First, the aircraft. Most of you will know that www.AINonline.com have an excellent 'Alerts' service, which provides timely notice of important aviation matters. They issued the following earlier today:-
"P&WC and Eclipse Investigating PW600 Carbon Concern
Pratt & Whitney Canada, manufacturer of the PW610F engine that powers the Eclipse 500 very light jet, and Eclipse Aviation are jointly investigating the cause of a carbon buildup problem that resulted in an inflight engine shutdown in early August. Although details of the occurrence are unavailable as no report has yet been made to the FAA or the NTSB, P&WC was “made aware of this,” according to a P&WC spokesman, “and we are currently collaborating with Eclipse to investigate the issue. Initial findings indicate that carbon appears to form in the combustor during high-altitude operation with full cabin bleed selected. Both teams are pursuing the investigation at this time. However, it is important to note that there are no recommended changes to maintenance or operational procedures associated with the PW610F engine.” The PW600-series powers the Eclipse 500, Cessna Citation Mustang and nearly certified Embraer Phenom 100. To date, the Eclipse fleet has accumulated more than 50,000 operating hours since late 2006, according to the spokesman."
Pratt & Whitney Canada, manufacturer of the PW610F engine that powers the Eclipse 500 very light jet, and Eclipse Aviation are jointly investigating the cause of a carbon buildup problem that resulted in an inflight engine shutdown in early August. Although details of the occurrence are unavailable as no report has yet been made to the FAA or the NTSB, P&WC was “made aware of this,” according to a P&WC spokesman, “and we are currently collaborating with Eclipse to investigate the issue. Initial findings indicate that carbon appears to form in the combustor during high-altitude operation with full cabin bleed selected. Both teams are pursuing the investigation at this time. However, it is important to note that there are no recommended changes to maintenance or operational procedures associated with the PW610F engine.” The PW600-series powers the Eclipse 500, Cessna Citation Mustang and nearly certified Embraer Phenom 100. To date, the Eclipse fleet has accumulated more than 50,000 operating hours since late 2006, according to the spokesman."
Now that is significant. Might there be a design issue with the FPJ installation, as there is no word of a similar event with the Mustang? We know that the switch to P&W, after the 'first flight' with Williams, was done in a rush. Since one of the key arguments in favour of the FPJ over turboprops with broadly similar mission profiles is high altitude fuel burn, any restriction here could be catastrophic to resale values. Plus any remedial work, which may be required, would have to join the queue for FIKI, AvioNG etc.
Next the company. I continue to get emails expressing serious concerns about assembly methods. What we are talking about is the original build quality on the floor, and how safety issues that arise during the build process are handled. Most of you by now will know that there are significant concerns about how the Production Certificate was issued by the FAA and the continued adherence to a 'standard' by the company. A normal ACSEP (Aircraft Certification Systems Evaluation Program) inspection of the factory was due to being this week, but has been postponed to 'late September'. Needless to say, this delay was not initiated by the FAA. There has been much speculation in the 'community' as to why this happened, but two potential 'answers' have surfaced. Take your pick:-
1. Eclipse plan to suspend their PC for a period, and they've said as much to the FAA.
or
2. Eclipse have major influence in Washington, allowing them to delay this 'cast in stone' event.
And another thing....
We know that Eclipse are in two minds about their production, as their most recent 'Media Alert' is pretty vague on the Russian factory. In fact, it makes no mention of the planned new facility, saying only that "Eclipse also confirms it has no intention to move its production facilities outside of the United States in contrast to some current media speculation." Strange. Yes there is/no there isn't another factory. Wish they would make their mind up.
Speaking of which, I would like to draw your attention to the excellent Russ Niles, of www.AVweb.com. We've already had a part of this on the blog, but it's worthwhile increasing its visibility here:-
"In case you haven't been following the news, the U.S. wants Russia to leave Georgia alone and Russia wants Georgia to leave Abkhazia alone and the whole thing came to a head because some Russian diplomat blew a tire and couldn't change it himself. As I write this the Russians have troops and tanks and guns in Georgia and despite some kind of agreement they're looking like they might hang around awhile and, if necessary, sink a few more ships. I wish I was making it up."
Later he continues:-
"Then there's Eclipse. A Russian factory appears to be a major part of the plan to make the company profitable but maybe Roel Pieper, et. al. should investigate friction stir welded tanks instead. Seems to be a market..."
Read the whole article, it's worth it. For our American readers I should state that here in Europe, we are really worried what might happen if the Russian Republic takes on another one of the 'former' USSR states, and the EU decides it has to respond. If you think OPEC have a stranglehold on oil, just watch what happens to the European market if Russia decides to restrict supplies of natural gas.
UPDATED Wednesday 20th August 12.50 (GMT)
As noted earlier in several comments, this actually was released just prior to my post. I've put it up here for maximum visibility.
"Lawmakers Set Hearing Over Eclipse 500 Jet Type Certificate
19-Aug-2008
By Karen Di Piazza
This morning, the oversight and investigations staff of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee confirmed to this journalist that a hearing is set for Sept. 17, at 10 a.m., regarding the Federal Aviation Administration's oversight and issuance of its Eclipse 500 type certificate. The committee, chaired by Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., ordered the Department of Transportation's inspector general's office to audit the FAA and present a briefing in regards to the FAA's possible rush of granting Eclipse Aviation with its full TC on Sept. 30, 2006. FAA-employed aircraft certification engineers and flight test pilots say they were prevented from properly completing their assigned certification and safety responsibilities, before the FAA issued its TC to the plane maker. Committee spokesperson Jim Berard said that both the IG's office and oversight and investigations unit of the committee "have gathered enough credible evidence to warrant a hearing."
"We don't have a confirmed witness list at this point and aren't likely to have one until prior to the hearing," he said. "We expect the DOT's IG's office and some former Eclipse employees to testify. We have invited FAA and National Transportation Safety Board officials and will likely invite Eclipse management."
Although certain people are invited to the hearing, Berard explained that the committee has the power to subpoena those who refuse invitations.
19-Aug-2008
By Karen Di Piazza
This morning, the oversight and investigations staff of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee confirmed to this journalist that a hearing is set for Sept. 17, at 10 a.m., regarding the Federal Aviation Administration's oversight and issuance of its Eclipse 500 type certificate. The committee, chaired by Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., ordered the Department of Transportation's inspector general's office to audit the FAA and present a briefing in regards to the FAA's possible rush of granting Eclipse Aviation with its full TC on Sept. 30, 2006. FAA-employed aircraft certification engineers and flight test pilots say they were prevented from properly completing their assigned certification and safety responsibilities, before the FAA issued its TC to the plane maker. Committee spokesperson Jim Berard said that both the IG's office and oversight and investigations unit of the committee "have gathered enough credible evidence to warrant a hearing."
"We don't have a confirmed witness list at this point and aren't likely to have one until prior to the hearing," he said. "We expect the DOT's IG's office and some former Eclipse employees to testify. We have invited FAA and National Transportation Safety Board officials and will likely invite Eclipse management."
Although certain people are invited to the hearing, Berard explained that the committee has the power to subpoena those who refuse invitations.
Words begin to fail me here. The more I learn, the sadder I get. Well done Karen, you've nailed another key piece of the story that will be 'Eclipse, how NOT to run an aviation company.'
Finally, a brief word from the unfortunate suppliers. They have been informed of a significant cut in production, which will result in little or no requirement for new shipments. The word is that there are enough parts on hand at the factory to finish 31 more FPJ's, after which no one can predict what will happen. And the funding round is not going well.
I have a feeling we won't have long to wait for more. Stay tuned....
Shane
251 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 251 of 251Fair and balanced safety review?
Or political hack, former Boeing government liaison executive, hired by another former Boeing employee (Hickey), with bone fide political donations and connections, and now paid to say that everything is fine?
Maybe. Maybe not.
We report.
You decide.
Kudos to you, F-O, for finding the right balance in describing the situation.
"Oh no you don't - the Mattress Police have arrived!",
DI
( I think I just like saying "Mattress Police" )
Fobserver,
I don't know who the heck you are, but you is one scary hombre....
Did I ever say "remind me not to F&^% with this group?"
man
What the heck happened to this BloG???!!!!
All of a sudden people are digging lots o first hand and/or well researched info, and even providing both sides of the coin.
WoW. Keep it up. I'm glad I stuck around through the mindless insult fest phase.
"I'm glad I stuck around through the mindless insult fest phase."
most of those guys have been gone a long time already!
;)
Here we go - Detailed NTSB Factual Report - for the first VLJ accident.
[B95 summary: Piot overwhelmed by multiple autopilot and flight display failures overuns runway.]
NTSB....
The pilot further stated that as the airplane crossed over the STAR waypoint about 30,000 feet msl, the right [co-pilot's] Primary Flight Display (PFD) began to
flicker. About 5 minutes later, as the airplane continued to descend through 28,000 feet msl, the
left PFD flashed an alert indicating that the autopilot had disconnected. The pilot immediately
felt the disengagement of the autopilot from what he described as the heavy control forces on the
control yoke that he had to exert to fly the airplane. He additionally noted that the autopilot
activation light was not illuminated, further confirming that the system had disengaged. Shortly
thereafter, the pilot discovered that the electric pitch trim [located on the control yoke] was not
operational. After establishing that the pitch trim was not functional, he ultimately began using
the trim wheel located on the center consol, which operated normally. The pilot noted that
following the autopilot failure, the flight director bars overlaid about a 10-degree pitch up
attitude despite the descending flight path.
Flying the airplane by hand, the pilot continued the STAR and reported to air traffic controllers
(ATC) that he had an autopilot malfunction. As the pilot descended to 5,000 feet msl, the airplane
encountered instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). Controllers vectored the pilot to the
instrument landing system (ILS) to runway 24. The airplane broke out of the overcast conditions at
2,600 feet msl and the pilot relayed to controllers that he would make a visual approach to the
runway. The pilot noted that he was overwhelmed with the electrical failures and fatigued from
maneuvering the airplane by hand for such a long duration (which he approximated was around 45 minutes).
The airplane crossed the runway threshold configured with the wing flaps fully extended [30
degrees] and flying about 15 knots faster than his predetermined landing speed; the pilot had
previously calculated a Vref speed of 87 knots. From looking at the airspeed indicator, he noted
that the airplane was fast for landing but thought the runway would be long enough to accommodate
the likely delayed touchdown. As the airplane progressed down the runway he approached the small
uphill slope that was located around the middle. The airplane approached the apex of the sloping
runway and the pilot began to clearly distinguish where the runway surface ended, which was sooner
than he had anticipated.
The touchdown occurred far down the runway surface, past the middle location. The pilot realized
that despite his braking attempts and extension of speed brakes, the airplane was going to continue
off the runway surface over a small downsloping cliff at the end. He determined that he would not
be able to abort the landing due to the airplane's diminished groundspeed and elected to perform a
180-degree course reversal by rapidly turning the control yoke. The airplane ground looped, coming
to rest in a dirt area south of the runway; the main landing gear collapsed and the flaps folded
under the wings.
A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector spoke with a controller that was in contact with
the pilot during the accident sequence. She observed the airplane approaching runway 24 and noted
that it appeared to be quite high in altitude. In a radio transmission she queried, "do you think
you can make it" to which the pilot replied "yes." The airplane then touched down on the runway
past taxiway A4 and subsequently ground looped.
Long time reader, but not a blogger due to NDA. It is good entertainment and a simple way to keep up with EAC.
The SEJ>25K discussion has reached a crescendo once again, so I ask you to consider the following with respect to 14 CFR Part 23.841 Amdt. 23-49 (latest).
1) Definition of “probable" for a Part 23 Class II/Class III aircraft. Engine failure is not probable.
(AC 23.1309-1C; note reference to “each aircraft”, minor, and 10^-3)
2) Definition of "pressurization system." It has been proven acceptable to exclude the Part 33 certified engine bleed air source in the system definition.
If the above two items do not provide at least the possibility that some of the statements on the blog are incorrect, then consider the fact that the FAA has already found compliance to 14 CFR Part 23.841 Amdt. 23-49 with respect to a single engine aircraft. The precedence has been set, but the blog overlooked it.
Time will tell, but I expect SEJs to become a vibrant new market segment in the same way that single engine turboprops have.
B95 summary: Piot overwhelmed by multiple autopilot and flight display failures overuns runway
So HAL went bonkers and Eclipse blamed the pilot?
If the above two items do not provide at least the possibility that some of the statements on the blog are incorrect, then consider the fact that the FAA has already found compliance to 14 CFR Part 23.841 Amdt. 23-49 with respect to a single engine aircraft. The precedence has been set, but the blog overlooked it.
Welcome to the blog! The blog is meant to be self-correcting by the participants. The best way to get things right is to have lots of eyes on whatever the topic is.
Time will tell, but I expect SEJs to become a vibrant new market segment in the same way that single engine turboprops have.
I expect in time they will too.
Well, overall Boeing has been a little short in the ethics department, lately. So you bring in a former Boeing type with no certificaton experience to do a certification review? On top of that he has ties to the industry organization that hired the former FAA Administrator who signed off on the airplane being investigated in a highly questionable manner? Can you say: "THE FIX IS IN"? They are going to keep playing these stupid games until someone gets killed.
They are going to keep playing these stupid games until someone gets killed.
I think you're optimistic.
Sources:
http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com
http://www.opensecrets.org
http://www.fec.gov
MACK, GERALD MR
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 CONSULTANT, SELF-EMPLOYED Updated Q2/2008
$ 250 , John McCain (R)
MACK, GERALD R MR
ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES/EXECUTI
3/25/05
$400 Republican National Cmte (R)
MACK, GERALD R MR
ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES/SENIOR
8/17/04
$500 Bush, George W (R)
MACK, GERALD R MR
ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES/EXECUTI
10/15/04
$500 Republican National Cmte (R)
MACK, GERALD
ALEXANDRIA,VA 22307 BOEING
7/15/02
$500 Cantwell, Maria U.S. SENATE: WA (D)
From:
http://www.campaignfinance.state.pa.us/CFReport.aspx?CFReportID=42315&Section=IB&StartRow=301&RowsPerPage=100
Campaign Finance Report
Schedule I - Part B
All Other Contributions $50.01 to $250.00
Filer Number and Name Report Cycle Type of Report
8600230 - Boeing Political Action Committee 2006 Cycle 2
2nd Friday Pre-Primary
Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778644/20/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778644/6/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778643/23/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778643/9/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778642/23/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778642/9/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778641/26/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
Issaquah, WA  9802778641/12/2006$40.00 Mack Gerald
+++++++++++++++++++++++
The FAA Senior Management today has become politicized beyond belief.
Just like the recent Bush Justice Department fiasco, the clock has been turned back to before the civil war by this administration.
It now appears to take a fair size monetary donation to the republican party to get an appointment.
You wonder why a TC was issued?
Don't count on an unbiased Special Certification review. The players have all made their "correct" financial donations.
Perhaps the IG investigation, or the congressional hearing will shed some light on the issue.
In the meantime, pardon my cynicism, but I think it would have been more believable had they appointed an outside, disinterested third party to head the certification review- one who did not have an extensive political campaign donation track record to raise doubts about objectivity.
Baron95: Pilot overwhelmed by multiple autopilot and flight display failures overuns runway
Dave: So HAL went bonkers and Eclipse blamed the pilot?
Me: Nope. Brandywine doesn't have a runway 24, and that FPJ was on a short leg after refueling at another local airport. FPJs don't have "yokes", either.
All that glitters is not gold; all that crashes is not an Eclipse.
You *took* the bait - a tip of the hat to Mr. Baron...
Would you like the combo?
DI
"I think you're optimistic."
I think you are right. It is going to take a fatal accident, then a lawsuit headed up by a good, ethical, plantiff's attorney (and there are some), and he is going to tear these people a new one.
Explain your quotation please, Baron...
Re the certification review: I don't think the fix is in. I would expect this to be full CYA mode for the FAA. They've little to gain by going easy on Eclipse at this stage: one of the purposes (I guess) for having the review is to pre-empt the results of the enquiry into the TC. That way they can say that '...mistakes were made, but the system is self-correcting, you can trust the FAA'.
Alternative theory: the review obfuscates things so much that it's difficult for the enquiry to get at the truth (because the matter included in the review is deemed to be off-limits for the enquiry, and the review is drawn out to a point after the end of the enquiry).
But if they whitewash the review after serious questions have been raised about the TC, who will protect them when the a/c starts falling from the skies and killing people? Or do they not think that far ahead?
Note that I'm not so naive as to think the the FAA will do the right thing because it's their job to protect the public.
In the meantime, pardon my cynicism, but I think it would have been more believable had they appointed an outside, disinterested third party to head the certification review- one who did not have an extensive political campaign donation track record to raise doubts about objectivity.
Does anyone know if during the previous special reviews whether or not non-FAA people conducted the reviews and if so what was their background?
Wow - two instances of "tow the line" in one thread, from two of the smartest people I have encountered on-line in several years.
Lines do get towed around quite a bit, particularly in the corporate world, but I think the posters meant "toe the line".
sPh
All that glitters is not gold; all that crashes is not an Eclipse
You *took* the bait - a tip of the hat to Mr. Baron...
I hadn't considered Baron to be a liar. The first VLJ to have an accident was the Eclipse - not the Mustang - during testing. I guess I'll have to stop trusting the honesty in Baron's posts.
Go figure why Baron is posting this again (the Mustang accident). Something about it being the "first VLJ accident". VLJ is a worn out acronym at this point, run into the ground by EAC. Could we perhaps stay on topic?
I think it's as likely that the FAA will admit to a mistake in the certification of the EA500 as it is for Eclipse to admit to there being any safety issues with the aircraft. It's not the nature of the beast, to admit to errors made.
We shouldn't get our hopes up. They did certify it, after-all.
Engpilotder said ... Time will tell, but I expect SEJs to become a vibrant new market segment in the same way that single engine turboprops have.
Welcome to the Blog and thank you for providing that info. I too am hopeful in the SEJets market developing as the next frontier for "personal" GA aircraft.
Sources close to the Eclipse 500 program said that FAA was eager to complete the review and publish the results by September 12, 2008, prior to a hearing regarding FAA's EA 500 certification process to be held by the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on September 17, 2008.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=busav&id=news/REVIEW08208.xml&headline=Eclipse%20500%20Gets%20Special%20Certification%20Review
DI Said ... Me: Nope. Brandywine doesn't have a runway 24
And congratulations to you, DI.
That is right, that accident was the first accident of a certified so called VLJ - a Mustang 510.
The relevance of posting the factual report is that:
1 - The Mustang Pilot experinced a PFD (right) failure, and autopilot going off line, a trim failure all on the Cessna/Garmin G1000/GFC700 suite. (Most people here, myself included, assume that these things are unique to EA500s)
2 - An ATP pilot crosses the threshhold high and at least 15 TS faster than Vref, and even when questioned by the controller "Are you going to be able to make that (the runway)?", decides to continue.
So, IMHO, extremely relevant when we are talking about "blaming the pilot" or "blaming the plane" or certification reviews. It is important to keep things in perspective.
How these pilots are getting their ATPs and type ratings is beyond me. This one pilot was "too tired and mentally exhausted because he had to fly the plane by hand for 45 min". For crying out loud - who is training these people?!!!???
AT said ... airsafetyman said...
Well, overall Boeing has been a little short in the ethics department, lately.
And a lot short on the engineering and management side. ILFC today said that, on average, their B787 deliveries will be a full 27 months behind schedule.
800 planes on order, 27 months late per plane, airlines make up to $1M profit/widebody/month.
That would total about $20B in profit that won't be made on 787s. Typical compensation for an airliner that is 20% more efficient would be about $4B that Boeing will have to pay out.
How is that for a screw up?
Hell hath no fury like a Capt. Zoom scorned.
www.aero-news.net, see the article about congressional hearings into Eclipse.
I am guessing he isn't getting the exclusives anymore.
LOL
20yr, we hope is enjoying the Hummer! If he's registered with the FAA as an A&P he's admitted numerous times to engaging in "substandard work"...which is kind of like disregarding the oath of a Doctor! With the other jobs he's supposedly been invited to he chose to stay with EAC....HIS DECISION as it was....for the per diem and $$$. Was, is and will be a 20YR hack. He should go do C & D's on old heavy junk...and not work on an EFIS corporate jet!
With that said the EAC fleet has some injury free hours...quite a few actually. Spin it as you wish.
Cirrus had 35 fatal accidents since 2003 with 72 Souls lost. God bless them all. (we're not counting non fatal accidents BTW).
Yes the production #'s are higher...but look at 2003 when production #'s were aligned with EAC (almost)! 3 fatal accidents with 7 Souls lost. Again, God bless all the families and friends.
---Kat
Did Cirrus reach the 1K production mark in 2003? Quite a feat. Would certainly correct previous post of Cirrus/EAC production alignment in '03.
---Kat
Kathy said...
20yr, we hope is enjoying the Hummer! If he's registered with the FAA as an A&P he's admitted numerous times to engaging in "substandard work"...which is kind of like disregarding the oath of a Doctor! With the other jobs he's supposedly been invited to he chose to stay with EAC....HIS DECISION as it was....for the per diem and $$$. Was, is and will be a 20YR hack. He should go do C & D's on old heavy junk...and not work on an EFIS corporate jet!
Now I don’t recall ever saying I engaged in substandard work, I FIXED ALLOT OF SUBSTANDARD WORK, and was told to do things that I knew was wrong (reported it). I bucked the system, and ECLIPSE Management soon after was looking for any excuse to get rid of me and labeling me A TROUBLE MAKER. I assure you that I have given a FULL REPORT to the investigator that is conducting the investigation for the congressional hearings that is coming up un September. FURTHER MORE I WILL TESTIFY if asked and I have a truck load of info and facts to unload to them, things I choose not to divulge here on the blog. WHY? Because it would scare the s**t out of most people, and I have fully disclosed all my info to this investigator. Thanks to Shane for putting him in touch with me. In fact KATHY! I have been dropping info to a certain ABQ JOURNAL reporter since June of 2007. DO I GIVE A F**K about a NDA? Hell Know I Don’t. I worry more about the people that fly and peoples lives, than profit or how much money I can make. If you have a misguided opinion of me, that is your problem. But I can assure you that I don’t give a s**t about being blackballed or being called a nark for telling it like it is at ECLIPSE. More people that worked there should come forward but wont because they don’t have the balls. For that alone they should lose there A&P license. I can confidently say the the ECLIPSE 500 is the biggest piece of S**T that I have ever worked on. Even if I did stay there to try to make a difference, the egotistical and arrogant management was not going to allow anyone with any knowledge of production, to change there FORD MOTOR CO way of thinking. THEY WILL ALL GET WHATS COMING TO THEM SOON.
Love 20 YM
ceri :
#Note that I'm not so naive as to think the the FAA will do the right thing because it's their job to protect the public.#
partly being from a country where there is lots (with more than one s) of peoples to "protect" us [France]...
i can tell you this :
anywhere on earth when some are given the task to protect others , they always end-up protecting theirs ass first ! some even take advantage of it ...
often it's a good sign of the degree of "political maturation" ...
baron
surprisingly enough , i discover you as more balanced than i thought ...
yes , EAC was quite successful as a start-up ...
unfortunately , the worst disease on them for using the dream they created into the mind of customers , for their own (and sole) benefit !
if they would have sticked with good practices (or clear , that would have been something already!) , it could have been something good ...
self-inflated ego , blunt stupidity and mismanagement leaded to something which is not only a disgrace for any entrepreneurial spirit , but as well unsafe and way too expensive for what it is really ...!
i agree that in any "story" there are good and bad ...
nothing can be 100% good or bad ...
it's only up to anybody to see what are the + and the - ...
without pink-goggles on or only bad ideas ...!
20yr :
if you stayed with EAC for $$$ :
it is fine for you !
if they didn't see the point of taking out your best(for what they paid you) :
the pox on them !
the problem would be if you did or corrected "substandard" and chose to just shut-up ...
often when someone has to hide something , they call the curse on the ones who are outspoken enough about their part of guilt in the problem ...!!
I stayed in ABQ for LOVE, Not for Money, that is the fact and that is why I still live in ABQ and am now on the road working. I can make more money at other places that is for sure. You can only due what they ask and if you know its wrong and you challenge it, then your ethics are in tact as was mine. They dont like to change the blueprints even when there WRONG. That is whey I couldnt wait for them to get audited by the feds.
I hope they hold the cocky f**k Vern accountable for any events that happen in that piece of S**T.
As I always said "THEY WONT LEARN UNTIL THEY PUT ONE IN THE DIRT"
20YM
20Yr
you probably got me wrong :
whatever are /was your reasons , they are yours !
when i see a bad worker (not aimed at you ) keeping his job or a good worker not asked to do his best ...
only one question come to my mind :
are you sure the management has any talent ?
you reminded me of an other life , when working in W.S. , i had a final argument with my then boss ...
i told him :
"we cannot say anything to anyone just for the sake of making money !"
his answer : "aren't you paid enough to shut-up ?"
In his book "Gorky Park" author Martin Cruz Smith has his main character, detective Arkady Renko, make the following observation: "The purpose of an official investigation is not to find the truth, the purpose is to avoid finding the truth at all costs". (Not an exact quote). I think most people here realize that if the FAA team did their job Mz. Marion Blakey would be out of her cushy lobbyist job and slinging burgers on K Street instead, if not actially in jail. This is damage control from the start. Think of the Army's investigation of the prison scandals in Iraq, a few Army gomers from West Virginia were sent to prison and had their lives destroyed while Rumsfeld putters around writing his memoirs.
You will never guess who is one of the 105 full-time members who make up the membership of the Aerospace Industries Association, the lobbying group headed up by our very own Mz Marion. They can't make the customer refunds but they can keep those industry association dues up to speed!
airsafety ...
nothing surprise me , anymore !
how many of you knows that Amid Karzhaï (actual President of Afghanistan) is a former consultant of Connoco-Oil and Haliburton ?
freely elected ?
what a joke !
the same with this : if anything goes wrong for top-brass , they will blame the ones in charge of investigations ...
if nothing goes wrong = nothing will be found ...!
Engpilotder: "If the above two items do not provide at least the possibility that some of the statements on the blog are incorrect, then consider the fact that the FAA has already found compliance to 14 CFR Part 23.841 Amdt. 23-49 with respect to a single engine aircraft. The precedence has been set, but the blog overlooked it."
Interesting post, thank you.
A bunch of people on the blog are always interested in this topic, so it would be nice to have more detail.
Which aircraft are you referring to?
Could you give us an overview of its pressurization system?
To follow up my own post, here's something from the pJet site:
"One of a pilot’s prime concerns is cabin decompression at high altitudes. In the event an engine fails at 35,000 feet, the cabin will not experience a rapid decompression. Instead, pressure will leak out of the cabin at a much slower rate. If the cabin were to reach an altitude of 15,000 feet, an automatic emergency oxygen system will deploy oxygen masks to the pilot and passengers with enough oxygen for the entire emergency descent profile."
- the implication being that it's acceptable to provide oxygen instead of keeping the cabin below 15000ft.
The piper site's got some decent material about the design of the pJet - not sure if the link's been posted before, but here it is:
http://www.newpiper.com/piperjet/
http://www.newpiper.com/piperjet/
From Alec Rosekrans at Halogen Guides, Eclipse In Hot Water...
While Google news indicated 198 ( or so ) articles about the recent FAA actions, they are virtually ALL identical to some base press release on the subject. It's nice to see somebody use that as a mere starting point to tie a number of threads together into a short article worth reading.
Pull around to the second window,
DI
Here's some interesting posts by DayJet's Director of IT:
http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=3759865&SiteID=17&pageid=0
Also this from earlier:
To that end, the company has been changing the problem inside its simulators every day for the past four and a half years, looking for those broad mesas of good solutions. And after a million or so spins of the VOC, DayJet has produced a clear vision of the total market and its likely place in it. Iacobucci expects to siphon off somewhere between 1% and 1.5% of all regional business trips within DayJet's markets by 2008, with "regional trips" defined as being between 100 and 500 miles. In the southeast states the company initially has its eye on, that's 500,000 to 750,000 trips a year, out of a total of 52 million, more than 80% of which are currently traversed by car.
http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2008/01/15/TheNextBigThing.aspx
AIA press release of Eclipse become the 100th member:
http://www.aia-aerospace.org/aianews/press/2004/rel_11_18_04_b.cfm
Dave I., is the Halogen Jet Guides piece an actual article or just a blog entry? It's kind of hard to tell.
engpilotder:
Thanks for the clarification on the FAR interpretation. I had assumed the only way to certify was that engine shutdown couldn't be considered probable. This isn't something I've ever substantiated (the engine specific part).
Regarding this tease:
consider the fact that the FAA has already found compliance to 14 CFR Part 23.841 Amdt. 23-49 with respect to a single engine aircraft. The precedence has been set, but the blog overlooked it.
Come on, what's the example? We know that the FAR's earlier amendment said 31000 ft and this is what most SE turboprops are certified to....
For a little insight on how retrofits are going, N168TT ( s/n 00042 ) is headed to Garden City, KS by way of Frankfort, KY from Albany - after 12 weeks spent AOG there...
I'll get that for you by Next Tuesday,
DI
"after 12 weeks spent AOG there"
They ran out of duct tape?
That was some tailwind...
Flight Aware makes mistakes, too.
Let's see ... 641 NM ... 13 minutes ... nearly 3000kts!
No wonder an engine carboned up.
Would you like that Cajun style?
DI
They ran out of duct tape?
I guess service parts really ARE hard to come by.
From the 2006 grievance:
As a reminder, the safety mission is to keep safe the lives of the flying public and not to “save companies”.
http://www.avweb.com/newspics/grievance-EclipseTC-AIR402.pdf
From the link above... "The Eclipse 500 has the distinction of being the only aircraft to receive a SCR without having been involved in an accident resulting in an injury or fatality. It is believed that the F.A.A. initiated the SCR as a response to an abnormally high number of Service Difficulty Reports sent from Eclipse 500 operators."
And I hope that this is a trend that sticks. We need to find the problems before fatalities happen. The goal should be ZERO fatalities in aviation. The western ailines are virtually there - WN has been there for decades. Business Jet Aviation is basically there also. Now lets put personal turbine flying there. Followed by all GA flying. That has to be the goal.
For that, the FAA/NTSB need to look at trends OUTSIDE of accidents/incidents. They need to look at de-stabilized approaches, at substandard training, improper IFR, incomplete/complex A/C systems, etc.
I hope this SCR is not a cover my ass -inspired event, but rather a proactive response to SDR and NASA aviation reporting forms.
New post up.
Again.
This thing is moving very, very quickly.
Shane
And I hope that this is a trend that sticks. We need to find the problems before fatalities happen. The goal should be ZERO fatalities in aviation.
On this we agree. It seems like usually actions are taken reactively rather than proactively. I'm not just talking about the FAA, but also the DOJ, etc. They're usually there to pick up the pieces once the damage has either literally or figuratively been done, rather than stop the damage in the first place.
I hope this SCR is not a cover my ass -inspired event, but rather a proactive response to SDR and NASA aviation reporting forms.
Don't get your hopes up. The investigation is being headed up by an aircraft industry lobbyist. The FAA is just trying to cover-up rather than clean-up, but they'll get nailed.
Also here's the official calendar for the hearing:
Hearing
FAA Aircraft Certification: Alleged Regulatory Lapses in the Certification and Manufacture of the Eclipse EA-500
September 17, 2008
http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?newsid=736
E-mail to CEO/Chairman XXXXX Company 22August2008
ECLIPSE SITUATION
Hi XXXXX --
I think it will get much worse, and looking at clues I don't think Eclipse
will be around much longer in their current form. This may have
significant impact on NXXXXX being a viable tool for XXXXX business use.
1. The FAA is conducting a major review of the EA500.
2. Eclipse has announced major lay offs.
3. Many suppliers are shutting down affecting parts availability.
4. Production is halting which means no cash flow.
5. Bad press which will only get worse as FAA review is conducted.
6. Layoffs will affect Avio NG upgrade and current mx.
7. Pending additional bad press and regulatory directives on engine shutdowns.
8. Pending additional bad press and regulatory directives on fire retardant cabin and cockpit.
9. Bad press about the bad press and much more during the review and hearings.
I just wanted to pass this on given the record of NXXXXX's past reliability. The
circumstances will only get worse, and the Eclipse will have all eyes focused
on it during this tribulation. We are moving ahead into an icing period which our
Eclipse is not certified.
I feel duty-bound as a XXXXX employee to make you aware of the full
ramifications of the current events at Eclipse. We will try our best to keep
it flying, but you as well as I know what the past track record has been
on this aircraft. My number one duty as a pilot for this company is safety.
Thank you.
XXXXX
Post a Comment