URGENT, FAA issues a "Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin" for Eclipse owners.
Check out the official notice from the FAA. They've clearly been fielding questions about the current 'issues' affecting the FPJ. Read it, fully, and act accordingly. Anyone operating one of these aircraft may find themselves in more hot water if they choose to ignore the advice. In particular I'd draw your attention to the issue affecting those with IS&S displays (AvioNG), which cut on on s/n 105 and may have been retrofitted to a few of the earlier aircraft.
Original Post
I've been watching, in my quiet way, a few of those who were interested in the original Chapter 11 sale for the assets of EAC. I did so in the firm belief that the pre cooked sale by Roel, to Roel, would end in tears. I'm aware of several entities who may, or may not, be able to make Eclipse V 2.0 happen, some of whom will make a go of it, and others who will not. As often happens in these matters, those who 'come out' early on get an advantage, if only by being brave enough to explain what they are about.
Dear Eclipse 500 Owner,
Herewith two of those efforts. Make of them what you will, and understand that I provide this space in a sincere effort to find a way forward for staff, suppliers and owners seeking some solace in difficult circumstances. Others, with similar intentions, are of course welcome to contact me. In the meantime, the best of 'Irish Luck' to Phil, his team and now the 'owners group', who join the fray below. I should add that this has been sent to me by the official representative of the the owners, who is know to me for some time.
So, now there are two. May the best 'entity' win....
Shane, updated 27th February 2009, 16.30 GMT
Dear Eclipse 500 Owner,
As you must be aware, Eclipse Aircraft Corporation has been in Chapter 11 bankruptcy for the last two months. In the last few days events have unfolded that will take the company into Chapter 7 liquidation.
The future utility and value of our aircraft is now in serious jeopardy. If we as owners do not take control of these events, we risk having our planes grounded, become unserviceable, and ultimately become worthless. We can no longer rely on someone else.
The only way the owners can be assured of the continued use of their aircraft is to come together as a group and as a group participate in the creation of a successor organization that will have full control of the serviceability, modification, and long term reliability of our airplanes.
Today there are a number of outside entities that are “looking” at the owners as an income stream that they can fully exploit like a monopoly. These entities believe if they control the assets of Eclipse, they can charge the owners hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get their plane upgraded and serviced. One of these plans wants to charge owners a $300,000 surcharge for any modification plus the marked-up cost of parts and labor. Another plan wants to charge owner a yearly fee of up to $90,000 just to access service. This would add $500 an hour to the average cost of operating your aircraft significantly reducing its value.
We as owners can either sit by and watch others take control of our airplanes or we can take that control ourselves. This will not be easy or without cost. But it will be far better than the alternative.
The Ad Hoc Committee of Eclipse Customers has recommended that Eclipse Owners join together and form their own group, taking charge of their destiny. We, the owners on the steering committee of the Ad Hoc Committee of Eclipse Customers, will be holding conference calls in the next few days so that we can reach out to all owners and discuss next steps in this process. We ask that you join us on one of these conference calls.
Just email your name, street address, telephone number and Eclipse serial number to EclipseOwnersGroup@gmail.com and we will send you the access number, dates and time so that you can be part of one of these conference calls. If you cannot attend one of these calls, we will send you full information on how we can all join together.
We are on a very fast timetable. The liquidation sale will take place very quickly. We don’t have a great deal of time to protect our future. Let’s all unite, and as a solid unified group we will be able take control of our Eclipse future and be able to fully utilize our aircraft without being held hostage by others.
Mike Press, Randall Sanada, Ron Lebel, David Green, Ken Meyer
P.S. As we mentioned there are a number of “plans” being developed by others. Please make sure that if you have to sign an NDA to view those plans that you are not limiting your ability to join all the owners in a common effort.
The future utility and value of our aircraft is now in serious jeopardy. If we as owners do not take control of these events, we risk having our planes grounded, become unserviceable, and ultimately become worthless. We can no longer rely on someone else.
The only way the owners can be assured of the continued use of their aircraft is to come together as a group and as a group participate in the creation of a successor organization that will have full control of the serviceability, modification, and long term reliability of our airplanes.
Today there are a number of outside entities that are “looking” at the owners as an income stream that they can fully exploit like a monopoly. These entities believe if they control the assets of Eclipse, they can charge the owners hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get their plane upgraded and serviced. One of these plans wants to charge owners a $300,000 surcharge for any modification plus the marked-up cost of parts and labor. Another plan wants to charge owner a yearly fee of up to $90,000 just to access service. This would add $500 an hour to the average cost of operating your aircraft significantly reducing its value.
We as owners can either sit by and watch others take control of our airplanes or we can take that control ourselves. This will not be easy or without cost. But it will be far better than the alternative.
The Ad Hoc Committee of Eclipse Customers has recommended that Eclipse Owners join together and form their own group, taking charge of their destiny. We, the owners on the steering committee of the Ad Hoc Committee of Eclipse Customers, will be holding conference calls in the next few days so that we can reach out to all owners and discuss next steps in this process. We ask that you join us on one of these conference calls.
Just email your name, street address, telephone number and Eclipse serial number to EclipseOwnersGroup@gmail.com and we will send you the access number, dates and time so that you can be part of one of these conference calls. If you cannot attend one of these calls, we will send you full information on how we can all join together.
We are on a very fast timetable. The liquidation sale will take place very quickly. We don’t have a great deal of time to protect our future. Let’s all unite, and as a solid unified group we will be able take control of our Eclipse future and be able to fully utilize our aircraft without being held hostage by others.
Mike Press, Randall Sanada, Ron Lebel, David Green, Ken Meyer
P.S. As we mentioned there are a number of “plans” being developed by others. Please make sure that if you have to sign an NDA to view those plans that you are not limiting your ability to join all the owners in a common effort.
ALBUQUERQUE, NM — February 26, 2009 — Today Phil Friedman announced the formation of New Eclipse Acquisition LLC (“New Eclipse”) which intends to bid for the assets of Eclipse Aviation Corporation in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings.
Mr. Friedman is an experienced aerospace executive who has turned around several companies over his 28 year career. He is currently CEO of Harlow Aerostructures LLC in Wichita, KS which manufactures electro mechanical and structural assemblies for many OEM’s in the aircraft industry. Peter Reed, former CFO of Eclipse for seven years, is part of Friedman’s team and has actively participated in developing the New Eclipse business plan over the past
several months.
“I have been studying the Eclipse situation for over a year,” said Friedman. “It is sad that the company has ended up in bankruptcy, but I believe there is an excellent business opportunity going forward if managed correctly. Our plan is to take the first 24 months to stabilize the fleet of 259 aircraft and restore the brand. All aircraft will be brought up to the current type certification level so that ongoing service and support is as efficient as possible. We will also retain a significant number of engineers to improve aircraft reliability, upgrade the avionics suite, and focus on reducing manufacturing costs to industry benchmark levels. We will open several smaller service centers around the country to provide more convenient access to service the fleet and will also provide pilot training here in Albuquerque.”
“We will be charging customers to bring their aircraft up to the latest certification level. Our business plan assumes some of the customers will not be able to afford the upgrade. Our sales representatives will work with these customers at no charge to find new buyers who will have the means to pay for the upgrades. In providing this service, and with a business plan that translates into the New Eclipse becoming a company with a profitable long term future, we will be supporting the investment that the existing owners have made in their aircraft. Our objective is to bring the aftermarket price of the Eclipse up to the $2 million range, thereby providing a valuable service to all existing owners. We also plan to finish and sell seven new aircraft on the production line that are about 95% complete. In addition there are 28 DayJet aircraft that will need to be upgraded and refurbished and new owners found.”
“Employment levels over the next 24 months should be about 400 people as we upgrade and service the fleet,” said Friedman. “After the engineers have upgraded the avionics to the latest functionality, reduced manufacturing costs, and we have re-established relationships with the supplier base, we plan to restart new aircraft production in 2011 at modest levels, approximately 100 aircraft per year with pricing in the $2.4 million range. At that point employment will increase to approximately 600 people.”
“We certainly recognize that bringing Eclipse out of bankruptcy will be challenging. There are many parties that have been badly hurt and bridges will have to be rebuilt and relationships restored to execute on our plan. We understand that the employees who have been laid off need to feed their families and pay their mortgages. We are actively exploring ways to hold the key talent together during the Chapter 7 process so we can re-employ them with the new company.”
Mr. Friedman may be reached at (702) 449-8312 or email at phil@harlowair.com.
Mr. Friedman is an experienced aerospace executive who has turned around several companies over his 28 year career. He is currently CEO of Harlow Aerostructures LLC in Wichita, KS which manufactures electro mechanical and structural assemblies for many OEM’s in the aircraft industry. Peter Reed, former CFO of Eclipse for seven years, is part of Friedman’s team and has actively participated in developing the New Eclipse business plan over the past
several months.
“I have been studying the Eclipse situation for over a year,” said Friedman. “It is sad that the company has ended up in bankruptcy, but I believe there is an excellent business opportunity going forward if managed correctly. Our plan is to take the first 24 months to stabilize the fleet of 259 aircraft and restore the brand. All aircraft will be brought up to the current type certification level so that ongoing service and support is as efficient as possible. We will also retain a significant number of engineers to improve aircraft reliability, upgrade the avionics suite, and focus on reducing manufacturing costs to industry benchmark levels. We will open several smaller service centers around the country to provide more convenient access to service the fleet and will also provide pilot training here in Albuquerque.”
“We will be charging customers to bring their aircraft up to the latest certification level. Our business plan assumes some of the customers will not be able to afford the upgrade. Our sales representatives will work with these customers at no charge to find new buyers who will have the means to pay for the upgrades. In providing this service, and with a business plan that translates into the New Eclipse becoming a company with a profitable long term future, we will be supporting the investment that the existing owners have made in their aircraft. Our objective is to bring the aftermarket price of the Eclipse up to the $2 million range, thereby providing a valuable service to all existing owners. We also plan to finish and sell seven new aircraft on the production line that are about 95% complete. In addition there are 28 DayJet aircraft that will need to be upgraded and refurbished and new owners found.”
“Employment levels over the next 24 months should be about 400 people as we upgrade and service the fleet,” said Friedman. “After the engineers have upgraded the avionics to the latest functionality, reduced manufacturing costs, and we have re-established relationships with the supplier base, we plan to restart new aircraft production in 2011 at modest levels, approximately 100 aircraft per year with pricing in the $2.4 million range. At that point employment will increase to approximately 600 people.”
“We certainly recognize that bringing Eclipse out of bankruptcy will be challenging. There are many parties that have been badly hurt and bridges will have to be rebuilt and relationships restored to execute on our plan. We understand that the employees who have been laid off need to feed their families and pay their mortgages. We are actively exploring ways to hold the key talent together during the Chapter 7 process so we can re-employ them with the new company.”
Mr. Friedman may be reached at (702) 449-8312 or email at phil@harlowair.com.
535 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 535 of 535DB,
no buyer, though!!
DIE-HARD ONWERS - make an offer, perfect for parts...
ATM
no need to be Die-Hard for buying ...
be owner alone is already enough to be looking for (soon) rare spare-parts ...!
kinda best buy ! ;-)
just for the fun of it :
Ukraine is "supposed" to pay for its supply of gas (dead-line : end of this week)
if they fail to do so , they will end-up as getting gas on a "pre-paid" basis ...
if you wondered why RiP was going there = for him it feel like home ... always a day late and a $ short ...! ;-)
Fred,
I hope UK and RP don't wind up out in the cold.
billy ...
you've got to understand that the Ukrainian PM (the one with the "funny" blond hair ) has lots of responsibility in the mess ...
up to last January, Ukraine was paying gas at 1:4/1:3 price of international market ...
but the same gas was sold to ukrainian peoples at nearly european prices ...
where is gone the difference , when you know that she has bought her own private-jet ... ;-))
like always , politicos play cow-boy-style , peoples remain to pay the foolishness ...
wherever you can be , if you do not watch your politicos like boiling milk on a stove , expect the worst ...
even if they are good ! power is such a corrupter !!
as for Ukraine and some others eastern countries , the score is quite interesting :since they are not EU member and they have been playing a bit too much EU against Russia / Russia against EU ; they have no help in sight from both ...
which leave only the WMF , wich is mainly funded by USA ...
which is broke , itself ...
(not really broke , USA is only making a check of few trillions to itself and after claim being rich enough ... till the check is not cashed and the guy who get it do not complain about the "bouncing" = no problem ! unfortunately ; trying to extinguish a petrol-station without shutting-off the fuel-valve is a bit pointless ...!)
what a wonderful world , we are living in ...
Fred,
keep in mind NL is third biggest business partner of the Ukraine and Turchynov is visiting NL...
The Russian fpj project is finished or is RP trying to motivated Russia to spend some more money for the fpj?
If the owner put the price of the parts too high
- who is going to care for the software etc.?
What's the current lowest price per fpj flight hour (without provisions for waste disposal, but with jetincomplete,...)
$5000, if fpjs are grounded right now?
Julius
guten tag , julius ...
i am not sure the third partner is going to be of any help in this mess ...
let me tell you the story of Angela & Nicholas ...
they do not agree very often , except when it comes to save money for their own needs ...!
as far as i know : Ulyanovsk is postponed to a later date ! (read late later , or even later late later ...! ;-) )
by the time the money will be ready , Fpj will be a nice bottle-opener ...!
Since the russians (who had money) now don't, RP is going begging to the Ukrainians (who never did).
"Desparation"....the world worst perfume!
Bloggers,
Throughout my business career I have lived to a set of simple principles. Always do your best, be honest with people, respect others, and live to a set of ethics that allow you to shave each morning.
I make no apologies for my 7 ½ year tenure at Eclipse. It was the hardest job I ever had and at the same time the most rewarding. I truly believed in the vision through many times of near death as we struggled from financing to financing. Contrary to some accusations on this blog, I was not the CEO running the company. CFO’s provide input, but the CEO is ultimately responsible for the big decisions.
For reasons I do not wish to discuss publicly, I lost the faith in mid 2006 and my internal compass told me the ethical thing to do was to resign. I gave my resignation to Vern Raburn on November 10, 2006 and to the Board of Directors on December 15, 2006 which should give some a clue as to why I resigned.
So why would a person of my age (FYI I am not 65) be involved in trying to turn around Eclipse? The answer is simple. There are some outstanding people still left at Eclipse up to a week ago. They have worked their butts off to make the dream a reality. The Eclipse 500 is a good plane but it obviously needs upgraded avionics and improvements in the reliability area. Phil Friedman is the CEO we should have been installed five years ago. I’m back fighting to rescue Eclipse because I owe it to a lot of people who also believed in the vision and still want to make it work. And I think we can under Phil’s leadership.
So that’s all I have to say. I’m proud of my accomplishments and contributions at Eclipse. I did my best and never deviated from my internal compass. When I lost the faith in the senior management and my internal compass went askew, I walked away with my head held high. Phil has an excellent business plan to turn Eclipse around. It will not be easy, but old war horses often do not know when to quit.
Oh, one last comment. My wife of 35 years, born and raised in Shane’s Ireland, had some choice words she wanted me to relay to certain bloggers. Out of respect for Shane’s rules on decorum, I have respectfully not include them in this posting!!! :-)
freedom :
the 1st of March :
Vnesheconombank held RUB 417.10bn (approx. USD 11.53bn) on deposits.
may be we shouldn't buy too much the piss-poor excuses from RiP ...!
Peter I'm glad to see that you're a stand-up guy and have posted here unlike your former boss who said he would address non-anonymous critics and then didn't. That being said, I don't think that eliminates some of the criticism that has been said here. You do in some sense want it both ways - where if Eclipse did something good you want the credit for it and if it was something bad then it was your former bosses fault and you were a mere C-level exec. Again I give you credit for posting here.
Russia's aggregate Reserve Fund reached nearly RUB 4.87 trillion, an equivalent of USD 136.3bn ...
(USD 63.99bn, EUR 45.66bn and GBP 9.65bn, respectively.)
RUB 179.11bn (approx. USD 4.95bn) of oil and gas tax revenue from January 2009 was received on the federal budget account
National Wealth Fund, which totaled roughly RUB 2.996 trillion, or USD 83.86bn ...
i don't know about you , but to me that seems to be much better than the biggest pile of debts in human history ...!
Welcome Peter, thanks for coming. It's been a little one sided here since Ken, and the other position holders went AWOL again.
Obviously, you will have to be a cheerleader. It is you job to be upbeat, enthusiastic and decisive.
I wish you well with your venture, although I have already been an outspoken critic of the limited information Phil Friedmann supplied in his podcast and press release.
Basically it seems to me a form of insanity to throw good money after bad, based on sentiments like "I’m back fighting to rescue Eclipse because I owe it to a lot of people who also believed in the vision and still want to make it work".
If you had $XX Million right now, and you looked for an investment with the best balance of risk and reward, you would not even sniff around carcass of Ecorpse!
Emotions fed the cash incinerator to the tune of $1B? $2B? 3B? (Now you are here, how many Billion was it in the end?).
I did my best and never deviated from my internal compass.
Q/ Did you, Vern and/or the other directors know,that the Williams engine would be terminated, at the time that you demanded the progress payments triggered by first flight?
Mr. Reed, thanks for joining us on our humble blog - understand some tough questions may be asked if you choose to participate but speaking for myself I'll keep it as respectful as possible.
I'll take you at your word that you were not the CEO but understand that no man is island, not even Vern, and he could not have done what was done, nor enforced the decisions he made without a strongman backing him up - it certainly appears that you were that backup - and some decidedly ugly decisions were taken by this company while you were essentially #2 there.
What in the new business plan is truly different than before? It seems very much like we have heard this music before, the only difference is the volume is lower (pun intended).
What IS the exit strategy? Is there a desire for an IPO or is the intent to build a sutainable company? How do you expect to generate an ROI?
I think any prospective customer (read that current owners and perhaps even new customers) has a right to understand that.
How do you plan to overcome the damage done within industry? Hundreds of people have seen years of their lives taken by this endeavor only to end up with nothing.
How do you plan to attract the right talent given the history?
How do you plan to price service and support for the existing fleet to be reasonable while also funding 'completion' of the plane? This seems to clearly be competing interests.
How will you prioritize the efforts given what will surely be limited resources?
What will be different in how you setup and execute vendor management this time? The last time certainly has all the indications of a train wreck and in your bio you take credit for setting up the original approach.
Thanks if you decide to address any/all of these.
Hello Peter Reed,
Thank you for stopping by and sharing your thoughts.
I think we are all pleased that some of the senior Eclipse management is reading the blog- there's a lot of good information here (and a lot of bad information too).
We'll trust your judgment on deciding which is which, and hope you and others can then use the good information to build a bright future for Eclipse.
Cheers,
Goat.
p.s.- I appeal to our fellow bloggers to resist the temptation to reiterate their positions specifically to Peter- as I assume he has been a somewhat steady reader of late (and is probably pretty busy lately !!)
:)
(Although I too look forward to his answers to many of the questions we are all thinking- and I encourage folks to pose questions courteously and respectfully).
Hey, who am I kidding?
Sorry Peter!
:)
--------------------------------
But seriously- he's a seriously busy guy right now, and sort of our guest, so please use some restraint- and realize his time is pretty constrained right now. I trust he'll get back with us as his time allows- thanks.
Peter,
Pardon me if I do not want to jump into throwing 300,000 dollars at your company to secure possible upgrades, and I do not want to sell my plane at that time. Am I still eligible for your company's support for my aircraft (just plain Avio) while I sit back and wait to see what happens with Eclipse V 2.0? And if I am eligible for support, what would be my cost per hour as defined in your business plan? Are you guys going to attempt to get close to Jet Complete prices, or is that just last nights dream? Thanks for your time.
If the Eclipse aircraft to be built in Russia are called Eclipski, what should we call Ukrainian Eclipse aircraft? Eclipssack?
Sorry iPhone went post crazy.
I think it's safe to assume that Wedge was the number 1, 2 and 3 guy at Eclipse, leaving Peter as number 4 (not #2 as suggested by the cold and wet mackarel). Vern probably consulted only with himself in a mirror before announcing his exalted decisions from on high.
Shadow,
You're getting "Cinderella" mixed up with "The Wizard of Oz".
We need to stay "on script" -
(? "The Titanic" ?)
Tsk, tsk. Maybe Mr. Reed will prove to be "The Man with the Gold" (-en Gun).
(Uh oh- I don't want to get our friend FlyBoyMark on my case! :)
---------------------------------
Speaking of Gun- where's our pal Gunner- I'm wondering how his Epic is working out ??
Mr. Reed,
Welcome. I wish you luck in the endeavor. I think, however, that given today's economy you don't stand much of a chance at success. The Eclipse name has become synonymous with scandal and financial loss. Eclipse has become the Bernie Madoff of the aviation community.
I knew The Wedge in his early days in the software industry. In my opinion he was never the person to run the company. He, along with Captain Zoom, couldn't even run a small computer business in Tulsa, OK. Zoom was running around playing fake doctor and The Wedge was loosing his butt in an industry that was booming. He could never have found financial support in a normal economy. It was the go-go/anything-goes dotcom economy that let him get to the point he did.
That said, I hope you succeed. I've flown an Eclipse (unlike most of the bloggers here on the forum). It isn't a BAD plane. It is an OK plane that would be a good plane after about 2-3 years of upgrades and innovations. Putting it in terms people can understand...it is a 1959 model Cessna 172 versus a 1965 Cessna 172! Same basic plane, but lots of non-radical but needed improvements.
If you expect to post on this board you better grow some alligator skin. You may need to toughen up:) Keep in mind this blog predicted the future. My advice to you would be to listen to some of the suggestions you find here. Used correctly this blog can serve you well!
Again, best of luck!
Signed,
Just another Bubba
So why would a person of my age (FYI I am not 65) be involved in trying to turn around Eclipse? The answer is simple. There are some outstanding people still left at Eclipse up to a week ago. They have worked their butts off to make the dream a reality. The Eclipse 500 is a good plane but it obviously needs upgraded avionics and improvements in the reliability area. Phil Friedman is the CEO we should have been installed five years ago. I’m back fighting to rescue Eclipse because I owe it to a lot of people who also believed in the vision and still want to make it work. And I think we can under Phil’s leadership.
Peter, with all due respect, why does Eclipse need to be rescued? Keeping the existing planes flying is one thing, but trying to save a company which has little to no hope of making a profit just doesn't make good sense - and if the company can't make a profit you're just stringing the employees along further until they eventually get the axe - again.
Not fair to the employees, and not fair to the investors who are going to lose money in the deal.
Mr. Reed,
congratulations for one hell of a move, posting here. I expect things will be different - first sign, you accept the blog as a valuable forum. Kudos.
I suspect your wife had choice words for my stuipd reference to your not enjoying traveling with her that much... my sincere personal apologies. The remark was a slap towards Vern, who apparently used your wife as your excuse for leaving the company. I am sure she is a wonderful person, and you seem to be.
One can smell sincerity, and I believe your comments.
I hope you defend some accusations/comments that will come your way, through this blog. Many people, without inside scoop, actually want to know what happend, AND you can probably ease their pain. We've been right about a lot of things, and some issues remain a mytery... you would do well to clarify.
Finally, my own question, pleae indulge:
How much does it cost to build the ea50, finished, at say 100 units per year - procuring parts, systems and asemblies, at this conventional rate?
How much do you believe you can sell these for, at 100 units per year for 15-20 years?
Thanks for posting, and I am sorry if my remark to "out" Vern for using your wife, was misunderstood.
I posted why I thought you left, and I believe I was correct - you did not think it was going to work anymore, and you left.
Smart.
Honerable.
Practical.
Vern speaks and speaks...as usual only to Zoom with whom he can count on not to ask the tough follow up questions.
Stan is referring to the 4 part interview that Vern is giving to ANN. Just showed up there.
Henry, I mean EclipsepilotOMSIV, I see that N500VK has not flown since Jan 25. Is the aircraft airworthy? I thought you had a D-Jet on order? You should have learned your lesson by now.
So wedge can't read. Lucky he knows some one can read, who read to him :)
Shame none of us have jobs.
Shame none of the Ecorpse employees have jobs either...
Glad that neither Midway nor Brandywine were serious accidents.
I like the way Vern basically called 'journalists & editors' useless - while he was speaking to one!
Notvern,
I don't like it when blogger try to out other people. But I will tell you that I am not Henry nor do I fly that particular aircraft. Dude it doesn't make you look cool just stupid. If you want to play games I think you might try Jeopardy. I also do not condone Ken for trying to out a fellow blogger. (if you're going to say I let him slide by). It is funny I think this is the second name someone has called me and been completely wrong.
PS Personal preference but I think any diamond plane is a piece of junk.
OMSIV
amen, amen, amen...
The bird briefly flew . . . Money was extracted from escrow . . . Then, the plane was revealed as not being airworthy! At a single moment in time, the “company” had opportunity to return the money . . . but chose to continue the game.
At that moment, the employees, the company officers, “customers”, suppliers, and the rest of the world got a look at the inner workings of the leadership of Eclipse.
What’s more to know? From that point on, it was just a matter of folks acting on the obvious, or “ignoring” the obvious, revealing much about personal integrity and/or gullibility.
Sure, there were many other obvious clues to knowledgeable people, before and after that event. But that was the moment of revelation. Most folks evidently missed it or CHOSE to ignore it, but for anyone willing to “look” and understand, it stood out in living color.
And with any prosecuting attorney worth his salt, it will not be overlooked.
In the days ahead, we’ll learn much about the legal system (at all levels) and the integrity of those involved, right up to the governor.
gadfly
Henry, OMSIV or whatever your name is. Sorry if you missed my question...is your aircraft airworthy? What was the last time it flew?
N85SM (aka: Ken) is flying again.
notvern,
Yes it is airworthy. I will only tell you it has flown this month . Plane has flown a great deal since chapter 11, without significant problem. As I have stated before only real problem with the aircraft was pitot static issue that we're all aware of.
You'd think that Vern having run a company that relied so much on PR wouldn't have the view of "those who can do and those who can't become journalists."
Hi EPx,
Once the EASA mods (or at least the portions desirable for private operators in the USA, AvioNGv1.5, pitot probe, etc) are updated),
What would be your preferred priority for say the next 5 changes / upgrades / product improvements / innovations?
(Not in each individual category- just what 5 things would you like Eclipse to work on, after the EASA stuff, that doesn't take a lot of engineering or development time)
Thanks!
Hmmmm, I should clarify myself, and say improvements to the airplane- I think the list of improvements to the company would be much longer than 5 !!
But, come to think of it, I'd be interesting in knowing separately what 5 "ownership experience" / customer service / support things Eclipse as a company could do better as well.
Thanks.
Once, I purchased a brand new 1970 BMW 2002 . . . "Gerhard Motors" . . . it was “fantastic”. It had “torque” like nothing else on the road. I climbed our hill at 70mph, like a home-sick angel . . . it held narrow roads like nothing else. And the sound of that engine . . . nothing could compare!
And then one day, going down I-40, in “Lane #1" (far left, to those who don’t know), the rear end locked up . . . I had to get out of there in a hurry . . . and with an eighteen wheeler in the second lane, I pushed the little “Colorado” orange thing, over three lanes, and came to a stop on the shoulder. (It was a bearing in the left rear trailing arm axle . . . evidently made in Germany, and not Japanese.)
The car only had a little over forty thousand miles on it . . . but I never trusted it again. And, with good reason . . . as those of you with either “Beamers” or Mercedes can understand. I went on to own another Beamer . . . I didn’t learn the first time.
Owners of the little jet may have a “blast” for a few hours. But before long, they’ll have a problem or two . . . here and there . . . and the original “thrill” and hype will wear thin . . . and the integrity of the original organization will take on a new, and ominous look . . . anything but comforting at thirty-something thousand feet.
The WWII para-trouper was told that if his main chute didn’t open, he still had an emergency chute. If that didn’t open, there would be someone on a motorcycle to pick him up. Well, the first and second chute didn’t open . . . and he was last overheard, “Bet that guy on the motorcycle won’t show up, either!”
gadfly
(What's the old saying? . . . Lie to me once, shame on you. Lie to me twice . . . shame on me! But who knows what lurks in the mind of a customer, of a "VLJ"?!)
Hi Gadfly,
Every time I give an attractive 30-something an ominous look, she brings up integrity and organization too, and I usually "crash and burn".
Sounds like your paratrooper buddy and I have a lot in common!
(And when the guy on the motorcycle shows up, it's usually her boyfriend!)
I wonder why Zoom never asked Wedge for the $80,000 EAC owed him?
Shane
OMSIV
“Yes it is airworthy. I will only tell you it has flown this month.”
Thinking back a long time ago, high performance aircraft usually required about two hours of maintenance for every hour in the air. Now, that may no longer be true . . . but I venture that when you say “it has flown this month”, the statement reflects an attitude of someone driving a car . . . and not understanding that “having flown this month” is not a sign of airworthiness . . . and may, in fact, be a most dangerous attitude.
“Sitting around” on the tarmac is not the best thing for an aircraft. Much more than a car, a bird needs to be flown, often . . . especially the type that depend on fire coming out the tail pipe.
Do you have a fully qualified “A&P”, to thoroughly inspect your bird, and legally sign off on a normal inspection? If not, you are playing “Russian Roulette”, with only a couple empty chambers.
Little things quickly go bad when they’re not used. The old saying . . . “Use it or lose it” relates to aircraft as much as sex. Now that I have your attention, ‘just because you have flown the little jet within the last month, your reasoning is not in your favor . . . quite the contrary. You need someone who thoroughly knows that little bird, inside and out . . . to continually look inside and outside that flying contraption. We’re not discussing a Cessna 150, or an old Luscombe “Silvaire”. Airspeed, and avionics . . . along with everything else on a “questionable” aircraft are clear attention-getters, that you need to take every precaution to make sure you didn’t, in reality, purchase an airborne “Yugo”.
gadfly
(Goat . . . the word is out . . . "sheep" belch too much methane (and not from their tailpipes) . . . If you're not carefull, the "Gore Group" is next going after goats.)
Peter,
Courageous post. I take you at your world that you, as probably many other Eclipse Execs, felt inspired by Vern and the "dream", but at the same time had to pinch your nose on some of the decisions, and ultimately you could stand the smell and left.
I hope you stay "on message" and resist the silly counter-bickering, like "I am not 65". According to Vern you will be turning 64 in 2009 so you are wither 63 or 64 now, and it is a completely irrelevant issue. As is the bit about your wife.
ATM,
Very classy apology - very nice. Hopefully that puts that part of the discussion to rest.
FreedomJam,
Re why Peter feels he needs/wants to rescue Eclipse...
Fortunately or unfortunately, business decision are OFTEN if not invariably, personal.
Some people love cars, so they go and open a dealership or a body shop or a car wash. Some people had a father or family member in a business and decide to go into it.
I think it is only natural, that someone like Peter who invested 7 years of his professional career into Eclipse, and saw it go in the "wrong direction", feels like investing another few years to "do it right" and rehabilitate the company and by association his involvement in it.
It is normal. It is not always a smart business decision, but 90% of starting a new venture comes down to having the motivation and personal drive to do it (aka balls). If it were not for personal motivators, very few businesses would be started in America.
Sure, this is a tough one. But Peter has the personal motivating factor and also the inside knowledge of the challenges. If he is helping lead the team that wants to make a go of it, well, let them try.
NinerZulu,
Regarding stringing employees along for a few more months of years...
I'd venture that if you go and ask those employees, virtually ALL of them would tell you that they'd rather have the job for another few months of years than not have it at all.
It really gets to me when people say that Eclipse is bringing misery to 1,000 employees. It is ridiculous. Eclipse brought employment for many years to those employees. Employment that did not exist in NM. It paid about 100,000 person-months worth of wages, taxes and benefits. So what if it ended? How is that different than Cessna and PWC and HB laying off workers?
So let Peter and Co buy the assets and re-hire some and make a go of it for some time. Nothing is certain in life and Eclipse employees are not dumb and in need of nanny. Let them have the option and choose to accept or not the positions.
And If not Peter and Co, let someone else try.
I wouldn't put my money in this venture, but I am sure glad someone is. And I am certain that Eclipse owners, ex-employees, suppliers, etc are also.
Shane Price said...
I wonder why Zoom never asked Wedge for the $80,000 EAC owed him?
Shane, it is called a symbiotic relationship. Vern IS paying. He is keeping Zoom's site in the lime light and drawing CPS (Web ad revenue) to the site. Conversely, Zoom is giving Vern a forum to be in the limelight and stroke his ego.
Me thinks this symbiotic relationship will go on, and on, and on, and on.
P.S. Your obsession with Zoom is showing. Don't let him get to you.
Baron,
P.S. Your obsession with Zoom is showing. Don't let him get to you.
It's exactly the other way around. Zoom is convinced that 'we' are robbing 'him'.
He's the one who's obsessed....
I'd love to publish (and probably will, one day) the entire volume of our 'correspondence'.
But one little bit is relevant. I replied to (yet another) of his routine threats with the following:-
On a personal level, one businessman to another, there is one little fact which I would like to know.
Did your last payment from Eclipse clear the bank yet? Because I suspect it might well be the last one.
That was on the 15th of August 2008.
So I was 'amused' that Zoom still thinks Wedge is newsworthy for aviation.
And that he didn't ask for his money back...
But you are right on one level. Us 'cockroaches' should not be concerned with those who circulate at the levels Zoom and Wedgie do.
Even if Wedge really DOES want to buy the bits of the ConJet off the trustee.
Shane
Baron,
"Sure, this is a tough one. But Peter has the personal motivating factor and also the inside knowledge of the challenges. If he is helping lead the team that wants to make a go of it, well, let them try."
Everyone should read this, and if they don't feel the same way, examine themselves in the mirror.
I guess this guy is not a whore, and left becasue he just lost faith and did not agree with the shenanigans. I want to believe this is true, and I do believe it. I even wrote it as my suspicion... of why he left.
I would agree, this guy is a compass. I am not sure he has perfect knowldge of the market issues. Lets just say, EAc had a "build it and they will come" attitude, and from what I now, they lacked ANY real market analysis.
So, my questions stand, how many at what price, and what will it cost to produce?
Other than this "gap" I think this guy could be areal resource, and I personally wish him all the best.
All the best.
The owners s/n 260 still continue to suffer. They don't have their aircraft since the Eclipse sale didn't go through and they don't know what Eclipse has done with around $400K in escrowed funds plus now they are worried about their aircraft being damaged since nobody is at Eclipse to take care of it.
I would agree, this guy is a compass. I am not sure he has perfect knowldge of the market issues. Lets just say, EAc had a "build it and they will come" attitude, and from what I now, they lacked ANY real market analysis.
Vern is saying that the Harlow plan was his plan for those that he has consulted for (I believe he said he talked to two interested parties - which he doesn't confirm or deny if Harlow was one of them).
Shane,
relax,
you have provided more insight and better intel than Zoom... and the best way to deal with Vern and his infantile and illogical statements is...
Leave it to everyone else.
Rise above it.
Actually, I am starting to feel sorry for the guy. Not in an enabling way, in a dramatic pathetic way.
Dave,
I would contend, from afar, that the PLan... the Harlot plan as I will now call it, if the same as Vern's is based on the same lack of market analysis, rigor, risk analysis or any informed aspect of real market place value analysis.
Just a rational observer of the history and facts.
So, I ask Reed: answer the simple questions, and lets see, how much this plane would cost, at a reasonable rate of production volume? and how many he (they) expext to be able to sell.
My guess is: "haven't got a clue"
"It's exactly the other way around. Zoom is convinced that 'we' are robbing 'him'."
Tell Capt Zoom and the Vernster to check in with the clinic. They want them both back to continue the experiments.
Thanks Gad the plane is well looked after by an old DayJet guy. Part are an issue my friend, but I do not play Russian Roulette with the aircraft.
The less attention paid to this village idiot, the better. He is a well connected blow hard failure.
Do not provide any more forum for this a-hole.
What I'm saying is that Vern could be the one behind it (or at least playing some role in it) with Reed just being the public face of it like how Roel was the public face of EclipseJet but secret Mann got 20%. If these guys weren't one of the two Vern consulted with, I'd like to know who the two are that Vern told his plan to.
Hi Baron,
I appreciate your kind advice to Shane, regarding Captain Zoom:
"Don't let him get to you."
But
"Your obsession with Zoom is showing."
Is quite the reverse, as Shane pointed out, and Stan has commented on as well.
I think this link has been posted before, but for "newcomers" who might wonder what's going on:
Zoom, Zoom, Zoom
(Or things that make you go Hmmm besides Mazdas)
zoom sounds like mac maclellan
OMSIV
'Glad to hear your response.
gadfly
Hi Gadfly,
"Gore Group" is next going after goats"
Don't worry- they won't get my goat!
(Might get me to eat fewer beans though... :)
---------------------------------
EPx,
That's about my take on Mac too- seems a little full of himself.
(No doubt Mac and I would get along fabulously ;)
Thanks for the info on Stan's reference (4 part interview, posted Tue-Wed-Thu-Fri). I "don't go there" to Zoomie's site often- too bad, it's an okay site- it's just he's such a pain in the Wedge to Stan and Shane.
(I can see why Zoom and Wedge are buds. Extrapolating- imagine Mac, Big Ed (DelayJets), Zoom, and Wedge- all in one room. Talk about pollution control !! I'd rather be in a small room with a large herd of goats and a case of beans apiece !! There'd be enough spin in that room to change the tides !)
(Apologies to Mac- he's annoying, but not purposely so :)
EclipsePilotOMSIV said...
zoom sounds like mac maclellan
LOL - Now, that IS funny. I used to respect Mac and enjoy his down to earth writings. But the man has "lost" it. He has become too much or a Mr know it all (I know, I know, look who is talking, right?). He should go back to just report on the facts. How many were produced, how many were promised, what is the observed UL, CS, ROC, endurance. Next.
Talking about other okay sites- by accident, I came across the "VLJPlanet" website- it was briefly considered for a "roost" before Shane adopted us.
VLJPlanet
It's become mostly a headline posting site with little blog activity, it appears, but it's nice it's still running. (I am, however, infinitely pleased Shane took us in).
It did have an article which had escaped me- seems like Wedge IS on the move, with an AP interview on March 01, 2009 ( !! Dateline, ABQ !!)
"Especially for the last three to four months, it's been a process that's akin to watching a loved one die," said Vern Raburn..."
Try, 3 to 4 years !!
"The company has said it has no plans to fight the bankruptcy, which comes before a court Wednesday."
Hmmm. I had wondered what the timeline would be- what's next? (What a STUPID queation to ask, when talking about Eclipse !!! :)
"Raburn said what sunk Eclipse was "gross mismanagement" of the company's inventory..."
Well, Wedge is half right- about the "gross mismanagement" part.
Wedge Talks- to AP, not Garbo
(...maybe that should be fabricates, rather than talks...)
For those so interested (about the Garbo Talks bit, not Wedge):
Greta Garbo
(She made her last movie the same year the ERcoupe first flew - 1941- both are timeless and beautiful- one could argue, the ERcope a bit more timeless, Garbo a bit more beautiful).
Well, Wedge is half right- about the "gross mismanagement" part.
Hearing him rant he just comes across as so clueless. He complains that the mismanagement came from the people he hired and that his mistake was not firing people fast enough. Vern in his complaints about his underlings actually undermines the very core of his business plan - building each unit in about 600 hours, which he says now couldn't be done and people just tricked him into believing it could. It's so funny hearing him rant against his own former employees when he's the one who went out of the way not to hire aviation people and he claims he was tricked by others because he was a babe in the woods about aviation.
Baron,
I thought Richard Collins had lost it too- what a rambling nitwit. I wish him a happy retirement though.
Okay okay,
Hey Kettle, meet Pot...
:)
Mac and Richard
(Hmph. Fancy editors of Flying magazine are probably justifiably flattered to be covered in our blog, no doubt! And WE won't even charge 'em !! .)
I wish Wedge a happy retirement too. Like Garbo, I just wish he'd go somewhere and shut up !!
Okay, okay,
Hey Kettle...
----------------------------------
Garbo has a star on the Hollywood walk of fame, Wedge has the Colliers trophy...Life is full of ironies :)
Garbo got four Academy Award nominations- but no wins. The ERcoupe never won the Collier prize either...Life is full of cruel ironies :(
Yes, B.E.G. the way he made such a huge circuitous deal about high morals to not sell his P210.
What a bunch of BS. Should have just come out and said - I got more money for it parting it out than selling it whole.
These guys are just like the old guard News Anchors - no one told them their time had passed.
Question: What was the average age of a CBS 60 minutes correspondent before Dan et all were pushed out? Like 98 or something? Please!!!
And for those who might care (and I have no idea why you would care), the Baron has officially called 6,700 as the market bottom and is jumping back in - both feet, head, and toes - into 100% equities.
Ignore at your own risk.
Sell everything you can, including wife, dog, guns, grand mother's jewelry and buy stocks.
Here we go ppl
And for those who might care (and I have no idea why you would care), the Baron has officially called 6,700 as the market bottom and is jumping back in - both feet, head, and toes - into 100% equities.
Ignore at your own risk.
Sell everything you can, including wife, dog, guns, grand mother's jewelry and buy stocks.
You're more optimistic than me as I see the market heading lower - potentially much lower. That being said, I think those who buy stocks now are buying them at a discount from what they will be in the future and you'll make money.
Baron,
(Since Dave did it too, here I go :)
I concur on the market- I figure we're in the valley floor for the next four months, then gradual but sustained recovery starting in September or so. Good news- lots of time to get in, I think.
BUT, thinking about my history of market predictions, which has been a statistical aberration in it's abhorrent inaccuracy, I'd say something else completely is going to happen. (Giant Lobsters from Neptune Invade, Eclipse turns a profit, America gets HDTV, etc).
(Oh, wait a minute- one of those HAS happened- sort of :)
Hi Fred,
Either:
1) You are very smart, or
2) I am very stupid, or
3) both
(Ah, can I have a fourth option to pick from ?? :)
- because your seemingly effortless, light-hearted posts send me off on research missions which become in-depth studies.
Earlier today (March 3) you put me on the fourth treatise which I have yet to complete and post.
You're harder to keep up with than Eclipse!!
.)
billy :
what would you expect from me ?
i learned to spell right my own name on the first attempt ... only last week ! ;-)
(you don't know what kind of pain is to have a 4 letters name when you know how to count only to 3 ...)
i feel that you're right , we are both ...
(i don't know about your cleverness , but have no doubts about my own stupidity ...!)
as for buying "papers" (opposite to "things you can touch, feel and which have value anywhere on earth , "stocks and certificate have a very limited value when out of the emitting place , remember "in the kingdom of the blind , a one eyed is the king " ... or some years ago i had the immense privilege to share the life of natives in the Amazonian Forest in French Guyana ,i had a revue with me , on top of it it was a photo of an extremely beautiful Top-model , i think it was A. Karembeu , the tribe peoples thought that men in outer world were totally crazy to fancy such ugliness , instead they presented me their "local miss" to me she was looking like a monkey ... ) now , let me give a comment from a good friend (which happen to be managing one of the funds in a petro-monarchy from the Gulf starting by D ...)
"nothing to do with USA now , there about everything is oversold and underfunded ..."
i love this chum , i think he has a great sens of formula ...!
well , as you understood , i am not sharing B95 optimism ...
it can go much lower ... you know
first if some would please me by removing their pink-goggles and try to understand that such a place as "the best country in the world" is real "foutaise" ...
if such thing would be to exist anywhere at any :
who can decide where is it ?
on which criteria ?
with what scale ?
it is only something extremely personal and therefor extremely difficult to be taken as something looking like "Universal Truth" ...
if anyone can believe to be in the best place on earth and can go stating it publicly ...
it's fine and i admire such person for their ability to see ONLY their belly button ...
but then , Nazi's ideas are only the next door !
Ps: i love to be difficult to follow ... don't you want everything for free ? ;-)
Baron,
I'm with Fred on your '6,700' call. Methinks it's not quite on the floor, just yet.
However....
What everyone seems to be missing is how LONG it will stay at lower levels.
I'm staying in cash (or forestry, but that's cash as far as I'm concerned) for another 12 to 18 months. Only when I see two quarters of 'stability' will I be tempted to have a go at equities.
Back to the FPJ.
Today is D-Day for the Chapter 7 process. If Roel is a no-show at the Court to oppose the Motion to Convert (11 to 7) then a Trustee will be appointed to dispose of the assets. However, I expect there will be several petitions (s/n 260 is bound to be one, for instance) so we should not expect too much.
I am, however, standing by. If there is 'news' expect to see it here....
Shane
Monsieur Shane ...
you are being so right ...
it is not very difficult to see that the last time something did happen into a said place , it has lasted for quite long time ...
the place : Japan !
they were booming and booming , in MBA school it was , then , fashionable to (try to) speak Japanese ...
everybody was , then , sure they would swallow the whole world in only a very few bites ...
they became over-confident ...
started to funds a myriad of firms not even worth the weight of ink from the letters making their names ...
banks , there, was so over-optimistic that they started to "bury" all clients with cash on credit and even worse "stocks on credit" to be paid much later ...
one day they had a squeek ...
they entered a mild recession and their govt to save his own population goodwill and faith started to pour even more money into the mess than the banks were foolish enough to put in the first place ...
transforming a mild recession in a F***G nightmare ...
it was 18/19 years ago , they have not recovered yet ...!
does it sound like something you know ?
just need to change one word about the place ...then you have it !!!
will it be the same ?
well , history has a nasty habit of coming back in the face of the ones not able to learn a lesson from it ...
bill e.goat,
why are you so optimistic about Peter?
I do not know what he did before resp. after his jobw with EAC.
With EAC - being a design shop -
he saw how money was collected and burnt and provisions were made for the production "next year" or "this year"...
He know the number of orders and the related payments.
Anyhow he should have had all the finacial numbers and should be in doubt about the future of EAC every year starting from 2001(? or even earlier).
Now he shall be in charge of numbers he never was when working with EAC (production costs, maintenance, ROI, tools, material, investor relationship...).
Hopefully Peter is up to date with accounting after his "funny, creative" years with the wedge and his specialists!
Julius
"no one told them their time had passed"
I actually did in an email to MM a couple of years ago. Very nasty response!
fred,
should I say
bonne nuit,
although the sun is shining...
At least a certain country will learn that there is something beside the tertiary sector...
BTW: That was also new for some politian in Germany...
FPJ: Roel & Phil - why not?
Roel played the bad guy - Phil will be the good guy...
Unfortunately Al also wants to get some money...
Just $28M + plus "notes" (a task for Roel), I think that better than a ch 7 auction...
Julius
Bloggers,
As some have correctly surmised, I am very busy of late. I have no idea how some of you can keep up with the blog real-time, all day long. There really are other things in life ya know!!! :-)
At any rate, I’d like to address one long time blog misperception which keeps coming up.
The Williams engine.
The Eclipse 500 first flew with the Williams EJ22 engines on August 28, 2002. The following day approximately $25 million of depositor funds were released from escrow per the terms of our deposit agreements. Did we know at that time that the EJ22 was having serious problems? Absolutely. Did we know we were going to terminate them? Absolutely not.
Shortly after the first flight Williams committed to a rigorous schedule to fix all the issues within 6-8 weeks. As I remember, they missed just about every commitment. Williams is a secretive company and had never allowed an Eclipse employee to attend their EJ22 programs. Sam Williams is a brilliant guy, but his attitude was “trust me, we will deliver”, and we and the BoD did just that.
Finally, with BoD support, we managed to get a world renowned turbine expert into Williams to review the program. It was a shocking report. The EJ22 was far out bleeding edge technology and in technical areas where Williams had very little experience. The expert told us the EJ22 would be years late in getting certified and we should order three engines for every aircraft, as one would be in repair all the time due to inherent reliability problems with the design.
We finally terminated the program in November 2002 after several BoD meetings. It was a very scary day for us. We literally jumped off a cliff with no parachute as the Pratt & Whitney Canada deal would not be signed until February 2003. I know you all like to bash Vern (and much of it is deserved), but to his credit he brought all the VP’s into a meeting room prior to the termination and told us we might very well die with the termination of Williams, and he asked for a vote. There weren’t many times the VP’s all agreed on something (that’s another book in and of itself), but that day we were 100% unanimous to terminate Williams. If we were going to die, we chose to do it then versus die from a thousand cuts over time.
I personally thought we didn’t have a chance to survive as the program was set back 2+ years to redesign the aircraft for the PW610, we were running out of money again, and now the program costs were ballooning due to the two year extension. We had become, literally, a glider company. Somehow we survived – Al Mann once more bet big on us in the next round of financing, the customers asked for very few refunds, and the employees dug down deep as the engineers somehow strapped on Teledyne missile engines so we could continue flight testing of the airframe.
Sorry about the length of this, but I have always had a “to do” to correct the blog impression that we “stole” the $25 million from our customers after the first flight because we knew we were terminating Williams. That is simply incorrect, and I can assure you I would have never released those funds if it had been.
As some of you know, we old people sometimes wake up in the middle of the night with thoughts racing through our minds. I have no idea how Williams popped up tonight, but now I can finally cross one more “to do” off my list.
If I get time, I’ll post why the Phil Friedman plan is a good one.
guten tag , julius ...
the sun is still shining (some kind of...) for me ...! ;-)
well , you know not a single place in the world has been and will ever be in possibility to sustain huge (weak word) deficits or unbalanced budget for very long without running in a long term problems ...
this is one of the "funny" aspect of the nature of things ...
balance in everything !
did you ever see a woman with one breast of 5 kilos and the other one of a few grams , still finding her attractive ??? ;-)
with a planned budget-deficit in the nature of being able to repay all debts accumulated since Louis XIV (the one who has built Versailles palace, a joke of only 720.000 Sq.feet with a little garden of a mere 20.000 acres ) by the French state until now ...
or 7 times the overall costs of the German reunification process to date ...
all of this for ONLY 1 year of deficits ...!!
i doubt illusions can hold for very long , anymore ...
--------------------------------
Chap. 11;363 VS Chap. 7
i would be inclined to say that the best could be that if all owners declare together that whatever the costs , whoever to pick-up the gauntlet ...
they won't spend a dime anymore on the matter ...
then Owners to pick-up the leftover for the pocket-change they would agree to give in the auction ...
cutting the grass straight under the feet of the numerous attempt of "salvation" which are going to flourish out of this captive market ...
a kind of "self-caring entity" where decision and costs would be shared between owners ...
not the kind of "hold-up" which all other attempts are going to be more or less , excluding money-making and profits from the talks would probably serve owners more than anything else !
otherwise , the problem will be only displaced to some other "Tuesday" ...!
"a world renowned turbine expert into Williams to review the program."
With all the benefit of hindsight, why not do this before committing to Williams? The choice of this engine (nothing like it ever done before) was a "bet the company" decision warranting considerable due diligence. Eclipse bet and lost.
Peter ...
(may i call you this way ?)
it is nice to have someone who've been "hands in the grease" on topic ...
much better than to rely on impressions , deductions , disdain from some "i know so !" ...
still , if you can find some times to spare for it ...
i would like an answer to a question following your last post :
after the first flight , if Williams committed itself to fix problems within a 6 to 8 weeks frame , why (this is the question) the release of funds was not postponed of the same length of time ?
and Why the position-holders THEN , were not informed of such development ?
i deduct from your post that EAC was Cash-starved right form the beginning ... which for me is not the sign of any good-healthy-project !
"a world renowned turbine expert into Williams to review the program."
Although world renowned in my own mind, I am definitely not a turbine engine expert, but even I, when I saw this engine displayed at OSH for the first time said, "This will never work!" Surely there must have been some strong clues well before the first flight.
Williams is a secretive company and had never allowed an Eclipse employee to attend their EJ22 programs.
Didn't the Wedge sit on the BoD of Williams at that time?
"Shortly after the first flight [of the Eclipse on August 28, 2002]Williams committed to a rigorous schedule to fix all the issues within 6-8 weeks."
The ENGINE first flew on a modified Sabreliner on May 30th, 2002. Did not those first flights on the Sabreliner give a clue as to the problems? More self-serving bob-and-weaving.
Peter, I've told you many times to keep good notes for the book. It looks like you have. Do you have a publishing deal yet???
"With all the benefit of hindsight, why not do this before committing to Williams? The choice of this engine (nothing like it ever done before) was a "bet the company" decision warranting considerable due diligence. Eclipse bet and lost."
where have I heard THIS before - man, you are 100% right on this.
We have explored EAC's "competencies", and they were supposed to be world class aviation procurement people... this was one of their claimed strengths.
Guess what?
Anyone who bases an aircraft program on a technology-demo engine, is just plain stupid.
Anyone who agrees to do the above, and also agrees to let the manufacurer/developer of said engine do it cloaked in absolute secrecy, is even dumber.
Finally, as in this case IIRC, anyone who pays for the above, under the above conditions, should be barred from aviation manufacturing completely, becasue they are obviously oblivious to risk.
Of course hindsight is 20-20, but the recipe for disaster is black and white, and the level of risk-taking, especially with OPM, and the level of ignorance regarding engine development programs, is really mind numbing, in this case.
One caveat.
IIRC, a former Williams engine program guy, named Ken HArness WORKED at Eclipse before and during first flight... this should tell you something about what EAC knew and did not know about the EJ22, when the took the deposit money.
Some would argue ignorance and say it was stupidity, some could argue it was criminal.
I personally characterize this as criminal stupidity.
Williams is a secretive company and had never allowed an Eclipse employee to attend their EJ22 programs
Designing a product around a piece of experimental equipment, setting an unprecidented certification timeline for the engine, changing the specs of the engine from the work that had been done with NASA and then keeping yourselves in the dark about this extremely key piece of equipment that by Eclipse's own admission built the aircraft around looks like you are asking for the very problems you had.
We literally jumped off a cliff with no parachute
You jumped off a cliff with no parachute by building the Eclipse 500 around the experimental engine and then letting yourselves be kept in the dark...heck, whether you were kept in the dark or not you were jumping off a cliff with no parachute by basing the aircraft around an unproven uncertified technology.
Peter, I would like to hear your arguments on why the Friedman plan is viable. The upfront payments from the existing fleet make the per hour cost of operating the jet way out of line by an order of 5X or more. How can you justify a per hour maintenance only cost of over $1000??? That just won't be supported by existing customers, and will certainly not bring ANY new sales once you start production. It's a losing proposition that just can't work, and you are asking the owners to fund it. Seems like old times...
airtaximan :
yes , i agree ...!
a bit difficult to buy in the story , we preferred a 2 years lateness to a 2 months certitude ...!!!
even if , off-course , after the race it is always easier to name the winner ....
Peter,
thanks for the WI fiasco clarification, post.
Just FYI, it does not ring true. Perhaps the CFO did not know the engine was never going to make it, but, I fail to believe that with all the employees, and the funds spent on engine development, and Harness working at Eclipse, your top executive did not know the issues with the ej22.
If this is the case, by some massive negligence regarding the critical aspect of the aircraft, the system that was the design driver, really, then you were part of what will go down in history as one of the dumbest, most irresponsible group of aviation developers in history. It simply does not compute.
Anybody here with development experience, please correct me on this, if I am off base.
It begs the question: "what the heck were you doing regarding all the other suppliers and systems that were procured for the plane?".
You spent hundreds of millions of dollars and years, and you put a test pilot in the plane for first flight, AND did not know the engines were so problematic that they would be replaced.
C'mon.
I thn you has some to do's and some thoughts late at night about this engine for perhaps a year before first flight... and certainly after.
PS. industry rumor is, the pilot was told not to push the throttle forawrd except as slowly as humanly possible, and he was literally sweating bullets scared suring that flight. What exactly did EAC not know?
EB,
do you think Peter was the mastermind behind letting the position-holders fund the development program, get bought in so to speak, and then jack them for more money all around?
Normally, deposits are used to fund the production of the clients plane.
after the first flight , if Williams committed itself to fix problems within a 6 to 8 weeks frame , why (this is the question) the release of funds was not postponed of the same length of time ?
and Why the position-holders THEN , were not informed of such development ?
Fred, these are VERY good questions.
Sounds very absurd, that they did not know, until first flight (eventhough the pilot had his instructions) the engines were garbage.
In fact, there is no way to build a plane, and just strap on engines and fly first flight, without really testing the engine a lot before hand, roll tests, bench tests, etc... and use the actual data from the test to design the plane.
One would have to believe this was never done, and if not, this is a first.
Also, if WI provided false reports, false data etc, Vern should have gone after them. I believe this was not the case, as I know Vern would not hesitate to sue WI.
So, the plan was, take the deposit money, make'm ask for refunds, and make this a big risk for the depositors, as who knew how much was left to refund?
This was always the case.
Even with the avionics.
Even with the demad for 500 progress payments.
Peter, in year one, when you called hundreds and hundreds of progress payments - did you know it was next to impossible to produce those planes within the timeframe?
atm :
i am 100% sure that if on the discovery of the EJ22 (taking granted that they didn't know anything before) EAC could have gather the deposit-holders , tell them of dev. problems and ask them confidence-vote ...
THEN it would have been some kind of ethic !!!
the problem :
the Dev.program was paid using deposit money ... putting in that all the risks on clients !!
Ps: when talking between Pros , ignorance IS criminal , especially if life(s) can be at danger , IMO !
I wonder how Peter can address the Dayjet thing.
Lets see - Dayjet claimed 300 or so orders and Eclipse's order book had them down for 1400 orders or more.
Sounds like no one at EAC knew that Dayjet really had only 300 orders. Except, EAC claimed Dayjet had 300 orders in the press...
or
Maybe no one at EAC knew Dayjet had 1400 orders. Except, EAC had Dayjet down for 1400 orders while they told the world the orderbook was 2300, 2500, 2700 orders strong... they never said 1400 of them WERE from Dayjet, all the while Dayjet's orders were described as 300 or so.
What?
I guess no one at EAC knew really, how many orders Dayjet had. Until Karen got Dayjet to admit they were couching a 1400 order as only around 300, becasue they had no clue IF or WHEN they would take more than 300 planes. OK, I guess THEN EAC found out.
That must be it.
Sarcasm is the only way I can seem to make this point.
EAC misconstrued the Dayjet order, and people relied on the high number of total orders, and the low Dayjet number becasue no one would take a 1400 Dayjet order seriously, AND, it would make EAC lose credibility, or at the very least increase the risk factor asscoiated with more than half their prders not really being orders, coming from a start up, and not backed by any real money, or be on any real schedule for delivery.
Its called intentionally misleading, IMO.
I fail to buy the "we did not know" argument regarding simple things that needed to be knows. No one is that dumb, careless, clueless, reckless...
"Breakthrough" products usually require taking SOME risks. Eclispe signed up for at least two "bet the company" risks: Williams and Avio, both of which went against them. IMO, this is a key indicator of supreme arrogance ("we are so smart we can solve any problem") in the corner office, if not the entire senior management team.
1) i'll vouch for williams being secretive. basically a bunch of military engine guys who think even their commercial engines are classified military projects. very hard to work with them.
2) with all the 20/20 hindsight comments, people are forgetting that at the time there wasn't any engine available to power the FPJ.
3) As an engineer and DER i'll tell you the real waste of time and money was eclipse bolting on the teledyne engines and then continuing to "flight test" since this configuration wasn't anywhere near the conforming configuration with the 610s, this was a complete waste of time and money. Absolutely no usable data came out of this exercise. Basically the program should have been shut down while the engines and the avionics were allowed to catch up. Instead insane amounts of money was burned for no usable data.
Peter,
There is a sign in the Post Office that reads, “If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is.” This advice is intended to prevent mail fraud but could apply to turbofan engines also.
Hindsight is always twenty/twenty and it is easy for bloggers to pull out their Retrospectoscopes and examine business decisions. Eclipse management and board bet the company on the Williams engine and lost.
The warning signs were there. The engine was a three-spool design which had not previously met with broad success. The engine was to weigh only 85 pounds, another tipoff. As Whytech points out, many of us looked at the engine guts at Oshkosh and said, “No way.”
Note that the Pratt & Whitney engine, a more conventional design weighed three times as much, 260 pounds, to deliver 17 percent higher thrust. This topic was covered in detail by Air & Space Magazine in late 2005:
The Little Engine That Couldn't
Hello Peter Reed,
Thanks for stopping by again!
(As you can see, no good deed goes unpunished:)
(...so I guess Wedge really will be taking the "up" elevator after all .)
Don't take the "down" elevator !!
Tail
i'll vouch for williams being secretive. basically a bunch of military engine guys who think even their commercial engines are classified military projects. very hard to work with them.
may be , but then HOW to work efficiently with them ...?
you know why it is difficult to put a Jaguar-engine into a Lada ?
just because the Lada-car has never been meant for !!!
this is only about cars , so in 2 dimensions only ...
how can something supposed to be going trough 3 dimensions be simpler ???
(basically speaking if you cannot know anything about the engines : how to design what is going around ?)
people are forgetting that at the time there wasn't any engine available to power the FPJ.
That isn't being forgotten. If you "bet the company" (Vern's words) on an experimental piece of equipment and then you make it even more experimental by changing the specs, you're begging for there to be delays and various other problems. The problem isn't so much in the delay but in the taking of the money. There had already been dozens of hours of flight testing on the Sabreliner in addition to other testing on the ground before the Eclipse 500 test flight. It wasn't like this was the first time the engine had been tested in the air and was just some big surprise. Eclipse went out of their way to say that there was nothing wrong with the engines (the issue had been raised at the time) and then did a reversal and criticized the engines after all the depositor checks had been cashed.
billy
for the first time i can read your post without feeling the need for an Aspro ...! ;-)
you are right , with little picture in colors = it is much easier to understand ....;-)
Ps: is that you , on the photo ?
Sounds a bit like the Führerprinzip defense.
I think the Chewbacca defense would be more reliable.
Tail,
") with all the 20/20 hindsight comments, people are forgetting that at the time there wasn't any engine available to power the FPJ."
Well, you are right and wrong. Why make a plane there is no engine for? You don't. So WI had the FJ33 and PWC was working the PW600 series for years before EAC launched.
Engine guys look for launch customers, and Cessna qualified for PWC, Eclipse apparently was dreaming about a $100k engine. PW would not agree, BUT they DID have an engine, as ready as WI FJ22, or more ready. It actually flies these planes, and arguable the FJ22 never could.
Anyhow, there were viable alternatives, including making a bigger plane.
omething tells me an FJ33 powered larger plane would have sold better, been easier to build and would have been better value. Just a hunch. Would it have been $2.x millions? YES< CenturyJet was planning such a plane, and I think the honest price based on conventional rates was around this price.
HO HUM.
Just a hunch. Would it have been $2.x millions?
yes , but then all the marketing would have gone into smoke ...
and marketing was 50% of plot !!
there is too many things "bit weird" into the story ...
Mr. Read, a couple of comments;
Your description of the events surrounding the Williams demise are inconsistent with Vern's podcast on the other station..Now I know that Vern might have selective memory recall...
When Eclipse position holders were asked to pony up 60% of the contract amount, they were told by Vern that this money was going to purchase equipment for their aircraft. Were you the CFO at this time? I think so. Where is the money? As you were the CFO and had a fiduciary responsibility to be the caretaker of these funds, where is this money?
I appreciate you coming to the blog, it is brave, are maybe stupid, but now you have arrived, inquiring minds would like to know.
Folks, doesn't anyone remember that it was Sam Williams who came up with the business plan for Pronto Aircraft (which later became Eclipse)? In fact, under the original business plan Williams was going to develop the whole enchilada – engines, airframes, etc.
Also, Sam Williams is the one who basically raised all the funds in the first round from his friends, including Al Mann.
So all this talk about why didn’t Eclipse do its due diligence is rubbish. There was no due diligence on Sam’s engine and Sam made it clear there would be none. And the initial investors said fine as they had the utmost confidence in him. Also, Sam Williams controlled “everything” for the first couple of years. Vern Raburn was basically the sales person giving all the presentations to potential investors. Slowly, over time Vern assembled his team and later took over the airframe program and moved it to Albuquerque (that’s also another book).
A few facts go a long way toward an intelligent conversation.
And, by the way, tell me any major system that does not have issues during development? As I said, we knew the engines had some big issues, but the decision to pull the plug was long after the first flight.
And, for some more facts, the depositors clearly knew in writing that their initial deposits would be used to fund the company’s development and were not to fund the production of their particular aircraft.
I’ll take sleeping pills tonight!!! :-)
Actually you didn't need 20/20 hindsight to see that there was no chance of a 770 Lb thrust reliably civil engine weighing 85 Lb to power the EA500. Anyone with a half-arsed knowledge of GTE theory could see that the technology was/is still not even close to being developed.
All you needed was for grown up management to lay off the Koolaid.
Peter,
see how much fun this is?
Do you have an aerospace/aviation development background?
This is a very specialized field, and the statement that systems have issues in development is true, so one will not (except military) bet a development program on a technology demo engine. Ever. This is risk upon risk. BIG risk... the I just belew everything risk.
How about the Dayjet issue?
How about asking for 500 progress payments?
I like the sleeping pills comment, it could be taken 2 ways, so pls don't take too many
;)
Peter Reed said,
As some of you know, we old people sometimes wake up in the middle of the night with thoughts racing through our minds.
Thanks for your input Mr. Reed. Hopefully one night you can indulge my request for more background when the racing thoughts run thru your mind. Personally, I just hate insomnia.
I was a new grunt in Eclipse in March 2006 and eventually I got moved upstairs in the HQ building not far from your cube and Vern's; I can admit a few (unintentional) overheard conversations were rather shocking... about who would want to buy EAC for our systems integration abilities. Sadly, that didn't happen...
I was a glorified spreadsheet churner for QA and Glenn Pressley. I replaced one of the retired engineer buddies Glenn brought in from Bell Helicopter, a guy who was making like $800/DAY.
I am fascinated with the number of "graybeards" that came into the company - necessary experts to help deal with one issue or another. I later got the feeling that Glenn was one such person, but as a new/green person into the aviation biz, I mainly noticed the issues where I perceived corners were cut. The sheer magnatude of PAPER that Quality had to deal with was insane, and it was stupid for me and my QA counterparts to have to dig thru paper build records in order to determine IF an essential part was installed on a flight test bird. Can you tell me if Vern really understood the seriousness of that issue? Can you come up with some real answers why Glenn Pressley was 'thrown under the bus" in December 2006?
When Glenn left, all the (good) people from Bell took off also, including my manager at the time, Larry Davis. And then QA was stuck with Saul Pacheco as our VP, a guy from Medtronics and Motorola. Jesus Christ, I just couldn't believe that Vern would emasculate QA in such a fashion. Is that something that you can explain? Why on earth would Vern not get - AND KEEP - at least one QA executive with real aviation experience????? I am truly dying to know Vern's thought process, if any. Fast forward to 2008, my pinhead manager at the time (from Raytheon, no less) would never say no to Todd Fierro ...promising that **I** could do all sorts of things for Mfg tools. Glenn might have had issues, but at least I witnessed his abilities to throw shit back at people when they were trying to dump issues on QA to solve...
In October 2006 (Friday the 13th, to be exact) I was 'promoted' to run the tool calibration for Eclipse. And over time, I kept bashing my head against a brick wall to get FU**ING barcodes and RFID tags so I could track all the damn tools properly. Yeah, I even had a $4500 Barfield unit for SP11 go missing one day, but no way to track its location. It didn't turn up until 6+ months later, but my VP ignored my email at the time asking if I should file a bloody police report in case APD finds it (via the serial number) in someone's car one day. Can you explain why Vern - a guy from a technology company - would not give the grunts the technology resources needed? Why do something like that, and then screw over Glenn for some extraneous reason about QA records for AC 1-10 when he didn't really have control over what systems were deployed? LOL... even when Jason Lundstrom took over QA, I was STILL asking for barcodes!!! And NONE of the a/c parts in SP10 had barcodes QA could use in SAP; Lou Piper had already left the company.
Truth be told, Vern PUSHED OUT all the good people in the company... because they wouldn't do things his way. The idea that EAC failed because of "gross mismanagement" of assets is a serious understatement. The PEOPLE we had were assets too, grossly mismanaged. Vern will never understand that.
e.d.t.
Folks, doesn't anyone remember that it was Sam Williams who came up with the business plan for Pronto Aircraft (which later became Eclipse)? In fact, under the original business plan Williams was going to develop the whole enchilada – engines, airframes, etc.
Also, Sam Williams is the one who basically raised all the funds in the first round from his friends, including Al Mann.
So all this talk about why didn’t Eclipse do its due diligence is rubbish.
Then don't you think it's time you start reigning in your ex-boss for saying that Vern/Eclipse were the "visionaries" as now you are saying that Williams was the visionary and that Vern was just the sales guy? Vern as recently as a couple of days ago on the podcast was claiming credit for this.
A few facts go a long way toward an intelligent conversation.
That's just it. You on one hand say that Williams controlled everything, yet on the other hand Eclipse can and did fire Williams. If Eclipse had the power to fire Williams, Eclipse had the power to do due diligence.
If I take it as red that due diligence wasn't allowed that itself would be a reason to not do business with Williams. It doesn't matter what industry you talk about, you have to do due diligence. It's like what happens with people seeking funding for perpetual motion machines where they claim they're the only ones that have it, but wont let there be due diligence - it means stay away.
I have never heard of anyone designing an airframe without having a clue as to what the detailed specifications of the engines would be. You intended to develop and certify and engine while developing and certifying the airframe, which itself was to be integrated to the nth degree with respect to the avionics. As it turned out it would have taken three of the Williams engines to power the airframe you developed. Are you really shocked it blew up in your face?
There is, of necessity, an element of program risk inherent in driving innovation.
When GE or Pratt develops a new engine, they make clear decisions of the allowable innovation driven program risk up front. For something like the 787 engines, the probably had a risk budget of around 7% for technologies which were not available/ proven at the time of program launch, which would need to developed by the time engines deliver to customers.
In practice, this might be a decision to design around a cycle which requires a TIT 6° higher than the state of the art, which might get divided into a technology project to produce a material process to increase allowable heat by 2°, with 4° going to tech project to improve the insulation of the cooling film.
For a Military program like the F22 that risk budget may have been something like 25%. Something like using a stater less counterrotating turbine.
You can bet your arse that these aspect of such a program gets special management attention, and conservative plan B's are in place for the inevitable disappointments, to ensure the overall program stays on track.
When I compare this industry standard with you discriptions of Sam Williams "plan", I can see urquelle of the fountain of Koolaid!
If you think that there aren't engines very far along in development that don't put out the same thrust/weight ratio as what Williams proposed, y'all are pretty far behind on tech.
The conversation is going to get interesting, mostly because what have been a lot of assumptions/surmising on the part of many of the critics might either a) get validated or b) get pointed out for being incredibly stupid.
Anyone else want popcorn?
some things just get me scratching my head...usually simple statements, that become curiouser as yu think about them...
"Sam Williams ran everything, and Vern was just the salesman making the presenttion" or something to this effect...
OK.
Why did Sam Williams decide to do AVIO? This is a really crazy thing for an engine guy to be concerned with. Airframes are really just hanging brackets for turbine engines, according to every engine maker, really... I would be surprised if Sam Williams cared one lick about AVIO.
Okay Cybit. Please point us to a project "well along" for an 85 Lb engine producing 770 Lb of thrust (or thereabouts), which will offer civil industry standard reliablity?
The Thrust to weight is not the killer in itself (the GE90-115B is at around 7:1 power to weight), but getting this sort of performance out of a sub 1000 lb thrust three spool turbofan for thousands of hours on end. Pure fantasy!
ATM posts: "I wonder how Peter can address the Dayjet thing."
I'd like to see him address the Nimbus debacle.
Peter, you claim your "moral compass" forced you to leave the company in late '06. where was that same moral compass in '02-'05?
I realize that all companies try to report their status in a positive light, but knowingly falsifying an order book should have pegged your BS meter and at least made that needle on that compass swing a few degrees.
I applaud your courage to post here on the blog, but strongly question your ethics and motives.
yes ...
and if depositors knew in writing that their deposits were to be for Firm's Dev. ...
then who was going to pay for their birds ?
if the deposits were to be used for building the company , it only reinforce the IPO exit ... !
i can really agree with you , peter that we were not at the wheel in those times ...
but to me : it is VERY strange that depositors were sold the idea that they were paying to develop EAC ...
then IPO (did they know ?)...
and depositors left over to "hold the bag" ... only 10 years would have been spared in this scenario !
as it is the situation , now !
i am really very glad to have "someone from inside" to tell a bit ...
but in 15 years + of finances/economic work it is the first time that i hear a "firm being developed for itself , with the full agreement and knowledge from investors " (if depositors taken as investors , which they were = a big chunk of the problem !)
what about product ?
what about ROI ?
(in that case the depositors were expecting a Fpj as ROI ? )
i think i will need one of your pill , things starts to be confuse
...! ;-)
freedom ...
yes , the kind of thrust does exist !
it is for drones and cruise missile !
why only for them ?
Same answer than for FSW :
they fly only once !
"If you think that there aren't engines very far along in development that don't put out the same thrust/weight ratio "
You stated "in development." That means now, not 10 years ago. So, 10 years or more have passed since the Eclipse engine decisions, and nothing yet certified? Tells you something.
From my understanding, most of the future potential of aircraft lie within propulsion breakthroughs. Yes, it might have been risky to go with what Williams was proposing, but even companies such as GE, RR, and P&W can completely botch an engine they have swore up and down will work. (Anyone read the reasons why the 737R study was canceled?)
The fuel efficiency of the E500 was dependent on the Williams engine. Once that didn't perform up to spec, they were hosed.
Look up the engines proposed for the 737R.
fjt,
3 spools...AND iirc, 19 stages...
19 stages...am I correct? 19 stages.
how do you spell durability?
ATM said... Anyone who bases an aircraft program on a technology-demo engine, is just plain stupid.
Hummmm like Boeing betting the entire 777NG program (77W, 77L) on the exclusive deal with GE and GEs technology demonstrator to produce a turbofan in the 115Klbs class and incredible SFCs? That sure was stupid.
Fact is, throughout the history of aviation, from the Wright Bros onwards, airframes and engines invariably advanced together with one betting on the other.
What came first? The Wright Flyer or the Wright Engine? The ME262 or the BMW JetEngine? The 747 or the high-bypass turbofan?
ATM said... Anybody here with development experience, please correct me on this, if I am off base.
In this you are totally correct.
A new engine only goes on wing of the intended new airframe when it has already proven itself on ground and flying test beds.
Usually only things like nacelle aerodynamics and FADED tuning remain to be done when it goes on wing of the intend airframe.
The fact that Williams supplied a pair of engines to go on-wing and those engines could not hold together and (according to Vern's interview) the following 23 flight tests needed to be scrapped because the engines didn't work, should be PROOF CONCLUSIVE THAT THERE WAS NO CHANCE THAT ENGINE WOULD EVER WORK. PERIOD. No room for interpretation - yes, it is that black and white. Williams spent years working on the FJ22 under contract and all they could produce was an engine that didn't even hold up together and claim it was ready to go on wing? Come on. Lots of people in the industry KNOW this is a black and white no-go.
Williams spent years working on the FJ22 under contract and all they could produce was an engine that didn't even hold up together and claim it was ready to go on wing? Come on. Lots of people in the industry KNOW this is a black and white no-go.
Then why the dog-and-pony show with the Eclipse 500 test flight other than to get $25M+. Afterall, by the time of Eclipse 500 flight test, there had already been dozens of hours of flight tests on the Sabreliner.
Also answering other people's posts. The decision to create Avio (along with FSW) was done in 1999. This was when Williams was supposedly making all the decisions and Vern was just a figurehead. It seems strange how on one hand we are hearing the problem was that Vern didn't have his employees in place while on the other hand Vern himself just the other day complains that he didn't fire employees he hired fast enough. I also don't see why Williams would be interested in Avio or FSW.
Also here's an article from right after the test flight where the Williams issue is specifically addressed with Vern basically saying "Move along, nothing to see here" in regards to questions about the Williams engine performance.
New Post up
I can now, finally, declare that Eclipse Aviation Corporation is bankrupt.
Shane
ATM said... do you think Peter was the mastermind behind letting the position-holders fund the development program, get bought in so to speak, and then jack them for more money all around?
Peter was there when the 6-month progress payments were required as the cash reserve to keep the company running while Vern went looking for more money. I always questioned Peter's timing on his departure, and now looking back I suspect he and Vern had a disagreement on how to fund the future of Eclipse. Peter did what he thought best, and decided not to be part of the slaughter.
BAron,
a technology demo engine, is very different to a technology mauration program. There is NO program in modern GA aviaiton history (I said GA) or even commercial aviation as you refer to, that was based on just a technology demonstration.
NASA funded WI to demo this engine, and they did, sort of. Bottom line, no ratioanl OEM would BASED a program on a demo engine.
A better referene would be the tech demos going on at GD regarding the SSBJ, but, they did not full-throttle spend until the tech wa sufficienctly demonstrated and matured. Still some risk, but nothing like the NASA demo program for the FJX2...
no way
Post a Comment