As promised, reports from the Front Line

Too often on the blog we spend time discussing issues of high finance, low dealings and dodgy sales promises. But we must always keep in mind the people who actually work on the aircraft. I speak of course of the EAC line workers, as well as the pilots/owners and their mechanics.

First, from the factory. This snippet might help explain why the aircraft have so many issues in the field.

"The first thing that I noticed at Eclipse Aviation is the almost total lack of training in the tasks that are needed to manufacture an aircraft. Eclipse has a program with the state of New Mexico in which the state pays 44% of a workers wages for 6 months if the person is qualified. Eclipse gets the money and I assume that Eclipse is responsible to train the worker since there are training forms that as supposed to be signed off and turned in. The problem is that the training never gets done and everyone that I have spoken to about the forms say, "What training?". They say, "I am not going to lie to the state of New Mexico and say that I am getting training when I am not getting that training. What should one do? One could lie about the training and risk problems in the future, tell the truth about the lack of training and risk being fired by Eclipse, or just do nothing. Most people chose to just do nothing."

Lets be clear about this. If you don't know what you are doing, how are supposed to do it right? I feel sorry for the line workers who have to put up with this sort of treatment.

These next set of comments come from a mechanic charged with looking after several of the FPJ's. He seems to be rather busy....

"I have followed your top ten list with interest. I would add repeated failures of yaw and autopilot servos. We maintain xxxx aircraft and have changed at least xx different actuators. Some have failed right out of the box. The most recent failure was of elevator trim actuators that left the aircraft with an un-commanded non responsive nose up trim condition leading to an emergency landing."

I asked how many hours his fleet had, to get some idea of hard they were working. He responded:-

"It is hard to rack up the hours when half the planes are usually down for some kind of maintenance squawk. Cockpit side windows and flap actuators on xxxx different planes have been really serious problems. One thing we have noticed that others haven't seen is that in the pylon area there are small doors called VORE doors that are part the air conditioning system. These have little actuator motors that sit inside a little well bumped into a bottom panel. That well will fill with water and cause corrosion on the motors. We have replaced three and have taken to drilling drain holes to alleviate the problem."

Hmmm, I thinks, the VORE doors is a new one (to me), I'd better share it with the blog.

So now you know.

Next a commentary from a 'working pilot' on the various matters around the Brandywine incident. He has some clearly expressed views, which might help other pilots of the FPJ. Note also that this person is positive about the aircraft, just a bit put out by the avionics.

"As many of my fellow Captains will agree, the FPJ has excellent engines and a pretty solid airframe. It's fuel efficiency is downright fantastic. After looking at the list of shortcomings, you guys have hit the nail on the head. The order might be different than somebody who craves function would like, but this does an excellent job of illustrating the many woes.

However, we are having less problems with tires. It has been weeks since I have heard of one blowing, where I work. This plane doesn't need antiskid, spoilers, or any other device to slow it down. All it needs is average piloting skills and better procedures. I have been teaching the others to bring the stick to full up during braking. This puts more weight on the main wheels for better traction. This technique is filtering it's way through the fleet.

I have years of experience of flying into high density airports with smaller transport aircraft. This plane can mix it very well. What limits it are the idiots that came up with the idea that final approach, from the final approach fix, has to be done at Vref + 10 ( about 103KTS). This school of thought comes from flying heavy transports that have a lot of momentum to control. The FPJ is light, and slows down easily when flaps are brought to landing and the power is idle. It doesn't burn up excessive runway either.

If I were to come up with an approach profile for this plane, this is how it would be. Keep the flaps at the takeoff position until short final with the runway in sight {about 200' AGL}. Speed 120 kts. When landing is assured, power idle, flaps landing. The airspeed will slow to Vref easily. Guess what, it's the same as the single engine approach procedure for this plane. I would also like to increase the max flap extension speed to 125 kts, for flaps landing, instead of the 120 we have now. Another plus is that if the pilot has to do a missed approach, the flaps are already in the takeoff configuration. All the pilot has to do is to raise the landing gear, when the plane is climbing at a positive rate.

We all believe that the FPJ can really be something. Piss poor planning, and execution has prevailed. EAC should "stand down" and concentrate on what's important."

So you see, it's not all bad news. The aircraft is well liked, with a good airframe, engines and fuel burn. The avionics are a problem, but we knew that, and the way EAC treats its customers is a big problem. And we have known that for a long time!

Finally, thanks to all who contributed to our Top Ten Shortcomings list, now winging it's way to the appropriate inbox. The debate was useful, and the original idea from Turboprop_Pilot was just the sort of suggestion the blog needs.

As I finish this, many rumblings reach me from ABQ. More later, I'm pretty sure.

Shane