raise every now and then because of the quality of work environment ...!
so sometimes Experts are not this bad , they just need to be allowed to be a bit creative ...
Nice try Eclipse. Looks like they have hired Tony Blair to put a spin on things.
Interesting that the have 200+ planes "delivered" (tm eclipse), a signifcant number tof which have been in commercial service for up to a year, and the total fleet hours are only 12K? Note that the also mix in the 6000 flight test hours to bulk up that number. A single 777 can produce 12000 hours in a little over two years.
If we use Flight Centers data for Dayjet, you can see that the rest of the fleet sure is not spending much time airborne.
Airjets posting is a buffet:
Additionally, if the throttle from the opposite engine is determined to have a valid signal, the system will hold the thrust on the engine with the engine control fault at the last good value as long as the opposite throttle is positioned approximately at Maximum Continuous Thrust (MCT), or greater. If the opposite throttle is positioned or moved to something less than MCT, the system will command the engine with the engine control fault to a fixed idle thrust setting.
and
The design philosophy driving this logic was to provide appropriate engine response during thrust-critical phases of flight. For example, during takeoff, both throttles are positioned above MCT, so a dual-channel failure of one throttle will result in continued takeoff thrust based on the opposite throttle position.
So they thought this was a good idea at the time. Hey, maybe it is - shame it is expressly forbidden by the design code - FAR23.1143 (d). Maybe one of those areas where a pesky experience aviation expert could have been an asset?
Lastly, although Eclipse believes the unique feature of using the opposite engine's TLA (if valid) for determining which fault accommodation mode to select (high power or idle) under dual fault conditions has beneficial characteristics, in certain circumstances it may lead to pilot confusion.
I can picture the complete lack of information to the operator as to this behavior being one of the circumstances whch may lead to pilot confusion!!!"
I love the use of the term "unique feature" with regards to the crossing of the engine controls. The reason it is unique is that prevention of crossed controls is probably the oldest concept in avaiton design codes. They had identified how dumb this is by the end of the first world war. Eclipses set up was unique because it is illegal, and no one else is dumb enough to even think of it!
The logic for the dual TLA fault accommodation will be revised to simply use the last good value of the TLA input. This means under the dual TLA fault condition, the engine power will fail fixed at whatever power setting the TLA was prior to when the faults were detected.
It will be interesting to see if the FAA AD's this change. I would expect it.
You can also see that when you point the spotlight at an eclipse system, you find all sorts of other problems.
As of the date of this publication, all but one of the reported test failures were due to noise in the throttle quadrant. Upon further analysis, it has been determined that the noise is not related to the potentiometer hardware in the TQA, and thus not a factor in the engine control fault. Eclipse performed testing on units exhibiting this noise and determined it to be normal operating friction and noise coming from the autothrottle servos. Although the autothrottle system is not yet operational, the servos are installed in all throttle quadrants and, by design, provide a level of friction to hold the throttles.
You can bet that the "noise issue" in the TLA resolvers is driving a hardware redesign. Nice how they mix electrical noise and mechanical friction stir it around, and everything is hunkydory!!
Analysis of fleet-wide historical data through the Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) system revealed that, within the data collected (over 12,000 flight hours), a total of ten aircraft have experienced some kind of TLA fault. In the case of eight of those ten aircraft, the fault was limited to a single potentiometer, so there was no effect experienced by the operator due to the other valid redundant potentiometer.
So the TLA resolvers are failing at a rate of 1 per 1200 flight hours. (lets round that probablity to 10^-3), Eclipse goes on to define this as " not occurring frequently in normal operations..
I wonder what sort of failure probablity you need in critical system for them to feel they are occuring frequently?
While we are not yet absolutely certain of how this service bulletin will be implemented, it is likely that this update will only be provided at an Eclipse service center, as the update is unique to the FADEC system software.
Looks like flight aware will soon pick up a number of one way flights from Gander! We europeans trust that the Frankfurt International office of the FAA is performing the oversight of the Europe based N registered Eclipse, as required from the USA according it's ICAO responsiblities as state of Register!
Sorry, bare with me for one more post.
The AD field test was designed to identify two conditions:
1. Normal throttle movement causing a TLA range exceedance on both potentiometers (illuminating the ENG CONTROL FAIL CAS message), and
2. Unusual noise or binding during throttle movement.
This backs up some posts I made over the last week. The building code requires that the control: ...must be able to withstand operating loads without failure or excessive deflection. (FAR23.1141(d)
Since you can extrapolate from the specific loads given for the flight controls (especially the elevator), you can substantiate a specific number for this operating load, even if this is a dumb way to design a plane.
That argument leads to a legal consistant AD which tests for failure in the normal operating range of force, but does not test for stupidity (It is stupid to assume that people in stress situations don't get hamfisted.)
All these things need is an effective physical stop. They can add that while doing the redesign to address excess friction, and electrical noise. The SB will be available on Thursday.
It is clear to me that if you were to test the entire fleet to see what happens when pilot throttle slams, you have 100% grounded A/C, and the throttle vender finally gets the production volume promised!
I have not read the source of the text yet, but the snippits above lead me to think when they refer to “noise from the AT” they are talking about mechanical notching from the AT motor, which is probably a stepper motor. Those have a very slight cogging effect, which could be interpreted as mechanical grinding.
Either way, the threshold set by the software for an out of range on the throttle position is razor close, and needs to be corrected with a proper margin to accommodate normal production variations. And de-couple the throttle logic between the two engines – that’s more confusion than it’s worth.
(I also believe they state the sensors for the throttle position are potentiometers, not resolvers.)
"The Eclipse 500 fleet of aircraft was not grounded as a result of the AD. The AD required a mandatory pilot inspection prior to the next flight of the aircraft. A successful inspection, which took most customers less than 10 minutes to complete, enabled immediate operation of the aircraft."
Not to be picky, but the aircraft IS grounded by Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2008-13-51until the thottles are inspected AND signed off in the logbook AND until two changes are added to the the airplane flight manual AND the changes also noted in the aircraft LOGBOOK (not just the revision page of the AFM). The person performing the throttle tests (who must possess at least a private pilot certificate) is tasked with notifying the FAA of the results within 10 days. According to the AD a technician who did not possess a private pilots certificate would NOT be authorized to perform the tests. Therefore Eclipse would NOT be able to notify the FAA on the throttle tests on aircraft at their service centers UNLESS it was done by a pilot on their staff. Same with making the AFM change entry into the logbook.
freedom ...
may be that's the new definition in Vern's glossary :
Volume can be achieved by delivering many planes or by delivering few planes with excessive needs for spare-parts ...
how did you call it again ?
lawn darts ?
In the case of an accident the NTSB takes custody of the aircraft and releases parts of it back to the owner or insurance company as the investigation progresses, retaining those parts it feels necessary for further study. In this case Eclipse apparently ran out, downloaded the data, and began its own independent investigation. This is an absolute no-no. I would look for Eclipse to be dropped from the investigation if they persist in this attitude. At the very least the legal department of the NTSB should write a letter informing Eclipse that they are not to download ANYTHING in the instance of future accidents unless it is under the direction of the NTSB investigator in charge.
My son showed me an easier way to solve the problem with the Eclipse throttle quadrant:
There is a small USB port located at the bottom of each AvioNG unit. Remove the cover and plug in an ordinary mouse.
With the mouse connected, power up the unit and a Welcome page will appear with several choices. Click on SETTINGS, AIRCRAFT, then FAILURE MODES. Uncheck any boxes that are checked, like FADEC, AUTOPILOT, BRAKES, THROTTLE QUADRANT, RUDDER TRIM, PITOT TUBES, WINDOWS, etc. That should eliminate any future in-flight failures.
While you're at it, click on USER DIFFICULTY SETTINGS. You'll see EASY, NORMAL, HARD, EXPERT. Choose EASY. A certain dentist we all know chose that setting and he and his wife have been very happy with their Eclipse.
Unplug the mouse, reboot the system, and your problems should be solved.
I have not read the source of the text yet, but the snippits above lead me to think when they refer to “noise from the AT” they are talking about mechanical notching from the AT motor, which is probably a stepper motor. Those have a very slight cogging effect, which could be interpreted as mechanical grinding.
I'm really trying to understand why Eclipse is blowing off the noise issue. How exactly would noise result in the so-called false positives? If said noise gives the same error, why is Eclipse only addressing one issue and saying the other isn't a problem? I'm trying to understand this and I don't understand what the noise is and how that results in a fault and why Eclipse completely ignores this despite it causing the majority of tested faults.
In this case Eclipse apparently ran out, downloaded the data, and began its own independent investigation. This is an absolute no-no. I would look for Eclipse to be dropped from the investigation if they persist in this attitude. At the very least the legal department of the NTSB should write a letter informing Eclipse that they are not to download ANYTHING in the instance of future accidents unless it is under the direction of the NTSB investigator in charge.
Might not the NTSB and FAA take the faults due to noise more seriously than Eclipse? It seems like Eclipse is in a rush to ignore known faults and is trying to pressure the FAA/NSTB into accepting faults not being fixed on the Eclipse.
Eclipse has an excellent opportunity to turn a ‘bug’ into a ‘feature’. We read that the autothrottle servos are installed but not connected, just providing friction and power lever ‘feel’. These servo motors should be hooked up and used to remedy the problem found at Midway Airport.
If the crew believes they’ve lost operational control of the engines, say both are stuck at takeoff power or idle, the solution is simple. They reach up to the Avio NG panel and press a soft key labeled "Engine Reset". They will see a warning box –“Crew Remove Hands From Throttle Quadrant”. Next they press “Okay” and relax as the hourglass symbol is displayed.
After brief software reload, the throttle levers begin moving rapid fire. First the left throttle full forward and the right at idle, then a mirror image movement. All possible combinations are automatically tested to ensure FADEC resets and smoothly running engines. A box appears saying “Engine Reset Complete’.
#They reach up to the Avio NG panel and press a soft key labeled "Engine Reset".#
not to be confused with the "Jettison all" ...
oops ...
too late !
Eclipse also announced today that of all the Eclipse 500 aircraft in customer operation, more than eighty percent have been inspected as directed by the AD. Of this group of inspected aircraft, seven have reported fault errors. Four of the seven reported faults were determined to be erroneous due to noise caused by normal operation of the TQA.
Aren't all errors erroneous??? Then again this is MS Flight Simulator, so its not a bug, those fault errors are features!
The occurrence in Chicago was the first report of an engine control fault on the Eclipse 500, and the first incident for an Eclipse 500 in more than 18,000 total fleet hours.
That is verifiably false. It was the third NTSB incident:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/
This is excluding all the incidents that are in the FAA SDR database. Why would Eclipse make up such easily verifiable lies about the number of Eclipse 500 incidents?
The aircraft did not experience "un-commanded thrust" from the engines. In fact, the aircraft provided thrust settings in accordance with the design logic of the dual FADEC and throttle lever positions. While Eclipse failed to provide adequate pilot procedures to address a dual engine control anomaly, the system responded and performed as designed.
Saying it did what was programmed doesn't mean it wasn't uncommanded.
Additionally, the NTSB press release included speculation by the NTSB that the Eclipse 500 was experiencing component failures too early in their lifecycle. As you will see from the factual data presented in this edition of the Eclipse Flyer, this rare and isolated occurrence is not indicative of premature component failure.
So Eclipse is proud of the number of FAA SDRs? Those SDRs are just for commercial operations and don't include all the problems private pilots have had. What's in the FAA database isn't speculation.
Since the incident, Eclipse has been working closely with all involved parties, including Pratt & Whitney Canada and the FAA, to execute on a plan to certify and implement an improvement for the TLA and FADEC logic.
Releasing a separate report prior to and separate from both the FAA and NTSB, it doesn't look like Eclipse is working closely with either. Also Vern calling the NTSB chairman a liar isn't exactly a way of showing unity and cooperation.
Distribution of Aircraft S/N 1 - 100
DATA is only correct as far as public accessible FlightAware is accurate and complete
I have not scraped data for S/N 100++
Six aircraft with S/N less than 100 have flown to Europe
9 N513EA
51 N500UK
53 N514EA
80 580WC
97 502TS
99 911MX
Five Craft with S/N less than 100 are in Linear + NAJ fleets
16 N15ND Linear Air Charter
18 N875NA North America Charter
64 N717LK North American Charter
75 575CC Linear Charter
86 990NA North American Charter
Twenty-Eight Craft are in Dayjet fleet. Eleven are mothballed in KGNV, and rest are active and distributed between KGNV and KBCT
2 N126DJ Dayjet, KGNV
6 N109DJ Dayjet, KGNV
7 N110DJ Dayjet, KGNV
20 N115DJ Dayjet, KGNV
21 N116DJ Dayjet, KGNV
22 N119DJ Dayjet, KGNV
23 N130DJ Dayjet, KGNV
33 N131DJ Dayjet, KGNV
34 N132DJ Dayjet, KGNV
35 N134DJ Dayjet, KGNV
36 N135DJ Dayjet, KGNV
37 N136DJ Dayjet, KGNV and active
54 N139DJ Dayjet, Active
55 N141DJ Dayjet, Active
56 N142DJ Dayjet, Active
57 N145DJ Dayjet, Active
58 N146DJ Dayjet, Active
59 N147DJ Dayjet, Active
61 N148DJ Dayjet, Active
62 N150DJ Dayjet, Active
71 152DJ Dayjet, Active
72 153DJ Dayjet, Active
73 156DJ Dayjet, Active
74 158DJ Dayjet, Active
77 160DJ Dayjet, Active
78 161DJ Dayjet, Active
79 162DJ Dayjet, Active
81 163DJ Dayjet, Active
Twelve non-DJS Craft with S/N less than 100 have spent much of June in KGNV
1 N508JA to KGNV in Feb, Short KGNV and Ormond flights in June
5 N504RS to KGNV, March 14
10 N500VK KGNV
11 N777VE KGNV
15 N515MP To KGNV in April
17 N17AE KGNV in early June
28 N963JG KGNV, June 5
44 N489JC To KGNV on June 23
70 570EA in KGNV, June 9-19
83 38DA KGNV on June 17 onward
89 N44EJ KGNV on June 17, active west coast
92 355BM To KGNV June 17
Three craft are in Albany (one left recently)
42 N168TT In Albany since May 28
52 N502ET To Albany on June 19
82 382EA Albany through June, diversion to Saint Louis
Eleven craft are in KABQ for substantial portions of time, post June 6
8 N941NC Albuquerque on June 21
12 N651FC To Albuquerque on June 16
14 N705PT To Albuquerque on June 19
27 N502LT In Albuquerque May to June, left June 24
30 N768JF In Albuquerque in June
32 N80TF Albuquerque June 15-24
41 N541LB in Albuquerque, June 6-18
87 50EJ In Albuquerque June 3 -17
88 N457TB left Albuquerque, June 16
94 417CG To Albuquerque on June 22
98 598EA Left albuquerque June 23, after month, diversion in Renton
Eight craft have (apparently) not flown after the AD
19 N519EJ to Texas June 9
25 N546BW for Sale, south Carolina, last flight June 11
29 N55BX Last flight, June 6
31 N531EA last flight April, leavin KABQ
63 N778VW Last flight June 6
65 N23PJ June 1 to Saint Louis, no flights post 6/1
69 71MT last flight June 11, diverted back to base Akron
76 576EA last flight June 2, in Albuquerque late May, to Texas
Five craft are blocked or missing data
3 N816KD no recent flights listed
4 N229BW blocked, Mike Press
45 N500CD blocked
68 615RJ missing
96 464PG blocked
Twenty-Two craft are in active private, fractional or small charter ownership, some have been at service centers briefly post-AD
13 N317BH Active in Utah
24 N561EA Active Colorado
26 N612KB
38 N112EA
39 N858GS
40 N444RL
43 N62RC
46 N6100
47 N218JT
48 N570RG
49 N549AF
50 N456MF
60 N429CC active Florida
66 N370P
67 568PB
84 509JA active California, brief loop to KABQ on 6/17
85 778TC in Albuquerque briefly June 24
90 N2486B active
91 54KJ active Texas
93 233MT California, Mexico June
95 317DJ active Nevada
100 9922F active Pennsylvania, in Albany briefly June 22-24
Summary:
28 -- Dayjet
22 -- private, fractional, or charter flight
12 -- KGNV, non Dayjet
11 -- KABQ
8 -- ground
6 -- Europe
5 -- other fleet
5 -- missing
3 -- Albany
airjet,
Thanks for the 'Eclipse Flyer, Special Edition' post.
Talk about positive spin. I'm pretty sure this is an historic event, a sort of final fling as a desperate Vern Raburn flails all who come in contact, as he attempts to retain control of EAC.
Vern has run out of sugar daddies. Roel Pieper is the only game in town (sort of) but there has been an interesting development on that score. It would appear that Mr. ETRIC has had to become involved with suppliers recently.
In late May, this long suffering and much abused group had finally asked for some proof positive that more cash was coming. Roel issued the appropriate email on the 4th of June, however I can report that no money has emerged to date.
Or if it has, those lucky enough to get some are keeping VERY quiet....
Anyway, back to my main point. If Roel now has to do Vern's job for him (provide the cash, keep suppliers on side etc) what does he need Vern for?
1. As a figurehead? Yes, if you are running a Circus.
2. To stay on top of the NTSB and the FAA? By calling them liars...
3. Dealing with customers? So how does being on the board of ICON help EAC.
No, what he really NEEDS The Great Raburn to do....
... is sue us!
Shane
Anyway, back to my main point. If Roel now has to do Vern's job for him (provide the cash, keep suppliers on side etc) what does he need Vern for?
Eclipse needs to be taken over by some mature management. I don't think Roel is it, but hopefully he could hire a CEO that would be good. Then again it might be to his advantage to let Eclipse USA go under along with all the liabilities attached to it and for the money he's put in, go and have Eclipse Russia and Make ETIRC 500s and ETIRC 400s and potentially be able to import those back into the US.
In late May, this long suffering and much abused group had finally asked for some proof positive that more cash was coming. Roel issued the appropriate email on the 4th of June, however I can report that no money has emerged to date.
To quote from that email:
"I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for an empennage today."
airjet said...
Eclipse Flyer
Issue 2 June 2008
Airjet, thanks so much for posting this - It is great that Eclipse decided to communicate the issues fully and with all the details included. I wonder if the press, most owners, would have the patience to read it all, but I can't find any fault in the Eclipse flyer. Sounds like their course of action is flawless.
Eclipse locations for S/N greater than 100
DATA is only as accurate as publicly accessible Flight Aware records, may be incomplete!
Craft not in Flight Aware database (higher numbers may not have taken maiden flight, and not be delivered, as is typical)
118 105LB missing after Feb 28
122 164MW
142 2711H missing
162 224ZQ
166 23FK
177 177EA in May 29th video
186 204ZQ
189 435NF
197 218G
198 888DZ
199 165DJ
200 166DJ
201 167DJ
204 607LM
206 977VH
Seven additional craft to Europe
104 117EA Europe
120 27052 Europe
137 36FD Europe
138 100VA Europe
152 113EA Europe
155 114EA Europe
190 190CK Europe
20 Craft with no flights after the AD (5 in ABQ)
112 112EJ no flights past May 22
117 117UH test loops ABQ on 6/3, no further flights
125 370EA last flight Salinas 6/13
126 953JB last flight May 23
127 261DC to ABQ on May 29
131 67NV to ABQ May 23, (diverted to Tucumcari?)
146 146EA to Texas from ABQ on June 1, no further flights
147 414TW May 28 last flight, KGNV to KFLL
149 149EA no flights post June 7
150 920GB no flights post June 6
154 66BX KABQ on 6/2, no further flights
165 669CM last flight June 13
168 568EA ABQ loop on 5/10, no further flights
170 170EA last flight May 2
171 58EH last flight May 21
176 9900R last flight May 24
179 220BW to ABQ on June 15, no further flights
184 118EA last flight May 30
188 652FC last flight 5/20
195 227LS last flight 6/4 to PA
Five craft recently returned to ABQ
108 812MJ to KABQ on 6/20
109 777ZY to KABQ on 6/17
134 800EJ to KABQ 6/23
182 177CK to ABQ on 6/23
193 193EA back to ABQ on 6/20
Two craft in KGNV and two in KALB
101 539RM to Albany June 24, active
121 855MS to KGNV on 6/19
141 504TC to KGNV 6/20
202 169DJ to Albany 6/23
Twelve active flying, but in service for >5 days in June
113 717HD active, in ABQ June 8-12
124 227G active, ABQ from 6/12-17
128 528EA active, in ABQ 6/6-11
129 500DG active in ABQ, May to June 12
130 322JG active Calif, in ABQ early June
144 545MA in ABQ to June 11, Canada (odd data)
145 145EA ABQ from 6/8-6/22
157 500CE active Houston, on ground June 3-25
159 727CW in ABQ June 15-24
172 964JG ABQ from 6/11-18, to Trenton NJ, no further flights
173 173PD in Albany 6/10-23
about 38 active flying in sales, private or small charter operations
102 277G active SW
103 333MY active PA
106 516EA active Texas
107 706PT Saint Louis on March 12
111 175JE active Tenn
115 727HD active Louisiana
116 75EA active Florida
119 815WT active Louisiana
132 964S active, Utah
133 21EK active
135 3MT active Minn
139 500MM active Arkanasas
143 533DK Chicago to KBCT (NAJ?)
148 148LG active Colorado
151 85SM active Arizona, Calif
153 800AZ active IOWA,
156 234EA active, Florida
158 500ZH active
160 2YU active Colorado
161 448HC active Tenn to Pa
163 63AD one flight on 6/17 from KGNV to Charlotte, Florida
164 884AM active Ala
167 800JR active NY
169 166EA from Albany, diverted to Saint Louis on 6/16, no further flight
174 21YP now active in Texas
175 512MB active out of Hayward, Ca
178 721MA active, Pa Ohio
180 712WG active Texas to Michigan
181 99KP now active out of Saint Louis
183 N555EJ active Indiana
185 500FB now active So. Calif.
187 187EA active Texas
191 678PS loops in Ohio
194 70EJ active, So California
196 508CP active Colorado
203 883LC active SC
205 N653FC to Hayward, Calif.
207 207EA active Florida
Three are blocked on FlightAware
105 522DK
140 100MZ
192 61DT
Three are in (full-time) charters
114 197AR North American Charter
123 696NA North American Charter
136 136EA Linear Charter
One is in full time medical flights
110 501DX
Dave said... So Eclipse isn't fixing the root cause that generated the most failures and in fact the noise resulting in failure is considered normal.
Am I mistaken, or are you guys reading this wrong?
My reading is that the AD required testing the throttles for the out of range CAS message AND FOR ANY BIDING OR NOISE during operation.
We are talking audible noise here - not electrical noise.
Eclipse then reports that the audible noise was due to the AT servos and not an issue.
Am I wrong?
Suppliers going directly to the money before delivering parts. Wasn't that also a feature of the final throws at Thielert?
If they now dump Vern and his management team (you know, the ones who think that "the quality of the airplane is now crap"), and bring in adult supervision, what chance does this outfit still have?
Lets look at the assets:
Backlog,
shrunk this year by:
- 100 ("delivered" tm Eclipse)
- 1700 Dayjet Floptions
- 100 Conversions to E400 Vapourjet
- ??? Cancellations because they could.
- ??? European orders cause the plane ain't certified.
Value proposition, plane costs only:
$775,000 no
$990,000 no
$1,200,000 no
$1,600,000 no
$2,100,000 for a limied time
Disruptive technology:
Avio ?
AvioNG ?
GNS400W maybe Tuesday
FIKI ?
Auto Throttle ?
Area Nav ?
Lav ?
Reliablity:
Tires ?
EFIS ?
Autopilot ?
Windows ?
Throttle ?
Goodwill:
Suppliers
Management
Staff
Customers
Investors
FAA
$NTSB
Ken
Now lets look at the liabilities:
No significant market interest in A/C at current (realistic) price.
Retrofitting:
AVIONfG
GNS400W's
Fadec SW
Deicing boots
Aero Mods
Contracts with vendors built on 1000/year or so, while new customers are currently beating down the door at minus xxxx/year (to get their money back).
Quality
Described by an Eclipse manager (and confirmed by the CEO) as CRAP!
EASA Certification
Existing contracts which sold the plane at about a $1,500,000 loss.
The consequences of calling the NTSB report "lies".
Employee motivation.
Supplier loyalty.
An active blog created by Eclipse behavior towards this industry we are proud of.
Frivolous lawsuits.
Vern!
My reading is that the AD required testing the throttles for the out of range CAS message AND FOR ANY BIDING OR NOISE during operation.
I went back and read the FAA Emergency AD. It appears that two items to look at were abnormal throttle handling and abnormal throttle sounds. When performing said tests, if there was an alert message that was to be reported too:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/ce4f900742d2987b8625746700025e60/$FILE/2008-13-51_Emergency.pdf
No significant market interest in A/C at current (realistic) price.
I still see a ray of hope post-BK. I guess something like what happened with the Hummer could happen with Eclipse. The Hummer for the commercial market is made in a completely different factory than the original military Hummer. There might be some value in rebuilding semi from scratch in a different factory (either in or out of the US). ETIRC and the banks might have already tied up Eclipse's valuable assets and I'm not exactly sure that ETIRC isn't just another version of Vern but who speaks with an accent. Eclipses could have been made profitably if they had been manufactured more efficiently and budgeted for a reasonable volume.
From the NTSB website:
“The quick FAA response to the urgent recommendations we issued could save lives,” Rosenker said. “Additionally, the NTSB is looking forward to reviewing the results of the FAA-required inspections of these aircraft.”
Here's a quote from Vern:
"We found out the large, untapped market isn't untapped, and it isn't large."
Baron95 wrote:
Sounds like their course of action is flawless.
This statement surprises me from you Baron.
That was the sort of gushing statement we haven't heard since Ken took his toys and left, and Mike Press got his mouth taped by Vern for reporting a near BK.
I do agree that that newsletter is a step in the right direction by sort of coming clean, but there is still way too much spin and way too little coming clean in this PR.
How many brownie points do we award for one spun up infogram, to a company which has been spouting "transparency" in their PR for years, while trying to shut up legitimate criticism through legal action.
They have played down the planned removal of the crossed throttle very nicely. The fact that they state that they still think it is a good idea, to me shows that removing it was forced by an external force.
If the FAA cert team really did get pulled and replaced by politicos in washington, it is also in their best interest to quietly brush some of these non-compliances under the rug. Rather than just shutting up and quietly removing the offending non-compliance, you still have Eclipse spouting off that it was a good idea.
(Eclipse pilots, how does it make you feel that the management of Eclipse thinks crossed controls is a good idea?)
I think you may be correct that we may have jumped to the wrong conclusions of electrical noise rather than audible noise there.
Since the tone of that Eclipse newsletter seems to be directed squarely at comments originating on this Blog, I am sure we will soon hear more on the throttle noise.
The fact that they state that they still think it is a good idea, to me shows that removing it was forced by an external force.
The force is Vern's massive ego where employees know what should be done and they say this so that Vern wont explode on them.
Dave,
My guess was the external force was the FAA saying, remove the non compliance, or we'll AD it!
Electrical noise is a term defining a “less than clean and undesirable electrical signal”, that interferes with the “clean” sine waves of distinct frequencies . . . and often caused by “dirty” contacts sweeping across a “potentiometer” . . . a differential analog device. Modern technology avoids this sort of problem with the “clean” digital signal from an “encoder” of some sort . . . magnetic, optical, etc.. To learn that “potentiometers” are used, rather than digital encoders, is a revelation, in itself. Even in a machine shop, a simple “micrometer” or “caliper” or “indicator” uses a digital encoder. Analog is not only inaccurate, it is easily “fooled” in position by inaccurate voltage input, “dirt” (which changes the electrical resistence), and a variety of other variables.
This is not to be confused with the requirement to “listen” for a mechanical sound. Nor is it the sound of a “stepper motor/ actuator” linking/driving physical throttle mechanisms . . . which is a normal characteristic of some motors.
The "clue" that confirmed that an "analog" potentiometer is used is that "the man" mentioned the "AD" (analog to digital) converter. And that becomes a mystery as to the "throwback" in design.
gadfly
(Think in terms of the “static sound” of an old radio volume control . . . the result of “electrical noise”, translated into sound "noise".)
SPJM is now offering 4 Eclipse *400* positions on Controller.
S/N 8,10,11,14
reports offer at a 50K discount to factory price.
Eclipse 500 Receives Flight Into Known Icing Certification
Certification expands flying capabilities for Eclipse 500® owners and operators
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - June 25, 2008 - Eclipse Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first very light jet (VLJ), today announced that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has granted Flight Into Known Icing (FIKI) certification for the Eclipse 500®. With this certification, the Eclipse 500 can now operate in conditions in which ice is known to be present.
"This certification process is one of the most difficult things to put a new model of aircraft through," said Vern Raburn, president and CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "We've worked through this process for some time, flying the Eclipse 500 in the precise natural icing conditions that the FAA requires. We tested the aircraft in some of the most severe weather conditions we could find, wherever we could find it. By receiving the FAA certification, we proved that the aircraft can withstand known icing conditions in a real-world operating environment with no structural changes required of the airframe," said Raburn.
Eclipse conducted its first test flight with an artificial ice shape in August of 2007. Since that time, more than 300 flight hours on three test aircraft have been recorded, including more than 60 hours conducted in natural icing conditions in many locations in the United States and Canada.
Eclipse also performed extensive tests with the Eclipse 500 in normal operation and ice protection system failure conditions in icing tunnels and with artificial ice shapes to simulate ice build up attached to the aircraft's airfoils. The de-icing system on the Eclipse 500 includes pneumatic de-ice boots on the wings and horizontal stabilizer leading edges, electrically heated windshield and air data probes, and bleed air heated anti-ice engine inlets.
About Eclipse Aviation
Eclipse Aviation is the world's leading very light jet (VLJ) manufacturer, producing innovative, affordable jets that are revolutionizing air transportation. The company created the VLJ category with the design, certification and delivery of the Eclipse
500® - the industry's first VLJ. Eclipse applies advances in technology, manufacturing processes and business practices to create high-performance aircraft that provide the lowest cost of jet ownership ever achieved. By changing the value proposition for private jet travel, Eclipse is allowing more pilots to enter the world of jet-powered aviation and enabling a new generation of entrepreneurs to help business travelers move between cities on a quick, affordable and convenient basis. Contact Eclipse at www.eclipseaviation.com.
By receiving the FAA certification, we proved that the aircraft can withstand known icing conditions in a real-world operating environment with no structural changes required of the airframe," said Raburn.
So what structural changes are required? Is this still starting on SN 266?
Honest compliment:
Congrats to Eclipse on this one...at long last.
Gunner
For once I am betting the bad news vs good news is really just a coincidence.
Congrats to the Eclipse team for FIKI.
Based on previous history I reserve final judgement until I see a revised TC and if there are any outstanding issues they neglected to mention in the press release (e.g., SW loads or other changes) but good job on a long needed capability.
Would be interesting to know what changes are now required (different boots, pipes, valves, SW, controls, etc - all are not 'aircraft structure' and we know how Vern can parse his words.
How will the changes be incorporated - SB, AFM/IPC revision?
Now get back to work and finish everything else.
FIKI just announced in press release.
This should be additive to the value of the assets when the Chapter 7 filing comes.
Thanks John for your info, This just helped validate what I was saying to TURD AND BURN about aircraft parked in ABQ and Gainesville. Thanks to Flight Aware John has proved my statement, AWWW VINDICATION.
8 N941NC Albuquerque on June 21
12 N651FC To Albuquerque on June 16
14 N705PT To Albuquerque on June 19
27 N502LT In Albuquerque May to June, left June 24
30 N768JF In Albuquerque in June
32 N80TF Albuquerque June 15-24
41 N541LB in Albuquerque, June 6-18
87 50EJ In Albuquerque June 3 -17
88 N457TB left Albuquerque, June 16
94 417CG To Albuquerque on June 22
98 598EA Left Albuquerque June 23, after month, diversion in Renton
In ABQ an not delivered yet
118 105LB missing after Feb 28
122 164MW
142 2711H missing
162 224ZQ
166 23FK
177 177EA in May 29th video
186 204ZQ Delivering 7-7 in ABQ
189 435NF
197 218G Final Test and customer acceptance flight 6-24
198 888DZ Service and Delivery Hanger ABQ
204 607LM Service and Delivery Hanger ABQ
206 977VH Paint Shop in ABQ
20 Craft with no flights after the AD (5 in ABQ)
117 117UH test loops ABQ on 6/3, no further
127 261DC to ABQ on May 29
131 67NV to ABQ May 23, (diverted to Tucumcari?) Now at Double Eagle
154 66BX KABQ on 6/2, no further flights
168 568EA ABQ loop on 5/10, no further flights
179 220BW to ABQ on June 15, no further flights
Five craft recently returned to ABQ
108 812MJ to KABQ on 6/20
109 777ZY to KABQ on 6/17
134 800EJ to KABQ 6/23
182 177CK to ABQ on 6/23
193 193EA back to ABQ on 6/20
113 717HD active, in ABQ June 8-12
124 227G active, ABQ from 6/12-17
128 528EA active, in ABQ 6/6-11
129 500DG active in ABQ, May to June 12. STILL THER IN ABQ
130 322JG active Calif, in ABQ early June. STILL THERE in ABQ
144 545MA in ABQ to June 11, Canada (odd data)
145 145EA ABQ from 6/8-6/22
159 727CW in ABQ June 15-24
84 509JA active California, brief loop to KABQ on 6/17
85 778TC in Albuquerque briefly June 24
192 61DT I know this plane is in the service hanger with damage in ABQ
WOW 45 aircraft in potentially in ABQ prior to June 24th
Plaines in Gainesville
2 N126DJ Dayjet, KGNV
6 N109DJ Dayjet, KGNV
7 N110DJ Dayjet, KGNV
20 N115DJ Dayjet, KGNV
21 N116DJ Dayjet, KGNV
22 N119DJ Dayjet, KGNV
23 N130DJ Dayjet, KGNV
33 N131DJ Dayjet, KGNV
34 N132DJ Dayjet, KGNV
35 N134DJ Dayjet, KGNV
36 N135DJ Dayjet, KGNV
37 N136DJ Dayjet, KGNV and active
1 N508JA to KGNV in Feb, Short KGNV and Ormond flights in June
5 N504RS to KGNV, March 14
10 N500VK KGNV
11 N777VE KGNV
15 N515MP To KGNV in April
17 N17AE KGNV in early June
28 N963JG KGNV, June 5
44 N489JC To KGNV on June 23
70 570EA in KGNV, June 9-19
83 38DA KGNV on June 17 onward
89 N44EJ KGNV on June 17, active west coast
92 355BM To KGNV June 17
199 165DJ In Gainesville Not Delivered
200 166DJ In Gainesville Not Delivered
201 167DJ In Gainesville Not Delivered
WOW 27 jets at Gainesville prior to June 24th
Rumor has it (and it's just that, rumor) there will be three required modifications for those aircraft that already have the updated boots, aero mods, and NG. Those modifications are some type of rudder spring, some change (I believe just markings) to the center switch panel, and some kind of paint around the static ports. As far as I know there has not been a SB issued yet that details everything.
Rumor has it (and it's just that, rumor) there will be three required modifications for those aircraft that already have the updated boots, aero mods, and NG. Those modifications are some type of rudder spring, some change (I believe just markings) to the center switch panel, and some kind of paint around the static ports. As far as I know there has not been a SB issued yet that details everything.
Thanks
Good news from Eclipse - surely welcomed by operators everywhere.
For once I am betting the bad news vs good news is really just a coincidence.
It was known outside Eclipse before, but after Midway it then was publicized.
This goes into some details on the FIKI:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=busav&id=news/ICE06258.xml&headline=Eclipse%20500%20Approved%20For%20Flight%20Into%20Icing
Congratulations for the FIKI. And earlier than they said. (I think originally slated for mid to late summer)
The freakin ECBs have been reset long ago on the boots. Too bad the windshield heat won't work without the AVIO NG. So much for the worthless certification.
A NEW AIRCRAFT COMPANY TO BREAK GROUND IN ABQ.
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - June 24, 2008 - Today SOLARUS Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first ULTRA light jet (ULJ), announced that it will design and manufacture the new SOLARUS 5000® The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is very optimistic that SOLARUS Aviation can receive its TC (TYPE CERTIFICATE) and PC PRODUCTION CERTIFICATE for the US Market by mid 2009. SOLARUS currently has over 300 orders for the new ULJ, the SOLARUS 5000® and has plans for delivery of the first aircraft in September 2010. President and CEO Sum Dum Fuk, a Chinese national and recent Albuquerque resident says “ We hope to deliver 2 a day once we start production and the line starts to move as planned.” Sum also went on to say that SOLARUS does not anticipate any problems finding qualified personnel to make this happen as the Albuquerque is rumored to have many talented aviation personnel.
SOLARUS is incorporating state of the art materials in its construction process including some materials like POLYSTIREEN® (STYRAPHOME) and POLYPROTPLASMA® .
The SOLARUS 5000® will be powered by 2 CCM Pulsejets producing over 5000 lbs of forward thrust and rear vectoring thrusters that will aid in the aircrafts sharp turning abilities.
Marketing Director, Douche E, Bag says ”This aircraft will revolutionize the way we travel around the country, this will be a big hit to most if not all the major airlines in the country. This serves them right for trying to charge the traveling public $25.00 for the first bag and $50.00 for the second.”
"One of the advantages to having such a technologically-advanced aircraft is that we can quickly put the competition, DINASAURS if you would, out of business.”
SOLARUS will break ground at the Double Eagle Airport in July on its 2 Billion dollar facility. What do future employees have to look forward from SOLARUS Aviation? FREE SODA POP whenever you want it, the coolers will be stocked to the gills in the break room said the Director of HR, Dat Young Hoe.
More news to come.
Part 2
SOLARUS AVIATION MAKING BIG STRIDES IN ALBUQUERQUE..
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - June 25, 2008 - Today SOLARUS Aviation, manufacturer of the world's first ULTRA light jet (ULJ), announced that it will have a fully operational FIKI system on the new SOLARUS 5000® The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is very optimistic that SOLARUS Aviation can receive its TC (TYPE CERTIFICATE) for this system. CEO Sum Dum Guy Said " I am pleased that all things are coming together for us at SOLARUS here in Albuquerque." Sum, went on to say that he cant wait to read the blog, SOLARUS AVIATION CRITIC and will not be worried about ND's or people taking punches at SOLARUS. "I LOVE A GOOD CRITIC" Remarked head of engineering Wang Hung Low.
Metalguy siad... Hu? Typically it’s a data card sent by mail that any of the thousands of repair shops can do in a couple of minutes. Some “traditional companies” even load it over the “internet”.
You are not serious, are you? What mannufacturer lets end users update FADEC SW after an internet download.
Again folks. Stick to valid criticism. There is no need to say EVERYTHING that Eclipse does is wrong/stubid/fraudulent. They do many things right.
This blog and the posters loose complete credibility with readers if you insist on blidingly finding fault with EVERYTHING.
Just my 2c.
"Aircraft delivered prior to S/N 38 will need the performance improvement package, if it has not already been fitted, and aircraft prior to S/N 78 will need new wing and empennage de-ice boots. FIKI approval also will require all aircraft to be painted with a rain repellant coating around the static ports and have static bonding and discharge modifications, including windshield coatings, engine ground bonding straps, dorsal fairing bonding and new static wicks. Aircraft also will need a new autopilot pitch servo and rudder centering spring."
But no 'airframe structural modifications'. What a tool you are Vern.
I did not know any of the details about FIKI, frankly I was surprised you actually got it 'done' (TM Eclipse). But based on nothing more than previous history I just knew there was more to the story than your happy announcement.
And no schedule or idea how long the mods will yet take.
Freadomjam said ... I do agree that that newsletter is a step in the right direction by sort of coming clean, but there is still way too much spin and way too little coming clean in this PR.
I agree. But that is as expected. They are presenting a lot of factual detail that is useful for owners/pilots, while still presenting the company in the best possible light.
Kind of like Keller did when he issued a statement regarding Southwest's missed AD.
I'm not sure that, knwoing what I know, I'd write a much different news letter.
CW, Gunner & others,
Thank you for acknowledgement of the FIKI cert. There is a long list of IOUs from EAC, but this was near the top of the list and it sure is nice to get the cert.
As far as the mods, the previous post was close, but not quite. Rudder spring (already on the line), special paint around the static port, and an additional switch on the panel are required for NG aircraft.
Earlier aircraft need boots, NG, or ETT mods as required.
On another note, this clown 20YM is ruining the blog! Shane should ban him from posting. Before he was aboard we were all able to disagree in a civil manner. This guy is obviously an ignorant moron. (check out the spelling and grammar)
It is not my blog, but I respect the majority of the posters, and this guy does not belong.
EX-421
Re FIKI, a few comments...
1 - It is impressive that Eclipse managed to get FIKI without vert stabilizer boots. Cessna tried with the Mustang, but had to revert back to adding boots there.
2 - Also good that they did not need any aerodynamic help to get FIKI. Cessna had to put vortex generators on the boots, which is a bad design from the durability point of view. Wait until the line maintenance guys start knocking them out during fueling, servicing and washing.
It probably means that the EA500 has a very good stability margin in their airfoils and control surfaces.
3 - I believe that for owners, it still means that FIKI is several months away, based on getting their planes updated in the service centers. So not time to pop the cork yet.
So we may have the first few FIKI ready EA500s next quarter and substantial numbers of the fleet only in 2009 (if all goes well).
421 jocky:
I did prove my point about the Planes parked at ABQ and Gainesville, Thanks to John. As for the SPOOF press release, That has been floating around the plant all day long as its MOCKING VERN and the HYPE mongers. So many direct hires are fed up after yesterdays inside news and many will be leaving Eclipse. They were warned not to put in a 2 week notice, because if you do they will walk you out that day. That is sad when a company jacks you like that when you try to be a good Emp and do the right thing. But for you, Im sorry, I wont post any more spoofs for you to laugh at. YOU ARE FAR TOO SERIOUS FOR THE FUN STUFF. Enjoy you FIKI
20 YM p.s. Is that better?
20 YM,
Thank you for your post. Be careful, the walls have eyes.
EX-421
They are presenting a lot of factual detail that is useful for owners/pilots, while still presenting the company in the best possible light.
They outright lie in trying to present the company in the best possible light by saying this was the first incident an Eclipse 500 has experienced:
The occurrence in Chicago was the first report of an engine control fault on the Eclipse 500, and the first incident for an Eclipse 500 in more than 18,000 total fleet hours.
Talking about the number of incidents is not a minor manner and the falsity of their claims can be verified here:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
I have to agree with 421 this guy looks like an embarassment to me. Just because they said Black Tulip was witty, doesn't mean you can try to duplicate and actually succeed. Stick to what you do best: "supposedly" being a mechanic.
I have to agree with 421 this guy looks like an embarassment to me. Just because they said Black Tulip was witty, doesn't mean you can try to duplicate and actually succeed. Stick to what you do best: "supposedly" being a mechanic.
Wait a minute, You guys called me a liar and John Proved me right! A few of the posters, Dave being one of them backed me and with good cause. I have provided good info for you on things on the inside of Eclipse. Now I share a funny press release that I for one didn’t write, but found funny and you clowns want to insult me further? You are a tough crowd to please! Enjoy your plane mate, but with what’s going on inside I doubt there will be any backfill employees to have build these things in the future. The moral in the factory is the lowest ever and people just don’t care anymore, they are even openly criticizing Vern in meetings and that has never happened before. This is why that flyer/Spoof press release is so funny, THE NATIVES ARE FED UP.
ENJOY YOUR FIKI
20 YM
BTW Honda Jet will be starting production of its Jet next month. There are 5 mechanics and 1 manager that we know of that will be leaving Eclipse. Also now that L3 in Waco Texas is paying contractors $28.00 through STROM AVIATION, we have heard some Texas transplants that hate ABQ chirp up and say they are leaving as well. MONEY TALKS in the world of aviation contracting and allot of the companies out there have seen the light and raised there rates. I guess you could say that is one good thing about Eclipse, That made the aircraft companies have to step up to get any good mechanics.
There you go, A positive post. LOL
20 YR
“20 year” . . . don’t get your liver in a quiver. I could claim to be “43 year mechanic” ("A&P", pilot, designer, inventor, machinist, business owner, etc., etc., etc.,) . . . and it wouldn’t matter, no how! . . . nor can all that bring someone back from the grave. The fact is that the little jet, for whatever the “design” is worth, is being produced (in-complete at best) by folks that have long ago demonstrated their inability to be honest and “up front”. (The design is also in question, but that is another subject at the moment.) ‘Having established that basis “early in the game” (of being less than truthful), there is little else to be said in their support. If certain customers choose to fly in these “incomplete flying machines”, they can never say that they were not warned.
We don’t wish them “ill”, but in all honesty, we know that sooner or later, bad things are sure to take place.
gadfly
(‘Coming to work, I watched someone run a “red light” on “Old 66" (Central Avenue) . . . he got away with it, this time. But sooner or later, bad things will happen . . . in less than the “blink” of an eye. I hope I don’t see it happen. I keep thinking "What if a member of my own family would be a passenger in this thing?" . . . and on that basis, I'll continue to make my comments.)
Dave said.... "...and the first incident for an Eclipse 500 in more than 18,000 total fleet hours."
Talking about the number of incidents is not a minor manner
If that paragraph was meant to say it was the first incident of any type, than it is false, it is the second NTSB incident.
If it was meant the first engine incident type, than it is correct, but they may have tried too hard to slide it as the first incident of any type.
So Dave, I agree with you. That paragraph should have been more forthcoming.
20 YM said ... I have provided good info for you on things on the inside of Eclipse
That is correct 20YM. While I can't say your have the best posting style (particularly in the subject of the pictures - I sent you my email address by the way), you have provided GOOD INSIDER info.
As a matter of fact, you are one of only a few posters that has posted non-public info about Eclipse.
I hope you stick to the Blog and continue to contribute relevant info from your insider friends.
I'd rather take good info with an attitude, than the attitude with no info that we got from some of our fellow bloggers.
Stick around dude and send the pictures or any other info to gatopardo95@yahoo.com - I'll have them posted in no time if you so desire, or you can send them to me for independent veryfication.
20 YOM said ... The moral in the factory is the lowest ever and people just don’t care anymore
Why is the morale so low now? I mean to the average grunt at the factory floor it doesn't much matter if there are reliability issues in the field or supplier issues. You come in, clock in, do your work, clock out get paid.
Why would the morele be low? Why is it lower now? If it is just managers pushing for more productivity, that is true of most factory floors, should be nothing new.
20YOM can you shed some light?
GADFLY:
True, I just want you guys to know that there is allot of good mechanics that know there S**T and have some great talent that built some of these aircraft. You cant blame the faults on the people building it when If you question the validity of the prints, the trainees in charge (6 week wonders that got promoted)Call you a trouble maker and hold your job over your head. You kinda have to waver from the Blue Print or it wont fit or cant be installed. Crap engineering if you ask me. The same old NCR's over and over again and when you make a suggestion to correct the problem you get asked WHAT? YOU SOME KIND OF KNOW IT ALL, SOME KIND OF ENGINEER OR SOMETHING? buy the weak management and the 6 week wonders. The best one I heard today was that the FAT CLOWN is getting promoted to ME (Manufacturing Engineer)from his lead position. This FAT CLOWN was a 6 week wonder 1 year ago and he does not even have a degree. WTF? It gets even better as another 6 week wonder emerged from under the FAT CLOWNS desk and will be assuming his lead spot. WILL THE INSANITY EVER END?
I agree with 421jocky, THE WALLS DO HAVE EYES, BUT THEY NEED AN EYE EXAM.
THE CRAP NEVER GOT ANY BETTER WILE I WAS AWAY.
GOOD NIGHT TO YOU ALL AND FLY SAFE!
Ain't that cute . . . we'll keep it all polite and legal . . . and politically correct. Of course we all know what that is . . . picking up a "dog turd" by the "clean end".
Yes, even the "gadfly" can be crude when it might save a life. The bottom line is that we're dealing with something that is dangerous . . . and treating it like a "political issue".
All too soon, the headlines will declare things that none of us want to see. An incomplete flying machine should not be allowed to "darken the skies", until it is a proven safe and reliable aircraft. Who is at fault? . . . we wait and watch.
gadfly
Metalguy said... Hu? Typically it’s a data card sent by mail that any of the thousands of repair shops can do in a couple of minutes. Some “traditional companies” even load it over the “internet”.
You are not serious, are you? What mannufacturer lets end users update FADEC SW after an internet download.
Yes, actually I am serious - field software updates are very common and there has been substantial FAA guidance in place for many many years on this capability. FADEC or otherwise. Vern states:
"One of the advantages to having such a technologically-advanced aircraft is that we can quickly isolate the cause of an incident and then rapidly deliver a solution to our customers via a universal software update," said Vern Raburn, president and CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "In contrast to traditional aviation industry approaches, the time and customer inconvenience factor saved is immeasurable."
Precisely what capability is he touting that hasn’t been done for years?
Morale can still be low to the "little guy" that seems to not care about the end picture, as long as he still gets paid.
But I think it does affect morale. Everyone wants to feel that their work accounts for SOMETHING.
BUT I think these may be some men that need to learn some lessons on "pride in their work" despite "sticking it to the man". The assembly line needs to realize that not following proceedure or not doing their best is not hurting Vern, it is hurting the suppliers, customers, etc. People that the assembly guys dont really have intentions on hurting.
Hey Baron95, Hope you are well:
Ok, I will start with some of the directs Employees promised pay raises and stock options for one. IT DONT EFFECT ME, Im a contractor and I learned from UNITED AIRLINES not to count on anything in this industry.
2. SAME OLD CRAP NCR's over and over again. They never learn, hell we are on ship 252 that is being loaded in the jig (position 1) tonight and still the same 4 NCR's that have been haunting us since AC# 17. WHY?, WHY? wont someone listen to reason? Where is Lou Dobbs when you need him.
3. Some people are pissed off that we are closing the plant (SP 11) tomorrow and keeping it closed until July 5th or so. AGAIN NOT MY PROBLEM, but some paycheck to paycheck employees are sweating it because they got overextended when ECLIPSE moved them to ABQ. Yea I know what your going to say, BE RESPONSIBLE WITH THE COIN. They where not.
That is just a few, WANT MORE? Just ask. They decided to plug all 8 of those deep drill starts in the keel I told you about the other night.
LOVE THAT QUALITY!
20 YM
charity . . . you're getting very close to home. The "man on the line" that sees a real issue . . . a problem, is responsible for what he knows. If he does nothing, in fear of losing his job, or status, is equally responsible with all the others . . . he might have a "legal out", but what he knows and refuses to reveal will haunt him for the rest of his life. And that, my friends, is fact!
gadfly
(Yep! . . . we're cutting close to the bone . . . but isn't that the purpose of this "blogsite"? Oh, did I mention that early in my Navy career, while waiting for the beginning of "Electronic's School, I worked in the commissary "butcher shop" . . . so I know about "cutting close to the bone".)
BTW
Im not here for the money, I made a truck load when I was in England working an a Euro version of a VLJ and it is a plane I cant talk about, I DID SIGN A NDA at that facility.
I live in ABQ and have a girl here so Im staying here for awhile.
I do care about quality and I do care about the people flying them and riding in them. I hope that by running my rant in type form that someone reads this, (MAYBE VERN?) and get Todd's head out of his *** and address some of the quality issues, and quit chasing ghosts by way of law suits with Google. Fix the problems, don't blame the others for blowing the whistle and blogging the facts.
I wish you all the best.
GOOD NIGHT
20YM
20 yr,
Your comment about "being responsible with the coin" just reminded me about how Elclipse (years ago) hired a bunch of people from out of state and then just a few months later downsized and let most of them go. It was awful. Some of them took losses on their homes to move their families to Albuquerque... due to the promises of striking it rich with Eclipse, just to be told "Oh, never mind"
Just one small example in the back of my mind. Not that the past matters anymore, but it goes to show the poor planning and mentality of Eclipse.
Not that the past matters anymore, but it goes to show the poor planning and mentality of Eclipse
Look at the Eclipse quality comments from Brian Skupa. Eclipse considers this former employee's comments extremely credible and have gone so far as to use them in a court of law in unrelated litigation.
20YM said ... Some people are pissed off that we are closing the plant (SP 11)
What is the reason to close SP11 (I think that means Sunport 11? And why does that idle the entire factory? Any info on that? Are they converting SP11 to higher output tooling or splitting into two positions?
How is it that no aviation publication from Aviation Consumer to AW&ST, not to mention the industry lapdogs AOPA Pilot and Flying has gotten an EA500 owner to let them test fly the freaking plane?
I have to question. Are the owners aiding Vern in the cover up? Are they trying to protect their ego and residual value of their planes by preventing bad news to get out? If so are the owners trully innocent victims on this?
It is like a pyramid scheme. You get suckered in, and then you know the only way you'll save your situation is to make sure that many more also get suckered in.
Even Adam let the press fly that piece of crap A500. And in typical fashion, the lapdog rags were saying how good it was even as Adam was getting ready to close down.
How about it owners? Whould any of you let aviation consumer test fly your plane?
baron
You might as well go talk to the back wall of a "Tee" hangar . . . you'll get the same results. The little jet is a failure . . . Please turn out the lights when you leave . . . don't bother locking the door, there is nothing left worth taking.
gadfly
(Nighty night!)
Congrats to Eclipse on the FIKI certification.
As for downloading the upgraded FADEC software over the internet, why wouldn't you? Download it to a thumb drive and install it on the airplane and make a logbook entry. The service center visits should be reserved for the physical removal of the throttle quadrant and the installation of an airworthy unit when they become available - you know the kind that have been around since 1903, FADEC or not?
Baron,
I'd let anyone test fly it that wanted to pay for the operational cost of doing it.
picking up a "dog turd" by the "clean end".
Now that's funny right there...
Link to picture N513EA
Jet Ready launches English website, shows N513EA (S/N 9) as fleet. S/N 9 flew to Europe on 5/23, after an earlier career in the US.
Jet Ready claims to have capitalization of 3.5 Mill Euro, which seems paltry to run an airline on.
Jet Ready Spain homepage
20yearmechanic said... BTW Honda Jet will be starting production of its Jet next month. There are 5 mechanics and 1 manager that we know of that will be leaving Eclipse. Also now that L3 in Waco Texas is paying contractors $28.00 through STROM AVIATION, we have heard some Texas transplants that hate ABQ chirp up and say they are leaving as well.
I guess even with all of your "talent and experience" you couldn't get hired elsewhere. LOL. What a load.
That’s a great picture of the N113EA . . . showing the lack of knowledge of the need for a slight “washout” of the wings, and the crude leading edge “fairing” on the vertical stabilizer . . . begging “transonic” drag.
Thank you!
gadfly
epilot,
You should go over the FARs regarding shared costs and common purpose before 'renting' your aircraft to an aviation publication.
Also don't be be penny-wise and pound-foolish. We flew an AOPA writer and photographer in our plane at no cost to them. It resulted in a very favorable article about the aircraft type. How do you measure the value of that?
Baron,
For the record, if they can pull of a FADEC update with a USB stick stuck in the instrument panel, color me impressed and I will give Vern that one. But given Eclipses track record, ya have to show me first :)
For the cert nuts out there:
By the way, a long while back, common mode failures in software were discussed. The current thinking is that by means of the DO-178B software certification process, the probabilities of an error (design or otherwise), are reduced to an adequate level for the function being performed. FADECs have always been presented as the example - transport aircraft have used the exact same FADEC code in each of the engines, with, historically at least, zero software bugs in that code (granted, typically level A) that have caused all engines to be disrupted by a common software bug residing in each FADEC.
Eclipse has now disrupted that trend by having the first common mode failure in FADEC software that has effectively caused both engines to fail. This will certainly provide ammunition to the argument that yes, even certified software can exhibit common mode failures that are not of acceptable behavior. Regardless of what the paperwork says.
For dual engine control failure, this is probably categorized a hazardous failure, which should have a probability of failure between 1XE-6 to 1XE-7. This corresponds to (please check my math), once per 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 flight hours. Instead, they have encountered it at at least once per 12,000 flight hours, if not more. Not good enough, and in theory, might very well trigger a re-evaluation of the certification approval. The fault seems to be the odd design feature where the engines are cross-coupled, significantly increasing the probability of failure of both engines, versus just one.
One might now expect the FAA engineers to actually be allowed to evaluate this new-and-novel design, versus being ram-rodded through the certification process. But then again, maybe not.
John's information is based on FlightAware data. Check any aircraft's history and you will find holes in the data. LivingLarge verified FIRST HAND that you are full of shit. Why not just take some photos and post them. Back up your statements with the photos. It in't gonna happen because they're not there.
If you are not moving out of ABQ I guess you're not worried about Eclipse's future, or no one will have you.
For the record, if they can pull of a FADEC update with a USB stick stuck in the instrument panel, color me impressed and I will give Vern that one. But given Eclipses track record, ya have to show me first :)
Eclipse does state to have a USB 2.0 port for updating software:
http://www.eclipseaviation.com/files/pdf/Eclipse%20500%20Reliability%20and%20Maintainability%20White%20Paper.pdf
It doesn't mention updating FADEC software in particular. If this is true that a single USB port can update all the FADECs (or any other avionics components), then that again brings up the question as to how independent supposedly independent components are. Having a single USB port to update all avionics software would seem to point to there being a single point of failure with Avio not just reading data from various systems, but able to write as well. What interaction is there between Avio and various systems - does Avio read and relay data from various systems or does it give commands and even overwrite the software code?
John's information is based on FlightAware data
Since you agree with FlightAware, why do you continue to argue? When are you actually going to contribute something instead of complain about others?
Genuine congratulations go to Eclipse on the FIKI certification.
Having flown an iced-up aircraft on a few occasions (thru bad luck) I know what FIKI is worth, but can only imagine how difficult it must be to get it right and then pass the FAA.
BUT, the aircraft will now be flying in conditions it has not ventured into before - except in testing, and will be even more vulnerable to SW and systems failure.
It has been said already that the guys who successfully dealt with the FADEC FUP would have been fully 'under the pump' had it occured in solid IMC...
Let's hope that is the last of it.
PS: I'll take my climb, cruise and descent without ice thanks, perhaps a little shaken, but not friction stirred...
So now we learn that basic functions are accessible in “RAM”, rather than protected in “ROM” . . . so ‘most any “geek” can “tweak” the basic functions of this bird. Amazing!
gadfly
‘Sounds like something out of the “fifties” . . . milling the heads on a “deuce”, and rebuilding an old flat-head V-8 to compete at “Saugas” or “Santa Ana”.
I have never seen a VFR flight on FlightAware.... Cause it doesn't happen. PS if your gonna tell me that NO ONE will fly this plane VFR for travel or just plain fun, don't waste the energy in thoes little fingers of yours, because I know from personal expirence it is possible and not all that uneconomical. In addition to my expirence I have my contacts as well, ie other Eclipse pilots, Dayjet guys, mentors, you name it. Nice to see FIKI on the horizon.
So now we learn that basic functions are accessible in “RAM”, rather than protected in “ROM” . . . so ‘most any “geek” can “tweak” the basic functions of this bird. Amazing!
For all Vern's claims of being a tech messiah here to save aviation industry from itself, he's pretty ignorant in his alleged area of expertise. Vern is the ultimate PHB.
What happened to S/N 192 ?
N61DT was reported on FlightAware with maiden flights on June 7, 2008. 61DT was also in the Av News video of the May 29 fly-in meeting.
I recorded the first flight in my database scrape. Since that time, 61DT is fully blocked on the flight record.
20YRMech says: "I know this plane is in the service hanger with damage in ABQ".
It curious that someone thought to delete the FlightAware record of this craft. This seems obsessively paranoiac.
Off Topic
Captain Zoom just listed his personal aircraft sale as a "news" item on ANN. This should do wonders for what credibility he has left.
p.s. I understand that many here have a deep respect for the journalistic integrity of Mr. Zoom. I apologize for offending your sensibilities.
john , i had a look on "Jet Ready" ...
wow ...
in the section "booking and fees" :
they state about "Valencia~Hamburg" with "normal Commercial Airlines" a price of €2621 (+/- 4100 US $) ...
it is a quite "out of the way" of mainstream routes but :
it took me less than 8 seconds to find offers on Regulars , flying direct , First Class at a median price of €1184 (+/- 1855 US $)
is that an other example of "presenting in the best light " ?
if any one accept to fly other than first or business class , on regulars (NOT talking about low costs ) a full fare return ticket, direct flight is 250 / 300 € ...
is that what they specify in the site :
#
Very competitive prices : we offer you the efficiency of a private jet at a price that is lower, or equal to, a business class ticket or the full fare of any conventional airline. #
one other thing :
their plane (toy500):
#The Eclipse 500 is a very light jet with equipment of a highly functional nature. It reaches a cruising speed similar to that of traditional jets (700 kilometres/hour), but its operation costs are much less than those of other jets on the market. With an upper limit of 12,000 metres altitude, it manages to avoid the meteorological conditions that affect turboprop aircraft. Besides, its design makes it possible to operate at small aerodromes, as it can take off and land on 700 metre-long runways. #
ok , so apart the bla-bla about using costs , there is the SPEED = once again in the best possible light where 700Km/h (max being already 685 in EAC website) is of the same nature other jets who have a cruising speed as such ?
and about 12.000 meters altitude (+/- 40.000 feet) = may be , but EuroControl may have a other idea about the permitted altitude for a "thing" not allowed directly into European Airspace , but only thou equivalence accord ...
remain the most problematic part of the story :Easa ...
as it is permitted to OWN the bird , Tolerate ( NOT allowed , ONLY tolerate) to use it under certain conditions , BUT NOT TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY within European Union ...
(where starting point and ending point are within the frame of EuroControl ...)
on top of it , the contact number of the firm is NOT the number of the said firm , but the phone number of a Public Relation firm in Valencia ...
sounds very much like an other P.R. stunt ...!
after a quick look at
"Registro Mercantil"
CALLE Pintor Peyro
46010 VALENCIA
it seems the said firm "Jet Ready" does not even exist ...
i can be wrong on this , but you know the story : "when a fish smell from the head ..."
i forgot :
Jet Ready is showing a take-off runways length of 700 meters (where EAC website show 714 meters) ...
is anyone cleverer than me ( obviously almost everyone!) knows what is the relation between :
altitude of runway / Temperature / length of run way ?
i remember getting stuck in Qatar (U.A.E.) once because air-temp° was too high for a safe take-off of the plane ...
(may be it was a way to put the blame on something else ?)
but if it is so , i wonder what is the reliability of a firm already showing some discrepancies (as in needed length ) in an area where summer Temp° are often higher than 40°c (105 F°) under a shelter ....
If the EA500 is that sensitive to noise I wonder what will happen when it gets hit by lightning. Having build over 1000 special industrial manufacturing systems (mostly controled by computers) in my previous company I know firsthand how much havoc noise can do to a computer controlled system.
In addition we have some experience with lighting and If the 500 gets hit I bet it will take out the whole computer.
Now that I have heard it is certified for FIKI (avweb this morning) It will be flying around storms and lighting. how does anyone fly the airplane with the main computer taken out, no throttle, no avionics, no pressurization control probably. it will be a very interesting ride.
Has it been tested to withstand lighting strikes?
Did anyone find it rather humorous that AVWeb's number 1 story was about the Eclipse throttle "fix" - and the FIKI cert was almost "hidden" in the "On the Fly" section - along with the Linear Air blurb?
Congratulations Eclipse on securing FAA approval of FIKI on the E500.
This will significantly enhance the safety and utility of the E500. This is a huge boost for the fleet operators.
It has been a much longer trip than expected, with many delays along the way.
FIKI approval was originally committed to be part of the original aircraft TC and delivered starting with aircraft #1.
In June 2006, Eclipse slipped the schedule to Dec 2006.
In June 2007, Eclipse slipped the schedule to Dec 2007.
In Sep 2007, Eclipse slipped the schedule to early 2008.
In Jan 2008, Eclipse slipped the schedule to 1H 2008.
As recently as May 21, 2008, Vern stated that FIKI would be approved in 2 weeks.
Eclipse's Plans
In that same article, Vern stated “There are some minor modifications required, which all aircraft from serial number 121 now have and we expect FIKI certification some time in the next two weeks.”
Yesterday's Aviation Week article makes no mention of serial #121 and would seem to contradict Vern's statement to AIN.
"Aircraft delivered prior to S/N 38 will need the performance improvement package, if it has not already been fitted, and aircraft prior to S/N 78 will need new wing and empennage de-ice boots. FIKI approval also will require all aircraft to be painted with a rain repellant coating around the static ports and have static bonding and discharge modifications, including windshield coatings, engine ground bonding straps, dorsal fairing bonding and new static wicks. Aircraft also will need a new autopilot pitch servo and rudder centering spring."
Are both of these statements correct? Is there a difference in the retrofit requirements for owners of aircraft above and below serial #121? Or will all aircraft above serial #78 have to have the same modifications?
The Aviation Week article also states that new production aircraft will be shipped with FIKI approval starting late summer 2008.
Will FIKI production start at the same time or after the Garmin 400Ws production start?
Phil Boyer says 40% of pilots are significantly decreasing their flying due to fuel prices
What impact are fuel prices having on how much VLJ pilots are flying?
Will FIKI production start at the same time or after the Garmin 400Ws production start?
FIKI production is supposed to start on SN 266. I don't know if that's the same, before or after Garmin.
flightcenter ...
a projectionist (a guy forecasting , don't if term is correct in english) working for Gazprom told me in a conversation we had last few days that the Oil price is foreseen (end of year~first semester 2009) in a fork of 200$/250$ a barrel ...
so if already 40% are reducing , what going to happen then ?
and FIKI is great ...
but it just add to the problem (in vern's word )
look like a sinking boat someone want to load a little more ...
they already loose on each plane going out , they will upgrade for free , they'll fix for free , now they put needed things for free ...
i wonder if Fiki (even if good thing ) is not coming a "bit" (too)late ?
i wonder if Fiki (even if good thing ) is not coming a "bit" (too)late ?
The phrase we have here is: Too little too late.
You would think that if this goes in at SN 266 that would mean that there are hundreds of aircraft that requiring at least some level of work and that would be expensive simply based on volume of work required.
Dave,
Serial #266 is the plan for production of the Garmin 400W version of the aircraft.
It would make a lot of sense if the same serial# was chosen for the FIKI cut in, as FIKI seems to have at least one avionics dependency.
Fred,
Arjun N. Murti, the Goldman Sachs analyst agrees with you. He said oil may rise to $200 a barrel within two years.
But the US Energy Department has a completely different view.
"Oil prices will fall to $70 a barrel by 2015 as new production begins in countries such as Azerbaijan, Canada, Brazil, and Kazakhstan, the US Energy Department said."
Who is right?
flight...
as soon as the hole i am making in my garden will be deep enough to get oil ...
i'll tell you ;-))
no , i think the US energ.Dept is a bit ... how to say ... hum ... optimistic ?
the situation nowadays is quite simple to understand :
$ will continue to fall ...
oil is currently paid in $ ...
production is too scarce ...
western countries say to producing countries " spend your cash to produce more and to put up more derricks ... but don't forget we are looking for alternatives meanwhile ... so when you will have spent all your dineros ,to make new well to produce, we MAY tell you to get lost ...!"
what would YOU do ?
if you were in such situation ?
try to please me , by ruining yourself ?
take whatever can be taken , and bye ... see you in hell ?
or do nothing and wait till the cashbox is full ?
(in other term : do nothing , get the cash , keep increasing price with downturn of $, even if sometime you have to lie a bit on your intentions )
no need to be very clever !!
ps: The oily sands MIGHT not be that really good in economic terms , the process is highly expensive , ecology after even more expensive ...
and still the BRIC's are still pushing so hard in terms of new needs , not sure they won't swallow themselves what they will find ...
sorry !
Arjun N. Murti, the Goldman Sachs analyst agrees with you. He said oil may rise to $200 a barrel within two years.
But the US Energy Department has a completely different view.
"Oil prices will fall to $70 a barrel by 2015 as new production begins in countries such as Azerbaijan, Canada, Brazil, and Kazakhstan, the US Energy Department said."
Who is right?
Between government analysts and sell-side analysts, I side with government (or just about anyone else). I don't hold sell-side analysis in high regards.
Looks like N612KB is having an interesting flight.
"they will upgrade for free , they'll fix for free , now they put needed things for free ..."
in another related industry, taking it back into the shop for free work is a "recall".
** anyone smarter than me know if the coatings, changes, etc... required to FIKI the plane is "normal"... again, does this not at least show they had no real robust plan for FIKI when they designed the plane? Is this not really scary?
- Is there a current plan to finish the plane ? I am not joking, really wondering if there is in fact a plan to have ll the INOP stickers removed, and have everything functioning? Is there a date?
... the throttle issue still bothers me, a lot. I do not believe they have found the root cause. I think they are just rigging the system into not reporting a CAS. Maybe its no big deal, but to me, it is.
You either design "for" something... or you end up with a pandoras box leading to a bunch of fixes on the fly so to speak.
Just makes for an eery feeling...
dave ...
yes , it's up to you ...!
but remember this :
it is vacation time , peoples who are used to drive in this season are reducing the expenses ...
govt analysts are to the orders ...
(don't worry it is the case in lots of countries , i know quite well a statistician in INSEE , french institute for analysis , we joke quite often about is job , his favorite sentence is " i wonder how they didn't understand by now , that i should be replaced by a monkey ... they are not any more clever , they just obey more ...!)
in a time where elections are soon ...
with a rampant finance crisis (not finished , we still have to see the c.d.s. to come out )...
so Govt analysts may be tempted (or ordered) to do the same than greenspan did ...
say what other want to hear !
Dave,
The scary thing (for us here in Europe anyway) is that we get a lot of our total energy needs via the natural gas that Gazprom pump down the pipes to us from Siberia etc.
Now we've known for some time that the infrastructure was suspect, but its now really clear that the reserves are not what the 'old' regime said they were.
So when Fred tells us that his contact in Gazprom is thinking in the $200 to $250 region for oil at end 2008 early 2009, it should be treated with respect.
My 'best man' now trades futures in Chicago, working at the sharp end of several markets, including oil. He is of a similar opinion, just not as sure about the timing. If anything, when it's clear that Obama is going to get elected, he thinks that type of pricing could happen as early as October this year.
On one of the boards I sit on, where we have to buy lots of oil products, forward buying contracts are being offered for 6 and 12 months on a $150 to $200 basis.
So if the Bush administration tries to sell the American public on the idea of $70 oil, all I can say is....
.... Vern for President.
Think of the positives.
1. As soon as he was elected, someone else would get to finish the FPJ.
2. The price of oil would crash, since everyone would know that he was going to screw up the American, and probably the world economy.
3. As a result, the demand for oil would reduce and the price would drop.
This plan works for me, anyway!
Shane
John said...
Link to picture N513EA
Jet Ready launches English website, shows N513EA (S/N 9) as fleet. S/N 9 flew to Europe on 5/23, after an earlier career in the US.
Thanks for the link John. Looks like they will start operations with an N-number US registered plane. Which seems to validate that lack of EASA certification may not be an impediment. Is that your understanding?
ATM, According to eclipse after this FIKI is all set up. They are figuring on 400s being certified mid summer. After that everything else ie FMS, Autothrottles, etc should fall into place. Their estimates according to a presentation by the head of marketing posted on their website calls for the plane to be 98% complete Q4 2008. 100% Q1 2009. As far as all the planes having all of these upgrades I have no idea. Hopefully their timing estimates are accurate, it was nice to see FIKI come this fast. I didn't expect it until about August.
Trying to predict the price of oil 12 months from now is a waste of time. The truth is that no one knows. Projections are all over the place. If you feel like speculating one way or the other, go right ahead, there are plenty of people willing to run your trades and take your money.
As for the inpact of higher oil prices, just remember that oil has gonne up some 575% (from $20 to $135) in the past few years.
During this time, airliine travel (passenger-miles), airliner production and GA jet production has been breaking record after record.
Sales of 300 horsepower+ cars are also breaking ALL records. Same for sales of 400HP+ cars and 500HP+ cars.
So where is the doom and gloom predictions of the impact of higher oil prices? If 575% increase has gonne largely unoticed, another 30-40% to $200 or $250 will be another big snooze.
Look at the facts, not the headlines.
Baron-
I'm with you on this.
If the world is, in fact, going to hell in a handbasket, enjoy it today.
If we're headed for economic collapse, what good is holding onto cash that'll be worthless...enjoy it today.
If the future is, in fact, looking like a bad remake of Mad Max, sharpen your survival skills and invest in commodities that'll have real value and be easily broken down to "make change"...I suggest ammunition! Preferably 22 LR.
Meantime, enjoy your money and spend it as if there IS a tomorrow....because chances are overwhelming that there is.
As always, YMMV.
Gunner
Trying to predict the price of oil 12 months from now is a waste of time. The truth is that no one knows. Projections are all over the place. If you feel like speculating one way or the other, go right ahead, there are plenty of people willing to run your trades and take your money.
Probably the best bet is to trade on the volatility, not whether it goes up or down.
Sales of 300 horsepower+ cars are also breaking ALL records. Same for sales of 400HP+ cars and 500HP+ cars.
So where is the doom and gloom predictions of the impact of higher oil prices? If 575% increase has gonne largely unoticed, another 30-40% to $200 or $250 will be another big snooze.
Look at the facts, not the headlines.
There's been across the board drops in SUV sales while hybrids and more fuel efficient cars are going up:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/01/AR2008050103773.html
I think with people who buy sports cars - particularly the exotic kind - they don't care about the price of gas. I see the price of oil affecting DayJet moreso than private users, though Eclipse targets buyers on the margins and as such people who could just barely afford an Eclipse would be [temporarilly] priced out of the market due to operating costs.
"it seems the said firm "Jet Ready" does not even exist ...
i can be wrong on this , but you know the story : "when a fish smell from the head ...""
An ETIRC trick? They wouldn't do that would they? Take that buusiness plan to the bank and see if there are any moron bankers in Spain?
Gunner said... suggest ammunition!
I always keep plenty of "commodities" on hand, however my personal policy prevents me from confirming or denying the presence of personal weapons of ammunition and their quantities that I may or may not have.
Some facts.
SUV sales have fallen off a cliff.
GM is trying to sell Hummer.
US gasoline consumption is down more than 2% last month.
Piston aircraft sales are down 28%.
Boyer says 40% of GA pilots are flying significantly less.
United lays off 950 pilots as a result of fuel prices.
I'm not buying Baron95's contention that oil price increases have gone largely unnoticed.
The question is whether E500 owners and prospective buyers will fly less and buy fewer aircraft based on the rising cost of oil.
Pilots like Ken seem to feel that the cost of fuel is a significant operational consideration for an E500.
Pilots like CJ3 seem to feel the price of fuel is a rounding error compared to the other costs associated with operating a CJ3.
FlightCenter said...
Some facts.
SUV sales have fallen off a cliff.
GM is trying to sell Hummer.
Baron> Are you sure it is a gas issue and not a GM/Ford/Dodge issue. Fact is that Mercedes SUV slaes are up close to 50%. BMW, Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Infinity, Nissan SUV sales are ALL up. SUV sales in China, Brazil, etc are all breaking new records. Be careful extrapolating a localize US big-three problem as a global trend. Also note that the GM lambda platfom [Acadia, Enclave, Taverse](not classified as an SUV) is replacing a bunch of SUVs. Similar size, same mission, different classification. Same is true of the other brands. Yes, the SUV "fad" is fading in America, but it is not entirelly due to price of oil.
US gasoline consumption is down more than 2% last month.
Piston aircraft sales are down 28%.
Baron> GA Jet aircraft sales (which burn a lot more fuel) are breaking record levels. Do you think maybe some of those piston drivers like me, previously in the market for Malibus and Barons are not looking at Meridians, TBMs, Eclipse, DiamondJet, etc. With the exception of C350/400, SR2x, and the Diamond line, the piston product being offered is a rehash of 40+ year old designs - I'm surprised it is even selling at all. Again, look at the piston numbers. Diamond, Cirrus are still selling all they can build. Cessna, Piper, Beech, Maule, Mooney numbers are down. Net/Net just like Ford/GM/Chrysler, the high volume old guard is suffering, the new entrants are stealing business.
Boyer says 40% of GA pilots are flying significantly less.
United lays off 950 pilots as a result of fuel prices.
Baron> United layed off 5,000 when oil prices were $20-$30, so I say that is an improvement. Meanwhile, WN, B6, EK are expanding their fleets and hiring as fast as they can. Again, be careful with the stats. Just because the likes of UA, NW, DL are laying off means nothing - these airlines are doomed by old fleets and crazy union rules. As I said before, globally the airline business is BOOMING. EK alone has placed orders for 58 A380, dozens of 77Ws and 100 A350s. That alone is 2-3 times as much long haul capacity as UA.
I'm not buying Baron95's contention that oil price increases have gone largely unnoticed.
Baron> It hasn't. It has been a big boom. Oil prices are high exactly because there is great demand. There is great demand exactly because the world economy is booming and every day there are more people buying more powerful cars and doing more air travel than the day before.
I said this before. The price of oil is a positive indicator of economic activity. I'd be worried if oil prices went down to $15. That would mean that we are in the middle or a world wide recession.
The only bad thing about the high oil/gas price headlines is that ordinary people are getting hurt by acting on it.
If the owner of a 2005 15MPG SUV walks into a dealership to trade it in for a 20MPG car that owner just got screwed big time. He will save $2400 over the three year ownership period assuming 10Kmiles/year and $4 gas. But he lost prob $6,000K on the trade (due to the dump the SUV headlines generating low perceived values) and will probably lose another $4,000 when he sells, because his run of the mill car will have a much lower residual value once the headlines wear off. So he took a $7,600 bath give or take, trying to chase a lower fuel consumption vehicle.
The smart guy in the mean time, sells his 3 year old Civic for good money because of the headlines, and picks up the first guy's SUV for $6,000 less. He will spend an extra $2,400 on gas over 3 years, but he is happy - driving a much bigger, more expensive vehicle, and pocketed $3,600 in the trade. Brilliant.
Contrarians usually make a ton of money when the headlines are all one-sided.
What does that have to do with aviation? The pilots that follow the headlines are dumping the Barons and buying Bonanzas. The smart pilots are buying the Barons for hundreds of thousands of dollars less, that will more then offset the higher fuel/insurance costs. So they are flying a faster, more capable plane for lower cost of ownership than the "follow the headlines" pilots.
Gosh, I with I was in the market for an SUV and a twin right now!!!
I have to wait 10 more months for one of my vehicle leases to expire - the replacement vehicle will have a net horsepower increase of 118HP - I could care less what the gas mileage is.
SUV sales in China, Brazil, etc are all breaking new records. Be careful extrapolating a localize US big-three problem as a global trend. Also note that the GM lambda platfom [Acadia, Enclave, Taverse](not classified as an SUV) is replacing a bunch of SUVs. Similar size, same mission, different classification. Same is true of the other brands. Yes, the SUV "fad" is fading in America, but it is not entirelly due to price of oil.
It figures that prices like Brazil would. They're trying to become members of OPEC. Oil is dirt cheap for them. The same goes for the middle east...in places where gas is cheap, there's no reason to care about the fuel efficiency of what you drive, so you'll find gas hogs aplenty. It is localized to the US (and other such consuming nations) because of the cost of the high fuel prices, which not all countries have the same gas prices we do...some much higher, some similar and some much lower (literally pennies per gallon).
Baron> GA Jet aircraft sales (which burn a lot more fuel) are breaking record levels
I'm guessing that's because the majority are more similar to sports car buyers. The price of fuel doesn't matter to that category. However, Eclipse has been attempting to sell to those who would be in the market for piston engines or current owners. If you're attempting to draw from a new pool of customers, those customers have a different demographic and different finances. I don't think billionaire CEOs owning personal jets care that much about the price of fuel, but if you're trying to sell to someone who isn't that rich and is making up their mind between a piston and a jet, the financial factory might weigh heavily.
What does that have to do with aviation? The pilots that follow the headlines are dumping the Barons and buying Bonanzas. The smart pilots are buying the Barons for hundreds of thousands of dollars less, that will more then offset the higher fuel/insurance costs. So they are flying a faster, more capable plane for lower cost of ownership than the "follow the headlines" pilots.
It depends on where you think the market is headed with gas prices and how accurate you are. Some would go long betting that $4 gas will be cheap further down the road (therefore they estimate getting a more fuel efficient car will have lower TCO), others will be neutral (not wanting to change a vehicle one way or the other based on future gas prices) while others will go short and see SUVs as a steal based on the expected drop in gas prices. The one that was right and made the best decision will only be known a few years in the future.
Dave said ... It figures that prices like Brazil would. They're trying to become members of OPEC. Oil is dirt cheap for them.
Sorry Dave, but gas prices in Brazil are about double what they are in the US. They are still a net importer of oil/gazoline and people there are extremely sensitive to gas prices. You should know that over 50% of the Brazilian car fleet can burn either gasoline or Ethanol and driver switch between the two fuels based on spot prices. A large percentage of the fleet can also run on natural gas. That is right - three fuel choices for one vehicle.
In China, oil is also much more expensive than the US, but I haven't been there recently so I don't know by how much.
The reason SUV sales are booming in Brazil and China are two fold. 1 - Economic prosperity and 2 - The SUV fad is just starting there (SUVs are "in" vehicles).
How do you explain the fact that GM/Ford/Chrysler have lost over 30 points of market share in the recent past in their home market to foreign brands? Consumers don't want that product thats why. They ran to minivans, pickup trucks and SUVs and that worked for a while because no foreign brands had products in that categuory. When Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Acura, Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Infinity started targeting that segment with crossovers and sporty/good handling large vehicles, the music stopped.
Now kuddos to GM and Cadilac and to a lesser extend Chrysler to recognize that they needed better design, sportier and MORE POWERFUL cars to compete. Some of their new vehicles are starting to resonate with customers. Is it too little too late? I don't know.
Will a Cadilac CTS-V ever be perceived as a cool vehicle to compete with a BMW M5? I doubt it. Can it get close enough to be viable? Possibly. It will be tough though.
With the exception of C350/400, SR2x, and the Diamond line, the piston product being offered is a rehash of 40+ year old designs - I'm surprised it is even selling at all. Again, look at the piston numbers. Diamond, Cirrus are still selling all they can build. Cessna, Piper, Beech, Maule, Mooney numbers are down.
GAMA Aircraft Production Numbers
OEM - -- -- Q407 -- Q108
Cirrus --- -- 249 ---- 76
350/400 -- -- 21 ---- 16
Diamond --- 115 --- 101
Total -- -- -- 385 --- 293
That works out to a 24% drop in sales. Almost the same as the average drop in piston sales of 28%.
Seems like all the piston manufacturers are suffering, even the guys with new products.
Dave said ... while others will go short and see SUVs as a steal based on the expected drop in gas prices. The one that was right and made the best decision will only be known a few years in the future.
Awh!!! That is where econimics 101 is not enough.
The problem is the loss of economic benefit. If you believe that there is a 50/50 chance of gas prices going higher or lower, then both the guy that switched to the SUV and the guy that switched to the smaller car have an equal chance of coming out on top.
HOWEVER (economics 102) the guy that chose the SUV got to enjoy the great benefits of driving a bigger, more spacious, more powerful vehicle. So on average, chosing the vehicle that brings the most benefits to you is still the right move.
How do you explain the fact that GM/Ford/Chrysler have lost over 30 points of market share in the recent past in their home market to foreign brands? Consumers don't want that product thats why. They ran to minivans, pickup trucks and SUVs and that worked for a while because no foreign brands had products in that categuory. When Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Acura, Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Infinity started targeting that segment with crossovers and sporty/good handling large vehicles, the music stopped.
Domestic vehicle makers are poorly run. With the newer SUV-type vehicles they have many of the benefits of a car versus an SUV and in fact some of those sporty SUVs are actually car frames and engines with an SUV body. I had for instance looked into getting the first generation RAV4 that was built off the Corolla platform and had car-like MPG. The crossovers specifically address the MPG issue while to varying degrees being more trucklike than carlike.
Flightcenter said ... That works out to a 24% drop in sales. Almost the same as the average drop in piston sales of 28%.
Not to be picky or a pain in the ass (though I am probably being both), you can't compare a typically strong quarter (4th) with a typically week one (1st). In particularly Cirrus seems to pump a lot of planes in the 4th quarte. If you look that theis 207 numbers, Cirrus pumped 144 planes in the first quarter and 249 (almost double) in the forth quarter. So, if you re-run your numbers as 1Q/08 vs 1Q/09 you will see that Cirrus increased deliveries in 1Q/08, Diamond is tapped out at around 115 anyway, and simply shipped more of their capacity to the higher profit margin Eurozone.
Regardless, the GA business as a whole is booming. Even using your number 4Q/07 vs 1Q/08 Jets are up 41%!!!!!!
Can you imagine that? Fuel prices double and GA Jets delivery goes up by 40%!!!!! A GA jet is pretty much, hands down the MOST FUEL INNEFICIENT form of transportation. Yet it is booming.
Where is the correlation to fuel prices and downside to aviation?????
If it is not happening in the airline business, if it is not happening in the GA jet business, where is it happening?
It is just not there. At least not in a big way, or if it is there it is being drowned by the booming world economy and booming disposable income.
HOWEVER (economics 102) the guy that chose the SUV got to enjoy the great benefits of driving a bigger, more spacious, more powerful vehicle. So on average, chosing the vehicle that brings the most benefits to you is still the right move.
I was treating both vehicles as equal as your analysis was primarilly of economic costs. I for one don't consider those things that you list with SUVs as pluses and consider some to be minuses. Driving a compact four door Ford Escort has more space than I need already so spaciousness seems wasteful for me, I don't like large vehicles (though some SUVs take up the same space as a car...like the RAV4) and as far as speed and pep goes I can leave SUVs in the dust and I have no need for power in hauling anything. A larger SUV I would personally consider less fun to own than a compact car, but there are others who would feel differently both out of personal preference as well as utility. Some people consider SUVs more utilitarian for their purposes while others for their purposes consider cars more utilitarian. Different strokes for different folks.
"HOWEVER (economics 102) the guy that chose the SUV got to enjoy the great benefits of driving a bigger, more spacious, more powerful vehicle. So on average, chosing the vehicle that brings the most benefits to you is still the right move."
AND
the guy who chose the PRIUS got the benefits of social responsibility, being admired by his chosen per group, easier parking and thinking he is doing something good for the lanet while saving a few thousand dollars. Plus, he doesn't have to hear any BS about destropying the planet from his kids!!
AND I'M NOT MAKING ANY JUDGEMENTS, HERE, JUST THE COMMENT THAT ITS A MATTER OF PERSONAL CHOICE AND PERCEPTION OF BENEFITS.
Fligthcenter,
You have to compare 1Q08 figures with 1Q07 numbers. 4Q typically has the highest number of deliveries because of tax incentives, whole-year quotas, etc., while 1Q is always the slowest in terms of deliveries because the OEMs rushed to push so many airplanes out in the preceding quarter and it's just historically a slower quarter.
OEM - -- - 4Q06 - 4Q07 - 1Q07 - 1Q08
Cirrus --- 192 -- 249 --- 144 --- 76
350/400 --- 55 --- 21 --- 47 ---- 16
Diamond -- 135 -- 115 --- 115 -- 101
Total -- - 382 -- 385 --- 306 -- 293
4Q06 to 4Q07 change = +1%
1Q07 to 1Q08 change = -4.3%
Here's a thought . . . an example:
A Lexus RX300 SUV, with "all wheel drive" . . . cash price new in 1999, $42,500 . . . total maintenance (including tires, brakes, etc., since), less than $5,000 . . . let's give it $10K for insurance . . . total about $57,500. Now figure the cost of fuel . . . 100,000 miles at an average "in town and mountain driving" of 20 mpg . . . 5,000 gallons (figure today's price at over $4 per gallon) . . . $20K for fuel. That comes to about $77,500. So for ten years, I have spent about a "fourth" of the total cost of ownership on fuel (based on today's fuel prices). Even with the "resale value", the fuel cost is not an overriding factor in owning an excellent car.
If you focus on the "fuel cost" for private ownership of a car or plane, you miss the big picture.
Fuel cost for commercial operation is an entirely different thing, where fuel and maintenance drive the formula.
That is probably a major reason why the little bird is in such a struggle . . . it is attempting to hit two opposite targets. It reminds me of the early firearm called a "blunderbuss". In fact, that better fits the description than anything else that comes to mind.
gadfly
(In view of today's news, would the little bird be protected under the "Second Amendment", if the name were changed to a "Double Barreled Blunderbuss"?)
For the record.
Oil at $140 a barrel.
One Euro buys $1.58
Dow Jones falls 350 points in one day.
Now who, exactly, will buy the FPJ in the volume Vern needs to sustain his business plan?
People who don't buy petroleum based products, earn Euros and avoid American shares.
?
Shane
Shadow said
OEM - -- - 4Q06 - 4Q07 - 1Q07 - 1Q08
Cirrus --- 192 -- 249 --- 144 --- 76
350/400 --- 55 --- 21 --- 47 ---- 16
Diamond -- 135 -- 115 --- 115 -- 101
Total -- - 382 -- 385 --- 306 -- 293
4Q06 to 4Q07 change = +1%
1Q07 to 1Q08 change = -4.3%
but made an error in adding the total aircraft shipped in Q108
here are the corrected numbers.
OEM - -- - 4Q06 - 4Q07 - 1Q07 - 1Q08
Cirrus --- 192 -- 249 --- 144 --- 76
350/400 --- 55 --- 21 --- 47 ---- 16
Diamond -- 135 -- 115 --- 115 -- 101
Total -- - 382 -- 385 --- 306 -- 193
4Q06 to 4Q07 change = +1%
1Q07 to 1Q08 change = -37%
Case closed
Baron95,
I agree that the big jet market is quite insensitive to fuel prices.
That was the point I was trying to make regarding the CJ3 and larger aircraft.
My point was that pistons are certainly being affected by fuel prices. Both the number of hours flown and the number of aircraft purchased are down - significantly.
The question is - Where on that curve is an Eclipse?
I really don't know and would be interested in an answer from an Eclipse owner. (or prospective owner)
A lot of people bought Eclipses on the promise that it was going to use somewhere between the same fuel per hour and the same fuel per mile as a Baron.
Certainly DayJet and Pogo built their original business models on 52 cents per statute mile DOCs.
Those days are long gone and it would appear so are DayJet's and Pogo's promised orders.
How big an effect are fuel prices going to have on the individual E500 owner purchase decisions?
I'm not sure what numbers you are using regarding automobile sales, but here are the numbers I found comparing May 2008 to May 2007.
May May
2008 2007
Chrysler 194,126 254,605
Ford 210,091 258,006
GM 230,956 382,899
Big 3 Total 635,173 895,510
AutoAlliance 10,965 13,540
BMW 13,775 15,402
CAMI 11,637 15,431
Honda 119,202 128,937
Hyundai 22,310 27,157
Mercedes 14,515 15,260
Mitsubishi 4,930 8,174
Nissan 83,568 101,386
NUMMI 33,013 36,286
Subaru 17,135 13,029
Toyota 95,302 114,849
Volkswagen 24,632 27,333
Others 22,449 24,497
Total 1,108,606 1,436,791
Source: Ward's AutoInfoBank
The only manufacturer who is up is Subaru. Everyone else is down.
The overall totals are down 23%.
Ward's Autobank Automobile Production Data
Oh how I long for the days when we used to talk about the little jet...
FC,
just a little opinion, relating to your question -
no one in this market trades DOWN.
;)
Oh how I long for the days when we used to talk about the little jet...
We still are, albeit in a roundabout way. The core issue is the impact of oil prices on the aviation industry in general and Eclipse in particular. Related to that is what are target demographics of the aviation industry in general and the Eclipse in particular.
Hey Eclipse it looks like your SLAPP lawsuit backfired. Since the lawsuit the number of posts just keeps increasing.
I think a lot of the owner pilots who put down deposits on the Eclipse when jet fuel was cheaper did so even though it was a stretch financially for them to own and operate the airplane under forecast conditions. Now it is just impossible. The single-engine turboprops seem the way to go for a lot of owners now.
Interesting little poll going on over at FlightAware. If you have an account, you can vote.
ooouuh guys ...!
lots of stuff in the post ...
as usual , lots of very valid point , some blindness (blindfold?) as well ...!
ok , so a bit of summary :
Gunner :
yes , i agree 150% with , spend your cash while it has some value (not a question of currency)
because what is the point to have money if you have to be stressed over it ?
i like your idea of piling-up some "easy-tradable" value of some sort , unfortunately for me if i start to follow your recommendation on ammunitions , i won't have to care too much about shelter and foods as it will be provided to me for free in the form of prison-meal and bed ... ;-))
well , the guy from Gazprom i was talking about had a very straight idea about the matter "if prices are not high enough to our liking , we'll make them hikes ...!"
Baron :
you're right NOBODY knows what is going to be tomorrow , that's for sure ...
i can even give a hint if someone , especially in economics , tell you today what is going to be tomorrow ...please , call him a liar or a fool in my name ...! ;-)
nonetheless : what do you prefer:
be surprised , because you were expecting a rainy day and the sky is perfect blue ...
or
be pissed-off because you have put-on your Hawaiian shirt and sun-glasses and all the rain of the sky seems to be pouring down on you ?
as well as you have to be careful in NOT getting confused between WISHES and NEEDS , QUALITY and USEFULNESS ...
do peoples want to have a better , wider , heavier , etc , car ?
yes , off-course ! (this is wishes )
is it reasonable ? (this is need)
when i changed one of my car , last year , i was tempted by a 599 GTB Ferrari ...
but i was feeling unease about it ... why ?
because i made a list of need and wishes :
pleasure , girls trap , glamorous , high style , life is too short not to be crazy ...
needs: a car to go from A to B , i don't give a damn about girls , i don't give a damn about what most think of me ...
the Ferrari needs a new set of shoes every 5/6 thousand Km , the clutch system is considered to be "checked" (polite term for change) after 35.000/40.000 Kms
so instead i took an Audi R8 , because quality of making is higher (personal opinion) price is half , consumption is much lower AND ratio Costs/Pleasure is about the same !
but we are probably playing in A VERY DIFFERENT FIELD than target-customer for FPJ ...
because where it DOESN'T WORK with EAC Bizz plan is :
Cheap to OWN =
not anymore , considering the prices hikes and that may be there isn't that many pride into owning ...
Cheap to fly =
not anymore , i agree that you and me are probably well-off enough not to care too much about gas-price , but are we customers target for EAC ?
Disruptive techs =
more problematic than anything else , and top of it : it seems such a shamble that no one is too sure what is the part of "software failure " and the part "poor quality process " ...
Widely spread =
not really , i guess that apart the mega-orders from Day-Jet , no ... Pogo , no ... Etirc , no ...Turkey , no ... Zimbabwe , not yet , what is left of "orders" is melting like an ice-cream in the sun ...
so if you add everything together , you have :
a little jet plane having a quite bad ratio "Quality/Price" made by a firm having a quite bad ratio " Investments/Profits" ...
i don't know about you , but i think it is quite a good segmentation of market :
the ones with real money have overlooked EA500 long time ago ...
(and won't care if oil is 150$ or 300$)
the ones with real "love for flying" have probably already made their minds ...
(it is like alcohol or cigarettes , no matter what is the price when addicted , some here are even marvelously crazy enough to build their own plane , typically the kind of crazy-love anybody should admire ...)
all others (which is , i believe) the CORE target customers have to be VERY careful ...!!
Post a Comment