HAPPY THANKSGIVING!
It's a fine bright day here in Ireland, and I thought it appropriate to post this little greeting on the blog. I know things have been somewhat gloomy recently, so enjoy this uniquely American holiday with your friends and family.
Best wishes to one and all.
Shane
Just so everyone is clear that customers, suppliers, depositors and yes, staff, are indeed 'skewered' by Chapter 11, herewith the email circulated by Mike McConnell yesterday:-
"Today, Eclipse Aviation started a new era in its relatively (feels like forever, ed) short existence. Eclipse filed for protection in a Delaware court under Chapter 11 of the U. S. Bankruptcy Code. The company is using Section 363 of the U.S. code to sell its assets and a lead bidder, an affiliate of ETIRC Aviation, has filed an offer to purchase the business out of reorganization. As part of this filing, there is sufficient debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing to allow the company to operate until the sale is finalized in January 2009. The process allows for the current company operating under protection to continue the manufacture and support of the Eclipse 500.
While this is an extraordinarily difficult thing to face, (NOT if you've planned it for a long time, ed) it was the best possible choice before the Board of Directors, the senior lenders and the executive management team.
The implications of this action are many and certainly complicated for everyone involved. While we have modeled many different scenarios, at this time, until the sale is finalized, the old company cannot disclose the final plans for things like production, suppliers and deliveries in 2008 and 2009.
This letter will attempt to outline the immediate scenarios for each constituency amongst the customer groups.
Customers who have taken delivery of their aircraft:
During the sale process, the new company intends to operate as a going concern to support the Continued Airworthiness of the fleet. However, there is a different path of interaction between customers and the company operating in reorganization.
Warranty - Warranties are no longer covered by the new company, post petition. Any and all maintenance work performed on aircraft will be on a time and materials basis during debtor-in-possession operations. The new company must decide if it will honor any part of past warranties. Any outstanding warranty claims submitted pre-petition will not be honored by Eclipse or the new company.
If your aircraft is currently in an Eclipse service center for maintenance, the new company will continue to work on it and return it to service, on a time and materials payment basis.
JetComplete® - JetComplete contract obligations are no longer being honored in this phase. It is too early to tell if a new aftermarket product will be offered by the new company. This means that Jeppessen and XM services (for the Garmin 496) will no longer be offered and paid by Eclipse on your behalf once your current subscriptions expire. Iridium services will be maintained by the new company for DSU purposes. Customers will be able to go directly to Jeppesen for service coverage so they are not grounded by out of date databases.
Pratt & Whitney Canada - Those with engine coverage as part of JetComplete will no longer have coverage through JetComplete or PWC under JetComplete. Please contact PWC for coverage in the Eagle Service Plan (ESP).
Spare parts - Debtor-in-possession financing will allow for spare parts to be supplied for continued airworthiness, providing the supplier is willing to continue providing parts to Eclipse while in reorganization. In the event a supplier is not willing to supply parts, the new company will be forced to find an alternate source.
Eclipse service centers - All Eclipse service centers will continue to operate while in debtor-in-possession for service, maintenance events and continued airworthiness.
Authorized service centers - At this time, Eclipse Aviation does not have any authorized service centers although a new service model could be implemented by the new company.
Post Delivery Commitments including modifications - Modification plans at the expense of Eclipse will not be honored in this phase of operations. Eclipse intends to sell services and/or the parts kits to all customers who request to have the final configuration installed on their aircraft. The new company will determine how to provide these mod services to the customer base after the sale.
The third party service centers that were intended to perform these mods will be given every chance to fulfill that opportunity for the new company and the Eclipse 500 customers.
Flight Training and maintenance training - Flight training will continue as planned including recurrency training but while in the debtor-in-possession phase, it is no longer part of the purchase price of the aircraft. The new company must determine what type of structure and inclusion in the delivered price can be maintained. Because JetComplete contracts are no longer valid, those requiring and scheduling recurrent training will pay the retail price of that service. Maintenance training classes will continue as required or requested.
During the sale process, the new company intends to operate as a going concern to support the Continued Airworthiness of the fleet. However, there is a different path of interaction between customers and the company operating in reorganization.
Warranty - Warranties are no longer covered by the new company, post petition. Any and all maintenance work performed on aircraft will be on a time and materials basis during debtor-in-possession operations. The new company must decide if it will honor any part of past warranties. Any outstanding warranty claims submitted pre-petition will not be honored by Eclipse or the new company.
If your aircraft is currently in an Eclipse service center for maintenance, the new company will continue to work on it and return it to service, on a time and materials payment basis.
JetComplete® - JetComplete contract obligations are no longer being honored in this phase. It is too early to tell if a new aftermarket product will be offered by the new company. This means that Jeppessen and XM services (for the Garmin 496) will no longer be offered and paid by Eclipse on your behalf once your current subscriptions expire. Iridium services will be maintained by the new company for DSU purposes. Customers will be able to go directly to Jeppesen for service coverage so they are not grounded by out of date databases.
Pratt & Whitney Canada - Those with engine coverage as part of JetComplete will no longer have coverage through JetComplete or PWC under JetComplete. Please contact PWC for coverage in the Eagle Service Plan (ESP).
Spare parts - Debtor-in-possession financing will allow for spare parts to be supplied for continued airworthiness, providing the supplier is willing to continue providing parts to Eclipse while in reorganization. In the event a supplier is not willing to supply parts, the new company will be forced to find an alternate source.
Eclipse service centers - All Eclipse service centers will continue to operate while in debtor-in-possession for service, maintenance events and continued airworthiness.
Authorized service centers - At this time, Eclipse Aviation does not have any authorized service centers although a new service model could be implemented by the new company.
Post Delivery Commitments including modifications - Modification plans at the expense of Eclipse will not be honored in this phase of operations. Eclipse intends to sell services and/or the parts kits to all customers who request to have the final configuration installed on their aircraft. The new company will determine how to provide these mod services to the customer base after the sale.
The third party service centers that were intended to perform these mods will be given every chance to fulfill that opportunity for the new company and the Eclipse 500 customers.
Flight Training and maintenance training - Flight training will continue as planned including recurrency training but while in the debtor-in-possession phase, it is no longer part of the purchase price of the aircraft. The new company must determine what type of structure and inclusion in the delivered price can be maintained. Because JetComplete contracts are no longer valid, those requiring and scheduling recurrent training will pay the retail price of that service. Maintenance training classes will continue as required or requested.
TRANSLATION = You're shafted
Customers who have paid any deposit including the 60% deposit:
Those customers who have paid a deposit for an Eclipse 500 are unsecured creditors of Eclipse Aviation. If there is a way to offer consideration to those affected depositors, it will be reviewed for consideration but it is not known at this time if it will be assumed by the new company.
Those customers who have paid a deposit for an Eclipse 500 are unsecured creditors of Eclipse Aviation. If there is a way to offer consideration to those affected depositors, it will be reviewed for consideration but it is not known at this time if it will be assumed by the new company.
TRANSLATION = You're in bottom corner
Customer who have asked for a refund:
Customers who have asked for a refund are now an unsecured creditor of Eclipse Aviation.
Customers who have asked for a refund are now an unsecured creditor of Eclipse Aviation.
TRANSLATION = You're toast
Eclipse 400 customers:
Customers who have asked for a refund are now an unsecured creditor of Eclipse Aviation.
Those customers that have not asked for a 400 refund are an unsecured creditor of Eclipse Aviation and must wait until the new company decides whether to honor those deposits. The new company will determine if the Single Engine Jet Concept is a viable aircraft for today’s market.
Customers who have asked for a refund are now an unsecured creditor of Eclipse Aviation.
Those customers that have not asked for a 400 refund are an unsecured creditor of Eclipse Aviation and must wait until the new company decides whether to honor those deposits. The new company will determine if the Single Engine Jet Concept is a viable aircraft for today’s market.
TRANLATION = You're were mugged, get over it
We truly understand that these are tremendously difficult times for you and for our employees. However, please be aware that there is not anything we are holding back from this communication so additional facts or answers will not be available from the teams staffing the phones.
The new company will continue the customer call events to update all customers on status and progress. The next one will be scheduled by the Customer care team.
Michael McConnell
Eclipse Aviation Corporation
President & General Manager
Customer Division
Filing details, thanks to Dave:-
Eclipse Aviation Seeks Court Approval for Restructuring under 363 Sale
Procedures and Debtor in Possession Financing
Affiliate of ETIRC Aviation, VLJ maker's largest shareholder, announces
offer to purchase Eclipse
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - November 25, 2008 - Eclipse Aviation(r), manufacturer
of the world's first very light jet (VLJ), announced today that it is
seeking court approval for debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing and
procedures for the sale of substantially all of its assets under Section
363 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The proposed sale will enable the
business to continue as an industry leader in the manufacture and sale
of VLJs with lower costs and reduced debt liabilities.
Eclipse filed for Chapter 11 protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in
Delaware this morning, simultaneously announcing an agreement for the
sale of its assets for a combination of cash, equity and debt to an
affiliate of ETIRC Aviation S.a.r.l., Luxembourg, subject to higher and
better offers. ETIRC Aviation, a principal driver of the VLJ industry
in Europe, is currently Eclipse's largest shareholder. ETIRC Aviation's
Chairman Roel Pieper has been the acting CEO of Eclipse since July 2008
and has served as Eclipse's Chairman since January 2008. The proposed
sale is subject to competitive bidding through a public auction, which
is expected to be completed and a sale finalized in January 2009.
"In the face of unprecedented economic challenges, it is clear that the
sale of the Eclipse business through the Chapter 11 process is the right
course of action to maximize the value of the business, secure its
future and protect the best interests of Eclipse's stakeholders,
including customers, suppliers, employees and creditors," said Roel
Pieper, CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "The successful sale will position the
business for aggressive global expansion, allowing the company to
fulfill its promise and solidify its position as the world's leading
manufacturer of VLJs."
Also announced today, a group of existing Eclipse shareholders and note
holders will provide Eclipse with post-petition, debtor-in-possession
(DIP) financing. This financing will provide Eclipse with sufficient
resources to continue normal business operations through the closing of
the sale. Eclipse has filed a motion with the Court to approve the
financing with a request for an expedited hearing to avoid business
interruption. Once approved, this financing along with other relief
requested from the Court, will position Eclipse to pay wages and
salaries, honor employee benefits, service customer aircraft and
continue manufacturing operations throughout the sale period.
New York-based Greenhill & Co., Inc., a leading independent investment
bank with proven expertise in mergers, acquisitions and restructurings,
has been retained as financial advisor to Eclipse Aviation. Inquiries
into the Eclipse Aviation sale process can be directed to Brad Robins,
Greenhill & Co., Inc. at 212-389-1567 or brobins@greenhill.com.
and
Eclipse Aviation Announces Departure of Peg Billson
VLJ leader activates search for new head of manufacturing
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - November 25, 2008 - Eclipse Aviation, manufacturer of
the world's first very light jet (VLJ), today announced that Peg Billson
has voluntarily left her position as president and general manager of
the company's Manufacturing Division to pursue other career
opportunities.
"We thank Peg for her contributions to Eclipse, and wish her the best as
she takes on new challenges," said Roel Pieper, CEO of Eclipse Aviation.
Ms. Billson's position will be replaced with interim manufacturing
oversight provided by Eclipse's senior supply chain, engineering,
production and flight operations leaders.
The new company will continue the customer call events to update all customers on status and progress. The next one will be scheduled by the Customer care team.
Michael McConnell
Eclipse Aviation Corporation
President & General Manager
Customer Division
Eclipse Aviation Corporation
and
Pronto Aircraft Corporation
of
2503 Clark Carr Loop, SE
Albuquerque, NM
a Corporation (including LLC and LLP)
Petition for Chapter 11
Estimated number of creditors, between 5,001 and 10,000
Estimated Assets, between $100,000,001 and $500 million
Estimated Liabilities (consolidated, book value), more than $1 billion
The petition is signed by Roel Peiper as CEO and dated today, 25th November 2008
Other details from the form include:-
1. There is a bankruptcy case concerning debtor's affiliate, general partner, or partnership pending in the District (Delaware)
2. The lawyers are Young Conaway Stargett & Taylor LLP of Wilmington DE.
3. The largest creditor, listed at $92.3 million, is Kings Road Investments Ltd. of Madision Ave. New York.
4. The total amount owed to bond holders (including Kings Road) is listed at $494.9 million.
5. The total amount owed to larger trade creditors ($2 million plus) is listed at $164.8 million.
6. The total amount owed to customers ($2 million plus) is listed at $29.7 million.
That's the 'topline' information, which I post to advise the widest possible audience.
Peg has left, and ETRIC have made the first bid to purchase the assets. The sale will need to complete in January of 2009, subject to other, higher bids. I'm sure we'll find out what ETRIC have offered, and where the funds are coming from to support the bid.
Al Mann and ETRIC have provided DIP (Debtor in Possession) financing of $12 million, with a facility up to $20 million.
The 'top three' for bond holders, trade creditors and customers (expressed in millions) are as follows:-
Bond holders
1. Kings Road Investments of Madison Ave New York for $92.3
2. KBK Master Fund of Crescent Court, Dallas for $84.9
3. Citadel Horizons of South Dearborn, Chicago for $53.4
Trade Creditors
1. Fuji Heavy Industries, Tochigi-ken, Japan for $31.8
2. Hampson Aerospace, Grand Prairie, Texas for $31.3, although we know the history here.
3. Pratt & Whitney Canada, Quebec, for $30.1
Customers
1. DayJet, Boca Raton, for $6.2, even though we'll never get to the bottom of this...
2. ATASAY-MyJet Aviation, Turkey, for $5.0
3. Triac, Nicosia, Cyprus for $4.3
Sundry amounts (above $2 million)
1. UT Finance, East Hart, CT, for $13.5 million, which is linked to DayJet
2. Irell & Manella LLP, Avenue of the Stars, Los Angeles, for $3.2 million of 'legal services'
Grand total
$706.1 million, and counting. Clearly there is a lot more to uncover. But it's a start.
Press Releases issued by EAC today
Eclipse Aviation Seeks Court Approval for Restructuring under 363 Sale
Procedures and Debtor in Possession Financing
Affiliate of ETIRC Aviation, VLJ maker's largest shareholder, announces
offer to purchase Eclipse
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - November 25, 2008 - Eclipse Aviation(r), manufacturer
of the world's first very light jet (VLJ), announced today that it is
seeking court approval for debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing and
procedures for the sale of substantially all of its assets under Section
363 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The proposed sale will enable the
business to continue as an industry leader in the manufacture and sale
of VLJs with lower costs and reduced debt liabilities.
Eclipse filed for Chapter 11 protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in
Delaware this morning, simultaneously announcing an agreement for the
sale of its assets for a combination of cash, equity and debt to an
affiliate of ETIRC Aviation S.a.r.l., Luxembourg, subject to higher and
better offers. ETIRC Aviation, a principal driver of the VLJ industry
in Europe, is currently Eclipse's largest shareholder. ETIRC Aviation's
Chairman Roel Pieper has been the acting CEO of Eclipse since July 2008
and has served as Eclipse's Chairman since January 2008. The proposed
sale is subject to competitive bidding through a public auction, which
is expected to be completed and a sale finalized in January 2009.
"In the face of unprecedented economic challenges, it is clear that the
sale of the Eclipse business through the Chapter 11 process is the right
course of action to maximize the value of the business, secure its
future and protect the best interests of Eclipse's stakeholders,
including customers, suppliers, employees and creditors," said Roel
Pieper, CEO of Eclipse Aviation. "The successful sale will position the
business for aggressive global expansion, allowing the company to
fulfill its promise and solidify its position as the world's leading
manufacturer of VLJs."
Also announced today, a group of existing Eclipse shareholders and note
holders will provide Eclipse with post-petition, debtor-in-possession
(DIP) financing. This financing will provide Eclipse with sufficient
resources to continue normal business operations through the closing of
the sale. Eclipse has filed a motion with the Court to approve the
financing with a request for an expedited hearing to avoid business
interruption. Once approved, this financing along with other relief
requested from the Court, will position Eclipse to pay wages and
salaries, honor employee benefits, service customer aircraft and
continue manufacturing operations throughout the sale period.
New York-based Greenhill & Co., Inc., a leading independent investment
bank with proven expertise in mergers, acquisitions and restructurings,
has been retained as financial advisor to Eclipse Aviation. Inquiries
into the Eclipse Aviation sale process can be directed to Brad Robins,
Greenhill & Co., Inc. at 212-389-1567 or brobins@greenhill.com.
and
Eclipse Aviation Announces Departure of Peg Billson
VLJ leader activates search for new head of manufacturing
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - November 25, 2008 - Eclipse Aviation, manufacturer of
the world's first very light jet (VLJ), today announced that Peg Billson
has voluntarily left her position as president and general manager of
the company's Manufacturing Division to pursue other career
opportunities.
"We thank Peg for her contributions to Eclipse, and wish her the best as
she takes on new challenges," said Roel Pieper, CEO of Eclipse Aviation.
Ms. Billson's position will be replaced with interim manufacturing
oversight provided by Eclipse's senior supply chain, engineering,
production and flight operations leaders.
Clearly, this is going to be expanded as more information reaches the blog.
Shane
738 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 738 Newer› Newest»FO,
What about TSO'ed avionics, etc.?
Do those all fall under the TC and PC?
If so, score another head shot for Wedge.
In the effort to obtain an unnecessary PC to support non-existant volume, he makes it nigh impossible to support aircraft in the wild.
Great post forward observer.
Even if an original vender to Eclipse wanted to supply parts directly to the operator, that is illegal if they have not got a PMA. And currently no one of interest has.
Not the end of the world, but just another we nail in Ecorpse coffin.
Are the avionics TSO'd? You do not have to use TSO'd avionics. You can qualify your own avionics to the same standard as part of TC.
Either way, you need a PMA or a PC if you want to deliver parts.
IMO, Servicing for the E500 IS going to be a problem, for owners anyway.
Assuming KABQ EAC2 is the only service provider, that still leaves the problem of owners having to deliver their jets 100s or 1000s of miles, hop an airliner home, then repeat the process when their aircraft is ready. And they have no options but to use EAC, pay their prices, bow to their schedule, etc. I’ll bet EAC2 sets new world records for astronomically priced airplane parts. $2000 tires anyone? And owners still have to deal with the arrogance and dishonesty that is a hallmark of EAC management.
Didn’t local municipalities just get screwed out of several million $$$ by helping build EAC’s own service centers? In these times of tight budgets and reduced tax revenues, I’d be surprised if this arrangement became a going concern, unless EAC2 wants to pay up the $$$ they owe them..
Have 3rd party FBOs become authorized service centers?
EAC already tried that in June 2008. They were going to have a network of FBOs certified to work on E500s. They pushed their contract hard, so they could make the big announcement at Air Venture 2008. And how many did they announce at Oshkosh? NONE. ZERO. ZIP. NADA. ZILCH.
Not one of the dozens/hundreds? Of FBOs they solicited, took the bait.
Of course that didn’t stop some EAC employees at Oshkosh from telling lies. At least one E500 owner called an “Eclipse authorized service center” to schedule maintenance, only to be told the FBO does not, and will not, work on Eclipse aircraft. Now THAT is a reality check.
EAC’s contract was ridiculous. As in “Are you smoking crack?” ridiculous.
Net plus 45 days, and net was whenever EAC decided your invoice was acceptable. Buy parts from EAC at full list price, with list prices unknown. Buy massively overpriced E500-specific maintenance equipment, and some equipment with prices unknown. The potential to do minor work on 10-12 aircraft. Get paid a for a fixed number of labor hours per job, when it was obvious the labor would be 1.5 - 2x that amount. Get paid 25% below the hourly rate your current customers were paying. And much more. The kicker was the minimum liability insurance required to work on an E500. A hefty fraction of a BILLION dollars. This suggested that when an FPJ became a smoking hole in the ground, EAC was going to try mightily to make the FBO the fall guy with the deep pockets.
EAC kept pushing their koolaide, and finally found a victim. Was it a top tier FBO chain like Signature, or Millionaire?.............no...................the only place they could convince was a floatplane shop in British Columbia, Canada. To me, that is pretty indicative of what successful FBO owners think of EAC management and their aircraft.
A few months later, EAC announced two potential new 3rd party providers.
Potential.
This strongly suggested EAC was pressuring them to sign, they hadn’t yet signed, and EAC felt by publicly announcing they were joining forces, the FBOs would actually sign. I don’t know if either of these two FBOs have their names in E500 logbooks yet. If so, based on the timing of recent events, and the terms of the contract, I’ll bet they don’t see a dime of the $$$ EAC owes them. Too bad, because they probably shelled out 35 grand just for the “privilege” of working on the FPJ, and may now own a huge piece of the financial liability that is the E500.
And if you read the EAC statement at the top of this thread, you’ll find... “Authorized service centers - At this time, Eclipse Aviation does not have any authorized service centers although a new service model could be implemented by the new company.”
Looks like those FBOs that once climbed aboard the Titanic, have jumped ship and are swimming for all they’re worth.
Assuming an EAC2 does arise from the ashes, it may be a shadow of its former self. In that case, it may be the FBOs that have the deepest pockets in a lawsuit emanating from a smoking hole accident. This shift in liability, plus working on an aircraft with known design flaws, and with a company that tries hard to screw everyone, makes the E500 a no-go on my list of worthwhile customers. A big deal-breaker is erratic parts availability. A maintenance center cannot afford to let aircraft take up shop space for weeks or months, waiting on parts, and not generating any profit. This was a major reason why some FBOs stopped being Mooney auth service centers. And who wants to deal with irate owners, who’s aircraft are going to be AOG much of the time, and who are going to get brutally raped on parts prices, especially after an FBO adds their 20% markup.
An FBO doing any maintenance or repair work on an E500 makes little sense to me, unless they are really desperate for customers, or are a Mom&Pop shop with few assets and can regenerate themselves after a liability lawsuit. Yeah, jest park yer jet next to the Aztec with one wing, Jeffro be along shortly.
As I said a while ago, there are shops and mechanics who have already made the decision to never touch an Eclipse aircraft. I think the recent events have convinced even more to make that decision. Lots of my friends think the smoking hole is just a matter of time.
IMO, the E500 has a long way to go to prove itself a reliable, fully functional aircraft. I’ll believe the FIKI service bulletin is a successful fix AFTER it has been in use by 100+ aircraft, and in serious weather.
I see EAC as a massive forest fire. With very few exceptions, everyone that comes in contact with it, gets burned.
E500 owners who got an aircraft for little money, are now next in line to get burned.
FJT
Thanks. I believe that most boxes are covered by the TC.
So even if others wanted to play outside of NewClipse in addition to liability, it will be big $$$ for the PMA.
Parallel thought ... now that Service Centers are not subsidized by waranty reserve, their T&M rates and burdens will be crushing.
Those are big modern buildings with big mortgages and staff on site just in case.
Feel free to contact Purdue with Eclipse charitable donations. Help support one of the main aviation programs in the country.
Contact: Mike Nolan
PH (765)494.9962
Department of Aviation Technology
Purdue University
1401 Aviation Drive
West Lafayette, IN 47907-2015
Voice: (765) 494-5782
Fax: (765) 494-2305
http://www.tech.purdue.edu/at/
forward-observer said...
If the PC is revoked, there will be no source of approved parts, unless and until someone else obtains PMA.
I'm sorry FO - I just don't want you to confuse the readers. A PC is not necessary at all to legally build fully certified EA500s or any part of the airplane for repairs.
A PC is nothing more than a convenience meaning that the OEM can self-certify the planes/parts they produce. Without the PC, they simply need to have the FAA sign-off on the items produces. A PC is a convenience to the OEM and the FAA.
Second, the FAA has a proven history of making it impossible for anyone to pick-up a TC and sit on it and not support the associated fleet. They "lean" very heavily on the TC owner and it is "support the fleet or relinquish the TC - or get ready for some extra attention from the FAA". There is no significant FAA certified plane in existence where an operating company has the TC and does not support the type.
In the extreme case where no viable company would pick-up the TC, the FAA would work with the 250+ owners on a program to keep them flying, including responsive action of field-approvals, etc.
It is just about how much it will cost and how inconvenient it will be, but the fleet will continue to fly for decades. That is just how it is.
On another note, could you guys please stop making a huge deal out of the AD restricting flight from FL410 to FL370. One it is no big deal and at best reduces range by 3% or so (if flown at the same TAS) and is likely to be lifted by alternative means of compliance.
Dave, per your question, DIP financing is usually in exchange for ownership in the post-BK newCo, except that if someone bids for newCo they need to settle with the DIP financing folks.
As I said before, money talks. Unless someone else comes up with a DIP financing alternative and an alternative bid, the court will just enter either a 363 sale order or a liquidation order with asset auction. Either way, RP/Mann can get the assets by outbidding.
Could someone that has access to the court filings post the info on the "ETIRC Affiliate" that is proposing to buy the 363 assets? It needs to be a company that is "arms-length" from the current EAC ownership. I'm wondering how they are structuring that company. The fact that the press-releases/emails only list "ETIRC Affiliate" leads me to believe they don't have that fully cooked yet. E.g. if ETIRC owns 50% of EAC and 50% of "ETRIC Affiliate" proposing to acquire EAC via 363, I don't think the Wilmington court can allow that.
To me the above and the appearance of any other suitor are the only open switches on the deal.
B95,
If they fail the arms-length or stalking-horse tests, and there is no other bidder for the whole company, does and precedent exist to send it --D-> to CH7?
RP/AM own ~75% of EAC
Virtually impossible for ETRICK Chairman / EAC CEO and EAC Chairman to claim anything ETRICK related as arms-length.
"Unless someone else comes up with a DIP financing alternative and an alternative bid, the court will just enter either a 363 sale order or a liquidation order with asset auction. Either way, RP/Mann can get the assets by outbidding."
- if a major creditor (outsider, not mamagement) bids $1 more, including their debt... or lets say the suppliers get together are bid the amount owed ... you get my drift...
My personal approach if I was an owner or position holder, would be as follows:
1- get as many folks who are owed planes or IOUs and sue, right now for the total amount of the plane at $2.15M or the difference of what I paid and what a completed plane is supposed to cost. RP just said he has 1100 sold at $2.1 and he's stiffing the previous buyer by either not finishing or delivering their promised planes. Anyone with a deposit, SUE for max dollars. I WOULD INCLUDE THE AMOUNT OF WARRANTEE (MONETIZED) AND JETCOMELETE (MONETIZED) as monies owned to me in the suit.
2- I would sue the company and as many individuals as possible for fraud and misrepresentation, starting with Vern and Roel... continuing with ETRICK and affiliates (all of them) and probably ending with the Board and execs at EAC... make them all get lawyers, and sue them all for the same amount as above jointly and severally.
So, perhaps this group becomes the largest creditor group.. lets see....
- 800 or so (claimed) planes, except for Roels own orders, owed around $1.5 million a piece (either a full new $2.1M undelivered plane, or upgrades/new plane that conforms)-
- THAT'S $1.2 BILLION RIGHT THERE
- Warrantee and jet complete for all the planes - has to be a few hundred grand a piece... say another $300M
- THAT'S $1.5B
Then the allegations of fraud and misrepresenation - Just the discovery process and media attention of this, plus a few dozen lawyers representing the perps.... this could be a big reason to settle.
- SO, WILL THEY WALK, OR SETTLE? I DON'T KNOW, but I WILL TELL YOU, THIS IS THE ONLY WAT TO GET ANYTHING OUT OF THIS SCREWING.
Face it - RP&Co have only 1 thing in mind, and that's a short timers exit.... and you will end up holding your perverbial d&%#ks in your hands, unless you make some noise.
As I said before, money talks. Unless someone else comes up with a DIP financing alternative and an alternative bid, the court will just enter either a 363 sale order or a liquidation order with asset auction. Either way, RP/Mann can get the assets by outbidding.
That was why I brought up the matter of clawbacks to finance the operation along with the creditors seeing if this deal is really worth it with all its fine print. Just because someone makes a 363 offer, it doesn't inherently mean that it is better for the creditors than liquidation. Perhaps the creditors are better of with this than liquidation, but I wouldn't automatically assume this.
Could someone that has access to the court filings post the info on the "ETIRC Affiliate" that is proposing to buy the 363 assets? It needs to be a company that is "arms-length" from the current EAC ownership. I'm wondering how they are structuring that company. The fact that the press-releases/emails only list "ETIRC Affiliate" leads me to believe they don't have that fully cooked yet. E.g. if ETIRC owns 50% of EAC and 50% of "ETRIC Affiliate" proposing to acquire EAC via 363, I don't think the Wilmington court can allow that.
You do bring up a good point on that. I'm not exactly sure what the final result would be if this deal was approved with who would end up owning what. EclipseJet was incorporated on 11/21/08 in Delaware and I presume it is 100% owned by ETIRC as the corporate parent (the APA refers to ETIRC as "Buyer Parent"). The financing for the deal is for ETIRC with the money coming from VEB and AirLyper and passing through ETIRC rather than the money going directly to EclipseJet and you can make of that what you will (as I've said I haven't figured it out). I do recall with the Russian factory that ETIRC would own 50% of that with the Russians owning the other 50% and with this now factored in, I don't know. Per the APA the creditors would own 15% of EclipseJet with Roel/Mann getting a piece of that for providing DIP (this I also don't understand since it says the DIP financers can get up to 20% of EclipseJet - per my reading each $1M in DIP financing equals 1% ownership for the DIP). With my understanding I think a judge could allow the sale (provided that a creditor doesn't challenge it), just either the BK court would rule it now or some court post-BK would allow all of Eclipe's debt to be erased, but for there to be substantial successor liability due to this being such a strong insider deal as well as being a 363 sale instead of fully going through the normal Chapter 11 process. For instance with the employee who apparently wasn't paid, I don't think Roel could wipe out that wage liability with the sale and that employee could take action against EclipseJet as a successor (current and former Eclipse employees suing individually or collectively over comparatively small amounts is where I see there could be large a number of lawsuits or legal actions taken against EclipseJet...$2K could be the difference between an employee having foreclosure/BK or being able to survive and thrive, but is a total pittance compared to the other figures bandied about).
Here's a little tidbit for you regarding how "arm's length" this is. Before Eclipse filed for BK and after EclipseJet was formed Matthijs de Haan was at the Eclipse facilities and apparently he didn't ID his affiliation to the reporter:
“You can do so much more in a simulator,” says Matthijs de Haan, a Dutch pilot training at the facility. “You can create all kinds of situations — from engine failures to fires and upset recovery — and yet you truly feel like you’re in the aircraft.”
NMBW:Eclipse-Top-flight training, without ever leaving the ground
Matthijs is listed second only to Roel at ETIRC Aviation:
ETIRC Aviation:Management
I think that ETIRC thinks it was sneaking around or else ETIRC's managing director would have proudly given his affilation with Eclipse and ETIRC to the reporter.
Could anyone with access to the filings tell me if a "schedule of contracts to be assigned" has been proposed. This usually is part of the APA, but can be filed later.
That is the document that would list which EAC contracts (e.g. with vendors) are being proposed to be assigned to the buyer (newCo) and which ones would be voided.
I'm assuming that the buyers, owners contracts are obviously being voided. But I'm interested in the vendor contracts.
The reason is that typically, for a contract to be assigned (to newCO) it requires the DIP (or oldCo) to settle with that creditor (vendor) first.
If you guys can find such a list or any mention that one will be filed later, I'd like to see.
This will list which vendors EAC/DIP/newCo will settle with and keep the contracts in force and which ones will be voided (supposedly requiring a replacement vendor or a post sale new contract signing).
Thanks.
1- get as many folks who are owed planes or IOUs and sue
I've gotta stop ya right there. Unless there is a motion made in BK court for a lawsuit to happen during BK, you can't sue. This is why I (and Baron too) have urged those with potential claims to take action before Eclipse takes action. If such a lawsuit had been brought before Eclipse filed for BK, it would be much easier for the court to allow the lawsuit to go forward during BK in order to determine who the creditors are and what they are owed and depending upon the nature of the lawsuit (namely regarding fraud), if that lawsuit was won a Constructive Trust could be imposed that could be even above DIP in getting paid back because the trust isn't considered part of the BK estate. Those who already filed lawsuits against Eclipse have a chance at getting a constructive trust and the like, but it is much much harder for someone new to say that they have a claim...it can be done now, just it is more expensive and the odds are much lower.
Could anyone with access to the filings tell me if a "schedule of contracts to be assigned" has been proposed. This usually is part of the APA, but can be filed later.
I'll give you the exact terminology of what was filed as part of the APA...
Designated Contracts with the subcatgories of Assumed Contracts and Assumed Leases; Excluded Contracts with Excluded Contracts and Excluded Leases. There isn't any mention of any suppliers (which I found surprising) other than for UT Finance for the DayJet deal, which Roel is trying to get excluded, which of course isn't a supplier contract but instead financing as you know.
Zed said...
B95,
If they fail the arms-length or stalking-horse tests, and there is no other bidder for the whole company, does and precedent exist to send it --D-> to CH7?
Zed, your question exceeds my knowledge and experience on CH 11. Having said that...
The Judge would ONLY do something against the DIP/APA agreements IF there is a valid objection from the creditors. So, if there are no valid objections this will go per the agreements, unless it gets assigned to one of the activist judges (like a visiting judge to the Delaware Circuit), and the deal just stinks too much for him to go along with it.
IF there are valid creditor objections, than it will be sorted out at the hearing and all options are open. Judge could go for a normal (read longer) CH 11 process (impossible without a DIP financier), stay with the 363 auction process or go CH7 liquidation and asset auction. The 363 APA though is such a strong candidate - there will be a big onus on the creditors to show that CH7 would yield more. The Stalking Horse (even being an insider) will just tell the court: "If the assets are so valuable, clearly someone else will bid") and in the end, the judge will probably simply loosen the terms and expand the 363 bid process.
But, when you go in front of a Judge with competing arguments, you never really know what will be the outcome.
Dave said...
I'll give you the exact terminology of what was filed as part of the APA...
Thanks a bunch Dave.
So there are no vendors under "Assumed Contracts" but also no vendors under "Excluded Contracts"? That is odd!!! Is there language that an updated list will be filed later? Or language that says all contracts not listed under "Assumed Contracts" are excluded?
Thanks again. This list folks is key.
This list folks is key.
did they not specifically stiff the position holders and premie-acceptors?
So there are no vendors under "Assumed Contracts" but also no vendors under "Excluded Contracts"? That is odd!!! Is there language that an updated list will be filed later? Or language that says all contracts not listed under "Assumed Contracts" are excluded?
Thanks again. This list folks is key.
I'll point to you something else from the APA that sounded strange and it might be in reference to what you are talking about. This is Section 2.3:
(a) Schedule 2.3 (Baron: this is what I previously provided you) lists all assumed contracts and assumed leases that buyer may elect to assume and have sellers assume and assign to buyer at closing. Buyer shall have until entry of approval order to designate which such contracts it wishes to assume and have sellers assume and assign to buyer at closing. In all cases, appropriate additions and deletions to Schedule 2.3 shall be made to reflect such elections made by buyer.
Now this is the part that caught my eye and it is from the next paragraph. It is a long paragraph, so I'm only giving the most relevant pieces and paraphrasing:
If at any time after the 90th business day from closing any party becomes aware of an undisclosed contract, the buyer shall have the right to require the seller to deliver the undisclosed contract without any additional consideration.
That of course is a much summarized version of it, but I thought that Roel was being sneaky because he knows he didn't list all the contracts and I felt like he was knowingly trying to hide something...like once the deal went through, he'd go "SURPRISE!" and there would be something valuable that he intentionally didn't declare during BK and obviously he didn't declare any of his suppliers. Apparently at no time did he say he was going to necessarily update Schedule 2.3 prior to the auction or ever.
question:
the position holders and owners are creditors... can't they show up and say "here we are, and we are actually owed $1.xB"
I am not as familiar with the BK laws (thanks the Lord)... as you seem to be.
I think this process leaves room for someone to show up and claim what they are owed... even if its just the amount being wiped away or settled for pennies...
I understand they are undecured, but, as a group, this is a big shafting.
did they not specifically stiff the position holders and premie-acceptors?
I'm not seeing them specifically mentioned either aside from DayJet.
I also just noticed this as an excluded contract and I'm trying to understand why/how Eclipse could enter into this in the first place. Apparently this is an option for Eclipse to buy shares in ETIRC:
Option agreement to subscribe shares of capital of ETIRC Aviation between Eclipse Aviation and ETIRC Aviation dated May 9, 2008.
Or am I misreading that?
Also one area that just now caught my eye has to do with P&W (UT Finance). Roel spefically wants the Eclipse/UT/DayJet Loan Agreement to be assumed while Roel specifically wants the Eclipse/UT/DAyJet Fleet Finance Agreements, the Commitment letter and the DayJet amended purchase agreement specifically excluded. To me it sounds like Roel is trying to stiff P&W (which doesn't sound smart in the long-term)...
the position holders and owners are creditors... can't they show up and say "here we are, and we are actually owed $1.xB"
Yes, I believe they are all listed on the creditors matrix, so they can show up as a class, but to bring a new separate lawsuit outside the BK court is possible to do, but much more challenging than had they do so pre-BK with a lawsuit.
I am not interested enough to read the whole filing... thanks Dave.
I think the logic of the UT finance thing, is ROel wants the financng agreement in place, regarding the planes, but does not want them to rank before him, as they are assets - and in the end, its a bargaining chip - that's all.
This guy is playing hardball... and should be dealt with accordingly... whatever Ken suggests, do the opposite, IOW.
In any case, I thought Roel send a note around basically saying no consideration for your orders, your deposits, or your warrantee and IOUs... I THOUGHT this was the shafting...
Get a lawyer, read the filings... he's probably misleading everyone.
In any case, MAKE NOISE, play hardball.... you are being shafted
The locals are getting restless...
From the ABQ Journal:-
The directive, which goes into effect Thursday, limits flying of the Eclipse 500 jet to an altitude of 37,000 feet instead of the authorized maximum of 41,000.
The problem is a buildup of hard carbon in the hot part of the engine when flying higher than 37,000 feet. The buildup "may result in a necessary reduction in thrust and decreased power for the affected engine," the FAA directive says. "In some cases, this could result in flight and landing under single-engine conditions."
It's too early to say what steps will be taken to fix the problem, said Pratt & Whitney spokesman Jean-Daniel Hamelin. "PWC is working closely with Eclipse Aviation to address this unexpected condition, which is unique to the engine model in this installation."
The key bit, for anyone interested in this AD, is that last line.
So, the question now is, who's going to 'fix' this issue, especially since no one has a complete handle on how serious the carbon build up problem is?
I know there are a number of worried people in several parts of EAC, wondering when the real questions will start.
So, Baron, I don't think we can dismiss this AD as a mere trifle, dealt with easily.
Shane
I am not interested enough to read the whole filing... thanks Dave.
I don't think if you read the whole creditors matrix you would know who are all the position holders and owners anyway. I'm just saying that based on the familiar names on the list that it looks like they are listed as creditors.
Baron said: "I'm sorry FO - I just don't want you to confuse the readers. A PC is not necessary at all to legally build fully certified EA500s or any part of the airplane for repairs.
You are correct- a PC is not necessary- if the parts are made under an APIS, or under “type certificate only”. However, the FAA no longer issues APIS’s, and, in order to be built under type certificate only, you are missing one small point- The FAA has to determine that each and every part conforms to the type design, and is in condition for safe operation.
Now, as best I can recall, the FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors who were involved with the project prior to the PC had a few issues with that. The parts DID NOT conform. You have seen on this blog the discussion of just how badly Eclipse was not able to control it’s production. What on earth makes you believe that any FAA Inspector is going to sign on the dotted line that a part conforms to the type design? If it doesn't, they won't. THAT is the problem with not building under a PC.
After what has happened with the intervention by John Hickey into to the process- FAA Inspectors will question everything. They ought to.
I’ll give you a hint: The job of FAA Inspector for Albuquerque (a new position, by the way) has been vacant since being announced in June. No one applied. And they reopened the bid in July. Now, normally a job announcement gets plenty of bids within a two-week period.
Not this one.
The job announcement continues to be advertised, but not a single one of the roughly 150 FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors – Manufacturing nationwide who qualify will apply for the job.
What does that tell you?
They all know the history, the intervention of Mr. Hickey into the process, and refuse to apply for the job until Mr. Hickey is removed from the chain of command.
So unless Mr. Hickey himself comes down to sign off each and every part, I don’t see a bright future for shipping parts out the door, should Eclipse lose it’s PC.
I can’t see Ms. Broyles, the ASI who testified before Congress, jumping on a plane every day to go to Albuquerque to help ship parts. Nor Ms. Broyles coworkers in Fort Worth. They know the story. And if Eclipse can’t prove the part meets type design, they are not about to sign anything.
And you might remember, Mr. Hickey was called over to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to explain why his employees spent over $3 million on time on Eclipse Certification, when most companies get less than one-tenth that attention. THEY are not going to be happy to see a lot more time and energy wasted to sign off individual parts. Of course, with the change in Administration, you'll see a new day - the next Administration will be one that supports FAA employees, not FAA managers who answer the "phone a friend" policy of the current corporate culture. That will be even more interesting.
Baron, I agree that in every other case, the FAA attempts lean on TC holders to support the existing fleet.
I would say, however, that Eclipse is disruptive technology, alright. Wedge made it that way. And Wedge's "phone a friend", Mr. Hickey, and his continued employment in the Aviation Safety Division continues to disrupt any chance of any worker in the FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service from being a willing part.
As you know, an FAA Inspector can’t sign an 8130-3 form for a Class III part, only a designee can. And Eclipse’s ODAR status also becomes questionable with the bankruptcy and change in ownership. As does the PC.
A TC is transferable to a new owner.
A PC is not.
Nor is an ODAR.
No, I would say that spare parts are going to be a problem, at least for the foreseeable future.
If Mr. Hickey departs employment of the FAA, you may see FAA worker bees willing to lend a hand.
Until then, however, the Eclipse PC, and Mr. Hickey, are both items that current FAA employees do not want to get within 100 miles of.
Forward Observer,
The most meaningful post in a long while.
FO, great post.
100% conformity is essentially what it takes to produce under TC, all under the watchful eye of an FAA inspector - ever wonder why Mooney is always on the edge when the economy changes - this is a significant reason why, it costs a lot to prove 100%n conformity on every part for every plane produced.
ODAR will not transfer to EAC NfG, they will need to do it again but they have a blueprint in the form of the existing quality manuals, vendor surveillance and auditing approaches and the personnel (if any of the people who really understand quality stay that is).
PC will also not transfer and that is very expensive for the reasons stated above.
It would be interesting to see if BK and the recovery plan, such as it is, were discussed with the 'key employees' in the meetings we heard about a couple months back - if BK is a rouse to renegotiate terms and wipe the slate clean, and RP's stalking horse can be identified and shown to be operating in bad faith the BK Judge and Trustee may not allow the proposed 363 deal, at least not as proposed.
I don't care why RP want the corpse, I do care about the damage done to this industry by this collosal mother of all F' ups. That is not anti-Eclipse bias BTW Baron, that is a given and undeniable proof. Eclipse did not invent the VLJ, they only F'd it up worse than anyone else, pushed incomplete Tin out the door and burned through the better part of $3B - almost twice as bad as my most conservative estimate.
They are shafting 1100 'customers', hundreds of vendors, and nearly a thousand employees.
After raising a paradigm-shattering $2B, after collecting $250-300M for the planes 'delivered' to date (none of them complete), they are over a Billion in the hole according to the filing.
They stiffed Pratt & Whitney for somewhere around 100-200 engines, Hampson for over a hundred rear fuselage assemblies, Fuji for maybe 100 wing sets, and others for countless tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars in components and assemblies. That is not anti-Eclipse bias Baron, that is the carnage left in the wake of the biggest failure in this industry.
All of those unpaid items were assembled into half-assed, incomplete and only partially functional preemie jets, and then foisted on the very enablers of this fiasco, the early adopter 'die-hards'.
Ken thinks he will still be able to get parts and I am sure is working hard to sell that 2nd position if he hasn't already done so - unless he plans to take it too as parts donor for his current preemie-jet.
I no longer fell sorry for Ken, he is going to get exactly what he deserves - I am planning on buying stock in Vaseline, even though Ken will not get the benefit of such.
The only bias around here Baron is your constant and annoying arrogance that nobody else here but you understands what is going on and it is you who keeps confusing criticism (go figure, being here and all) of the failed business plan, the lack of a suitable replacement business plan, and the heartbraking damage being done to thousands and thousands fo families literally all over the world by this abomination as 'hate'. I call that concern for my fellow man and for an industry I have given the bulk of my adult life to.
So spare me the rolly eyes - this is Eclipse Aviation Critic NG, criticism is what we do here - and we have been right far more than wrong, which is more than can be said for the subject of our august body's focus.
The latest from Russia regarding the VEB and the BK
Ken,
I figured some "gentle prodding" would bring you back. Diehards are getting harder to find, which is too bad because it keeps the blog more lively and adds some perspective.
As far as my having "jet envy" - you need to get a grip! Seriously. I've spent plenty of time around E500's, and all I can think about when I'm around one is how lucky I am that I DON'T own one. That's your nightmare, thank you, not mine!
Stick around for more abuse ;-).
Could anyone with access to the filings tell me if a "schedule of contracts to be assigned" has been proposed.
Baron, happy to oblige ( For those of you following along at home, it's on Page 89 of Exhibit B to Document 18 ).
"Assumed Contracts"
1 - License agmt with Avidyne, dated 2007-02-21.
2 - APA btwn EAC, PhyRx LLC & Peter Haaland, date 2007-03-23.
3 - License agmt with The Welding Institute dated 2001-11-07.
4 - Master Svcs Agmt with Computer Sciences Corp, dated 2008-10-09.
5 - MOU btwn EAC & Buyer Parent dated 2007-12-15, and all undertakings and agreements in furtherance thereof.
6 - Cptl Lease with Citicorp Leasing.
7 - Cptl Lease with Lyon Financial.
8 - Cptl Lease with De Lage Landen Financial Svcs.
9 - Loan Agmt by & among DJ Leasing, DJ Corp, UT Finance, EAC & Bank of Utah, dated 2007-07-16.
"Assumed Leases" lists 13 leases for various properties in ABQ, one with Albany County Airport Authority & one with Gainesville-Alchua County Regional Apt Authty.
86 "Excluded Contracts" are listed - too numerous to mention here right now, but the lease for Vern's FPJ is among them. The Santa Fe Opera gets stiffed too, but I see no mention of Dave's hilariously designated "Haarlem Globetrotters".
Would you like to try the Meadowlark Lemonade?
DI
Dave thanks for posting the link to the Russian press release.
On the one hand Google does a pretty convincing job of translating Russian. Many western European languages don't auto-translate this well.
But it also produced nuggets like the following. If the Russians have any intention of doing any form of due diligence (other than lunch with Pieper, then they should read the bold text.
Experts believe that the state has received control over profitable project for little money.
Find some new experts, as this plan has no chance of profit. Ever.
American Eclipse Aviation produces about 1,000 planes a year. Founded by former Microsoft manager right Rabernom
Well the wanted to produce 1000 completed planes - In practice they manage 150-160 incompleted planes in a year
The right Rabernom is the Wedge.
The cost of the aircraft - $ 1.6 million, the plane can sit on dirt airstrips.
The cost of the aircraft, if ever finished is unknown. We here are pretty sure that the actual cost is north of $2.3 million, probably way higher in low volume production.
The plane can sit anywhere. Dirt runways, corners of hangars, on a pole at the gate, on a tow bar. It is flying reliably which seems to be the issue.
Dave :
the "latest about VEB" :
be extremely careful about such , it is the typical example of Newspapers bullying ...
one paper publish a news ,soon reported by another one , soon by an other one , soon an other relaying this news ...
in no time , what was a press release become known as pure truth "because it is everywhere" ...
one dimension most foreigners don't have about Russia :
under the communists rule the 2 main "arms" of govt. were "Fear" and "Rumors" fear = no need to explain ; rumors = the USSR was always divided in 2 between hope of something , fear of not getting it , and fear to ask if it was true or not ...
unfortunately in today Russia , it still something in the mind of most (after 70 years of this treatment , normal)
i don't want to recall the number of time , i was talking with Ruuskyis who were explaining what is life in (let's say ) Paris ...
when i was telling that i am from there , they almost all times said me wrong "because everybody is saying so !" (i am not joking !)
so i see in this only a little more stunt , a little more BS ...
at the same time , Since a potential Ulyanovsk would be run by Russians ask yourself WHY do they need RP ?
The plant would be (eventually) Own at 50% by Etrick , 50% own by Region and Town (sounds really like L&H) but the 50% from Etrick pledged to the bank making the loan = until the lender can make enough profit to repay the loan = it owns 0% !
Making profit out of the EA500 at the time being as been a chimer , and will probably continue this way ...
if we can speculate on such , why not the Russkyis ?
once again , what do they NEED RP for?
will the russkyis be mad enough to lend the money to buy what RP is going to sell them ?
why not buying it straight away with the money they were supposed to lend to RP for doing ??
once again , it doesn't make any sens ...!!!
CW said...They are shafting 1100 'customers', hundreds of vendors, and nearly a thousand employees.
I can't believe you wrote this. Eclipse gave jobs and training to thousands for many, many years in a depressed area of the US. They gave hundreds of millions of dollars to vendors for years. How is that shafting?
Are Cessna, a HB and Mooney shafting the employees they let go? Is Boeing shafting the vendors that (MHI, GE Engines, Spirit, etc) that, after investing billions are sitting on a pile of 787 parts that Boeing doesn't want to take in or pay for until 2 years later?
Geez. That is business. Eclipse created those jobs and those vendors opportunities in the first place. It is theirs to do as they please. No one owns a job other than the employer that created it in the first place. (Except of course in the distorted ways of the UAW and other unions, that force employers to pay unneeded people to stay home - well, at least until they put the employer out of business, anyway).
Eclipse, run out of money and options. Pure and simple. No evil, no shafting. Just good'ol business.
Thanks for the info Dave. So it looks like newCo will be working on the Assumed Contracts list. That is expected. They need to know which vendors will play ball and what kind of ball they will play.
The ones that don't get an extra "shafting" to use CWs favorite word.
Shane, the day I start getting my technical aviation info from a 2-bit southwestern US daily is the day I shall surrender my license to the FAA. The ABQ daily wouldn't know what an AD is or what FL370 is or where the carbon is even building up. This AD is a minor inconvenience if it remains, and will probably be lifted before it even has an impact.
As to your question "Who is going to fix the AD?". Well this AD requires no fixes per se. It is simply an operation limitation. What will happen is that Eclipse will simply propose one of several alternate means of compliance. Something as simple as an amendment to the flight manual or placard saying: "Use of full cabin heat above FL370 Prohibited" should do it, or in increasing order of complexity an AvioNG code mod enforcing such or PW releasing a fuel scheduler SW mod. Either way, this is such a non event, that I doubt anybody will spend much time on it.
Someone with access to the Eclipse Flight Manual, please tell me, what is the fuel flow increase if you maintain the same TAS that you get at FL410 while flying at FL370? Is it 2%, 3%? 20-30 NM decrease in range. Such a huge deal. Particularly now that Oil is sooooooo expensive, like $50/bbl on a good day!!!! My god. The sky is falling.
FO, I agree with all you said, except that if RP really buy the entire business and operation via a 323, then the production certificate flows.
The recent example is the sale of Columbia to Cessna, but the more applicable one is the sale of Piper assets to New Piper. PC and ODARs all flowed nicely to newCo, AFAIK. Maybe you do need to re-apply (I don't know), but it is an automatic.
baron :
#Eclipse, run out of money and options. Pure and simple. No evil, no shafting. Just good'ol business. #
i feel you are oversimplifying ...
Cessna and other bizz are not delivering 85% BS + 10% unfinished job ...
if you really believe that this is "normal business" let apart "good practice" ,something must be wrong ...
if you put your AMG in a repair shops for maintenance , the owner make you pay in advance but doesn't do anything for many weeks than close its business ...
i am not sure you would say " good ol'business" ...
Eclipse Delivery Update
Jun-08 - 25
Jul-08 - 21
Aug-08 - 17
Sep-08 - 6
Oct-08 - 4
Nov-08 - 2
Eclipse delivered serial #259 (N84UR) to Passport 500 LLC on 11/21/2008.
Is Passport 500 LLC better off or worse off today than they were on 11/20/2008?
The flightaware history would seem to indicate that the aircraft is still in ABQ.
D.I.,
"would like some Meadowlark Lemonade?"
Go to Jail.
Do not Pass Go.
Do not collect $200.
Do not collect:
French Fries,
Freedom Fries, or
Stir Fries
:)
--------------------------------
FC,
Welcome back !!
Long time no see...
(er, blog)
FC,
Thanks for the (continuing!) good work on maintaining the delivery log. I had sorely noted both your absence on the blog, and the updates to the delivery spreadsheet.
Our new blogger friends will want to check it out- it is on the blog's home page, upper left hand corner, "Eclipse 500 Delivery Data".
FC's "Eclipse 500 Delivery Data"
Thanks FC!!
(fixed the link):
Fred,
I'm catching my breath (hard to do with a mouth full of turkey) and catching up a bit from yesterday...
Sorry it's taken so long- Baron95 and Dave and others keep posting a lot of really good BK material, but there's no pictures- just a lot of words. That reading stuff is hard work. I think their arguements could be simplied (kindly, for people like me) as:
New Eclipse Customer Care Policy Directive
(Dave, B95, and those other smarty pants might know a lot of big words, but I bet they can't draw worth a hoot ! .)
---------------------------------
"it can be a profitable business ...but one thing is sure = to make it profitable they have to dump all previous liabilities ...!"
I think Eclipse 2.0 has three big things going for it now:
1) Wedge is GONE
2) Wedge is GONE
3) Wedge is GONE
---------------------------------
"then at the same time IF they produce new planes, who is going to buy them ? the brand is plagued with a bad name already ..."
W-E-L-L, I have to admit, if serial no. 266 is the last one delivered, later in 2008Q4, I would not want to be the guy getting s/n 267.
------------------------------
"to reach some kind of profitability they have to screw old customers"
That's where the post Wedge business model comes in. Wedge screwed OLD customers as well as NEW customers. (And, OLD suppliers and NEW suppliers).
We're "moving on" to the new disruptive model, where only the OLD customers and suppliers get screwed.
(Ah, yeah,... S-U-R-E :)
-------------------------------
You're right about international sales- I figure it will be a pretty expensive airplane for EAC to maintain, they'll essentially have to have an A380 full of parts and technicians- maybe they'll restrict the flight manual to only land on runways that can be serviced by the 380 to ensure no stranded airplanes. (Think of the fuel bill for Mr. 380- disruptive indeed!).
-------------------------------
"what a good advertising ..."
I always thought Peg jumping out of a cake would be interesting and make good ad copy.
(Especially if she was holding Wedge's shrunken head* in one hand. It's okay- he wouldn't notice for several days. And it probably WOULD facilitate better B.M.'s for him).
(* "Is that over the top? I can never tell..."- Edward Nygma, in Batman Forever...)
(...and she's wearing a beekeeper outfit, and holding a Calculus book in the other hand. I'm not sure what this dream means. But I don't have it very often. Honest).
---------------------------------
"then there is the price-tag = who is going to buy Fpj if it is north of 2.3M$?"
Maybe it's time for ANOTHER disruptive auction like the one in late Nov. a year ago: "ONLY $1.25M for the first xxx"
(I wonder how many folks got fleeced with that one. That was REALLY bizarre. And being relative to Wedge (NOT related to, thank you very much !!!) that is saying a LOT. It makes me sad- "If it's too good to be true...").
Baron,
rethink...
$3.X smoking hole...
Justifies how much paid labor?
That's about the only ebenfit there was - no residual value whatsoever...
This was "capital incineration" in the immortal words of MR. Aboulafia... he coined the phrase for good reason.
Comparisons to Boeing and the like are, well... misplaced.
billy ...
was the turkey Good? ;-)
yes Wedge is gone , but honestly i am not sure Wedge.ng is any better ...
the business around maintaining already made can be a relatively well earning one ...
as long as owner feel it is better for their Ego to pay dearly than to drop the subject and buy a mustang or anything delivered completed !
some may have too much pride to swallow to do it , but i doubt it ...
for making plane = i believe it is toast !
no volume for it , if ABQ survive =it is probably too expensive to really make profits , let's apart who is going to work for them ?
so it's either cheap labor but inexperienced or well trained but too expensive ...(the trained ones may be willing to be once again there , if they do it at same rate =too bad for them ...)
Ulyanovsk = as soon as the Russkiyis will understand that the numbers promised are fiction ... have you ever seen a russian pissed-off ? nothing good to expect ...
at the same time Russians are not the cavemen most seems to think ...
if we (can and do) speculate on subject , HOW long it will take them to understand that they DO NOT NEED to lend money to someone for the aim of that very same person selling them what has been bought with the lended money ...!
Russians are pragmatic , they are very good at cutting "middlemen" !
ps : i thought the parts would be flown in the new Boeing ??? too bad the engineers cannot their put mouth and act together ...!!
And BTW, I really do feel badly for the customers, and am not making light of the fleecing they took. And I DO have to ,ah, er, hmmm, "admire" the, er, ah,..."resourcefulness" of Wedge's maneuver.
And, I really don't think it was a "maneuver" in the classical sense (that would require intelligence), nor even in a derogatory sense, really. It is more in a "desperation" sense.
But still, it was, ah, "inventive". (and... ?! Disruptive !?)
The deal (well, "deal", WITH some derogatory inference there, thank you) was: put half down, and you get a jet for $1.25M.
--------------------------------
From Stan's Dec 19, 2007 headline post on the original blog:
"Three weeks ago, we announced a special offer to lock in your standard aircraft price at $1.25M USD in exchange for $625,000 in escrow by December 14th. The offer required participation from enough customers for us to raise a minimum of $30M USD before we could access the funds.
"I am very pleased to report that we have reached our goal of $30M. At this point, and in accordance with the Escrow Agreement, Eclipse will have the option to draw upon these funds as needed. For those of you who participated, you will receive executed agreements to confirm your new price by December 21, 2007."
----------------------------------
(hmmm..."executed" agreements...maybe the "new" Eclipse customer service policy directive isn't as "new" as I thought... :)
What IS mentioned, is when Wedge recieved the cash, and when the customer recieves the paperwork
What is NOT mentioned is when the customer will receive their jet.
(I always wondered about this- were these guys “back of the line”?- in which case, there were probably mostly speculators, hoping to “flip” an airplane, as they didn't have a near-term need for it. And hopefully, not a near-term need for their $625K either. As Warren B. says “be cautious when others are greedy...”).
-----------------------------------
Our own Shane posted this a bit earlier (Nov 30, 2007- btw; one year ago, to the day):
"Locking in 50 odd customers to raise $30 mil is only a short term fix. The major problem is where the next 'percentage of what's already raised' comes from.
A few people have guessed what this figure might be, but the blog seems to average out at another 6 months burn or about $200 mil.
As Frog (and others) fully appreciate, that sort of money is not lying around somewhere looking for a high risk home.
CASH.
Businesses fold when they run out of it. No matter how good the product, or how clever the staff or how buoyant the market is....
I don't 'hate' anyone, least of all people I have never met. But I do have problems with some of the patterns I see in Eclipse. Most of The Critics come from the same corner of the field.
The end comes, sad though it is, when the CASH runs out..."
This caught my attention:
“Eclipse gave jobs and training to thousands for many, many years in a depressed area of the US. They gave hundreds of millions of dollars to vendors for years.”
Many years ago, my mother worked at “Goodwill Industries” in Orange County, California. “Goodwill”, as many of you know is a “charity”, that employs and trains folks that are sometimes handicapped . . . and returns them to local industries, or continues to employ them. They produce a product, and earn wages from the re-sale of those products. But “Goodwill Industries” does not “give” jobs to anyone.
The folks that worked at the main plant and in the stores were paid for their labors, and earned their training. Customers in the many stores purchased the products of their labors, and all involved benefitted from the hard work of these employees.
Over the years, I have “employed” many people . . . and sometimes even “created” a job or two, to provide a position during a crisis in someone’s life. But I never “gave” a job to anyone.
Maybe it’s this sort of attitude, possibly not meant in the manner stated, but revealed as to the philosophy of Eclipse toward the work force.
Much more could be said about the “depressed area” statement, unless it only referred to the aircraft industry in New Mexico.
And that part . . . “gave” . . . millions of dollars. Interesting! And all this time I was under the impression that it was “Eclipse” that had “received” the money from others, as investment in promised work that has yet to be performed.
This has all the makings of a charity (that’s for sure), but it would appear that the recipient of the charity is Eclipse Aviation. And an ungrateful recipient, at that!
gadfly
Baron,
Drop me a line to remind me about the FL410 v FL370 issue. I'm pretty sure we can bring the answer back to the blog if we work it together.
On the same subject, the 'carbon' problem runs deep. It's been rumbling along for a considerable time now, and seems to have defied a number of 'attempts' to sort it out.
The problem, when it arises, is very, very serious. Pilots report the loss of power from an engine.
This has happened to 'low hours' aircraft, in a variety of situations.
My point is quite simple. It won't worry anyone if the AD is revised with a simple statement about cabin temperature.
But, when the problems continue in the fleet, and 'NewCo' refuse to address it?
What then for the existing owners?
What will P&W do?
And finally, what will the FAA do?
Shane
baron95,
Eclipse, run out of money and options. Pure and simple. No evil, no shafting. Just good'ol business.
I hope, none of your business partners reads your words - someone might take your words for granted...
Being BK all the time and requesting deposits fot the Frankenstein jet - that good'ol business...hmmmmm....
Julius
P. S.: In Germany a delay in filing a petition in insolvency is elements of crime. That's why I have a different point of view!
Baron,
No cabin heat above 37000 ft? Brrrrr!
Actually, I think there is a limit to how high it should be turned up to avoid carbon buildup - 68 degrees is the number I think an Eclipse owner mentioned but don't quote me on that.
Gad,
actually, in order to create jobs or hire people, you need to believe there will be a commercial return - IE profits.
in this case, Baron is probably right - these guys were given jobs.. not their fault, just no serious expectation of a return.
Julius ; Guten Abend ...
#In Germany a delay in filing a petition in insolvency is elements of crime. That's why I have a different point of view! #
yes , they don' t have idea how it is in Old Europe ...
just to give a general example :
In France , when you Business goes bankrupt and you need to fill for Bk : you almost automatically loose the right to be in a managing position for up to 5 years ...
if there something illegal involved you can loose this right for the rest of your life ...
i believe that if you fail your actual business as CEO and declare that you want to buy out your failed business yourself ...
you end-up in jail ! at least the judge would ask you if you are insane or just plainly stupid ... ;-))
in Russia , in the same situation , you can be in a board or managing job ONLY after clearance from the court ...
still something that amaze me here :
WHAT has changed ?
apart that everybody is thrown together under the bus ...
NOTHING !
is there any more clients ?
I would buy a FPJ for $100,000, maybe less.
Owners are probably going to park these at the San Diego airports, leave the things unlocked, and beg a Mexican to fly it over the border, or ditch it in the ocean and get a check from the insurance company. How much will the insurance company pay?
Or maybe fly to Oklahoma or Kansas during Tornado season? I see it happening.
Abort takeoff and claim the thrusters got stuck, slam into trees? Sound familiar?
Check out the prices for Eclipse jets on www.controller.com. None of the prices have been adjusted downward recently. I'm not sure what pricing model they're using to justify that high of a price. If they were smart, they would rent the things out at cost so the pilots could get some hours.
A comment concerning the speculations around ETIRC's/RP's/RM's intentions/insight in the EAC BK:
1. Keep in mind that RP invested in Eclipse (debt or equity); he did not buy Eclipse. He bought into the business plan, albeit at a somewhat cram valuation. The poor man has absolutely no experience in aviation, especially production, and more elusive even, into the demand side. The Etirc enterprise is just a shell, the management there just ex-consultants fantasising about getting their hands dirty (that they might).
2. Keep in mind that Mr. Mann (God love him, apparently) "sat" on the Eclipse Board for years and let VR have free play with his plans; never a protest until the cash ran out.
Don't expect Mann or Pieper to have any more skill, insight or savvy in BK than they did in their prior passive EAC roles (more desperation perhaps; more sunk cost commitment; more misguided recovery plans, but not any more savvy about the market).
Don't expect Mann or Pieper to have any more skill, insight or savvy in BK than they did in their prior passive EAC roles (more desperation perhaps; more sunk cost commitment; more misguided recovery plans, but not any more savvy about the market).
The idea that somehow RP is going to buy Eclipse out of bankruptcy, sell it to the Russians, who are going to build Eclipse jets in Russia to satisfy untapped European and Russian demand, and that whole enchilada is going to make a profit --- that story belongs in a Marx Bros. movie where Harpo plays Vern and Groucho is RP. Just waiting for the duck....
that story belongs in a Marx Bros. movie where Harpo plays Vern and Groucho is RP. Just waiting for the duck....
Why a duck?
( ducks and runs )
DI
Why a duck?
When You Bet Your Life [by getting in an Eclipse] and say the secret word, the duck shows up.
When You Bet Your Life [by getting in an Eclipse] and say the secret word, the duck shows up.
If you got in an Eclipse, I'd question your sanity, and take whatever legal steps the contract between us allowed.
( shuffles through the contract )
Never mind - there ain't no sanity clause.
I really must be going,
DI
That's it! That was Vern's secret: He omitted the sanity clause from all of the contracts ("Both parties, being of sound mind and not under the influence, hereby agree to something").
No one on either side had to be sane to do business, they just had to do business and that was good because it was just business.
Dave,
Is it possible to post all of the BK docs on a stub page the way that FC posts the delivery data?
I assume that you get them through the US BK Court PACER system. Si?
Zed
Is it possible to post all of the BK docs on a stub page the way that FC posts the delivery data?
I'm looking into that - the delivery data is on a Google spreadsheet, so it's not quite the same thing ( but close ). The rest of my day is pretty busy, so it'll have to wait till tomorrow evening at the very soonest.
PING DAVE - "you've got mail" ( at the other place )
I assume that you get them through the US BK Court PACER system. Si?
Da.
DI
Dave,
Thanks. I will continue pulling them from PACER later tonight and explore the G-Docs link option.
Zed
What might be good to know regarding the carbon AD is whether or not this has happened on the earliest models that didn't have any retrofits (namely the aero mods/FADEC retrofit). The AD says that it applies to every single aircraft, but I'm trying to gather if that is because they saw that all versions of the aircraft or if they are just trying to be safe and act quickly. As I posted before, the SDRs showed more problems with the aircraft that had the most retrofits rather than the other way around. This is the same company that created the Frankenjet and rather than bothering to write new software, they pulled a HAL and intentionally lied to Avio telling it that it was connected to a PW610 when in reality it is a PW615 and also got around an Avio FPJ software bug by telling pilots to land faster.
Fred,
bonsoir!
Common senses are different.
I prefer certain common rules I can rely on. It's just cheaper and easier. In US I seem to be better if I would ask for ratings, lawyers, private investigators etc...
Greenhill seems to be a strong partner for the CH11 sec. 363 case.
It is interesting that EAC uses an unspecified company - "an affiliate of ETIRC aviation..." - in the motion for sec. 363.
Is that normal in U.S.?
It might be a crazy situation for a customer to get a FPJ after 2008-11-21 knowing that EAC would break the contract because of sec. 363.
Julius
I don’t think the carbon buildup issue is trivial. It cannot be reassuring to hear that ‘one’ engine can surge and require shutdown when you have two identical engine installations.
At altitude, the turbofan has a single input - fuel flow, controlled so as not to exceed N1, N2 or EGT. Near its ceiling the Eclipse has a problem. The compressor section of the engine can produce enough hot compressed air to feed the burner cans and propel the aircraft, or sufficient bleed air to comfortably heat and pressurize the cabin… but not at the same time.
A new fangled FADEC or an old fashioned hydraulic-mechanical fuel controller will be faced with the same issue. How much fuel can you feed the engine, and how hot or fast will you let it run?
At NBAA, Eclipse ‘management’ hoped limiting bleed air extraction by setting cabin temperature below 20 degC would allow the aircraft to operate up to its ceiling of FL410.
The FAA apparently disagreed. Eclipse ‘management’ allowed as how Pratt & Whitney was working on a new burner can design to remedy the problem. Overall, it is yet another example of premature delivery. The Eclipse 500 was never ‘run in’ in the classical engineering sense. (Like scraping the ways, Gadfly.)
Some may try to justify the AD by saying the Eclipse will 'only' burn a few percent more fuel down lower. That's not the point with this 'class' of aircraft. The difference between FL370 and FL410 can be the difference between being on top of a buildup or the jetstream.
Dave says:
"This is the same company that created the Frankenjet and rather than bothering to write new software, they pulled a HAL and intentionally lied to Avio telling it that it was connected to a PW610 when in reality it is a PW615 ..."
Dave, I don't think that's correct. If I recall correctly, EAC only built one Concept Jet prototype, and the prototype is powered by a PW610. They did propose using the PW615 for the production version.
As to fooling Avio, the only trickery involved was to fake the existence of a second engine so as to avoid revising all of the two-engine code. Perfectly acceptable for a prototype.
Now, some criticism for the critics (can you take it as well as dish it out?) I don't begrudge anyone their opinion, but all too often on this blog, someone makes an incorrect statement of fact. Someone else takes that falsehood, draws further conclusions from it, and runs with it. Pretty soon, the false conclusions become accepted fact among the bloggers. Now, I know some of you don't care, but some of those who proclaim that they are here only for "Truth, Justice and the American (or Irish) Way" should know better and take more care.
No doubt I'll get flamed for making this post, but hey, I just call 'em as I see 'em. I just want the facts to get out. I'm just trying to keep the aerospace industry from being hurt. I'm just trying to shine the spotlight of public attention on those who've done wrong. Sound familiar?
Re: The engine AD.
Original issue puts more Limitations on an airplane that already had enough limitations.
Maybe a name change to "Eclipse 500 Limited"?
("Limited" in a product name used to mean 'Exclusive" or "Special" ..... I guess you could say in this case that the E-500 is "Exclusively Limited in Performance")
Only the operators can decide if the limitation on cabin heat is significant. I'd wear a sweater.
The fix could be a simple as a FADEC revision, or as complex as a hot section redesign. Who pays for it? Only P&WC and the Eclipse lawyers know for sure.....but if the engine has to be operated outside it's originally specified performance requirements to make up for a heavier than originally specified airframe, well........
I've decided that the Eclipse is the ideal airplane for a retired pilot who doesn't have enough to do with his time, and his wife wants to give him a project to get him out of the house.
Since NOTHING in the airplane "ownership experience" (be it design, manufacturing, product support, warranty, manintenance, etc. etc.) is simple and/or straightforward on the E-500, this would be the perfect retirement project.
"the ideal airplane for a retired pilot who doesn't have enough to do with his time"
Sounds like Ken!
"Retired pilot with not enough to do....."
WAs not intended as an insult.....just a commentary on something I've seen repeatedly.
Guys who had their life all wrapped up in their work, and don't know what to do with themselves after retirement.
Have heard several (humorous) stories about guys I know who retired, then drove the wifes crazy by hanging around the house all day. Some of the wifes went as far as calling local Flight Depts./FBOs to see if they had some part-time work available, to get hubby out of the house.
Joe,
Concur with your post except for the prospect of a FADEC revision fixing the problem. No matter what is behind the power lever, when you move it only one thing changes - fuel flow. Unless you relax limits on fan speed, turbine speed or exhaust gas temperature, there is no flexibility. To change any of these shortens engine life.
Dave, I don't think that's correct. If I recall correctly, EAC only built one Concept Jet prototype, and the prototype is powered by a PW610. They did propose using the PW615 for the production version.
As to fooling Avio, the only trickery involved was to fake the existence of a second engine so as to avoid revising all of the two-engine code. Perfectly acceptable for a prototype.
I am talking about the proposed production version - the Eclipse 400. Eclipse said they'd reprogram Avio into reading the 615 as the 610 in the production version. I don't take much issue with what they did in the demo version - as it is a demo - except for what they talk about they going to do for a production aircraft.
Now, some criticism for the critics (can you take it as well as dish it out?) I don't begrudge anyone their opinion, but all too often on this blog, someone makes an incorrect statement of fact. Someone else takes that falsehood, draws further conclusions from it, and runs with it. Pretty soon, the false conclusions become accepted fact among the bloggers.
The whole idea is "many eyes." Nobody gets things right all the time, but if you see someone making a mistake, you correct it.
Guys who had their life all wrapped up in their work, and don't know what to do with themselves after retirement.
Have heard several (humorous) stories about guys I know who retired, then drove the wifes crazy by hanging around the house all day. Some of the wifes went as far as calling local Flight Depts./FBOs to see if they had some part-time work available, to get hubby out of the house.
I believe this is a real problem in Japan. There are lots of divorces happening with husbands who have recently retired. Their whole marriages they never really knew one another or spent time with one another and then when the husband now has a lot of time dut to retirement, these couples find they can't stand one another.
Black tulip wrote, "At NBAA, Eclipse ‘management’ hoped limiting bleed air extraction by setting cabin temperature below 20 degC would allow the aircraft to operate up to its ceiling of FL410.
The FAA apparently disagreed."
For the record, the FAA says you are incorrect.
The AD itself says that the condition in question ONLY occurs above 37,000 feet when the bleed air flow control valve goes into high mode.
In the absence of engine failure, high bleed air only occurs when you select a temperature 7 degrees or greater above current cabin or cockpit temperature. The fix is to select 68F; it locks out high bleed air unless an engine fails (in which case you're descending anyway).
Furthermore, when you set 68F in this aircraft, both the cabin and cockpit are quite comfortable. The aircraft tends to run a little warmer than the set temperature due to sensor placement.
BT, contrary to your feeling, the FAA's own documents indicate that this issue is a trivial one, readily resolved by simply selecting 68F on the environment page. Because of that, I think Baron95 is right--there is likely to be an AMOC pretty soon.
Ken
Ken,
Thanks, glad the aircraft is working out for you. Keep 'em runnin' and keep it flyin'.
Dave,
what you wrote is truly remarkable and important..
I imagined they would turn up the wick and screw with the FADEC.... as part of the "mods"... compromising engine life/performance.
Gad said I was probably right, and this post was a long time ago.
I believe the lack of understanding of the design trades and design tolerances is the biggest problem with this plane.
Its ice to know it CAN meet the required performwnce, in order to obtain deposit money - BUT, most companies provide design and performance margin, especially for planes designed for commercial operation.
These guys screwed the pooch - the plane is designed to get deposits, and the medium/longer term benefits are VERY questonable.
This IS a big deal...
Is ENAER suing EAC? If no then why?
In the absence of engine failure, high bleed air only occurs...
In the presence of engine failure, high bleed air never occurs. But that's not important right now.
Furthermore, when you set 68F in this aircraft, both the cabin and cockpit are quite comfortable.
Joe Patroni's suggestion of wearing a sweater rang true ( to me ). But that's not important right now.
I think Baron95 is right--there is likely to be an AMOC pretty soon.
To the extent that Avio controls the heating, and to the extent that Eclipse has a handle on its code base, and continues to pay its programmers, I tend to agree that a code patch will provide one. But that's not important right now.
Pay at the first window,
DI
Ken...
at least you could write:
"...so far..."
"...as far as we now know..."
"...from what we have experienced regarding this issue so far...."
"...according to recent history, this problem can be resolved for the time being by...."
la la la....
comprendo???
Dark Blossom
Your analogy to “scraping in the ways” isn’t quite the problem, here. Because a machine must still be “run in”.
However, from a distance there is another more basic flaw that I observe with the little bird . . . that to the new customer comes out as a benefit, but is also its worst characteristic. It’s “fun to fly” because it is not encumbered with safety margins . . . something that well built aircraft place up high on the list of priorities.
The entire aircraft is designed and built too close to the edge . . . in fact, had the aircraft developed only to that extent, it would have been bad enough. But rather than back up to do it right, the manufacturer continued on, with extra weight, etc., thinking that that made up for the lack of margin, with engines, landing gear attachment (including the tires, but not stopping with that, only), and a multitude of other seemingly minor things.
‘Sort of like the old woman whose doctor told her to give up smoking, drinking, and wild living . . . and she said she had never done those things. The doctor replied, “You’re worse off than I thought . . . you’re like a sinking ship with nothing left to throw overboard.”
The little bird has absolutely nothing left to throw overboard . . . there is no “built in margin”. Maybe like the extremely fast “Granville Brothers’” racers of the 1930's. They were certainly fast, but as that famous movie shows, when something breaks at top speed, there was no margin built into the design. Even Jimmy Doolittle attested to that fact.
As a successful designer and manufacturer of hundreds of machines (of all types), that is my firm opinion.
gadfly
(The lifetime guarantee that we placed on most of our products has never come back to bite us. If we designed AND built it, we stand behind it . . . forever. Safety and reliability has always been foremost in whatever we have produced.)
Dave Iverdorne wrote, "In the presence of engine failure, high bleed air never occurs. But that's not important right now."
Actually, Dave, that's not right.
In the presence of engine failure, the remaining operating engine automatically goes to high flow to provide adequate pressurization.
"Joe Patroni's suggestion of wearing a sweater rang true ( to me )"
That would have to be because you've never been in the plane with the flow control limited to low. Actually, it is quite comfortable without ever using high flow.
I suppose it would be hoping for too much for you guys to stop writing stuff when you don't know anything about the subject. So, instead of constantly correcting you, I'll just sign off for a while and snicker on my own :)
Ken
AT wrote,
"comprendo???"
Yeah, I do.
Did you read the AD?
The Systems Manual? The AFM?
These things are not a "state of mind" AT. They are facts. Either you know them or you do not.
Ken
So, instead of constantly correcting you, I'll just sign off for a while and snicker on my own :)
I know we have had several pools over the years as to when significant events or milestones will occur. I believe to date that all of the events have actually occurred, as predicted.
I propose that we start a new one called “When will Ken finally realize he has been totally screwed”.
I’m in for March 2009.
Gadfly,
“scraping in the ways” isn’t quite the problem, here... a machine must still be “run in”.
Of course, you are correct. It was a far-too-simplified analogy. I had never responded to your fine piece about bringing machine ways into trim and wanted to. I've seen it done also.
Metal Guy,
How will we know for sure?
With apologies to Clement Clarke Moore … a little advance taste of the poem “Twas the Night Before Liquidation” …
Ken was dressed in warm clothes from his head to his foot,
for his engines were all tarnished with ashes and soot.
To expand the concept that no matter the number or specificity of FADEC inputs, the only thing it controls is the gas valve …
Remember that the aircraft and engine geometry are compromises that attempt to optimize total system performance throughout as much of the envelope as possible. While there is a sweet spot where everything is in harmony, the majority of the time the aircraft is off-nominal. This holds for every aircraft, not just the FPJ.
It could be as simple as a slightly higher than desired angle of attack at 410 generating fuselage-wing-nacelle-empennage flow/pressure issues that generate an unanticipated condition within the engine. Excessive swirl, intake pressure gradient, exhaust pressure gradient, whatever … from a FADEC sensor perspective all is within bounds, but from a finite combustion perspective … well, the engine ain’t happy.
Those who claim and real knowledge of jet engines must agree that IF a “few lines of code” completely fixes the issue, owners of the Ecorpse 0.500 are some luck ____’s (deleted adjective).
Tail 727HD breaking FL 41 today.
I was curious how the max 37FL AD is being observed. Doesn't look like this tail is too concerned.
I was curious how the max 37FL AD is being observed. Doesn't look like this tail is too concerned.
The AD isn't in effect until December 4th. As long as they're doing what Eclipse said to do previously, Eclipse can't blame them for what happens (well, Eclipse can, just it is a matter of how effective it would be to do so).
“X” . . . don’t knock it. Tail 727HD went 33 minutes, cleaning up its own carbon footprint . . . requiring the planting of one less tree, and a slight loss of income for Al Gore.
gadfly
(‘Sorry folks . . . the gadfly was suddenly overcome with the possibilities of the “new technology” falling into “lock-step” with the evironmentalists. Imagine, if you will, jets carrying their own “pooper scoopers*” and plastic bags . . . keeping our atmosphere clean, while flying high overhead.)
*otherwise known as turbo-jet engines.
Meeting of Creditors
Request to Schedule Section 341 Meeting
Docket Text: Request of US Trustee to Schedule Section 341 Meeting of Creditors
December 22, 2008 at 11:30 a.m.,
J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building, Room 2112, Wilmington, DE
Filed by United States Trustee. (Leamy, Jane)
==
I was exchanging email with another vendor who is trying to coordinate a mass presence at this event. Reportedly the E5C folks will be there.
The only way to really make noise is to get out the vote and BE AT THIS MEETING !
Creditors All
This man, “Zed”, is giving good advice. You probably won’t see a penney of return from Eclipse . . . “been there, done that” with other similar unethical enterprises (I’m holding back the terms I would normally use . . . not vulgar, but more descriptive).
Unlike the companies with whom we lost money in less than honest agreements, you vendors have a golden opportunity, to “do the right thing”, and will know for the rest of your life that you stood up to the plate, at the right time, in the right place.
Do it! Get your rear on a plane, and show up at that meeting. Do it for yourself. Do it for you own integrity. Do it for the aircraft industry.
Or just do it, because it’s the right moral thing to do.
This “Zed” guy . . . I don’t know who he is, but he shows “savvy” in things aeronautical . . . I have a certain intuition in such things. And I have no dog in this fight . . . and no money to pursue the matter on behalf of others . . . but some of you meet the qualifications, and have a responsibility to be there . . . and “Make noise”.
Please, do the right thing.
gadfly
(December 22 . . . 46 years ago, on that date, desperately cold and snowy in Chicago, I set out on the best adventure of my life . . . four kids, nineteen grand-kids later, it’s still a daily exciting adventure . . . and I have never in my life regretted “doing the right thing”, without delay. It just gets better and better.)
I was exchanging email with another vendor who is trying to coordinate a mass presence at this event. Reportedly the E5C folks will be there.
The only way to really make noise is to get out the vote and BE AT THIS MEETING !
Before that the APA deadline to file objections is December 8th and the hearing is December 15th (if you want to say something then, I believe you'd have had to have filed an objection).
BassMaster,
Ok, I "took the hook" and looked up ENAER ("Chile's National Aeronautical Enterprise").
Looks like they make the nose section.
I don't think P&W or Fuji have sued either, nor has Hampson re-sued. Sounds like it is immaterial now that EAC has filed BK, but I think they can mail the bill to the judge, and let him decide what to do.
The Wedge might have a He-Hate-Me list, that he's been controlling, but I think there are going to be considerably more "uninvited" entries in the next few weeks...
ENAER
(Get'em while they're hot- I suspect most vendors will be removing references to EAC shortly)
The Wedge might have a He-Hate-Me list, that he's been controlling, but I think there are going to be considerably more "uninvited" entries in the next few weeks...
Vern shows up multiple times on the various creditors lists, so he could show up for himself as well.
JZguy,
Thanks for mentioning the PW610 in the Con-Jet prototype.
Wiki CON-jet
Well, maybe it WASN'T a prototype- after all, it was a fully functioning deposit extractor.
(Think how much more effective the incenerator would have been with a 615 instead of 610...)
----------------------------------
"No doubt I'll get flamed for making this post, but hey, I just call 'em as I see 'em. I just want the facts to get out. I'm just trying to keep the aerospace industry from being hurt. I'm just trying to shine the spotlight of public attention on those who've done wrong. Sound familiar?"
Go drink some more koolaid.
--------------------------------
You're showing signs of improvement though. Maybe building up a tolerance to the "brew"?
.)
The Wayback machine (NOT the Wayout machine...although Wedge and RP both probably wish(ed) there really WAS a wayOUT machine) is up and running. Although in this case, it is NOT so way back, merely 12 months, or say, $1B ago....
I was perplexed about the odd details of that $30M scam (as opposed to the $3B scam) Wedge was pulling about a year ago (specifically, who the "marks" were- was Wedge trying to further abuse old customers, or looking for fresh meat...?can you say, RP?), and I came across a nice article:
"(Existing) Position holders must agree to pay $ 625,000 by Dec. 14 (2007) in addition to any deposits already paid. For that they can get their base model Eclipse 500 for $ 1.25 million with no inflation adjustments through the time of delivery."
The basic pitch was "Spend $625K up front, to save $500K eventually", or something along those lines.
This is the first concrete sign that Wedge's scheme was failing. The rosy PR states that this will allow purchases to "save up to $500K". But if this was true, then it means EAC would really LOSE up to $25M, just to borrow $30M. (By business standards, that's loan shark territory- what competently run and viable enterprise would resort to that??)
There could only have been a few explanations for this "stunt":
1)Wedge was NUTS
2)EAC was TOAST
3)ALL of the above
It was CLEAR, that EAC was either a financial disaster, or it was run by idiots. One wonders why anyone would have taken Wedge up on that offer- wishful thinking, probably- the willful suspension of reality...
---------------------------------
That established, let's now consider a quote from Wedge, on the subject of finance:
"Raburn scoffed at claims by critics that the company is in desperate financial straits. We have other options for raising capital," he said, acknowledging that additional funding is necessary because the production ramp up has been slower than anticipated and the company needs to build airplanes in volume to be profitable. "They´re making it up. They´re plain, flat liars, really," he admonished, noting that as a private company no one on the outside has access to the company´s financial data."
Sorry Wedge, you are a lying ass.
It was all SO clear, SO long ago. There was NO "inside" information required to see what was happening. Just a calculator and EAC Press Releases.
But you know what? I really DO hope EAC's books are opened up. For a FRAUD investigation.
--------------------------------
What makes this particularly "amusing"*, is that Wedge's bluster was published exactly one year ago, in the (surprisingly good) Russian on-line "Jets.RU" web site
Jets.ru
(NOT Jets-R-US, nor Jets-R-USA... :)
---------------------------------
*I DO sincerely hope M00 was not damaged financially by recent events at EAC, but I DO hope he is a little less amused lately.
AND, I hope he "hops" back in here soon).
bill.e.goat said:
"Go drink some more koolaid."
goat,
Thanks for the well-reasoned forensic response.
I wish you a long and happy life. I hope you have many children that bring you much joy, and the love of a good woman. I wish you prosperity and health. I hope that you always have good fortune and the opportunity to spread your good fortune among the less-fortunate.
I hope that your sports teams are always victorious. I hope that you are recognized by your peers for your sterling character and contributions to society and that your receive acclaim for such.
In short, it is my desire that your life and that of those around you be blessed beyond measure.
And, when your time comes at the end of a long and happy life, I hope that the Virgin Mary herself comes down and takes your shining soul up to sit beside Jesus Christ at a banquet in heaven, where you will receive the heavenly reward that you earned in your time on this planet.
And after your passing, may everyone who knew you smile with fond memory at the mention of your name. May your friends and family visit your gravesite regularly and keep the headstone scrubbed, and fresh flowers in the vase.
And may your legacy live forever in the good works you've done, in the many ways you've improved our world, whether we recognize your hand in it or not. May future generations immortalize you with statues, in history books and ballads telling of your conquests.
Finally, several billion years from now, as our sun winks out, may the last survivor of the human race pass away quietly with the following words on his lips:
bill.
e.
goat.
JZguy,
Why thank you for all the nice wishes!
But I most like to think I will be remembered as a guy who was objective*.
How about you?
-------------------------------
*Like, maybe could tell the difference between a $3B swindle, and an innocent mistaken refernce between a PW610 and 615.
I can't tell what JZguy's "angle" is, but he obviously is having difficulty adjusting to reality. Maybe a bitter ex- or current EAC worker, who drank the koolaid and is blaming the blog for EAC's collapse?
Please tell us your angle- I don't really care enough to guess any harder.
And don't delude yourself that it's not showing through.
But I do thank you for the kind wishes.
JZguy seems to remind me of my old friend "Preacher" from last year.
...Probably just a
...coincidence...
bill,
I'm not, nor have I ever been, an Eclipse Aviation employee.
I'm a pilot, and I'm an owner of an Eclipse 500. I bought it from Eclipse for $995k, base price. (Didn't Vern promise to sell jets for less than $1 million? Worked for me.)
I've been very pleased with my jet. It flies post-BK just as well as it did pre-BK. What about the future? Will I be able to keep it airworthy? I dunno. My crystal ball is not getting good reception any more. Guess I'll have to switch to a digital version.
But I do know that I'm not worried about it. I didn't borrow a dime to buy it. I'd gladly pay for FIKI and AvioNG 1.5 upgrades tomorrow at full price, because it would still be a hell of a bargain. It performs at book values or better in every way and my family and friends love to fly in it.
But, enough about me. How did you come to be on this blog, my capricious (greek pun) friend?
I've been very pleased with my jet. It flies post-BK just as well as it did pre-BK.
As a point of clarification we are not to post-BK yet. Depending on what happens during BK in the weeks and months ahead can (and probably will) be very significant one way or the other.
JZguy, did you listen to the owners group legal briefing when it aired. Are you in for requested amount and do you think it is to little to late.
Dave,
Of course you are correct. What I was trying to say was pre-bankruptcy-petition and post-bankruptcy-petition, but I must have abbreviated it too much. Mea culpa.
Gad,
Is next Saturday the BIG football day for you, or did you enter through a more sane route?
Zed
Dave, et al,
With all of the events unfolding, and deadlines approaching, does Eclipse, the Trustee, somebody, have the requirement to FORMALLY notify the creditors (vendors, owners, etc.) with sufficient time to take action?
“just zis . . . etc.”
Ah yes . . . time flies when you’re having fun? And speaking of flies, the “goat” and I were chewing on a can of beans, a long, long time ago. There was a problem . . . I may have cursed him with the fleas of a thousand camels . . . attacking his armpits . . . or something of that nature . . . some little token of friendship. Well, in the course of time, we struck up an understanding of common thinking . . . and “at a distance” (even goats and flies have certain standards), we could tolerate to at least be in the same neighborhood . . . or at least on the same farm, as it were (depending on wind direction).
Back in olden times, for you, and others that are new to this game, we came to a consensus that the can of beans, a.k.a. (“also known as” to those in Rio Linda) E500, was not for “eating” but for “selling”. Are you with me, so far?
Now, so as not to get into the requirements of salvation, and the part that the “blessed virgin”, a most favored young lady, according to Scripture, may, or may not have in this most important subject . . . which would be a far more important subject of discussion . . . and might even strain the relationship with my good Irish friend, and host . . . I’ll welcome a discussion with anyone through the other channels of email . . . as that is closer to my purpose in living than criticizing the little bird from Albuquerque. Now, hopefully, I handled that with “tact”, and can move on to the subject of the blog . . .
Yesterday, Saturday, 29 November 2008, was the first of the present Met Opera series . . . something to which I have been listening, since I can remember (and that’s a long, long time). The first opera of the season? . . . “The Damnation of Faust”, by Berlioz. I could not help but think of Eclipse . . . as I worked away at my computer on a certain design . . . with the cold winds of New Mexico, attempting to move our home off the “mountain”. Now, that’s my kind of world! Stress . . . in complete safety! Criticism . . . without anger! Old age . . . with an unlimited future, because of a position of security!
You fly your airplane . . . I’ll let another fly mine. Thank you.
gadfly
(Interesting thing about the two story house that we built, back in 1973! When I was digging the basement . . . all by hand and back, with shovel and two wrecking bars . . . a 4 ½ foot, and a six foot . . . I reached a level where I could no longer move the two to five hundred pound boulders . . . and determined that “that’s the bottom of the basement”. So far, that has turned out to be a good choice. The two thousand concrete filled and “rebar” re-enforced concrete blocks have not moved. Build on solid rock, and don’t worry about the changes that occur. An old principle, written down two centuries ago . . . it works! In that analogy, I think Eclipse is built on shifting sand . . . and it will not stand.)
(Zed . . . I've never been much into football, although our youngest daughter has a couple degrees from USC, and I think I own a building or two out there . . . so you'll have to get your football info somewhere else.)
(Some time, ask me about "Royce Hall" at UCLA . . . and I'll send you a book, "A Frontier Lady", by Sarah Royce, my great-great grand-mother, the mother of Josiah Royce.)
(‘G,night!)
Gadfly,
Thanks. Was just wondering how you became a bubble head.
Zzzzzed
Shane said... The problem, when it arises, is very, very serious. Pilots report the loss of power from an engine.
I'd be surprised. Do you actually have a reference to anyone losing engine power because of it?!!!??
Carbon build up is nothing new. One of the pilots I mentor had the same problem on his Conquest - eventual fix were new nickel vanes on the engine.
In any event, carbon build up causes a slow and steady loss of power over several hours. It is usually picked up by the trend monitoring system or by any alert pilot that notices that cruise speeds are slower than normal for the same conditions (alt, temp, power setting).
I sincerely doubt that you could have actual total power loss on an engine due to carbon build up. Sure if you let it go indefinitely it could happen, but I doubt the plane would be able to take off with so little power.
I really don't see this as a big deal, if the condition causing it has been correctly identified: above FL370 with cabin heat above 68F.
P. S.: In Germany a delay in filing a petition in insolvency is elements of crime. That's why I have a different point of view!
So is posting an picture on the internet of a guy with his arm raised straight. Thank god this is America, where taking a risk and failing is not a crime.
One more thought, before I bring my day to an end:
Each generation has some rare genius in the aircraft industry . . . they come along at undetermined times . . . and there seems to be no pattern. But it could be, that one is now reading the comments of this very blogsite. Another “Kelly Johnson”? . . . maybe! But regardless, after the purpose of this blogsite has passed, we need not leave it to the relic heap of history as only a series of criticisms of a disaster . . . there are within the comments of “many”, a few thoughts that should, or at least, “could” be considered by those who truly have a “feel” for aircraft design . . . and will go on to great things. There are few things worse than a sermon that goes on forever and ever, so I’ll close this for tonight. I think you all get the picture.
gadfly
(baron . . . sometimes, more often than you might realize, the slow buildup of a problem can be far more dangerous than something that happens suddenly. "Mark Twain" spoke of boiler explosions on the river boats usually occuring on the long "sleepy" night watches, and rarely during a "race" between riverboats, when equipment was pushed to limits. It's usually the "slow stuff" that gets you in a condition approaching "ambient temperature".)
metal guy said...
I know we have had several pools over the years as to when significant events or milestones will occur. I believe to date that all of the events have actually occurred, as predicted.
Except for the important ones, like:
1 - Receiving FAA TC
2 - Receiving FAA PC
3 - Receiving EASA TC
4 - Receiving FIKI
5 - Starting volume deliveries
6 - Receiving Avio NG cert
7 - Receiving Avio NG 1.5 Cert
8 - Ceasing operations (it was always predicted as next holiday)
If you really look into it, you will find that the Blog predictions are often way off, the only exception being some predictions of number of planes delivered in 2007.
baron
Over the years, I have refrained from all polls . . . but have consistently said that Eclipse has not, nor ever will, produce a single complete aircraft "as originally promised".
'Wish to comment?
gadfly
(Good night!)
#Thank god this is America, where taking a risk and failing is not a crime.#
i prefer to remain on this side ...
some learn from their own history , some don't !
as for taking a risk and failing :
Was it USA that was swallowing 80% of world savings until recently ???
taking risks with others peoples money = any fool can do ...
as for the crime : i wonder if the rest of the world is feeling the same ?
it is called WorldWide recession , soon to be followed by deflation ...
Fred - grow up dude.
It is the same situation. Eclipse created all these jobs and bought all these wares from the vendors. Now there is a hickup in the party and everyone thinks Eclipse is "shafting" the employees, destroying their families and the like.
Similarly, the US consumer and institutions have been providing the music for a a worldwide party by buying more AMGs and Chinese toys and the like and providing the most liquid markets and the safest place in the world (US treasuries and the like) for people to park their money. Now there is a little hickup in the party, and you want to cry like a baby and blame the DJ.
Wake up pall. The world is only in recession because the US consumer is taking a little break. Did you forget that we've been the bigest buyers for a while? Where are the thanks. Thank you Americans for buying so many AMGs, so much French wine, so much oil, so many Chinese toys. You only remember when we stop buying?
You only remember when Eclipse lay off people or stop paying vendors? Did you say thank you Eclipse for creating so many jobs for so many years and for buying so many turbofans, and so many wings and so many Michelin tires? Didn't your mother teach you any manners? did she only teach you to whine and cry when you got off the nipple?
#1 - Receiving FAA TC
2 - Receiving FAA PC
3 - Receiving EASA TC
4 - Receiving FIKI
5 - Starting volume deliveries
6 - Receiving Avio NG cert
7 - Receiving Avio NG 1.5 Cert
8 - Ceasing operations (it was always predicted as next holiday)#
1° = was it the case for a committee hearing ?
2° = same as N°1 ,now to be called "telephoned cert."
3° = only very partial and after 5 years of works (what an exploit!) more as an FAA followed than for its own qualities ...
4° = is there any already "assembled" with N°7
5° = sounds like old Soviet car plant = "we make hundreds of thousands cars where capitalist-dogs make only few with same amounts of parts "
the real questions : "are they complete?" and "do they sell?"
6° = it is such a mess , i am not sure any geek would like to have a look in it ...
7° = as N°6 and what is the point ? silly me , i forgot : to extract cash from victims ...
8° = the REAL non-understandable part may be due to the "mud pit theory" ?
gadfly said...
baron
Over the years, I have refrained from all polls . . . but have consistently said that Eclipse has not, nor ever will, produce a single complete aircraft "as originally promised".
'Wish to comment?
Yes Gad. You have been very measured and haven been invariably going back to that line, and correctly so. I think it is safe to say that you will be proven correct for a very long time.
No one will ever accuse Eclipse of underpromising and overdelivering.
baron ...
i accept to grow-up if you accept to stop being blinded by your own feeling of importance ...
"The world is only in recession because the US consumer is taking a little break."
well actually ...
technically speaking it is not a little break ...
it is called "to be ruined" ...
or its kinder avatar : " credit-addicts are in for shock-therapy"
with Wolker at the stick , not sure credit spending is going to be on for very long , anymore ...
as for a "liquid and safest market" ...
well , i am sure the Swiss would like to believe you , unfortunately , you didn't BUY more items ...
you just printed more banknotes to pretend you could afford it ...
sorry !
baron
Thank you!
G'night!
gadfly
Hi JZguy,
Thanks for the background info. I'm glad you are enjoying your airplane. (Same for Ken and everyone else I am aware of that has one).
I'm actually an "advocate" of the airplane too, I think it is quite nice, especially for it's price- indeed, for several times it's price.
What brought me to the blog was curiosity- I had followed the EAC story from mid-2002 through the Oshkosh 2006 show, and was puzzled why there were no deliveries after TC (well, provisional TC, and why full TC took months, rather than weeks, as Wedge had professed).
The press releases started becoming convoluted, and AvWeek and the mainstream press were refused access, so after months of no demonstrable progress, I started scouring the 'net for information, and eventually I came across this site. I've been reading it since December 2006 (and read the backdated entries to it's inception in April 2006).
BTW, I have been a pretty consistent supporter of the airplane, for private use- I was skeptical of the air taxi thing all along.
I think the old piston twins are beautiful, but maintenance nightmares, and slow, and thirsty, and have an inferior feature set, in theory*. So I have to say, despite some delays and still missing features, the blog hasn't changed my generally favorable opinion of the airplane.
(*In practice, they are beautiful, maintenance nightmares, and slow, and thirsty- but, are supportable, and some have an arguably superior feature set).
And really, the blog hasn't changed my opinion of EAC much either.
EAC has changed my opinion of EAC- the blog merely is a place to discuss what's happening, and what we think is happening, and why we think it is happening.
Speculation, but pretty smart speculation, by lots of really smart guys, on both sides.
Lots of great technical information about aviation in general (especially throughout 2007), and business (especially throughout 2008).
So I'd have to say I'm an EA-500 "advocate", and a EAC "critic".
Over the years of reading the EAC press releases with increasing puzzlement, and watching the program flounder, rather than flourish, EAC's performance made me a critic of their business plan and execution, which is my main arena of participation on the blog.
So, thanks for the inquiry- I appreciated knowing your frame of reference, as I'm sure you do mine.
I believe you have correctly noted a bias, which I too perceive, regarding the airplane; but it is not a "loaded" bias- the fellows with this persuasion are pure in motive*.
--------------------------------
*Sometimes they are wrong, sometimes they are right- right often enough, I listen to them.
And I have noted they are open to correction- such intellectual honesty makes me listen to them even more. As I listen to and appreciate the folks who kindly take the time to inform and correct on the issue at hand.
With all of the events unfolding, and deadlines approaching, does Eclipse, the Trustee, somebody, have the requirement to FORMALLY notify the creditors (vendors, owners, etc.) with sufficient time to take action?
Right now it is late and I'll have to look into it when I have more time, but AFAIK there is no requirement that any creditor be notified. The more notice that is provided, the harder it would be for Eclipse to claim it does not have successor liability from the creditor who wasn't notified. BK courts are meant to balance out the interests of all involved and it is a matter of give and take for a creditor. That was why I previously made a big deal about successor liability as it pertains to 363 sales. However, I don't think you asked that to see if you can bring a post-BK lawsuit. I would think in any subsequent filing by your attorney representing the class, you would cite how you haven't even received formal notice and as such why X, Y and Z should or should not happen.
And JZg,
I think we do have more in common that you might have originally thought.
What follows is NOT a flame- I appreciate your candor, and I hope you will appreciate mine in discussing the following excerpts from a previous post.
--------------------------------
"I just call 'em as I see 'em".
I think -almost- everyone on the blog feels the same way; you might not agree with them, and they might be wrong, but they are sincerely "calling them as they see them" too.
--------------------------------
"I just want the facts to get out".
I believe you are saying, you want to get the facts out about the EA-500.
Bravo. I encourage -appeal to you and everyone- to inform and correct anything you feel is incorrect, about the plane, or the company, or finance and technology in general- it makes us all more informed.
Regarding the airplane- as I say, I am an advocate of it. But surely you must recognize that EAC is either blitheringly incompetent, or has been misrepresenting price, schedule, feature availability- whichever the case- those are facts that need to get out too.
(You might say they didn't know better, that it's innocent incompetence- but others would argue that it was NOT innocent, nor only incompetence).
---------------------------------
"I'm just trying to keep the aerospace industry from being hurt".
I believe you were really saying: "I am just trying to keep EAC from being hurt". By what you perhaps correctly note as a bias against the EA-500.
But really- regarding "the aerospace industry getting hurt"- you surely must recognize EAC has screwed dozens of aerospace industry vendors by not paying for what the blog estimates as up to 60 ship sets of equipment? Accident or not- they are screwed.
And EAC has sold their product at a loss- this HURTS the industry- it bankrupted EAC, it would have bankrupted Cessna and Piper and Diamond and Honda if they lowered their prices to sell at a loss just to compete with EAC's subsidized, artificially low prices.
"Stimulate the industry", as Wedge would say- do you see where that got EAC?)
---------------------------------
"I'm just trying to shine the spotlight of public attention on those who've done wrong".
What you really are saying is: "I want to point out incorrect statements made in public about the technical aspects of the EA-500."
Fine- please do, in fact.
But- let's read it out loud: "I'm just trying to shine the spotlight of public attention on those who've done wrong".
Do you really think this has been an innocent run of bad luck for EAC?
You are quite happy with your airplane- congrats, really.
But how about if you were still on the waiting list- how about the guys that took out a loan for this and don't have an airplane???
("Didn't Vern promise to sell jets for less than $1 million? Worked for me." Think about that statement- really: how many hundreds of people are loosing 10% down payments, and 60% progress payments? Does it really only matter to you that you got your plane, at the original price? I would say, of course not.
But to hundreds of others, who might never get their plane, at any price, that is the ultimate disrespectful, flippant remark. (I realize it was just a rhetorical construct- but a painful one to many).
Think of it this way: by saying that, one is doing EXACTLY what Wedge PAID to have done- he sold a plane at dramatically below cost: not out of sense of honor; but out of sense of advertising- and naturally, anyone would be thrilled and would be functioning as paid advertising.
I'm sure you are honest enough to realize hundreds of depositors really are getting "wronged", and it's through ill-virtue of EAC's failed business model.
---------------------------------
"Sound familiar?"
What is sounds like is you are saying since "you guys are biased against the EA-500, I'm going to be biased in favor of it".
Well, good- you have a right to be, if it's working out great for you, which I trust it is. But putting two flawed but opposed arguments together only confuses the truth, not clarifies it. Better to have two correct arguments, or at least one correct and one flawed.
---------------------------------
I sense you are frustrated with partially unjustified criticism the EA-500 is getting. I don't blame you- I'd be irritated too. Please correct errors, please state opinions, but we all need to be as intellectually honest as we can be- it strengthens our arguments, and we all benefit from the more rigorous (and less emotional) debate- it makes us all smarter.
(And I for one, can use all the help I can get !!)
I also sense JZguy has a LOT to contribute, and I look forward to hearing from him a LOT in the future.
(Although with Ken, B95 and JZguy, we might have to channel Frank Castle once in a while... :)
Actually, early in the Bankruptcy process, court will notify all of creditors of the filing and of the date of a creditors meeting (or conference call) at which the creditors will form a creditor's committee.
In Eclipse's case, notices should have been sent already. If Eclipse update's the creditor's list then, new notices are sent. Each creditor can then file a motion to update the amount owed, their address/contact info, etc.
The above was in response to Dave's post answering a previous question from ZeD (I think).
Also, I should mention that sometime, e.g. when there are many creditors (thousands), the court may order the creditor's committee to notify the other (generally smaller) creditors.
I think Eclipse is obligates to list creditors of more than $2M and/or any creditor that has sent notices (I think at least 2 in past 90 days or some other criteria), but I don't think they need to list hordes of smaller creditors. Now, if individual depositors rise to the notification threshold, I don't know.
So this may play in this case, where the creditor's committee is ordered to notify the depositors, owners, etc.
We'll see. I'm generally uninterested in case administration, though I don't minimize its importance.
In the end, this will go one of three ways: 363 sale order, Ch11 reorg plan order, conversion to CH 7 with asset auction. If it goes one of the first two, overall statistics are that 3 in 4 that the exit Ch 11 operating end up subsequently failing quickly and liquidating.
That is, of the proportion of firms that exit Ch11, only 25% will actually make it.
baron,
So is posting an picture on the internet of a guy with his arm raised straight. Thank god this is America, where taking a risk and failing is not a crime.
you don't want to understand it!
It is just a way how deal with each other - nothing with "arm raised straight"..- it's about fair practices according to the common sense in a country.
Up to now it seems that RP and the wedge did their jobs according to the U.S. laws. The lenders, customers, and suppliers enjoyed it - non risk no fun!
Some might think, that this was the last time they tried a fair business with a GA company - too much risk and no fun!
Julius
BT wrote:
No matter what is behind the power lever, when you move it only one thing changes - fuel flow.
Is this true BT? Does the PW600 have no VSV, or bleed valves which might also be scheduled alongside fuel?
FJT,
Good point, don't know about variable bleed in this installation. Can't imagine there is much internal surplus in this situation. Also wonder if keeping a really tight airplane with minimum mass flow would help.
julius ... bonjour !
#it's about fair practices according to the common sense in a country. #
totally agree ...
it always amaze me when i see peoples not living in a land can judge peoples of that land ...
or when some scale the whole world with their own eyes ...
one of the beauty of this world is : its diversity ...
ps: the country which buy the most french product is .... Germany (from far ) then UK , then then Russia and China ...
Germany is still selling a lot in USA , but things are changing rapidly ...
Why do you think the new BMW 7 has been displayed World Premiere on the Red Square , Moscow ?? when they are not even half of population of USA ...
it is called prospectives !
fairness of deals is quite important into such , when you know you sell things which may be paid for with real value ...it helps !
"Now there is a hickup in the party"
I don;t car who you are, THAT's funny right there!!
A 13 year $3.xB hiccup? For a silly little jet plane?
C'mon - THAT'S funny
Ken,
I do not think you comprehend.. here's why:
The "reality" before the AD was an unknown problem... to the extent they now understand the problem (to THAT extent) there is documented history on it...
You continuuously treat the plane as completed, as if you understand the issue that you do not yet know.
Before the windshields were cracking, the wing bushing failed, the tires blew, the engine throttle issue, locking up control surfaces, auto pilot problems, etc...etc... all was just fine in your eyes...
The current description of the plane as reflected in the ADs and AFM...is just THAT - and there will be more issues...
So enjoy the current list of ADs and the state of the AFM, etc... it will all be changing again and again as more issues come to light, gremlins escape and unknowns become known.
That's why it would be nice to hear you say for one, "As far as we now know..." or "from what we have seen so far..."
That's all.
Gad - how am I doing?
"These things are not a "state of mind" AT. They are facts. Either you know them or you do not."
Ken your "reality" regarding this plane has changed a lot over the past 10 years...
Some saw it coming, others did not - I guess it is more about "sate of mind" than anything else... sorry to tell you.
Denial is a very powerful thing - you should admit you were incorrect in your assessment of EAC and the risks associated with the plane.
There are a lot more risks that will probably prove to "change" the "reality" you associate with this plane.
Risk is inherent in the plane, IMO.
Its just my opinion, of course...
AT--
I'm getting the feeling that you don't know how to read an AD. It's actually not that hard. I'll help you. Here's what the pertinent part says:
"When the PW610F-A engine is operated above 37,000 feet altitude, for over an hour, and withhigh bleed flow, hard carbon forms due to high local fuel air ratio near the combustor wall."
I will help you analyze it, ok? It says:
1. Engine must be a PW610F-A. That makes sense.
2. The engine must be operated above 37,000 feet.
3. It must be for longer than an hour.
4. There must be HIGH bleed air flow (as opposed to LOW; low is low, high is high)
So, according to the FAA (and by the way their version is exactly the same as EAC's and PWC's), you can prevent the problem by not having any ONE of those FOUR conditions.
Well, we can't easily change the engine model. But we can fly at 37,000 or lower. Or we can use low bleed flow.
According to the FAA, either solution would work.
It's not a state of mind as you seem to believe. It's not "Ken Meyer thinks you just need to turn bleed air to low." These are FACTS according to the FAA.
Did that help with your logic process at all?
:)
Ken
airtaxi ...
you are right !
same thing this "mass production" ...
when you relativist the numbers ...
250 in 12 years ...
a "disruptive" 1.73 plane a month !
what an exploit ...!
airtaxi :
it is quite good to remind the imperfection of finition ....
they do not have any ideas of what kind of a mess they are going into if they sell Fpj in Euroland ...
with the regulations and laws there : they have to change 99% or be sued all the times ...
i really doubt anyone able to buy , would wait patiently in his corner to be screwed ....;-)
The recent AD requires that the following limitiations be put in the aircraft operation manual: "PER AD 2008-24-07, LIMIT THE MAXIMUM OPERATING ALTITUDE TO 37,000 FEET (11277M) PRESSURE ALTITUDE"
Thats it. No "you can go higher if you use low bleed", or "you can go higher if you limit the cabin temperature", and no "you can go higher if you take your blankie and earmuffs with you". The airplane is limited, BVY FEDERAL LAW, to 37,000 feet.
Of course the AD says you cannot fly over 37,000 feet.
I think you tuned in late to this discussion (or maybe not at all). Baron95 was pointing out why the AD is amenable to an AMOC--it is because by the AD's own fact set, there is an alternative method of solving the problem.
Ken
"That's why it would be nice to hear you say for one, "As far as we now know..." or "from what we have seen so far..."
Arrogance springs eternal (to adapt a phrase)!
FYI:
This may be a minor tidbit, but I thought it was interesting. I did a search on Register.com for the owners of EclipseJet.com. Ironically, all the main domains were picked up back in Jan/Feb 2000. The .com, .net., and .org variations are all owned by EAC. Only the .biz and .us are owned by a presumed squatter listed as one Bob Kerstein.
So, I'm going to go out on limb and speculate that Vern was buying them in year 2000 to prevent squatters from getting them. I don't think it means he was so clever and calculating as to have PLANED a future corporate change to EclipseJet Aviation Internation. Okay, maybe it's more like a 1% chance he was savvy enough to know a name change would be needed...
Yes, no?? ;-)
e.d.t.
Rarefied atmosphere experiences of the 85SM tail.
Cross country West after Oshkosh
West from Albany after Oshkosh
October flight east to the Florida rendezvous with VR
The westbound flight after the October love-fest was below the AD FL. I believe 85SM has kept itself close to earth since then as well.
Whatever happened to the new tires that Eclipse has been promising for months?
Also found this link that shows the creditors' committee meeting is set for DEC 8th, Monday next week...
e.d.t.
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/r03/de/org_meetings.htm
Also found this link that shows the creditors' committee meeting is set for DEC 8th, Monday next week
The same day that objections to the 363 sale are due.
Ken...
All I am saying is, this is just today's reality regarding your plane... the AD, the "solutions", the "problems"... its a moving target - moreso than with any other OEM, for many reasons, IMO.
If you don't believe this, that's OK.. its just your belief, that's all.
Others here seem to get my point -
Pehaps this provides another view into the mindset of an EAC customer...
Fly safe
Following up from my post last night, if you are a creditor with a claim of less than $2M and hence not on the list, you might want to file a motion like what Senior Aerospace BWT did where they ask for all the related BK filings be sent to them. Unless you are a top listed creditor you wouldn't get all the notifications and filings. Think about it: 5000 creditors times 42 filings would be 210,000 documents to be mailed so far just in the first few days of BK.
Ken,
I have simple test for you. If you take it and answer the correct answers, I'm sure MANY individuals on this blogg will have a lot more respect for you.
Sincerely,
FlyBoyMark
(Mark)
You must simply state:
1. I can not legally fly above 37,000 feet at this point and time and until the AD is revised..
2. I can not yet legally fly into known icing.
3. I must be very careful of my touch down landing speed till I have the revised tires installed.
No embellishments allowed or "spin" comments.
Of the VLJs delivered thus far, only the Mustang is fully operational. None of the Eclipse 500s in customer hands has been modified for flight into known icing conditions. Although Eclipse received FAA approval of that modification this year, the service bulletin to modify customer airplanes had not been completed as of this writing, and Eclipse has not announced when customers will be able to get their airplanes upgraded.
The VLJ era
Pehaps this provides another view into the mindset of an EAC customer...
Just think about this:
A modern aircraft being manufactured and delivered in 2008,
No GPS,
No WAAS,
No Roll Steering,
No FIKI,
No flight above FL370,
No warranty,
No JetComplete,
Manufacturer bankrupt,
plus, the next shoe to drop....
And someone wants to snicker about how good this is?
Mark--
1. False
2. True
3. False
Ken
Ken,
Do you have the approval in writting from the Fort Worth Airplane Certification Office for the approved AMOCS and the alternative inserts for your manual? If you don't, your not leagal on the first one.
Why would there be an improved tire if the old ones where fine?
I think Ken is happy with his airplane- it's getting him around just fine, it seems.
And he's not trying to con anyone into buying one if they don't want to.
So Ken- just cut it out.
:)
Flyboymark,
The AD doesn't take effect until December 4th, so Ken has around 72 hrs left to fly at FL410. Then it's FL370 until such time as the airplane is finally grounded due to lack of parts or maintenance availability. So essentially, you are correct.
Everyone knows touchdown speed is very important on an E500. The E500 is too heavy for the tires it is fitted with. Just because one pilots tires haven't failed yet doesn't mean they won't. Many E500's have had multiple blowouts.
Ken, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Mark--
Niner Zulu is right; read the AD. I'm perfectly legal flying above 37,000 at this point.
The tires are being replaced because they have atrocious wear characteristics, not because of the blowouts. The new tires will not change the fact that landing fast and then jumping on the brakes is a bad idea.
Goat--I'm just having a little fun with him. He didn't quite ask the questions he wanted answers to :)
Ken
9'rZ,
That's true, but what I'm trying to do is get Ken to openly admit to some short commings instead of "spinning" every answer.... like a salesman. If you read the earlier post I made only a few up you'll get what I mean.
SOOooo...whatya' gonna do when the 72 hours up Ken?
OH!
And Ken!
Why do the tires wear so fast?
Main gear have to much toe in? ;)
....and....
So it's ok to do what you want above 37,000 feet until 72 hours is up irregardless of safety issues?
FBM,
Does it really matter if the answers are spun? Seriously, most position holders have lost their shirts dealing with EAC. Some have lost 60% deposits on more than one aircraft. The rest have lost from somewhere North of $150-180,000. Nothing is going to bring this money back.
All the cheerleading in the world isn't going to save the current owners from seeing their aircraft go extinct. The only hope Ken has is that some company will come along that has the knowledge, wherewithal and motivation to take over EAC and complete the E500 and support it (..and don't look for this from Roel). This may happen eventually, but I think it will be months, if not years, down the road.
Until then, the E500's are dead or dying. Ken will be flying his a few more weeks, then his aircraft will go AOG as will the others and there will be nothing left to cheerlead about.
Flyboy
you should drop it ...
the fpj is more or less ok to circles around airfield ...as a non-professional ...
just a shame it took to burn about 3 Billions $ to find it out ...
as for the tires :
it is not the characteristics in default ...
only the Fpj way too heavy for a tire designed for the early bird (pre-mod , pre-wings tip ,pre-new engine ,pre-wathever ...) , and not changed in specifications after (what for anyway , for TheWedge the whole thing was probably not intended to fly ... anyway !! there Mr Gadfly's wisdom is very effective : "oh boy , sell the can but never , ever try to eat it!")
as well as the antiskid , why should have it , don't you understand it ??? it is pilot's fault !!!
".....stop writing stuff when you dion't know anything about the subject."
Depends on what your definition of "not knowing anything about the subject" is.
True I've never even seen an Eclipse, much less flown in one. But I've been working on bizjets for thirty years, twenty as a mech/Supervisor at one of the OEMs Service Centers, and the last 10 as DOM at a couple of Part 91/135 Aviation Departments.
Saying "heating is not a problem, because I'm comfortable" is BS. This being a production airframe, your individual opinion is subjective and only matters to anyone who values your opinion.
I'd probably be comfortable in it too, but I carry around to much "insulation"....I'd be more interested in the opinion of the average 170lb passenger, riding in the back, at night, after the airframe is cold-soaked..... The cockpit could be fine, but there is a lot of radiant heat coming off the windshields and cockpit glass,and I'm betting all those avionics generate quite a bit of heat on their own, and how is the heating distribution system layed out? Is it biased toward putting heat in the cockpit first?
Additionally, there is quite a bit of difference in trying to heat a cabin @FL370 vs. FL410.
Working under the assumption that this airplane seems to have zero margin on EVERYTHING, I'm going to assume (until proven otherwise) that the heating and insulation package in this airplane has zero margin, (IMO, like everything else).
And, as this aircraft at last report was not certified for FIKI, nobody knows what effect that may have on the "carbon build-up" problem.
Also unknown is if this becomes a problem over time......how many hours does the "high time" engine in the fleet have?
The major OEMs for the most part design airplanes using the following general rules:
-It is better to have too big an engine, than too small an engine.
(For performance and longevity reasons)
-It is better to have too big a cabin, than too small a cabin.
(The extra room WILL be used)
-Ditto with the designed payload....any margin you put in will be used by the operators, either by installing additional equipment, or by fudging the numbers when calculating weight and balance. (Admit it, EVERBODY uses 170lbs for passengers at one time or another, when 200 is more realistic.)
-Ditto with the fuel the airplane can carry......the more you can carry, the more flexiblity you have operating the airplane.
-A wing slightly too big is better than a slightly too small one.
(For fuel/range/runway length reasons)
-You can always sell an airplane that is a little to big for the specified mission, than it is to sell one too small for the mission. (as illustrated by the Gulfstream G2-3-4-5)
Eclipse chose to start a "new paradigm", and designed an airplane too small for the mission(IMO), with an unrealistic (IMO) empty weight target, with too many gee-whiz features that (IMO), don't add any value to the airplane, compared to the added costs of building and maintaining it.
Even if the airplane was perfect straight out of the box, there's the problems with the business plan.......which (IMO) was all about The Wedge & Co. getting theirs at the IPO, then "gettin out while the gettin' was good".
But then, you are right......my opinion only matters to the people who value it.
DISCLAIMER: I WON'T TAKE IT PERSONALLY IF ANYONE THINKS I AM FULL OF SH#T...
You're rite guys,
Jus' trying to see what kind of character makes up Ken.....I'm disappointed so far....And As I've said before, I think the EA500 is a great "idea", jus' to many bad people running the works. Still glad we didn’t plop down money for one. We definitely could not afford to flush money down the toilet on upgrades when they would have been owed to us. I'm glad for the guys that have hundreds of thousands of dollars to piss away on their preemie’s to fix at a later date. HEY! If those guys got that kind of money, maybe they can give some to Obama and raise my tax bracket for me some since they feel so benevolent?
Aw Hell!
I think we'll jus upgrade our Aerostar 600 to a newer 700 with the 28,000 foot mod....it'll do supposedly do well over 300 knots up there. Cost per mile is pretty cheap...any you guys got one like out there and can tell me about it?(28K mod)
..and with the gross weight mod, it'll carry an honest to God 6 people at full fuel.
"I'm just having a little fun with him. He didn't quite ask the questions he wanted answers to :)"
That, my friends, is the most revealing comment I've heard from the man in a couple years.
gadfly
The tires are being replaced because they have atrocious wear characteristics, not because of the blowouts. The new tires will not change the fact that landing fast and then jumping on the brakes is a bad idea.
You're assuming that the old tire models will be around, let alone the new design. The only thing I've seen in writing is Roel disclaiming responsibility/contracts/etc for the pre-BK owners. Even if new tires come on the market for post-BK aircraft, you have to find a business willing to take on the liability of selling them to you with your pre-BK aircraft. I'm not saying that wont be done, but you can't take it as a given that if there's "Phoenix Aviation," that said company will be willing to newly take on the liability of its past right after the court has waived past liability.
The Ad Hoc Committee of Secured Noteholders has requested that all files be sent to them. I suggest if someone is a creditor and they want to get the same docs, they have their attorney do a similar filing so that they are kept up-to-date.
Just for the record, "Phoenix Air" is a real company with headquarters in Cartersville Georgia (USA).
I've done business with them, they have a long proud history and their name should not be mixed up in any way with the Eclipse fiasco.
flyboymark ...
... and with apologies to NASCAR ...
It is not "toe in" that is the problem. To remedy the tire wear problem you must take out a couple rounds of Wedge.
Dave,
The only thing I've seen in writing is Roel disclaiming responsibility/contracts/etc for the pre-BK owners.
is that correct and acceptable for the sec 363 ruling?
RP seems to use his monopoly to threaten his former customer...
BTW: Mr Young has left the BoD - the "last new " one!
Ken- what's a guy to do?
It would seem the collective advice is to fly below 37K, but never land.
(Does make a person think about the missing lav...)
----------------------------
?Maybe landing on a grass strip will help?...
(Just wondering- with the low approach speed, is that okey dokey to do? Seems like some earlier biz jets were- can't remember which ones...)
Very good Zed...
;DDD
Tail 561EA aka SN 24 going high (FL 41) this afternoon.
This is one of the group of "Telluride" focused FPJ. The Midway go-round craft was also a Telluride regular.
goat
Somewhere in my memory, I recall an optional "skid plate" . . . something to that effect. 'Maybe Ken has a set of those contraptions on his aircraft, and therefore is not concerned about "tread wear" and "blowouts". Maybe his little bird is a "tail dragger" . . . a throwback to the old days, when that was called "conventional", as opposed to "tricycle" landing gear.
With all this disruptive logic thing going around, sort of like the "flu", who can tell any more.
If you don't ask the question, precisely, you won't get a straight answer . . . the man said so, himself (but then we knew that all along . . . it's just nice that the man finally admitted it . . . sorta caught him "off guard", as it were).
gadfly
('Back to the can of beans!)
Joe P. speaks the truth.
If I may elaborate, Margin = Safety. Safety = Margin.
Margin is key (I believe many others have made same point).
As a 10,000 hour ATP with multiple jet ratings, I just can't imagine, real world, being in the left seat (or any seat) of this E500, at FL altitudes, in weather, with passengers, at night, and feeling comfortable.
Flying a jet with pluck, regardless of your level of "Chuck Yeager" is really, if you're honest, based on feeling confident.
Feeling confident is about trusting your machine (beyond the complete confidence that comes from being a professional pilot, professionally trained).
I can't imagine flying this thing and feeling any confidence.
For you private pilots out there, you are crazy to take this thing into the air. And I know of no ATPs that would even step a foot inside it.
Hence the difference.
"I recall an optional "skid plate"
Good work! Yes - there is (was?) such an option offered to deal with a gear collapse.
I was wondering...
Since the EA500 is "EXPERIMENTAL" category, how-bout' mounting two 420+ shaft HP Allison's in the nose geared together for one unducted fan(not prop) and go for the world speed record?(and dump the PW's)
;)
...Oh my God...I slipped...if the Wedge gets wind of that disruptive set up....
"I was wondering..."
Bill Lear tried something along these lines - called the Lear Fan. He died before it was finished. An interesting concept.
BTW, its Rolls Royce, not Allison (anymore).
Boeing awhile back was doing research on the subject and actually had,I think, an MD-80 or and old 727 with one on it and it was quite effective. Was also two fans counter rotating on the engine. Don't remember it was the front or rear of the engine. As I recall the speeds were jus lightly below the normal stove pipe only speeds.
As a "pressure test" on the E500 community, or other Bloggers with various sympathies for this craft, may I propose the following:
Dispatch, under FAR Part 135 rules (or if you prefer, proxy FAR 135 for a Fortune 500 client) a E500 to Chicagoland (here in the northern suburbs we have nearly a half foot of fresh snow on top of packed ice/slush) and pick up 3-4 adult, HNW business owners and fly them to Denver, tonight.
Any takers?
Let's try a FAR Part 91 corporate flight as a back up lift solution to a Fortune 1000 firm.
Any takers?
I didn't think so.
Let's get the E500 to show up at Palwaukee Airport tomorrow morning, with a flight for three men to NYC, with catering (a stop in DET too). And then on to PIT (snowing) and then to BOS (same; then to New Brunswick (Chatham) and then back on down to Burlington, VT with a termination in TEB.
I didn't think so.
Only some naive private pilot, one used to flying a piston twin (an accident waiting to happen) would even consider it.
I do not believe there is even one ATP +8000Hr, FAR 135/121 PIC with a perfect safety record on this Blog, willing to even consider the idiocy of operating, or putting his passengers in, an E500.
DB,
I'm jus a Piston, MEL, commercial, instrument, working on A&P;
AND the thought of the throttles blinking on me at gross weight at just past V1 scares the crap out of me....Can't stomp brakesthats if the rumway is long enough), system reboot possibly required, jus what I need, jerking the throttles and circut breakers a few feet in the air when all blow pipes fail. I don't need the rest to convince me. Ice on the airframe, I've flown FIKI aircraft and it still worries me when I see build up on the structure unless its a "hot" airframe. At night with no moon, in total blackness, in the clouds(kinda reminds me of the moving the Haunting...I have survived two crashes in my 40 years of flying(not as PIC thank God..) and I don't wanna go there again.
If ETIRC's estimated $198million bid is accepted, Eclipse officials said they believe the manufacturing operation employing 945 workers would remain planted in Albuquerque. If another buyer bought the company, it's anybody's guess what happens to the local operation.
"It would be very expensive and time-consuming to move," Eclipse spokeswoman Alana McCarraher told the Journal.
Eclipse Owes Creditors $1 Billion
Now Eclipse is - unofficially of course - saying that their bid is the only one that would protect ABQ, but they don't even definitely state that ABQ would remain open. I wonder what they're telling the Russians, like if they're unofficially telling them that they're all behind the Russian factory etc etc etc.
Meant to say " The Haunting",....
Hi Gadfly!
Well, regarding plates- I think there is some confusion over the plate in Wedge's head, vs. a skid plate, and he does "wear" on a person, and is a "Blow-hard" (and sponsored last year's "blow out" event, the $1.25M sale).
"With all this disruptive logic thing going around...who can tell any more"- I agree!!
I'm going back to the beans. I found a can that boasts "make a bold statement". Intriguing, no?
:)
Deep Blue
Insanity does not run in the minds of Eclipse pilots/owners . . . it gallops!
gadfly
Flyboymark, you need to either educate yourself or go a bit easier on the blog. You are severely embarrassing yourself.
For example, the EA500 has no V1, so if you were waiting for a V1 call-out you'd be waiting a long time.
Or another example per your impertinent, poorly formulated questions to Ken... Even after Dec 4 with the present AD in place, it would be perfectly legal, on many days, to fly above 37,000 ft, and if you don't know how that can be, then you really have very poor aeronautical knowledge.
So the only thing you achieved so far with your questions and follow-on posts, other than embarrassing your self, is to be schooled by Ken (and his correct and no spin questions).
Go easy on the throttle, flyboy.
his correct and no spin ANSWERS (ed)
Throw away post of the day....
And Fred/Julius, given that I am fluent in 5 European languages and have spent more time in Europe than you have on the US (I'm pretty sure of that), don't you find it a bit odd that you complain that I'm making comments on Europe to contrast your comments on the US?
Or Fred are you just mad that you told everyone to put their money on Gold and commodities repeatedly in this blog (did you follow your own advice), only to see those prices collapse and all the money flow nicely, easily and predictably into US treasuries, to the point that US Gov can issue an endless amount of 10-year bonds and pay barely 2.5% in interest?
Or are you mad that the US consumer is providing a free schooling lesson to companies around the world? "Take away our credit and free money and get ready to take a severe and bloody beating".
Yes sir, the markets are working beautifully. The deck will be cleared of weaker companies, more money will flow to the security of America than ever before, gas and jet fuel will be plentiful and cheap, in due time (like BMW and Toyota are doing) companies will realize that they cannot challenge the US consume and will provide easy credit to sell, and we go on another nice rally, financed by those who can not be fired and go to jail for investing (across the Atlantic).
Life is good. IF Embraer manages to get the Phenom 100/300 into the market with good financing, I may finally dip my toe in jet fuel.
Oh and did I mention that Mercedes Benz Financial will be taking about a $25K loss to them (gain to the Baron) when my car comes off lease in April? Heck, by then it maybe more like $35K. Got love the free market.
Gad,
Since most of my entries don't get many responses I will aim this one directly at you (since we seem to think alike)
----
I would like to nominate Ken for the Wiley Post Award with Baron being my top nominee for the Will Rogers Award. (or was it Best Supporting Actor?)
What do you think? Maybe you could explain to the 'youngsters' (like me) what I'm getting at here.
------
100% agreement from me on the discussions on 'margin'
Post a Comment