Tuesday, September 9, 2008

'Our' FPJ and the mysterious world of owning one

Many times over the course of hosting this blog I've pondered what motivated people who've purchased their very own Fisher Price Jet. The more I 'see' inside the aircraft, or hear from staff and suppliers to the company, the deeper my confusion. After reading all those excellent comments in the last thread it prompted me to try a trusted method when seeking clarity on a subject.

I write things down. It's really simple, focuses me, helps me to analyze what's important and generally clears my mind.

So here goes.

As always when I do this, I start at the beginning. For me this was some two years ago, when I spent time researching an idea. In part it was a personal quest for an aircraft to fulfill a specific mission (Ireland to North America, owner flown) and grew into a business idea. After a few weeks it became clear that the aircraft required to 'do' the mission was beyond my budget, so I looked really hard at the business case to see if that would help stand up a purchase on it's own. That's when I first discovered Stan's blog, read my way into the discussion and the rest (as they say) is history.

What have I learned? Well, pretty soon after I took over as custodian, I found out the hard way that 'free speech' only stays that way if people driven by principles (take a bow, Gunner) are prepared to spend their hard earned cash defending the First Amendment. It also displayed for a much wider audience the moral background at EAC and made me very determined to expose them to detailed scrutiny.

Speaking directly with people and through the blog email (eclipsecriticng@gmail.com) I've discovered that there were many more strange things 'lurking' in this whole story. The more I heard, the more I became convinced that there was a lot more to this than a business plan gone a little off track.

Pilots, usually those working for a living, have been very helpful in filling in the blanks left by the absence of reporting by the traditional media, who themselves were hamstrung by Vern. Suppliers also have illuminated some of the darker corners of the business ethics (or lack thereof) at EAC.

Many, many members of staff, current and former were kind enough to contact me. This has been most helpful in rounding out the full picture.

And then there are the real 'stars'.

You are.

Each and every one one of you, who has chosen to post a comment on the blog. It's not easy to engage with the story of EAC, without becoming awed by the scale. Breaking it down into manageable bits is as good a way as any to try to make sense of it.

Most recently we've enjoyed refreshing input from owners. I am really glad they decided to join in and hope they continue to provide insight. In many ways I think the blog has a better future as a platform for them than for 'us'. After all, in the almost inevitable end game we all can see, who has a right to be more critical of Eclipse than the people who paid money, but never got what they ordered?

So, let's take a shot at a summary of 'Reasons to buy an FPJ'

1. Low cost, especially for those who got into the program early. Even now (8 years later) there really is nothing new available, for less money.

2. The running costs are very impressive, if you are prepared to ignore depreciation. 

3. It's performance 'package' including range, takeoff and landing distances and the ability to climb to the higher flight levels makes it appealing to a wide group.

However (putting my critic hat back on) these basic 'facts' have been distorted into a marketing mantra at EAC which endlessly promotes the huge numbers of orders, in turn justifying the low price. Of course such a vast market is difficult to see in the current, owner flown arena, so we have the creation of 'air taxi' companies that offer EAC orders into the dim and distant future.

Lots of people bought into the dream. Not as many as EAC claimed, but far more than many thought possible. More than enough to make the project viable with any sort of halfway decent execution or proper management of the available resources. These people had an expectation based on promises made. They have been let down, badly, by EAC. Why do they continue to defy the logic of where the company is at? As I see it, the best thing would be to sell now, before the bottom falls out of the market. But they seem to resist this option.

What is really scary is that some of these owners and/or position holders have parted with money for multiple aircraft. This last bit I fail to understand in any process dictated by logic. It's like playing Russian roulette with 5 live bullets and one empty chamber instead of the other way round.

I think that's a pretty fair summary of where we are now. Yes we can add an endless number of pro's and con's to the discussion (and probably will, knowing you lot) but we must also remember that real people are getting hurt out there. I'll finish with a passage from the inbox, which reached me last week. I've edited it, but only lightly, as it has a certain power of its' own, coming as it does from a parent concerned for a beloved child.

"It was immediately apparent to me that they were not serious about producing planes. You can’t hire contractors at $30 an hour and have them stand around talking all day and expect to run a successful company – even I know that. You can’t hire your friends to “supervise” and have them spend the day with their heads in the computer and not pay any attention to what people are doing on the floor and expect to run a successful company. You can’t let people steal you blind and expect to run a successful company. This whole thing was obviously a scam from the beginning – anyone who actually worked in production saw that immediately. But they duped not only their investors but the people who worked for them and believed in them. It’s not just the investors and suppliers and purchasers who got screwed, it’s the people who put their time and energy and faith in this company and are now looking for jobs. I am angry. I am angry at the politicians and that lying piece of s*#t Vern Raburn for deceiving and using all these people who gave them their trust and time and energy."

You can take it as read that the 'child' was one of the 800 odd who were fired recently, and that this parent was worked up enough to send me a (much) longer email, of which the above is a mere extract. Consider, carefully, this paragraph before you buy yourself an FPJ....

So, that's what I think.

What about you?

Shane

339 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 339 of 339
Labrador Blue Dog said...

Coldwet- to your comment of :

"I hereby apologize for previously suggesting the folks who expected a whitewash needed to bring in tinfoil headware."

No tinfoil anywhere, my friend. We simply know how they play the game.

The answer to the investigation was cast the moment they named the team.

The SCR review team consisted entirely of the highest paid FAA Management personnel- or, in the case of Mr. Mack, a FORMER FAA management person who worked under contract- all hired and assigned by Mr. Hickey, Director of the Aircraft Certification Service, the very person who it is alleged to have created an atmosphere of "Certify quickly at any cost".

The review team?

· Jerry Mack, SCR team lead and former Boeing Government Affairs executive (Former Boeing Exec, who worked directly for Mr. John Hickey, current head of Aircraft Certification Service, when he was in Atlanta FAA ACO management a number of years ago.) Now a consultant to Mr. Hickey. Now retired and works as a consultant to FAA management under a personal services contract. Salary unknown, but estimated in the 200K annual range for a quick consult here.

· Jerry Baker, Associate Aircraft Certification Manager for Flight Testing ( Wichita FAA Management, FY-07=$143,053. )

· Jim Richmond, Aircraft Certification Service Flight Program Manager (Fort Worth FAA Management, FY-07 = $149,022)

· Vivek Sood, Manager of Safety Analytical Services (Washington DC FAA management, FY-07 = $137,829) Lowest paid of the group- I feel for him- having sold his soul for fewer pieces of silver than the rest of them.

· Peter Skaves, Special Projects Team Lead (Seattle FAA Office Management, FY-07 = $141,155 )


·Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate (Seattle FAA Transport Directorate 3d level FAA management, FY-07= $167,268)

· Ron Wojnar, Senior Advisor, Flight Standards Service
(Former long-time deputy to the FAA Director of Aircraft Certification, John Hickey, currently “special assistant”; FY-07 pay- $146,736 )


And what did they investigate? Whether or not the managers below them approved things properly.

No actual REAL FAA people-- no FAA NATCA bargaining unit Aviaton Safety Engineers, NATCA flight test pilots or engineers, and no PASS Aviation Safety MIDO inspectors, were used in the review.

It was all strictly FAA Management to gin up a quick "cover my tail" report. The outcome was predestined from before the beginning.

Did you expect any other answer?

(Note- the team members salaries and positions can be verified here. )

flyboymark said...

oustedeac said:
You guys are so smug. You all think this is one big joke. You're addicted like this is just some video game. Let me assure you this is NO GAME, NO JOKE.

I am one of those that bled on the manufacturing line with hopes for this company. Now I have no job. You may not have started the fire, but you sure fanning the flames. No matter what you think, the lives of 600 families of my fellow ex-workers have been affected by your actions. Eclipse is what it is. If you don't like it, don't buy one.

Some of you are so deluded that you have convinced yourselves that you have this "higher mission" to keep the world and aviation safe from Eclipse. Well let me clue you in, you are all a bunch of tabloid writers looking for the attention that your parents never gave you. You get pleasure from making up lies that in the end only hurt the little guys like me that are so desperately trying to make ends meet in this crazy world.

Now I know, Airtaximan, Dave NinerZulu are all going to say they did nothing but reveal the truth. Well the truth is that you do not know the truth and you just continue to make all kinds of outlandish claims that have little or no merit.

Only the innocent get hurt, and you are all part of the inflictors.


FlyBoyMark:
Whelp!!!!
I had this little black dog once named Spookie. He got loose out the door once and ran down the street and disappeared for a few hours. When he came back I let him in the door and he ran under the couch. I tried to get him out but all he did was growl and snap at me. After looking at him with a flash light for awhile I came to the conclusion he had been bitten and shaken by a dog much larger than him around the neck. I tried in vain to get him out from under the couch but all he did was bite me three times badly. The only thing I could get him to understand was the 2x4 that I used to pry him out from under the couch and then toss a heavy blanket on him so I could take him to the vet. He was innocent too…..
oustedeac, are you that little dog that is striking out and biting everything and everyone around you because you got bitten by a bad company and don't want to hear the truth from the people that really care? Granted there are some pontifficating gas bags on this blog that have unfounded suppositions but 80% or more are rite on. I have been involved in G.A. aviation since I was kid and I have never in my life seen anything quite like EAC's fleecing of the public. Well...maybe one other person...Jim Bede.
oustedeac, you should also read his story too...he was banned by the FEC for taking deposits on aircraft. I too really, REALLY hoped EAC would be the coming thing, and what a heart break it has been.
One of the fundamental mistakes that just about all prospective employees make is to NOT questioning the ethics and stability of the company they are about to work for. You have that rite just as they do when they interview you. Choose your job carefully because there are very bad employers out there too.

smartmoves said...

Looks like Adam back in business - sorta - http://www.a700jet.com/

I haven't read all the posts s- orry if someone has already done this - Sm

airsafetyman said...

"I am one of those that bled on the manufacturing line with hopes for this company. Now I have no job."

I can assure you that no one thinks your situation is s joke. General Dynamics, and Piper are hiring on the east coast along with Embraer (soon). Beech and Dassault may be hiring at their completion centers in Arkansas. I spent most of yesterday helping a young guy with a family to (hopefully) get hired by a major aviation manufacturer. How did Vern, Roel, and Ed spend their day?

uglytruth said...

EclipsePilotOMSIV said...
Well here you go. Vern was a cock and everybody knows it. To his credit he did something that hasn't been done in years. And he had a pretty darn good idea. He let his ego get the best of him I think and that is most likely why he is gone.


Let me ask this. Most on the blog have management / manufacturing expierence. I believe most anyone could have done a much better job than Vern has done and went thru a lot less money doing it and produced much better results. If you don't believe that......ask your self......how could Vern's results or anyone elses be any worse when that much $ was spent?
The design alone did not lend itself to rapid assemble. Stir welding.....for the time saved vs money spent was a very poor tradeoff.

PS. I was there for 6 weeks. Took me 3 days to know it smelled really bad and got worse after that and they DID NOT WANT TO make the hard decisions to improve. If they did no one was in charge of making things better.....just hoping for a miracle. I heard all the EGO's spew there ideas but they produced no results. The expierenced A&P's knew it was doomed and when I talked to them they were just waiting for a call.

airtaximan said...

CW,

I guess your read of the report was close to mine? I am no expert... are they basically saying, YES, E500 passed the cert as written and interpreted, BUT we need to change the cert/standards IF we are to have safet part 23 planes out there?

I am more than willing to be wrong, but would like to know if I am reading this correctly.

Also, is "emergency" supposed to be "emergence"...

To me, the FAA is basically admitting, part23 is outdated for turbo fan aircraft and highly integrated computerized avionics in this category.

So, my opinion is - EAC could have used the more stringent part 25 cert, KNOWING the regs were lacking for this type of plane - instead they went with regs that are now shown to have holes where safety concerns are coming to light.

Maybe I have this wrong?

airtaximan said...

oustedeac,


man, I feel for you. I have been fired or let go a few times in my life -its rough.

Every time within a few months, they guy who fired me got fired, and or the company closed. In one case, the company was cut in half within 6 months.

Sorry you think somehow we payed a bad part in your getting laid off. I don't think so...

I do think however, soon, the whole company will be let go. You have a head start in getting back on your feet.

And you are right about one thing - this is "just a blog, to us" but we take it pretty seriously - I think we're allowed.

I hope your next job will provide more than your last!

airtaximan said...

"EclipsePilotOMSIV said...
Well here you go. Vern was a cock and everybody knows it. To his credit he did something that hasn't been done in years. And he had a pretty darn good idea. He let his ego get the best of him I think and that is most likely why he is gone."

Are we learning that no one tried to certify a jet to part 23, before?

Are we learning that "he had a bad idea" - trying to price a jet plane that could sell 750 a year for 20 years, for around $1M? - I think this was a bad idea. A good idea would have been, trying to develop a plane that could sell for $1.5M, needing to sell 200 a year - this might have worked.

He is gone, becasue he failed, and a banker took over. I do not think we know anymore about this.

I for one, do not know the man, and all this talk about "ego" and "he's a cock".. is irrelevant - the man obtained $1.x Billion for this project. He's a great salesman, he's a great finacier, and I bet he loves aviation.

He just forgot the product needs to make sense and make money. I think he was concentrating on building something BIG... big enough to cash out via IPO before anyone could realize ROI was going to be very tough. He plowed ahead despite all indications the product was not viable from an ROI perspective. I am not sure what to call this..

All the BS makes me sick... becasue that is what is really the problem. It CONvinced a lot of people to dfo the wrong thing with their money.

gadfly said...

To “oustedeac”

At least four of the bloggers, “fred”, “flyboymark”, “airsafetyman” and “airtaximan” gave good answers to your comments. They ‘just about covered the territory.

For a moment, I thought they had “stolen” bits and pieces of my own life. . . but often we find that our own experiences are not unique.

Bad things happen to all of us . . . but how we handle those experiences makes the difference.

Move ahead . . . and become the wiser for the experience. Or, moan and groan, do little, and join the long line of losers. But never blame others as an excuse for inaction on your part.

gadfly

(The story about flyboymark’s little dog, “Spookie”, was a good one!)

Michael Turner said...

Thank you to all who have responded with insight and advice. Certainly, our research presents some challenges. At this point, we are focused on the success of the design outsourcing, and rapid prototyping for the Eclipse Concept Jet specifically. We are in contact with Swift and Eclipse. Our survey of print and digital media (including this blog, and its “ancestor”) lead us to believe that there may be others who wish to have a voice in the story. In short, we want to make sure that we don’t miss any key factors in our research. I’d also like to mention that we have no desire to compromise any NDA. If you are interested in our project, or have questions, please feel free to contact me at: mturnernmsu@gmail.com

Thanks again,
Michael Turner

airtaximan said...

Michael:

I think your best bet for this blog would be to ask specific questions about your research, when you get further down the road. I think if you are in touch with EAC and Swift engineering, you are probably going to get most of what you need regarding cost, timeline etc..

If something strikes you as odd, post a question here - someone might have insight.

Just my 2 cents - good luck.

airtaximan said...

one thing I would reccomend:

regarding the outsourcing of the design...

In aviation a "design" is only as good as:

1- its ability to meet a demand in the market - understanding what they really did to peg the design to some market requirement(s) might be very interesting

2- understanding how many folks responded by placing orders for this aircraft, might provide some insight about how "successful" the design was.

3- cross reference other OEMs and probably talk to Grob, Epic, Spectrum and Cirrus regarding composite non-conforming prototypes - for timeframe, cost etc...

I think you have a cool thesis topic - and you can benchmark EAC on elements of success with industry players who have done the same sorts of things.

As an aside, you might want to investigate what SWift did that was different (successful or unsuccesful?) compared to aerospace proactices/expereince. This would be cool to see!

Best of luck.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

ATM,

My objection is that the certification process, the delegation process, the DAR process all are intended to function with an experienced FAA team, backed up by good managers -working IN CONCERT with a ethical, focused and reasonably experienced OEM working in GOOD FAITH.

That is how the system works, it is much more like a partnership than folks not inside it understand.

My issue is that it is my belief that Eclipse acted in BAD FAITH, they stacked the decks with inexperienced people, especially in the EFIS/Avionics design, as well as with the other electrical items - oddly enough the areas they have had the most trouble with.

So now the FAA is being driven to rewrite 1309 becuase odf the failures of Eclipse to live up to its' part under the partnership approach - THAT is my problem.

Deep Blue said...

Concerning the E400 research project (and ATMs' rec. to use the Blog proper as a research channel is very smart), one might add certain managerial and competitive elements (versus strictly technical and engineering ones) into the mix of mapping this particular rapid prototyping.

VR was if nothing else, highly competitive. While the E400 may have been a product line extension play or even de facto capitalization tool, it was inherently a competitive play vis-a-vis Cirrus and Piper.

VR is an adherent to first-mover strategy, and as a game theory outcome, the E400 was clearly a very personal tactical project to try and beat to market other s/e jet players.

The E500 may be seen this way as well; and that's part of the game of business (and technology development).

airtaximan said...

OK... I am not an expert, but would like a comment on my interpretation of the report.

Am I readin it correctly, that EAC certified the plane to part 23... and that now, the FAA is acknowledging that part 23 aspects need to be re-writen due to he fact that it fails to adequetly address certain aspects of safety regarding planes like E500?

It seems like you are blaming EAC, while I am just trying to understand what is being written.

Is this the first time a part 23 turbo fan plane is being certified?

If so, can we expect that a company could comply, but that certain important aspects are lacking/missing? Same with part 23 highly integrated avionics driven planes?

Am I on the ball? Thanks

airtaximan said...

DB,

so, you are saying "success" could be defined as "using the rapid process to gain a first mover advantage" in the SEJ market?

Interesting: I wonder how that's working out?

SP, I do not like first mover advantages - it only works in rare cases... almost never in a lowest cost value proposition, either. By definition, first mover advantage is not sustainable.

This is why you now hear Roel spewing "operational excellence".. its a fancy way of saying "low cost".

EAC WAS a high tech company... now trying to reinvent as low cost...

Ironically, the mismatch of high tech (for fund-rasing sexiness) with the customer value required "low cost" is the "gotcha" from a business school perspective.

BTW, I actually believe this explains the downfall of EAC. They never really focused on the true value.

Had they done this... the project/product would have been completely different.

eclipso said...

OustedEAC said...
You guys are so smug. You all think this is one big joke. You're addicted like this is just some video game. Let me assure you this is NO GAME, NO JOKE.

I am one of those that bled on the manufacturing line with hopes for this company. Now I have no job



Now, anyone that is smart enough to build an aircraft, should be smart enough to see when a POS company is about to can their a**es. I hate that people lost their jobs, but there were SCORES of people that took the cahnce and hauled ass when they saw the cave-in coming. Life is about choices. If you chose to stay in a collapsing building, don't blame the rescuers for not pushing you out of the building first.

As for being critics, this is EclipseAviation CriticNG. Perhaps someone will start an EclipseAviation LOVERS ng. Until then, this is what we do here. And yes, I DID leave the building BEFORE the collapse.

eclipso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Baron95 said...

AT said ... So, why you think the remark you cited is the most important, and why you think this will result in less strict regs/standars, is beyond me.

I'm interested to know...


Hi AT, I think all your points are, of course valid. The reason I believe this may be a start of treating these planes separately is that the SCR report/press-release, specifically recomended that new rules/process/work etc is needed in sub 6,000lbs jets.

I think it is safe to assume that the requirements will NOT be more stringent for sub-6,000lbs jets than for existing larger part 23 jets (Citation Jets 1, 2, 3, Premier, etc...).

So the ONLY obvious conclusion is that, if sub 6,000lbs jets are treated differently than larger ones it is to be for more relaxed certifiction requirments.

I'm sure you are aware that sub-6,000lbs twin prop planes have more relaxed requirements than those over 6,000lbs right?

At first the changes may be trivial, but the fact that a distinction is made, will allow for increasingly differentiated treatment of VLJs - and that can only be more relaxed regs.

I have been on record stating multiple times that only sub-6,000lbs jets are true VLJs, specifically because there is a precedent in classifying planes that way for regulatory purposes.

The FAA is allowing A LOT of practical relaxed regulations. The TBM and PC12 now both stall a few nots faster than the previously cast in stone 61KCAS for single-engine planes. turbines heavier than 12,500 lbs now routinelly get certified as part 23 (commuter) and single pilot vs the previously cast in stone 25/2-pilot for planes above 12,500lbs MTOW.

So yes, I do believe there is hope to treat a D-jet more like a Meridian and less like a Citation Jet 3.

Baron95 said...

forward-observer said...
We simply know how they play the game.

The answer to the investigation was cast the moment they named the team.


Shane, can we start a Blog Petition for a congressional investication to investigate if the SCR team charged with investigating if there was hanky-panky in awardtding the TC was it self hanky-pankier?

And since we know that will not be suffcient for the jihadist critics, can we start a parellel petition to investigate, the investigation on the investigation abilities of the SCR team that was changed with investigating if the original TC was properly awarded.

Then when those are done, we can start all over again with an investigation to investigate the investigation of the team investigating....you get the point.

Those investigations are so great, and lead to such enhancements to flight safety that the more we have the safer we will all be, right?

And it will certainly feed the blog, which is a plus.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

ATM,

Keeping it simple, my issue is that the FAA is being blamed for Eclipse's failure to play fair, failure to use and listen to experienced personnel, failure to put safety ahead of all other concerns, failure to plan, failure to execute.

Essentially, AC 23.1309 is supposed to be re-written because the FAA failed to account for the possibility of a totally incompetent and manipulative OEM in the partnership for safety approach.

The issue was and remains Eclipse's inability to plan or execute. The F&R issue, which is essential for uncovering infant mortality failures BEFORE the planes hit the field was obviously a joke - the customers have ended up being test pilots.

Making the FAA responsible for Eclipse's total and abject failures is misplaced.

Part 23 need not be changed, Eclipse needs to meet the actual requirements.

I remain in disagreement with Baron about the need ofr type ratings for VLJ's and SEJ's. Aircraft of the capabilities these planes represent simply require a higher level of competence.

Baron95 said...

smartmoves said...
Looks like Adam back in business - sorta


Yep - they are back in business all right - They managed to pay the $4.95 yo GoDaddy.com to get a web site up. Surelly certification, EIS, production and IPO cannot be far behind.

Baron95 said...

At this point, we are focused on the success of the design outsourcing, and rapid prototyping for the Eclipse Concept Jet specifically.

You guys are unbelieveble - MT asked and told you at least twice that he is specifically focused on the success story of the rapid prototyping of the E400 that Eclipse outsourced.

You guys are trying to inject all sorts of FUD, like the E400 has no buyers, blah, blah, blah...

It is irrelevant. The fact is that Eclipse made a business decision that they wanted to have a flying prototype of their SEJ buit in secret and produce a big splash at Oshkosh and put them "ahead" of Cirrus. It is irrelevant if that decision was good/bad/silly.

Once that decision is made, the second decision is how to go about it.

There is little doubt in my mind that, in outsourcing that job, Eclipse accomplished ALL their objectives. They were able to fly a cool looing SEJ into oshkosh. They had a cool shape/configuration that likely will be retained if the plane go into production. They achieved their hard scheduled milestone. They achieved total media surprise and high impact. They deflect the possible claims that engineering resources (in addtion to just $$$) would be diverted from EA50 to SEJ had they not outsourced.

The only part I don't have info on is how much they paid to outsource the design. Assuming that was a reasonable amount and they have rights to all engineering info, it was probably the most successful thing Eclipse ever did. Certainly the only thing they delivered on time - a cool-looking prototype of a SEJ to waow Oshkosh.

MT, I'm looking forward to your report - I hope it can be made available on line for all of us to read. And I hope you don't get distracted by all the noise that some are trying to inject.

I am sure you will be graded on how close to the goal of the biz case study you stayed. Perhaps other in your class will be looking at other aspects of the Eclipse business decisions.

got the t shirt said...

Oustedeac,

Yes, there IS life after eclipse! Fortunately, I was able to hear the train coming and got a job offer 4 days before the lay off. I'd been sick to death of all the BS, false promises, and outright LIES put out by management for quite awhile. I'll be the first to admit, the hours and benefits were pretty good and that's the main reason I stayed as long as I did. Screw 'em...I took the money they were blowing!

As far as the management, if there's a God they'll damn sure get what's coming to them. Higher ups are definately at least guilty of being dishonest with the employees that gave their all to do the best job possible. Even worse is the incest crowd (nepotism) that chose to look out for their family members. You probably remember the senior QA person with his 2 stepdaughters, once of which happens to be married to a manager. Funny how they all made the cut. Also, if you weren't a member of the cessna mafia (as all these were/are), your opinion didn't count.

I have a few friends that are really good "wrenches" that are still there, but by and large it was the ones that could suck a golf ball through a garden hose that stayed on board. You can bet your ass I know who the latter are and my new boss has asked my opinion about them, since the new place had gotten a resume' or two.

You need to pull yourself up by the belt loops and get on with life. Get out there and get that job NOW. I've got the feeling Mr Roel is gonna sell everyone down the river...sooner rather than later. It was bad enough having 800 people thrown on the streets (the 650 figure was BULLSHIT put out by eac). It's gonna be worse when the rest are given the pink slip.

I wish all my friends the best and hope the people that could have done something, but didn't burn in hell.

Baron95 said...

Deep Blue said.... VR is an adherent to first-mover strategy, and as a game theory outcome, the E400 was clearly a very personal tactical project to try and beat to market other s/e jet players.

Exactly. Very nice post DB. I hope their team looks at this to document the "motivation goals and objectives" portion of the project. Only with that properly documented, can they measure how well they were met in implementation.

Baron95 said...

CW said ... I remain in disagreement with Baron about the need ofr type ratings for VLJ's and SEJ's. Aircraft of the capabilities these planes represent simply require a higher level of competence.

CW, just for the record, my position is not that no type rating should be required for SEJs. My position is that there should be a consistent set of rules for ALL airplane types, regardless of propulsion, that look at aircraft complexity, novelty, etc and determines the appropriate pilot requirements for PIC.

I'm OK with even requiring a type rating for a G58 Baron or reuire IOE of new pilots or whatever in based on a reasonable basis.

The fact that a turbojet engine is turning a ducted fan as in the Eclipse or an unducted fan like in the PC12/TBM/BE-200 should NEVER EVER be the sole basis of determining if a type rating is needed. It is just plain ridiculous and self-evidently so.

airtaximan said...

BAron, I think you missed the point, which could be the issue with EAC on the 400 as well...

What were they trying to do?
If your answer is they were trying to build a one off prototype, and fly it as OSHKosh.. well, that does not sound like a sound business goal to me... BUT, even IF that was the goal - could they have done it another way, a better way, a different way? or did they do it the best way possible.

One could argue that the e500 is a raging success as well... if their goal was to build a small jet, at all cost, not matter what it would cost in thend, and no matter how many could be sold.

Sure.

Poor use of $1.xB, though. BUT, IF that was the goal... they did a hell of a job.

The commerical reason for the "project" is the driver of success/failure.

Did they get the response they wanted on the e400?
Did they get enough deposits?
Did it have the desired effect on the previous model?

other?

there are the real aspects, together with what could have they done better to actually design and develop a prototype? If they did a great job at this, then everyone else has something to learn from the prototyping aspect.


Sorry my opinion looks FUD to you - its not... just my view.

Deep Blue said...

ATM said

"so, you are saying "success" could be defined as "using the rapid process to gain a first mover advantage" in the SEJ market?"

Yes, although your point is well taken and clearly, it represents risk; the E400 also had a bit of "Hail Mary" flavor to it, given the E500 difficulties, making "first mover" a bit of an irrationality; but such are entrepreneurs.

One might wonder if EAC was best at promotion and marketing and could have been better off strictly outsourcing all manufacturing and after-market. Potential partners might have been Fuji, Mitsubishi, or even a US-base commercial OEM.

One might surmise that the "Russia" Etirc aspiration points that direction; but as good as the Russians are in aerodynamics, their commercial and contractual weaknesses make them a very poor, unreliable and unecessarily risky outsource platform.

Shane Price said...

First to Michael Turner, best wishes.

Michael had the good grace to contact me some time ago and ask permission to engage with the blog.

I'm not sure if he still thinks it was a good idea, but at least he's asking questions. Unlike my next subject...

Second, the FAA SCR could find nothing wrong with the FAA certification process.

Big surprise.

Why bother having the SCR anyway? Could it be that they were running scared of next weeks DOT IG hearings and wanted to get their retaliation in first?

Third, to all those impacted by EACs' poor business ethics, my condolences. There a many many emails from victims, both ex staff, suppliers and their families. Very few have anything nice to say about the 'lack of' management at the company.

Finally, it's possible that Roel can turn this around. However, I had a thought earlier today which I feel compelled to share with you all. This weekend, a major Wall Street bank, something of an institution in it's own right, is struggling to find a buyer. Lehman Brothers, even in these difficult times, have GOT to be a better bet than EAC.

What do you think?

Shane

Deep Blue said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave said...

The only part I don't have info on is how much they paid to outsource the design. Assuming that was a reasonable amount and they have rights to all engineering info, it was probably the most successful thing Eclipse ever did. Certainly the only thing they delivered on time - a cool-looking prototype of a SEJ to waow Oshkosh.

Twice in that same response you went about calling the ECJ successful and in fact said it might have been the most successful thing Eclipse ever did, however, whenever anyone points out areas you then say it is either irrelevant or FUD. I believe based on the defined area that MT is looking at that the project was a success, but that does not mean the ECJ was successful in a broader sense.

This was done at a time when Eclipse was bleeding red ink and this only caused them to bleed more money for an optional project. The ECJ was announced within months of the next financing round from Roel, which ultimately ended up costing Vern his job. Without knowing all the details, I can't say that Vern would still have been able to keep his job if he hadn't devoted financial and personnel resouces to the ECJ, but by taking money away when money is running out and human resources away when they are needed to fix existing problems, it certainly didn't help Vern or Eclipse from their bigger goals.

Also from a broader standpoint the E400 may never even be produced in the first place. I believe Roel said he would make the decision in November. Whether or not you believe in the first-mover advantage, you don't get it if you don't produce the product in the first place. Should Eclipse decide to pursue it, it again would raise questions whether the best use of funds is for a new product that would cost a hundred million or more to bring to market when Eclipse still has existing production matters to deal with. Eclipse is not a company flush with cash and it has been clear for a long time for Eclipse to go anywhere they have to show a profit and spending money on a non-essential pursuit greatly hinders their ability to show a profit.

Again, from the narrow defined area of creating a prototype, it was successful from an engineering standpoint, but looking at the ECJ from a broader view, I believe the ECJ was unsuccessful and was one of the things that lead to Eclipse being taken over by ETIRC. Also the ECJ may never see the light of day as the E400 produced for customers, which if that comes to pass, that would further make the ECJ a poor business decision.

Shane Price said...

Deep Blue echo's another 'working pilot'

Tell Baron 95 that there are two chances of the FAA relaxing the type rating requirements for a VLJ.

Slim and None. You get out, what you put into it. I don't like sharing the skies with half-assed pilots. The skies are filled with them now.

I'm sorry, I don't have much tolerance for people who think that it wouldn't hurt anybody to just skate by. Usually innocent people, like family members, who don't know any different, end up getting killed.


The FAA has many roles (possibly too many) in aviation, certifying the aircraft, policing the pilots and deciding what training is required for each 'type' of flying you do.

Why they need to act as their own 'examiners' as well is beyond me.

Shane

Deep Blue said...

A few comments on the "certification review" thread.

One might not put too much currency in FAA certification; whether manufacturing, aeromedical, flight and maintenance operations or air carrier fitness review (Parts 61, 91, 135, 121 and DOT 401 et al) as their ability to actually have perfect information is highly limited; moreover, their promotional drives support an enormous willingness to work with aviation ventures.

The ultimate "certification" of course is the marketplace (imperfect), and while the EAC venture may have some serious technical shortcomings, it is not probable (versus possible) that the craft is so inherently flawed that the FAA would warrant a revocation; even if it was, the supplier, investor and political community won't be typically challenged by FAA; that is the domain of other parties.

Many "problematic" craft (airplanes, helos, lighter than air, gliders and now non-atmosphericc sub-orbital craft) represent risks and many arguably flawed craft are still in operation.

Let's take the MU2 series as an example. I can speak with authority about this very high performance aircraft: 1,200 hours as FAR 135 PIC and a training pilot.

For you pilots out there, the MU2-B Marquise has a Vmc of 99 knots; Vr is Vmc + 10 knots; but VYSE is 150 kts; VXSE is 130.

Several fatal accidents were attributed to an innability to continue controlled flight after engine failure, post rotation.

Mitsu's rec? Land straight ahead regardless of obstacles if VXSE has not been attained in a s/e mode. That is, you are going to crash, at sub-VXSE and may or may not be able to acclerate to VYSE. Even at that speed, maintaining control is beyond all but the most highly trained, talented pilots.

The MU2? Still with us today.

The equally critical "certification" challenge/gap has got to be pilots.

The private platform is utterly outdated; commercial, instr, m/e is OK but really a learner's permit.

High altitude jet operations are pro space, period, unless there is so much vehicle intelligence in upset, failure, emergency recovery and complex ATC operations decision making, that it is all but automated. That leaves other high-challenge events like wind shear, icing, convection or high-density airport conformity unaddressed

We are decades away from an intelligent-jet/ATC scenario.

airtaximan said...

"Again, from the narrow defined area of creating a prototype, it was successful from an engineering standpoint"

I think you need to make this statement within context: how much did it cost, how relevant was the prototype to the ultimate design (think v-jet to e500) and if it was designed to demonstrate anything from an engineering/performance/manufacturability/technology standpoint... did it succeed?

If so, at what cost and was there a better approach?

At least that's how I would review it.

Many people have produced on-off planes - even in their own garage.

The key is to discover if in fact they did anything well. The criteria is their own goals. If the goa was just to make a plane under the cone of silence, and fly it to OK - sobeit. What did it cost? Was there a better way?

If not - success!!

Dumb, IMO, but success nonetheless.

airtaximan said...

deep blue -

I think your approach of outsourcing the whole thing was their first attempt with Williams designing the whole shebang!

Lesave it to an engine company to do the whole plane.

I persoanlly think, a low cost, COST program to produce a working reliable simple twinjet was the way to go. YES, they could have had someone do final assembly for them... even design the plane, really -

I think finding capital to do this would have been tougher - becasue it was the tech-sex that got the money.

IMO

Deep Blue said...

a quick follow up on certification.

The integrity and especially robustness of certification standards and conformity are highly skewed toward commercial FAR 121 and transport category aircraft.

Witness the recent FAA grounding of AA MD-80 craft concerning wire bundle harnessing.

Imagine the E500 passing FAA certification if it were an "airline" platform for the public.

The FAA's philosophy is generally "user beware" with GA; even to some extent with FAR 135; witness the utter lack of control over unregulated "brokers" (although that is getting more attention after several incidents/accidents).

My point? Boeing, EMB, Canadair, Airbus would never get cert if their commercial craft came out of production with spec gaps like the E500 apparently has.

AvidPilot said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave said...

Kanye West makes new video for DayJet:
http://www.tmz.com/2008/09/11/kanye-attack-caught-on-tape/
By flying DayJet you avoid the nutters at the airport.

gadfly said...

I-got-the-t-shirt said... I wish all my friends the best and hope the people that could have done something, but didn't, burn in hell.

I start a new job Monday. But I maintain that those here are also responsible, and have participated in the resulting demise and hardship of others. They are not without guilt. These include Gadfly, Airtaximan, Niner Zulu, Airsafetyman, Shane, Gunner, Dave, ColdWetMackeralofNothing, and Fred just to name a few. Their posts contain lies, innuendo, and malice against Eclipse and are made without concern of the consequences to others. They are NO better that those they criticize. And, the day will come that they when they will stand before their maker. Gadfly beware.

Dave said...

No, it's your fault, it's Vern's fault, it's the entire management team of Eclipse's fault, it's the Eclipse employee's fault and the fault of the customers, position holders and everyone else who held their nose and overlooked every misdeed of Eclipse so they could either make money or save money.
The only innocent ones at Eclipse are the ones who were either too new or too dumb that they truly didn't know what was going on, and I'll wager you weren't one of them.


I wouldn't go about blaming the employees who were fired. That employee who was fired by Eclipse wanted to vent, so I say let him vent. I'm someone that ex-employee specifically named in their vent and you don't see me complaining about it.

Dave said...

I start a new job Monday

Congratulations!

Dave said...

Their posts contain lies, innuendo, and malice against Eclipse and are made without concern of the consequences to others.

BTW, you're welcome to provide the facts as you see them here.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Ousted, let's see an example of a 'lie' I have told about EAC, or keep the character assasination to yourself.

As the others have said, your silence enabled the very situation you took financial advantage of to harm others, for far more money I suspect than you made while there.

Prove the claim of lie or take it back.

And while you go back and scoiur the record for something you think you can use to support your bogus claim, be sure and count up the posts where I state clearly that I have friends who were at Eclipse, and how I wished them and everyone else there (which would inhclude you by the way), well and hoping they would not be hurt by the inevitable collaps of the house of cards.

I stand by for you to man-up and apologize - but I won't be holding my breath.

Again, you have made some bold accusations - prove it.

Anonymous said...

OustedEAC said...
Their posts contain lies, innuendo, and malice...


OK, I'll go along with the innuendo and possibly malice but where are the lies? As we say on the intertubes, "No sauce?".

Anonymous said...

DOH!!!

StinkyFish beat me to the question. BlogSpot needs an edit button.

Anonymous said...

RE: Part 23 Certification

I thought the smaller jets were primarily certified to part 23 with a few part 25 items as optional (e.g. takeoff/landing distance)?

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Fear not Anon, some messages deserve repeating.

airtaximan said...

ousted,

FYI,

I've been posting here for a long time - narrow concern of issues, what I consider my domaine. I've been prety right on, regarding my posts.

When you say: "ColdWetMackeralofNothing" is somehow responsible for your problems - you are pissing on some pretty hallowed ground. I'm not kidding. This guy seems to have very deep knowledge of aircraft development, certification and manufacturing. I would not consider myself beyond reproach.. but I would consider him a 100% honest, transparent and accurate opinion on all things considered above.

So, back off m'therfker - I'm beginning to think you got let go becasue you were in the botton quartile regarding value, talent and potential.. which does not bode well for you from now on.

Recognize knowledge ad insight for what its worth - here its free, and its been pretty accurate. Lean and move along. You got burned, but not by us.

PS. something tells me that you would be very impressed with who is posting to this blog, if you knew who they were. That being said, you should grab your screw gun, and find a job somewhere else. Perhaps you'll be lucky enough to be working for/with one of us.

Baron95 said...

Dave said ... Twice in that same response you went about calling the ECJ successful

I'm sorry for being argumentative, but I said no such thing, nor whould I ever say that at this stage.

I said is that, the outsourced project to deliver a flying one-off show case of the Eclipse SEJ in time for Oshkosh and in secrecy for maximum impact (assuming it was at reasonable costs and Eclipse got all the technical info), was a success.

What part of that statement don't you understand. I never said ANYTHING AT ALL about the success of the E400 project or even if it was smart or dumb for Eclipse to have done that.

MT wants to study the benefits of outsourcing for having produced the one-off in time and good looking and in secrecy, once the decision was made.

That is all. he is not (as I understand it) studying the market or success for the larger E400 program and, as such, I am making no comments about that.

Yes, it is possible and even likely that the E400 is still born and that it was nothing more than a distraction.

Is it no possible in our mind to keep the two aspects separate?

got the t shirt said...

Ousted,

Yea, maybe the folks here didn't help, but the asshole that signed your paycheck (Vern) is the one responsible. Without that piece of shit of a human being, these guys wouldn't have anything to complain or speculate about. Period.

I'm just not sure who I'd insult more by characterizing him as a nazi or a member of the KGB.

We were all adults when we signed the dotted line to work there. For over a year and a half, I truly believed that we were doing something great. As soon as the con jet was unveiled, it was obvious that was another way to kick the can down the road a little farther. Trust me, if there was an aviation industry in ABQ, eclipse would have bled manpower a long time ago.

If you haven't noticed, almost everyone here has something to do with aviation, so it's probably not smart to blame them or make threats. See paragraph one. Remember, the ass you kick today may be the one you need to kiss tommorow. This industry is smaller than you think.

Best of luck on the new job. You're a leg up on those still drinking the koolaid at eclipse.

uglytruth said...

These include Gadfly, Airtaximan, Niner Zulu, Airsafetyman, Shane, Gunner, Dave, ColdWetMackeralofNothing, and Fred just to name a few.

These people have years and years of expierence. I read this blog to learn from them. There smarter than me. Gadfly says he's as old as yoda....he's gotta know a lot and his posts are very informative. And the one thing you overlook in your statements is everyone on this blod all concerned about safety. Aircraft safety, passenger safety, employee safety, investor safety.

Baron95 said...

Shane said... . I don't like sharing the skies with half-assed pilots. The skies are filled with them now.


Shane, I am getting more and more concerned about the quality, attitude and mental state of your "working/professional" pilot sources.

The previous one, if it is different, had a total lack of knowledge about the FARs and the need for IOE for the first type rating, and proceded to make an ass of himself by arguing about it.

This one, again, shows a complete lack of understanding of the FARs and the discussion.

Why is he not afraid of flying with a non type rated Mirage, TBM, PC12, SR22Turbo, C400 Turbo, Duke, P-Baron, Mooney Bravo, etc, all of which can fly at or above FL250 with private pilot's license no type rating but he is afraid of flying with a non-type rated pilot flying a D-Jet which has a cert ceileing at or below the above planes?

Is he that much of an ass or cock as you guys say in the british Isles than he can't even know that he is already flying with those pilots?

Or is he just one of those pilots, that believe he is a demi-god just because he has a commercial or ATP locense with a couple of type ratings?

And on top of that, he has to use you as messenger.

Tell him to get some therapy. The skies area public asset, and he has no choice but to share it, and given his comments, I'd recomend that you report him for fitness to fly for hire. His attitude shows a complete disregard for other pilots, an agressive attitude that is not condusive to flying safety.

What an ASS!!!

P.S. And that is the first time EVER I used this expression in a public or private discussion - so I DO MEAN IT.

Anonymous said...

got the t shirt said...
...if you weren't a member of the cessna mafia (as all these were/are), your opinion didn't count.


LOLWUT?!?!?!?

Are you saying that cessna runs the show in ABQ????

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

Ousted

Your threat to me has been duly noted. And I take a man at his word.

If you should use that feature, as many of us do on occasion: "This post has been removed by the author.”, your comments will also be removed from my memory. That’s how Someone else treated me, for which I am eternally grateful.

gadfly

Beyond that, I have no comment.

Dave said...

Is it no possible in our mind to keep the two aspects separate?

If you would have read what I said, I said it was successful from an engineering standpoint.

Baron95 said...

Yes, Dave you did say that. And that is going farther than I'd go. I don't know how well engineered it was. The only datapoint I have is that it flew and didn't come apart in flight.

The ECJ/E400 served several purposes for Vern/Eclipse - some, really, really critical:

1 - Got press, attention, made Cirrus jet look like an ECJ copy, showed that Eclipse could be more than one plane - a family, showed some responsiviness to higher fuel prices and the escalating EA50 prices, etc, etc, etc - soft bennefits.

2 - Probably played a critical role is securing ETIRC and other financing. Would they have invested without the ECJ/E400?

3 - Provided a place for position holders balking at the price increase of the EA50 to $2.15M to go, perhaps saving Eclipse 100 orders/deposits that were sure to be cancelled otherwise.

But that is a different story. MT wants to study the outcome of the decision to outsource the one-off ECJ show article. Very narrow.

Dave said...

Your threat to me has been duly noted

Gadfly I didn't read into that as Ousted making a threat to you, to me or anyone else. I didn't read the post as saying Ousted was going to send you to meet your maker, but rather what would happen when you did.

(Not specifically directed at you) I really don't see a point in arguing with an alleged ex-Eclipse employee. Vern and the executives have already established the accuracy of this blog with their lawsuit and some alleged former low-level employee calling what is posted here "lies" without offering any substantiation simply isn't going to go anywhere. I think it is better to attribute it to the Reality Distortion Field and just leave it at that. If Ousted is specific instead of just speaking in the most broadest of broad generalities (basically just name-calling and insulting), then address what is said then, but otherwise I don't see what point it serves to argue with someone who just lost their job.

Dave said...

2 - Probably played a critical role is securing ETIRC and other financing. Would they have invested without the ECJ/E400?

Without straying too far, I'd just like to re-emphasize that I think ETIRC funded Eclipse again despite the ECJ rather than because of the ECJ. Look at what happened with it as soon as Roel took over as CEO - he froze the program indefinitely. Again, I think the ECJ is one of the reasons Vern is no longer CEO and Eclipse is no longer an independent entity.

ColdWetMackarelofReality said...

Baron, my read is in line with Dave's. Scuttlebut was that ECJ was done off the books, the BoD didn't know about it.

I estimate between $15-20M total for engineering, equipment and fabrication.

Success would be determined by whether it was done faster, cheaper, or more ready to produce by the outsource partner vs. diverting limited EAC resources to it.

I suspect the outsource decision was as much to keep the rank and file in the dark, as it was to 'punish' the engineering team, as well as keep the project out of all prying eyes.

Ysing the criteria did it fly, did it stay together - I would say success. Producibility remains to be seen - but if reports are accurate and it has only garnered 100 maybe 200 total orders than I doubt we can call it a success.

That is of course ignoring all of the issues for Eclipse as a company.

Baron95 said...

I'm in general agreement with you CW and Dave, except perhaps that there may be a future for the E400.

Yep. In the end, Eclipse will be for a long time just one funding round away from possible success.

Having been on both sides of quie a few start ups, I know painfully well things are always on the edge. One good break and you hit a milestone before money runs out and get another round in. One bad break, and money dries out and it is all over.

It is hard, even on the inside, to predict which way it will go, let alone from the outside.

eclipse_deep_throat said...

To oustedeac,

Hmmm. Are we still stuck in the 5 stages of grief? Anger? Why direct that at the blog, I don't understand. Peg certainly isn't reading any of this. As others have stated: cause and effect. We didn’t **cause** the problems at EAC.

I am naturally a cynical person and I am just tired of all the crap that I have had to put up with over the last 20 some-odd years. Despite my cynicism, I still wanted to work at EAC. However, I don’t think that I had "perfect information" as to all the risks I was assuming. No one ever does. Now, do I have a pity party over that or do I move on? Of course not. Do I still worry about foreclosure? Sure, only because the NM economy is littered with trolls that only want to pay $12/hour for us college-educated 36-year-olds. Yes, even before I closed on my house last year I still considered the chance that EAC could dissolve at some point in the future. My job was eliminated a hell of a lot faster than I considered. I’m tired of losing my job every 10 fucking years. I’m tired of these pinhead managers lying to my face. These are the same pinheads I dealt with when I was 17yrs old, only the nature and quantity of their bullshit has changed. How is my “perception of reality” any better than yours? It isn’t. It’s just different.

What irratates me the most is when companies come in to New Mexico and casually use people when they need them and later discard them when they don’t. Sure, we can say that is part of the “natural” business cycle. EAC rises to a higher level of hipocracy when they claim to be using Lean Production – and some of us have an idea what that is supposed to mean in terms of how you treat customers, suppliers, and employees. Contrast EAC to what was in a recent Automotive News (Aug 18th) piece: Toyota is idling a truck plant with 4500 workers. Not ONE of them is laid off. Living up to their principals of never laying off your workers is estimated to cost Toyota $50 million. Why on earth is it so unreasonable to hold American companies up to the standards they claim to be using? Why do we have to resort to unions in order to get American companies to not act like assholes? Oops, too late. Boeing workers are still on strike today...

I’m sure someone out there can dig up dirt on Toyota; I am sure there are customer blogs about at least one bad Toyota product. The difference is that my perception of Toyota is that they have the one thing EAC lacks: HUMILITY at trying to avoid the ‘big corporation disease.’ I don’t think anyone posting on the blog is suggesting that Cessna, Pieper, Adam Aircraft, Boeing, etc. are saints. EAC is the newbie to the GA biz and they have dumped on all the others, claiming they would do everything better. Well, now’s the time to call ‘em on their bullshit. The only “innocent” people are one’s duped into working for EAC and perhaps this blog can help prevent other’s from making that mistake.

E.D.T.

nonsequitur said...

I was considering taking a technical publications job with Eclipse back in late 2004. However, after over twenty years in the business, I knew it would have been a bad mistake from the get-go. Eclipse just didn't feel or sound right. That's why I'm working for one of the established players in the business.

easybakeplane said...

FAA review:

I know one of the people involved in the review (nice guy) but he is a long-time FAA employee nearing retirement, and no matter what people tell you, that can influence what you do or say...

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

As I said before, I considered a job offer from EAC several years ago, but when told of their estimated production rate and manpower allocated for the job (as well as supporting non-production activities) I knew something wasn't right.

----------

I think the FAA should create a new 'EAC' category for Part 23, similiar to 'commuter category. Whereas Commuter category is used (and abused) by companies that have blown their weight estimates, or want to build a larger derivative based off a smaller a/c design (for the most part); the 'EAC' category a/c could be used by companies that have blown their budget/schedule and need to certify ASAP! Basically the FAA let you move your F&R testing to your first hundred customers so you can start making $$$ while working out the snags of the new a/c! (think of all the current and recent companies this could help!)

paul said...

Oustedeac:

I imagine eclipse was your first aviation experience, since you're so upset about losing your job.
If you choose to remain in the industry get used to it.
The saying goes in the airlines you haven't really worked in the airlines long if you have not been layed off.
Or go back to what you were doing before eclipse hired you.
In thirty years of aviation employment I've been at 5 airlines.
Four no longer exist.
I never blamed words on paper for their demise, it's the nature of the industry.

paul said...

Oustedead:

Lucky you that McDonalds is hiring!

Baron95 said...

EDT said ... I’m tired of losing my job every 10 fucking years. I’m tired of these pinhead managers lying to my face.

So it appears you are 36 yo and are tired of losing your job every than years. So you mean to say that this is actually only the second time you lost your job in 20 years of work? What is so remarkable about that?

I fail to see where you yourself take any responsibility for YOUR job. It is YOU that lost YOUR job. Do you by any chance believe you are entitled to a job regardless of what else happens?

You lost your job, Vern lost his job and reputation, Al Mann lost a ton of money, depositors lost money and the oportunity to buy something better, taxpayers lost the potential to get better tax revenues to fund better services. What makes you so special?

Do you want guaranteed results? Hummm, lets see, I think we have that MAYBE only in cuba and north korea these days - you are guaranteed to fail there. Pretty much everywhere else, you have a shot at success if you take with it the risk of failure.

If you are sooooo much better than the "pinheads", you work will surely be recognized and you will be running your own company soon. And of course, you will never fail in that venture and never ever lay off a worker, right?

The S#@$ we read in this blog!!!!

Baron95 said...

Paul said... In thirty years of aviation employment I've been at 5 airlines.
Four no longer exist.


Ouch! Paul, can you tell me what airline you current work for so I can short that ;)

Seriously though, yes, it is a tough, tough industry - not for the weak of heart for sure.

airsafetyman said...

Well Eclipse_Deep_Throat has a point. Firms like Toyota with pension programs, good pay, and good medical benefits get the cream of the workforce while dysfunctional outfits like Eclipse get the rest, if they are competing in the same workforce area. The head of the cratering firms leave with golden parachutes ( I think I will buy a Cessna business jet!) while the worker-bees wonder how to keep medical benefits and their family off the curb.

gadfly said...

paul said... Oustedead: Lucky you that McDonalds is hiring!

Like I said, there is no conscience here, and you think this is a game with points awarded to the most outlandish claims of falsehood. You guys don't give a damn about what effect your inaccurate comments have on others. YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN ECLIPSE. You disgust me, and you will evenually meet your maker and be condemned.

Dave said...

Like I said, there is no conscience here, and you think this is a game with points awarded to the most outlandish claims of falsehood. You guys don't give a damn about what effect your inaccurate comments have on others.

You keep on putting out heat, but not light so people don't take you seriously. By the way the bloggers here were not sued by Eclipse for making falsehoods, but rather the bloggers here were sued for being too accurate and there's the court records to prove it:
http://petrofsky.org/misc/legal-docs/Eclipse/Eclipse-vs-Does-CA-2008-05-23-quash-opposition.pdf
http://petrofsky.org/misc/legal-docs/Eclipse/Eclipse-vs-Does-CA-2008-05-21-Raburn-declaration.pdf

TBMs_R_Us said...

You disgust me, and you will evenually meet your maker and be condemned.

Ousted,

You must enjoy being disgusted, since you are choosing to read the blog and react poorly to someone's sense of humor. You should expect to be made fun of by folks when you post religious crapoloa like this. Just who the heck are you to condemn others anyway?

What is so funny about your posts is how full of S&*% you are. The blog had nothing to do with EAC's problems. That you think it did is funny / humorous / revealing. Your assertion that the bloggers don't care about the impact of what they write is just ass-backward. The bloggers DO care, that's why they write about EAC. Your anger would be better directed to EAC.

Finally, this is just free speech at work, something that has worked really well for our country over the last 200+ years. We are entitled to make fun of people and companies that we think are stupid, corrupt, or incompetent, and to level whatever criticism we like. If you don't like what people here have to say, then don't read it. Meanwhile, your posts are truly funny and will no doubt continue to generate this type of response.

BTW, no one here has ever said anything that could be construed as wanting to see people, yourself included, be hurt by EAC. What was said was that there was real concern that people would be hurt, and that evidently has proven to be true.

eclipso said...

Can someone else who was at Eclipse and got laid off give some comments? I could swear I read 650-800, but Ousted seems to think they were the only one. I agree is was wrong the way they did it, but most of us that have been in aviation could see it coming and left long before it affected us and our families. A hard decision at the time, but more important for what was BEST fore our families.

Now, some stayed regardless of how it would affect others around them, and if the blog had ANY responsibility, I would not still be posting. This is aviation. As far as lay-offs, "those who have, and those who will." is the order of the day.I got out BECAUSE of the information on this blog and am VERY glad the folks here gave me such insight to make such a choice.

Shane Price said...

Baron,

I've no desire to get between the two of you. However, as I've explained before, one of the 'working pilots' is in a sensitive situation and uses me to 'post' on the blog.

So, next time, when responding, you might address your comments to 'working pilot'.

Thanks.

Oh, and here's his response....

I apologize for using you as a conduit for my message to Baron 95. You understand my situation, though.

I was hoping that he would understand that the FAR's are predicated and written in response to rather tragic events, that have killed thousands of family, and friends. The spirit of these regulations is for safety to prevail.

In this business, there is a huge difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is curable, stupidity is terminal. On more than one occasion, I have been, very close to getting killed. I have never even been involved in an incident. I know others who have been killed. This, unfortunately, is a part of this business that must be avoided at all costs.

There have been countless studies as to the cause of accidents, in any form of life. NASA has volumes of it. Unfortunately, human error prevails as the main cause of aviation accidents.

I am third generation aviation, I started my career in General Aviation. I understand Baron's position, but after 30 years as an aviator, I can break it down into simplest terms.

Inattention is the root cause of all aviation accidents. It could be on the part of anybody that is involved in the operation, and movement of an aircraft. The mechanic, the fueler, the pilot, the controllers, the loaders, the plane and it's systems, and mother nature.

Who is responsible for making sure that all of these variables, and many more, can be safely managed? It's the Captain's responsibility to stop inattention it it's tracks. It's his ass that's blowing in the wind, and others depend on him to perform his job safely. He is the one that makes the big decisions. If we didn't have pilots and planes, nobody else in aviation would have a job. He dictates policy to the controllers, and is the master of the aircraft that he operates.

I don't know many times, my knowledge, training, and experience has saved my ass. The more you know about your capabilities and your machine, the safer everyone will be.

I have more important things to deal with when it comes to me coming home safely, each and every time. Paying attention to details, such as the task at hand, are my main interest.

I might not have a great knowledge of IOE requirements or a bible thumping knowledge of the FAR's. I thank Baron for bringing this to my attention. Through the air carriers that I have employed me, I satisfied IOE.

My main area of interest is part 91 flight rules, FAR part 135, Company Operation Specifications, and company Flight Operations Manual. I didn't mention SOP's and aircraft manuals. So it's easy to omit FAR's that are not within my area of operation.

I hope that Mister Baron 95 will understand this.

An airplane is an equal opportunity machine. It doesn't discriminate. It will kill anyone, from any nation, from any walk of life, if used improperly.


I'll add my own comment to finish. Recently, while chatting with a pal (who happens to be a commercial transatlantic pilot) I asked him what his 'go/no go' decision making process was, before he set off for x hours across the wide and empty ocean.

His response was very interesting. He would not put his own ass at risk, because if he did, the other 300 people sitting behind it were in danger.

Seemed pretty sensible to me....

Shane

chickasaw said...

Oustedeac said:

"These include Gadfly, Airtaximan, Niner Zulu, Airsafetyman, Shane, Gunner, Dave, ColdWetMackeralofNothing, and Fred just to name a few."

You guys sure have an innate talent for making people's shit list.

Ousted, there are a lot of ex-EAC employees/contractors (myself included), that saw the "handwriting on the wall". The people that you blamed for your downfall were not sued by Vern for lying; quite the opposite.

The Elmer Gantry speeches will get you nowhere. Take control of your life and be proactive in your career. Good Luck.

fred said...

oustedeac :

#You disgust me, and you will evenually meet your maker and be condemned. #


aren't you sure you're the type to "go see mummy" because you didn't get the Big-Prize in a lottery without playing ?

wake-up ! go ahead ...

are you one of the guys who went around because you were promised Company's stocks ?

if each time you loose your job or an opportunity (or what did seems to be at the time) do you go swearing at others ?

you see if you have two proposal for a job :

1° normal job , pay ok , normal condition , etc... and if you do your best , in 6 months a rise is to be talked over ...

2° job in a start-up where no one seems to fully understand what is going on , where the boss is an "illuminated lunatic" , next rank is nothing better, where standards and specifications change with the wind and you're asked to keep it shut because "if it works , you'll get plenty of stocks that even Microsoft employees will envy you"

which one will you choose ?

the first : if you're terminated , it's really a pity , but if you keep crying on fate , you will forever ...

the second : you played , lies have blinded you ? = tough but welcome in real life !

i am starting to wonder in which fields you are playing ...

fred said...

# You guys sure have an innate talent for making people's shit list. #

ok , so if you ask for it :

MY shit list =

I wrote about EASA ! was it shit ? more than a year later , NOTHING is done in this topic ...
EASA is so f***g fed-up of all the lies and empty promises from EAC , they consider dropping the whole matter ...

I wrote about European Union being VERY different of USA , in terms of needs of transportation !
I really don't think that you can contradict me on such , have you ever put a foot on European soil ? ( not what CNN or FOX News want you to believe ;REALITY!) long enough to understand anything ??

I wrote about the "Russian Connections" ...
Unfortunately , i am working in Russia , at a level you will probably never reach (considering your little wimp...)
Do you REALLY believe that they had a thousandth of what they pretended to have as connections ?
Do you really believe Russians are so stupid , that they will risk a few hundreds Millions $ to make a plane that doesn't sell ?

Baron95 said...

Working Pilot said... An airplane is an equal opportunity machine. It doesn't discriminate. It will kill anyone, from any nation, from any walk of life, if used improperly.


WP a more ballanced post, but still very depressing and scary. You should get together with Gadfly. Between your killer airplanes and his aluminum eating critters, you'll surely managed to discourage any "non-working" pilot from ever flying a plane.

On a more serious note, I do understand (I think) where you are coming from, and I do respect your experiences that shape your views.

Yes, the world would be a much, much safer place if only the people with the highest level of skill and professionalism were allowed to do things.

What what if we required a "type-rating" requiring you to demonstarate absolute precision and knowledge before being allowed to operate a motor vehicle (car, motorcicle, etc)? What if we made all drivers have sim checks every 6 months showing every possible emrgency avoidance manouver possible to keep their driving priviledges? What if we required a minimum of 2 drivers per car, with a manadatory briefing before every driving segment, etc, etc....Wouldn't we cut down on the 40,000 people killed on american roads every year? Most likely so.

I drive high performance cars on and off the race track. I pride myself in being a very attentive and safe driver (even on the rare ocasions where I may be driving above the speed limit on public roads). Sometimes I feel like you - lets get the idiots off the road.

But, we made a decision, as a society, that driving on public roads is something that should be made accessible ot a very large portion of the population, and the extensive regulations that do exis still allow people with basic/minimal skill and judgement to share the roads with us.

So we accept that 40,000 people will die in traffic accidents every year. We try to improve it without measures that will exclude most drivers.

Similarly in GA. Approximately 400 people lose their lives in GA accidents. Almost ALL of them happen at 1,000ft AGL or less as landing accidents, RLOCs, CFITs, etc.

NONE. READ IT AGAIN.... NONE happen as collisions in the flight levels. Absolutely NO ACCIDENTS fit the scenario you are so afraid off.

Just like you share the roads with unskilled, non-professional drivers you need to share the skies with non-working pilots.

If you are such a great pilot, I'd hope you would volunteer, as I do (and I don't consider myself a "great" pilot), to mentor some aviators moving into high-performace planes. Help them shoose the rihgt machine. guide them by the hand into the flight levels. Show them how to program a crossing altitude on their FMS, etc.

Don't sit there on your part 135 office and say "I won't share the flight levels with any non-professional pilots". That is just silly and ignorant.

A - You already do. the flight levels are full of Mooneys Bravos/Aclaim, Mirages, Dukes, SR22sTN, C400, P210s and the likes.

B - There are no accidents involved collisions in the flight levels. None. And there are likely to be none. That is the only flight segment you don't have to worry much about in terms of another pilot making a mistake and taking you out.

[P.S. I have done extensive analysis on one flight level colision in Brazil between a recent Gol 738 and an Embraer Legacy - both flown by experienced and type-rated 2 pilot crews under ATC control at FL370. In case you bring that up, I can provide you with a wealth of detail - those planes were readed towards each other opposite direction same altitude for 55 minutes before the colision]

I sicerely hope you reconsider your attitude and be constructive about increasing air safety without excluding people.

Increasing air safety by eliminating pilots/planes/flights is easy. There were no accidents in the US on 9/12/2001. But that is not the skies we want (at least I don't). We need smart people to work to increase air safety while at the same time increasing participation. More pilots, more planes, more pilotst in the flight levels, more jets, more pilots in jets.

I hope we can count on you to help, not to impede that type of progress.

Baron95 said...

And sory for all the typos and spelling errors - as usual it is a drive by typing...

chickasaw said...

Fred,

Slow down brother, I was not taking a shot at you. You are one of the contributors that I respect on this blog. I am sorry that you took offense and I apologize for "ruffling your feathers".

WhyTech said...

"What what if we required a "type-rating" requiring you to demonstarate absolute precision and knowledge before being allowed to operate a motor vehicle (car, motorcicle, etc)? What if we made all drivers have sim checks every 6 months showing every possible emrgency avoidance manouver possible to keep their driving priviledges?"

You must be reading my mind. I have often thought that this is the way things should be done.

You speak of "drive by typing." Your posts sometimes make me wonder about drive by thinking. Some are superb; others are, well....

One of my first flight instructors told me "this thing will kill you if you let it." He was not trying to scare me, but to motivate me to be a competent, skilled pilot. And, he was successful - over the last 40+ years I have invested in training and acft maintenance that are what I consider "professional grade," with the goal of being a "professional" pilot (partly mindset, partly skill, partly judgment), even though I dont get paid for flying.

In some respects, I dont give a rip what other do to themselves. If they dont wish to meet high standards, thats OK with me. Just dont let them increase my level of risk, and dont let them give aviation a bad name.

Flying in a reasonably proficient, competent manner is something that most humans can do if they chose to do so. Far too many fail to make this choice. Kind of like your typing. ;-)

metal guy said...

OustedEAC said:
You guys don't give a damn about what effect your inaccurate comments have on others.

I assure you that this blog had little to do with the failing of the Air Taxi model of transportation.

Eclipses success or failure is tied directly to the success of that model, not this blog.
If EAC was able to sell the tens of thousands of aircraft they claimed would be needed, there would be little to discuss here, you will still have a job, and Vern would have proven the entire industry wrong.

As it turns out, the model is false (as predicted), there is a lot to discuss here (as predicted), you are out of work (as predicted), and Vern has been proven to be a joke (as predicted).

Don’t blame the peanut gallery (see formal definition below).

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

FreedomsJamtarts said...

Ousted, I am sorry for your family that you were not perceptive enough to see the writing on the wall and get out before you got canned. Your ex-colleagues seems to feel there were plenty of signs.

I think you are correct about this blog probably having had an influence, accelerating the demise of Eclipse.

What drew so many experienced aviation professionals to this blog is a strong belief that this is a deadly program. People losing a job making non-conforming A/C barely tickles my conscience.

What are you going to say to the maker of yours, once someone augers in a half baked jet due to a non-compliance the blog hasn't yet published?

You helped build these things. You knew the drawings no longer match the parts because their have been so many changes. You knew that the FAA were not finished and the Cert team had strong concerns. You knew the gear, wheels and brakes were designed for a 4000lb A/C and are causing tire blow outs on landing (The single most dangerous phase of flight). You know they were rivetting Hucks with Cherry noses. You know there is a noncompliance in the throttle system which was within a whisker of an accident.

Vern himself used as evidence in a the subpoena against us, a statement from one of his handpicked managers the - the quality of the planes is crap!

Before you come pointing the finger at us, remember that the hand that points has four pointing back!

Baron95 said...

Wytech said ... Your posts sometimes make me wonder about drive by thinking. Some are superb; others are, well....


Guilty as charged. As a good poker player I pride myself on having no consistent styles/tells. I all gladly argue both sides of the Eclipse issue and all sides in between to stir the pot. I like to throw half baked ideas around. This blog is for fun - I don't take the 10-20 min/day I spend here too seriously.

There is one issue that is dear to me though. And that is to promote increased participation, increased use, increased safety, increased cpability of GA, GA pilots and GA airplanes - not one of those issues, but all of them together. A sub item of that is to open up fan-jet flying to the vast majority of GA pilots, not a tiny inority as it is today. And that is the reason I do care about what happens to Eclipe and that the "failures" and "successes" get reported appropriately.

Other than that, it is just water cooler banter with a few interested characters.

airtaximan said...

correction:

"Similarly in GA. Approximately 400 people lose their lives in GA accidents. Almost ALL of them happen at 1,000ft AGL"

Actually, they all happen at ground level.

airtaximan said...

fred,

its a good thing to be on the shit list, buddy - go with it!

It means the right people are pissed off at what we say

Turboprop_pilot said...

Baron95

I don't want flight levels opened up to hordes of private pilots. Their fabled inattention and lack of professionalism guarantees that one of them will screw up and bring down a A380 with 500 people and we'll be banned from the flight levels. I'm with Whytech in trying to be very professional through attitude, training and maintenance, helped along by our friendly insurance companies.

Turboprop_pilot

TBMs_R_Us said...

I don't like sharing the skies with half-assed pilots. The skies are filled with them now.

Baron95,

Given your reaction to this post, you must resemble that remark!

You are the advocate here for less regulation, less training, lowered pilot requirements. Why is that? So you would fit in better?

just zis guy, ya know? said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
TBMs_R_Us said...

just ziz guy, ya know,

Thanks for pointing out that particular accident, as it makes the point well: Even high time pilots with lots of training can get caught by a micro-burst they didn't expect. All the more reason for more, not less, training. Tragically, that particular accident cost the life of a 2 year old girl, and the forever sorrow of a good pilot. It was the first fatal accident in the 25 year history of Angel Flights.

airtaximan said...

Stan used to opine on this sort of thing... curious, at this time, there seems to be around 100 job openings at EAC, since the last month or so.

I find it difficult to believe they lack the talent in such areas as tech writer for avionics, reliability, etc...

No one to even retrain, from the pool of x00 let go?

Interesting on purchasing jobs opennings as well...

Someone smarter than me might want to look through and opine - weird situation as far as I am concerned...

Maybe with the layoff, a lot of needed talent left?

Baron95 said...

Turboprop_pilot said...
Baron95

I don't want flight levels opened up to hordes of private pilots.


What part of the fact that the flight levels are presently and have always been opened to any intrument rated private pilot????!!!!????

There are tens of thousands of turbo piston planes flying the flight levels - from a T210/P210 to Mooneys to SR22s to Malibus. What the heck are you guys talking about? What is another few hundred D-jets and Cirrus Jets mixig up with the tens of thousands of turbo piston planes and turboprops already flying there?

And as to a private pilot making a mistake and bringing down a plane through a colision.... the chances of that happeining at the flight levels with positive ATV control and instrument rated pilots being mandatory vs below 18'000 ft where student pilots, recreational pilots and now even sports pilots with no medical and 20 hrs of training fly into any airport is ridiculously low.

You guys are scarying me....

When I climb through FL180 I relax a bit my see-and-avoid scan, knowing that only IR pilots are there and that ATC clearance is required and ATC is require to maintan positive control and separation of ALL traffic above that level.

When I descend through FL180 I perk up my scan knowing that any and all things that fly can be there without talking to ATC.

When I further descend through 10,000ft I perk up even more, because I now know that planes are not even required to have transponders.

You guys on the other hand are worried about another few hundred planes on top of the tens of thousands being added to the flight levels, but are not concerned about the hordes of uncontrolled flights below FL180.

Go figure.

Baron95 said...

TBMs_R_Us said...

You are the advocate here for less regulation, less training, lowered pilot requirements. Why is that? So you would fit in better?


First of all, I am not the advocate for less regulation or less training. I'm an advocate for consistent rules and sanity.

I do believe that a type rating should be required to fly the BE200 King airs and I do believe that requiring an ATP standards type rating for a d-jet is total overkill. So I'm neither pro, nor against regulation.

I believe that every plane should have a mandate minimum level of training and experince defined by the mannufacutrer and approved by the FAA prior to PIC.

In my opinion some tailwheel single engine planes planes like an Otter should have a very high level of mandated training. Some jets like a D-jet should have less.

Either way it shold be specific to the difficulty of flying the plane and its systems, not the propulsion method.

Simple as that.

And yes, I do want fan-jet flying to be made more accessible in terms of price and pilot requirements to the masses of GA pilots. It is fundamental to expand the market if prices are to come down. We CAN hit a positive virtuous cycle here - lower prices, more pilots leading to yet lower prices.

You guys are advocating a vicious cycle of ever escalating prices and regulations further restricting GA fan-jet flying.

And yes, there may come a time where I decide that I am only personally safe to fly VFR in good weather between BDR and MVY and I'd like to have the option of doing it on a fan jet.

nonsequitur said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
airsafetyman said...

"It is fundamental to expand the market if prices are to come down."

The upper end of the turbine market is doing well and the LSA end of the market is doing well. The owner-flown complex aircraft section of the market seems to be declining. One poster nailed it several weeks ago: the effort and expense required to be current and safe and the expense required to maintain the complex aicraft to an airworthy standard is just beyond any meaningful segment of the pilot population, both in a financial sense and in the amount of time required to maintain currency. The Eclipse was supposed to be the "golden bb" with the highly automated systems and the "virtual copilot" and all the other nonsense. We all know where that has gone. Want to go the the Vineyard? Charter a jet and crew to take you there, or crank up the Bonanza.

Baron95 said...

Well, if you are content with no progress, no advancement and are resigned to live with the status quo forever that is your prerrogative.

I believe that markets, given the right conditions, change and generally for the better.

There is no question that a C501 was easier to fly than a Lear23 and that a CJ was easier to fly than the C501 and that the Mustang is easier still.

As a result, there is a much, much higher proportion of owner flown C510 Mustangs than CJs and Lear 23.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that this trend will not continue and even accelerate with the D-Jet and Cirrus Jet.

It would be nice, but not indispensible if the regs also cought up or even anticipated the trend.

In parallel with all that, I think the advent of the RR500 turboprop will break the ridiculous pricing power that PWC has with the PT6, and you may see an RR500 powered SR22 or Malibu for under $1M soon.

We shall see - but the trend is for ever smaller, cheaper jets to become available with a ever increasing percentage of owner flow as you go down range weather you like it or not.

fred said...

baron ...

this is wishful thinking ...

with what is looming underneath the surface , flying (let alone jet owning !) is going to become soon something out of reach for a bigger proportion of population ...

as you said , you like it or you don't , not gonna change anything !

so as for more and more Jet-Owners , i have a big doubt ...

fred said...

airtaxi ...

being or not being in the "shit-list" make not real difference ...

it is not a contest of who is cool or not ...

but when i see some looser (from anywhere) whining about their own little fate ...

i can't stand it !

to me it sounds like the one who could have been so happy , if only ... (fill up the blank yourself)

in french , there is a saying for this : "si ma tante avait des roues , elle ferait un bel autobus ..." (if my aunt would have had wheels , she would have been a good bus!)

amazing that peoples who were (supposedly) inside , didn't see the wind coming ... for some brain-transplant in NOT an option , it still remain to be invented !

fred said...

baron

#When I climb through FL180 I relax a bit my see-and-avoid scan, knowing that only IR pilots are there and that ATC clearance is required and ATC is require to maintan positive control and separation of ALL traffic above that level.#

this is exactly the type of mistake to be avoided (in my opinion)

thinking some others are going to do the right thing for you ...

isn't it the first step to feel relaxed ?

leading itself to carelessness ?

what about if they believe exactly the same thing ???

something like " why be extra-careful ? pilots at this level are only pro ! "

there is a precedent : in swiss , an ATC was so confident in the system , he went to get a coffee , when he came back two airliners were heading toward each others at same altitude ...

one was a freight plane , the others full of kids going on a trip aboard ... none survived !

the ATC has been killed by one of the father who couldn't stand the loss of his family , mostly because the Swiss Control Aut. released a comment in the form of "mistake happens ..."

julius said...

Baron95,

>>You guys are scarying me....

When I climb through FL180 I relax a bit my see-and-avoid scan, knowing that only IR pilots are there and that ATC clearance is required and ATC is require to maintan positive control and separation of ALL traffic above that level.

When I descend through FL180 I perk up my scan knowing that any and all things that fly can be there without talking to ATC.
<<

Sorry to remind you that the FAA, who "protects" you fostered the introduction of TCAS for a/C with more than 9 paxes.
Apart from EAC TCAS is becoming a standard (as long as ADS-B isn't worldwide available) in aviation industries.
You know ATC-people are also "... pilots" and make errors. The ATC-equipmemt collapses... don't relax a bit and scan the airspace with your eyes and your equipment for your own and others safety until the egines are switched off and the paxes have left the ramp!

(HMMMMMMMMM..I think you know that...hmmmmmmm or Fisher Price jets...)



Julius

Turboprop_pilot said...

Baron95:

The odds favor reductions in flying, not more:

The world economy is falling and may get much worse.
Airlines are failing and want GA to pay more of the costs
Terrorism has increased the security fears and increased rules
Fuel costs have risen dramatically
Credit has dried up
European owner flown GA has shrunk due to the much higher costs imposed by government fees
The skys are more crowded and restricted airspace is growing

Just as the micro picture of Eclipse is bad, the macro picture for GA seems even worse.

Just where do you think all these pilots are going to come from?

Turboprop_pilot

uglytruth said...

Years ago when I lost my first job an old friend gave me some wise advice that only comes with age.

He told me a job loss will affect my net worth but I should not let it affect my self worth.

It was simple and to the point.

FreedomsJamtarts said...

I worked for a number of years for an airline that rarely made a profit. It was taken over by a bigger airline which even less frequently made a profit. Once I had a family I a took a good look at the financial history of the airline industry, left the airline and took a different role in aviation. Haven't regretted that decision for a second.

Anyone looking for a secure job for life in the airlines or, even more so, start up general aviation manufacturers, is going to get a big dose of reality sooner or later.

fred said...

freedom ...

i understand well what you mean ...
never been working directly for any Airline ...

but few years ago , one tutor told me this :

if you want a job where you can say at the end of day "i have been mostly right" forget Economy ... you will be wrong 95/99 out of 100 ; and no one will be sure that the rest is not a occurrence of pure luck !

turbo :

World Economy falling ??? if i believe "ousted" , may be it is your fault if Lehman B's is filling bankruptcy ??? ;-)))

ok , on a more serious way : it seems that the credit and real liquidity is soon to be as rare as ice-cold water in Sahara desert ...!

WhyTech said...

"Anyone looking for a secure job for life in the airlines or, even more so, start up general aviation manufacturers"

There is no such thing as a secure job for life in any indutry. It could happen, but there are many, many events which can upset this plan. You make your own security - by doing an excellent job, keeping your skills up to date, and looking after your own worklife well being, not delegating this to some imaginary being up the management chain. The sooner one learns this and puts it into practice, the more secure one is.

Anonymous said...

Turboprop_pilot said...

A lot of things that seem out of touch:

The world economy is falling and may get much worse.

Yet the number of individuals and corporations that could own a business jet keep increasing.

Airlines are failing and want GA to pay more of the costs

The airlines are becoming increasingly more difficult to use for business travel due to security problems, lack of service, and simply poor performance. Even if GA pays more for ATC, that's a small percentage of the cost of operating a jet.

Terrorism has increased the security fears and increased rules

Which favors GA overwhelmingly.

Fuel costs have risen dramatically

Everybody's boat floats on fuel price. The airlines use less per passenger mile, but still it affects them as well. Price of oil has dropped a lot, too.

Credit has dried up

Not for loans on business jets involving established manufacturers and owners. Credit is not a stumbling block to buying a jet if you had any to begin with.

European owner flown GA has shrunk due to the much higher costs imposed by government fees

Bottom end GA, yes, this is shrinking. Top end is growing. Lots of GA business jets being sold to European customers, particularly entry level (Mustang 60% overseas for example).

The skys are more crowded and restricted airspace is growing

True, but manageable. Affects the airlines as well. Most GA jets fly higher than airlines do, so different airspace, at least for cruise.

Just as the micro picture of Eclipse is bad, the macro picture for GA seems even worse.

Eclipse is facing bankruptcy with a mish mash incomplete fleet. The other makers have backlogs and are making real money selling jets. What used ones come up for sale do so at healthy premiums. How can you say Eclipse is better than that? You need a reality pill.

Just where do you think all these pilots are going to come from?

Furloughed airline pilots, of course! :-)

Even if you had to grow a corporate pilot from raw stock, that's under $150K which is pretty small money on the scale of biz jets.

GA jets weathered the post 9/11 slump very well, and they are weathering this slump very well, too. The business is growing very strongly even during overall economic downturns.

fred said...

flyger :

i think that what turbo meant (personal opinion) is that the core-target for EAC is well under pressure from economic downturn ...

the real rich have no real concern , their assets are safe in different forms and places ...

the one who were looking for a "cheap priced" jet (aka EA500) are the one who are going to find themselves in difficult (more or less) situation ...!

i had a phone-talk with a buddy in the W.B. , things are expected too become tough ... expecting the banks filling for bk in US , in the hundreds , mainly local ... ( yes , with a S at end ) the measure to try to get-the-market-right are probably only going to worsen the situation
(think : last week freddy and fannie got feds coverage , they had about 50% of housing loan worth some 5 Trillions $... wich means : some 5 others Trillions$ are still in the nature ... what a fund with 70 billions can do ?? not a lot ... is it worth doing anything ? probably not , the faster the market will crash , the faster it will "eventually" recover ... it is a question of "do you want to die fast and painlessly or very slowly and seems like for ever ...)

so the bizz about private-jet is not going to suffer straight away , but very differently depending on what share it is :
the low-costs are going to face "some" reductions ( no one knows if the ones flying regulars are not going to switch for low-costs)

the regulars are going to suffer the most ...

the market for high-end (the ones with real money ; not trying to play rich by having their toys being paid by some kind of speculations ) is probably not going to be too much touched ...

as for start-up , cheap jets , and the "wanting to feel rich " well , i am afraid it is going to be very tough ...if not game-over (following the liquidities drain )

julius said...

Fred,

bonjour!

I think there is still a lot of real money in the world. Who wants to invest in junk?

U. S. and some Europeans have spent a lot of money in funny houses. You know the reasons why these house had been built...Just to give some americans a place to live!

US GA(A)P worked very well.
The European ignored Basel II.
The americans have postponed the introduction of Basel II. Now the "Reise nach Jerusalem"
has come to a pause and FM&FM, LB, ML,...(will) have lost their chairs in the paradise.
Someone has to pay for the high ROIs and the risks!

Good time to invest in real US assets!


Julius

airsafetyman said...

I believe the market for private, single-pilot, exsclusively owner flown business jets is so small as not to be worthwhile for any manufacturer to pursue. A lot of the Mustangs are going to charter operators and a lot to corporate flight departments. Some may go to wealthy family operations where the family patriarch can play Steve Canyon while his hired pilot rides in the right seat and keeps things upright. But exclusively single-pilot, owner-flown business jets? A miniscule market, in my opinion.

fred said...

julius ...

guten tag !

invest in US assets ?

in a few months , yes !

as for junk , like anywhere = high ROI = HIGH risks !

inflation of monetary masses had to have a limit ... now we are going to pay the price of not finding the limit earlier ...!

always the same story : Profits are privatized , losses are public ...!

Dave said...

Here's a Russian update. Apprently there's been $330 million approved for the Eclipse Russian plant:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.gudok.ru/index.php/news/20586&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=5&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Detirc%26num%3D100%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26as_qdr%3Dd
Either the translation is significantly off or Interfax got some of its facts wrong concerning the US operation. If this is true about Russia, it seems like Russia is setting itself up to be ABQ Part 2 as it is highly unlikely Eclipse could manufacture 800 units per year and even if it could, there aren't buyers for 800 units per year (that's assuming that there aren't even any manufactured in ABQ if Russia goes live).

Here's another source discussing the same thing:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.finmarket.ru/z/nws/news.asp%3Fid%3D936918%26rid%3D1&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=6&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Detirc%26num%3D100%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26as_qdr%3Dd

fred said...

airsafety :

some kind of ...yes !

i think that the type of private as DayJet is dead ...

soon the customers for such are going to find out : it is not that important to to go fast from a to b ...

small entities or directly owned (and paid for) are going to remain ..., as for the one without cash-flow and encumbrance ... well , i wouldn't like to be ...!

fred said...

dave :

thanks for your link ...

as far as i know , the project (financial aspect) of Ulyanovsk is dead ...!

i think (i may be wrong!) it is once again the "good old technical" method of spreading infos (not really real) in one go on lots of different medias ...

it can be a local branch who said yes , but they do not decide for such amounts ...
as soon as the project will reach the real decider , it will be inked in red ...!

i think i wrote before russians are often a bit on the "crazy" side , nonetheless they are far from being stupid ...! ;-))

especially if the fpj doesn't sell , if EASA is dropping the subject and if (cherry on top of cake) the FAA is blamed for non-compliance into issuing a proper cert. !

who needs more Fpj ? no one ! it would only more in the column "losses" as i do not think any is crazy enough to buy a brand new one now ... (may be a used one , but that's an other topic ...)

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

i forgot :

in the link they refer in VTB as the bank for external commercial activities ...

it is not true anymore ... !

VTB is a bank of its own , now !

even if the full name of VTB (Vnestorbank) is related to commercial activities abroad ...

now VTB is separated ...!!

so you have the Vnestorbank , for commercial activities abroad ...
and the VTB (more known in Russia as VTB 24) being a bank for private customers and small to medium business ...

so the news seems to be outdated !

Formerly known as "Just zis guy, you know?" said...

Name changed to differentiate from the Eclipse guy.

Yes, the macro picture is bad. Yes it is affecting GA. Yes, it has affected the bottom end first.

The question is: How bad will it get? Will Piper go BK again? Will Cirrus? Will Mooney? Will Diamond? Can any of the SEJ guys get it done with their core business going into the toilet? Will the big turbine manufacturers' backlogs carry them through the downturn like they all keep saying?

The answer to all is a very uncertain "We'll see..."

fred said...

dave :

after a quick talk with one strategist of VTB , the answer came as :

"we had 5% in EADS , we sold it because we tough it was too risky staying in the flying bizz , whay would we do in something costing more , being even more unsafe ?"

the bank in question has lots of subs and branchs :

JSC VTB Bank
JSC "VTB-Leasing"
VTB 24 (JSC)
CJSC "VTB-Capital"
JSC "Bank VTB North-West" CJSC "VTB Asset Management"
JSC VTB Bank (Ukraine)
VTB-Invest CJSC
CJSC VTB Bank (Belarus) VTB Insurance Ltd.
"VTB Bank (Armenia)" CJSC NPF VTB Pension Fund
"VTB Bank (Georgia)" JSC CJSC "UDC"
VTB Bank Europe Plc. "MultiCarta" Ltd.
VTB Bank (Deutschland) AG Euroleasing GmbH
VTB Bank (France) SA VTB Capital (Namibia) (Pty) Ltd.
VTB Bank (Austria) AG VTB Group Investment Business
Banko VTB Africa, SA
Russische Kommerzial Bank AG
Russian Commercial Bank (Cyprus) Ltd.
Vietnam-Russia Joint Venture Bank

Dave said...

"we had 5% in EADS , we sold it because we tough it was too risky staying in the flying bizz , whay would we do in something costing more , being even more unsafe ?"

So the news was rehashed and no longer valid? It should be interesting to see what happens with the latest fundraising attempt by Eclipse. With Roel spending a week sailing, he's acting like it is either in the bad or doesn't care. If Eclipse doesn't already have the $200 million it was seeking, that should raise serious questions about Roel with why he decided to play games while Eclipse was tanking.

TBMs_R_Us said...

It's interesting that I've been getting cold calls from Cirrus recently. That never happened before.

Number of Cessna jets on Controller has almost doubled in the past year. Prices of older jets have plummeted during the same time frame.

Do you think these trends will continue???

fred said...

dave :

my guess : it is something aimed to touted to some others somewhere else ...

not a first-timer with EAC !

something like (to a fund in USA [local bank , private fuds , etc] )

lend me some cash till the big check is coming ... from russia , you know , this strange country far away ... ;-))

fred said...

tbms :

technically speaking , next step is called deflation ...

do i need to add more ?

mountainhigh said...

I want to thank forward-observer for his earlier post. It is certainly worth reviewing .... for those who might have missed it.

See post above:
forward-observer
September 13, 2008 3:18 AM

To understand what is unfolding re EAC and the FAA one must fully appreciate this post.

Shane, I'm hoping this information/post has been forwarded to Oberstar.

flightguy said...

This statement just came out of Putin. It's hard to tell which side of the Eclipse coin he would be on. Production or reality?

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/09/15/315927/putin-tells-russian-industry-to-face-reality.html

Dave said...

To understand what is unfolding re EAC and the FAA one must fully appreciate this post.

If this was really FAA managers reviewing themselves isn't this statement by the FAA factually false?:
"The team members are independent of the original certification group."
http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=10273

Dave said...

This statement just came out of Putin. It's hard to tell which side of the Eclipse coin he would be on. Production or reality?

This might explain Eclipse ceasely touting that they'd build 800 units per year:
Putin says that "criteria for OAK's effectiveness will not be the number of mock-ups, experimental aircraft or tests completed, but the actual number of series production aircraft sold, and profitability of their production".

Shane Price said...

Mountainhigh

Shane, I'm hoping this information/post has been forwarded to Oberstar.

The team are working on it as we speak. A bit of 'megaphone diplomacy' is about to begin.

After all this is the worlds' favorite 'VLJ' blog, so we are bound to try something new every now and then....

Shane

Dave said...

This appears to be a recent filing about Eclipse Aviation Southeastern Europe changing its name to ETIRC Aviation:
http://www.etat.lu/memorial/memorial/2008/C/Pdf/c2139039.pdf
I don't think it really means anything, just I thought I should put it out.

fred said...

flightguy ; dave :

this statement from Mr Putin is genuine ...

the tax on western-planes imported is already reduced for a bit over one year ...

the funny bit : if EAC would have been able to deliver a finished acf a year ago , they had chances ...

but as usual = too late , too small , too few , etc...

the sum stated in the link is real , unfortunately for Roel , it concerns SOLELY Russian made , designed , certified items ...
(one could see the reason why EAC became all of a sudden Russian ?!)

as well there is an efficiency rule ... which prescribe : No waste of money , No waste of time , No waste of talent , No waste of opportunity ...

up to now it sounds exactly the opposite of EAC/Etirc ...! ;-))

fred said...

dave :

#With Roel spending a week sailing, he's acting like it is either in the bad or doesn't care. #

in history , there is lots of precedent ...

one i know quite well (because it is a town i like ) :

in middle-ages , the town of Carcassone was sieged by the English ( we had a little disagreement which lasted for about a hundred years!) ...

after several weeks of siege , the inhabitants started to die of starvation ...

the ruler decided that instead of eating the last pig , they would slaughter the animal , keep few of the best pieces and throw the remaining parts over the wall as a gift to the britts ...

off-course , the English were pissed-off seeing that , they thought the town had lots of stuff to eat , so they decided to leave

the town was saved !

this has been repeated many times into history in different places and situations ...

the party is always the wildest just before the end ... so they say !

Dave said...

in history , there is lots of precedent...

I was actually thinking of Nero. I wonder if Roel knows how to play a fiddle.

fred said...

nero ... you say ....!

just hope that in ABQ or Moscow , they have a good fire-brigade ...!;-))

eclipse_deep_throat said...

Baron95,

Funny. You sound like one that would argue FOR social darwinism. "Responsibility" is a double edged sword. In light of the obligations that I have, like child support, leaving EAC just because I was tired of their BS would not have been responsible. I would have left 2 years ago if there was something "better" here in Abq.

I'm sure all the suckers at Enron, WorldCom, Lehman Brothers, Merryl Lynch, AIG, ad infinitum ...all deserve your scorn? Where do rank-and-file employees' responsibility end? At what point are you willing to say, AH HA, THEY (management) FUCKED UP! I'm thinking of Henry Ford's refusal to modernize the Model T, but biz histroy is full of examples...

Regardless, I take it that Baron95 is a USA citizen. You pay taxes yes? So why should us taxpayers be responsible for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac? Just let 'em all file bankruptcy. The carnage will be fun to watch, for me and George Carlin "smiling down upon us" from heaven. But maybe some good can come out of it. Especially with GM, Ford, Chrysler not building the cars US customers want. Screw the UAW too, eh?! If GM goes tits up, I wonder how long the UAW can manage paying for all the health care costs of current retirees. The worker bees should have "been responsible" and staged a revolt to take over the factories!! Yes, while channeling the ghost of Karl Marx, they assume ownership of the Means of Production so they can crank out Chevy Volts by the millions, selling them for only $15k each. Hmmm, I doubt GM stockholders will approve that. I remember that in biz school, something about private security guards locking the workers out. Wikipedia the Homestead Strike: 7 guards and 11 strikers / spectators were shot to death. Praise Capitalism!!!

What of the current clusterfuck with Bank of America buying out Merryl Lynch? Yet AIG is left for the financial vultures to pick apart the carcass. Why on earth do we allow them to "privatize profits" but stick us with public losses? Well, looks like that won't happen with AIG. The Invisible Hand of capitalism will save them from facing the responsiblilty of failure. Why can't we demand the CEOs be held responsible for their failures? Too often they just get to BS their way to a new job while playing golf. Where is Vern????

You are right about entitlements. I'm not entitled to shit. I'm not even entitled to a notion that my employer will be a good corporate citizen. Next time you eat out at McDonald's ...you better hope the loser working there is still able to self-actualize his/her self-worth for $7.xx per hr before they are tempted to spit in your food just for their entertainment.

Obviously, if we can't depend on corporations to grow a positive culture for their employees, we better be prepared for *caveat emptor* from everything from Mickey D's all the way up to the doctor talking care of your wife, sister, son, daughter, mother, father. What if the Courts laughed in your face instead of protecting your most basic Consumer Rights? YOU should have been a responsible consumer not to go to a hack with a "degree" from Mexico City... or a fast food place with a clean kitchen. A world without responsibility is nothing short of Anarchy. I'm not one looking to turn the clock back to that pure State of Nature, 'noble savage' and all that. I'm just suggesting that we let Piggy (Roel) run for his life before the Lord of the Flies beats the crap outta him just for spite. Darn, that anarchy thing has a few POSITIVE things going for it. ;-)

I'm off to apply for a nice safe and secure job at the Post Office. Baron95 is right; I just need to lower my standards.

E.D.T.

Baron95 said...

EDT said... Regardless, I take it that Baron95 is a USA citizen. You pay taxes yes? So why should us taxpayers be responsible for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?

I'm not sure why this is directed at me, but for what its worth, I think it is totally ridiculous for the US government to be in the business of packaging and selling mortgage-backed securities. It should be left to the private sector to do it. There are many better ways of promoting home ownership, and I question if, even that, is an appropriate government role - who says that buying is better than say renting.

As it relates to your job at Eclipse, I have no idea about the particulars. But unless companies are free to hire the best as fast as they want and fire the worse/undeeded as fast as they need the markets can't function well.

I am not one that says that employees should leave if they see something at work they don't like. You, like every other employee has an obligation and right to do what is in your best interest. If staying and collecting the money while it lasts is what you think is best, go ahead and do it.

I also don't expect rank and file employees to be experts in predicting the financial future of ther companies they work for, and it is quite normal for employees to be surprised when they lose their jobs. It is a shock to many - and, of course, they have my simpathy.

Just don't get mad that your company is failing and your job is gone with it. Companies get started and companies fail every day in America. It is a fact of live, just like some days are sunny and some days are rainy. You may prefer the sun, but it does little good to be mad when it rains.

I don't think it is your fault that you lost your job. I don't think it is anybody's fault - it is just how it is. There is no blame to assign.

I wish, sincerey, the best of luck, and that you find a good and rewaarding job, and that this shock passes with little disruption to you and your family.

I may give my opinion of economic factors in the aggregate, but I never, ever lose sight that there are real people behind each and every headline. (well, maybe I lose sight of it every now and then, but not for long).

Good luck EDT. Don't be mad. Move forward and in 10 years you wil lbarelly remember this episode.

Baron95 said...

EDT said ... What if the Courts laughed in your face instead of protecting your most basic Consumer Rights? YOU should have been a responsible consumer not to go to a hack with a "degree" from Mexico City... or a fast food place with a clean kitchen.

Reading your post further, are you saying that consumers should not be responsible for their choices?

If my daugther needs a doctor or medication, I do a ton of research to make sure she has the highest possible likelihood of geting the best results. I don't go blindly into any Dr and say "Oh well, if it doesn't work out, I'll sue". Similarly, I select very carefully where I eat and buy food.

Samething in aviation, motor vehicles. I could care less what the NHTSA safety ratings on my car are - I do a lot of research, watch what the top companies are doing, and presently determine that I have a very good level of safety in the vehicle I chose. I would buy the same vehicle regardless of the NHTSA ratings.

Similarly with the Eclipse or Mustang. Regardless of what the FAA says, I made an independent determination that the EA50 is not currently safe enough to fly hard IMC, but it is safe enough to fly VMC to long runways. And I'd fly the G650 theminute Gulfstream said it was ready, regardless if it got FAA certification or not.

The power that consumers have is INFORMATION. Not regulation.

Yes, Mercedes will occasionally put out a vehicle that is less than "as safe as it can practiclally be" as they did with the A-class (not sold in the US), but they recalled, redesigned it as soon as the problem became apparent.

Same happenend with the Conquest II which had an unairworthy empanage, and Cessna, not as promptly as Mercedes, quickly addressed the problem.

And FAA TC means little to me. The individual plane, the company behind the plane, etc are what matters.

Consumers should not delegate their choices to some alphabet soup agency.

Neither should employees.

Labrador Blue Dog said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
TBMs_R_Us said...

Is an Eclipse safer than a Meridian or pre-Garmin TBM? YES. I believe so.

later

I made an independent determination that the EA50 is not currently safe enough to fly hard IMC, but it is safe enough to fly VMC to long runways.

You really ought to get your bs straight, Baron.

fred said...

baron :

#But unless companies are free to hire the best as fast as they want and fire the worse/unneeded as fast as they need the markets can't function well#

that is ONLY supposed to work this way ...

unfortunately , any system (even the best) always end-up being corrupted by some distortion ...

in the present matter , the short-term goal has/had too much attraction ...

the system works ONLY if ALL aspects of system are respected , as soon as you bend it to please someone (shareholders, voters , public opinion ...) you pave yourself your way to hell !

so i see Roel on the burning remains of Eac draped in a bed sheet , claiming the reasons of such ... and at the end shouting a good "Qualis artifex perreo " ;-)

eclipse_deep_throat said...

**Consumers should not delegate their choices to some alphabet soup agency.

Neither should employees.**

Of corse not. I guess we actually agree on something!! Responsibility after all...

Now, since this is a train wreck happening in slow motion, I'll volunteer that I sent Gov Richardson a carefully constructed rant. Essentially I told him, since EAC is so close to bankruptcy, no point in kissing their asses. Since they have shed 600+ workers, we don't need to subsidize a pool of labor via TVI/CNM anymore. Let the local labor market work and, if people want to work for EAC, let them seek out that on their own with EAC paying the full cost if they want local labor from TVI. (Hint: they don't since Roel will get the Russia factory up ASAP if/when NM locals demand a union).

Since we can't depend on MARKET FORCES to appropriately reward / punish EAC leaders, we need to see *some* action from the State.

Speaking just for myself, while at EAC, the level of issues was just staggering. The Lawn Jockey manager (aka "beach ball") that I had at SP10 was the most inept person I have ever worked with. And he supposedly came from LMCO and Raytheon. In my short 2.5yrs with EAC, I had like 7 managers: there was always a revolving door at the mid-level because these guys n gals could always call up their buds in Wichita or Seattle and get their old jobs back. Me and the other locals were/are stuck.

There was, my perception here, such a pervasive feeling of fatalism while there. No structure. No real guidance. My manager telling me that '(you) should get with the IT team to get SAP to work for you.' Gee, why didn't I think of that? BTW: our SAP group was down to less than 10 people. They allowed the IT dept to wither away in the last year since IBM was to take over everything.

I really do feel bad for Ms. S, who is stuck doing my job after I left. She is a 27yr girl who I hope, can grasp the responsibility at her feet. I was thrown to the wolves, left ALONE to defend my area to FAA auditors in Feb 2007 and May 2008. Now, I trained her on how to process transactions in SAP in case I got hit by a bus ...but I could never get her to grasp the concepts of why I decided to do X, Y, Z, and how I made rational exceptions to the process rules. Right on August 22nd, since I was already in contact with the FAA and the NTSB, I emailed them from home and explained that I am no longer in my position and that ...if Ms. S. is doing my job, NOT to hold her responsible. That would not be fair to her. I will have a serious amount of contempt for EAC managers if they throw her under the bus and expect her to answer Fidel in the next FAA audit.

No need to beat a dead horse, but I hope we can all agree that would not be a responsible thing for a manager to do. She is not a timid girl ...but I don't know if she would have the strength to say NO to them...

E.D.T.

Shane Price said...

New headline post up.

A first for the blog, and an interesting approach, I think you will all agree.

Shane

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 339 of 339   Newer› Newest»