Total Eclipse
- Thread starter jynxyjoe
- Start date
Italianaviator
Well-Known Member
I think the Mustang is probably the better one of the VLJ's. I know it cost about 3 times as much as the Eclipse but I have to give it to them and admit the Mustang is a great airplane for its class.
Speed Pilot
Brain Damaged
I'll second the Mustand as best VLJ. There's an eclipse in the area here and it doesn't compare to the Mustang. Granted they are in very seperate price ranges, the Mustang just seems more functional.
Orange Anchor
New Member
...after reviewing the tape, the ruling on the field stands. Nothing to see... show's over.. back to the caves..
Baronpilot244
Killick Stoker
Now the Mustang has been around a while and there are lots being intoduced to the market, a used one with a couple hundred hours on it could probably be bought for close to a new Eclipse price.
The Eclipse is a great concept they just tried to run before they could walk. Shame - its a cool looking airplane.
We looked closely at buying one before business went in the crapper (before the dark times, before the Empire!) but after the myriad problems it was having plus the lethargic SE performance we stayed away.
Bp244
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Very true, but look at the price of a used Eclipse. Even by the time you spend the money to get it to the most up-to-date avionics, you are still way under what the price is on a used C510. Granted, the Eclipse won't carry quite as much as a Mustang, but when was the last time you saw somebody fill a Mustang up full of people?
Baronpilot244
Killick Stoker
Indeed - I suppose the same could hold true for a lot of airplanes. I watched today at BNA as various King Airs and Citations rolled up - none of these aircraft had more than 4 pax on board. Two guys were riding on a KA350. That's a lot of air being hauled around.
Made me feel that our folks were getting their money's worth out of our Baron - 4 pax on today. Couldn't put a whole lot of juice in though!
Bp244
Wow. This is why I have been watching rather than commenting. I don't need poo flung at me. But, I still want to add my two $.02.
I think if they can fix the major issues with this airplane(namely loosing IFR cert.), and advertise it as it is, not as they wish it to be, then I see no problems with it. As for the whole single engine ROS (rate of sink), maybe we should all stop flying single engine airplanes. It's a VLG, what do you expect, G5 performance at 1/10 of the cost? Really? That would be nice, but not realistic.
Will I listen to your opinion of it. No, it's obviously biased.
Old Pete
Cockpit Authoritarian
Serious question. You've made a lot of allusions to your role in the certification process, but you've never explicitly said what it was. What was it?
madolfsson
Well-Known Member
In 2008 Eclipse had issues with water entering the pitot/aoa system, causing two ADs that revoked IFR certification. SB that fixed the issue were already published by the time the AD came out.
Regarding S/E - For 95% of my missions there is ample of S/E climb performance. For the other 5% there are a few seconds from rotation to reaching a safe altitude were losing an engine can be an issue. And when that occurs, just focus on flying the plane. No Props-Mixture-Throttle-Identify-Verify-Feather. During the type rating we did a lot of S/E work, and at least around here it is a no-event. Much safer than a single or piston twin in my mind.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
There is no benefit to me giving out that information and plenty to lose. I had a dog in this race, it came in first, and I didn't need to convince anyone on here of anything to get my point across. Plenty of learned and public figures have done that for me, and they've done so much more politely than I care to.
There is more than enough information out there for people to make up their own mind. My jeering from the stands only serves to make the die hards more defensive and hardened. At first the result is frustrating, I realize that many times in life people don't use their heads making decisions. Their other methods of arriving at a conclusion may vary widely, but the result is the same. I find no use arguing with walls especially when the war is over and (old?) Eclipse lost. Now there's a new chapter. Can Eclipse shirk it's old company culture or is this new product simply going to be more of the same? I don't believe that Eclipse has completely transitioned to a new way of doing business at this time, but you wouldn't know it from the sales pitches. It's offensive.
For those who read this and say, ya know I just never paid any attention and never read much into this huge Eclipse thing, can you break it down for me? Long story short, the result of the whistleblowers probe is out there and it chronologically and categorically reviews flaws in the aircraft and the FAA's inability to make Eclipse comply. It also, I believe, gives too much coddling to the FAA's chronic attitude and motto that "*sniffle* this is too complicated and I just don't understand any of it so I'm just gonna cover my ears, lay my head on the table, and hope it all works out." The FAA is allowed plenty of seminars and classes each year which "bring them up to speed" however the paid for seats are traditionally half full. Worse yet, there is a wide and happy network of individuals who can get you the skinny because the industry is so small, and to not even do that is simply mind-numbing. To have such lackluster performance, and then to squash complaints of senior members who do know what they are doing and attend those classes? If it were up to me I'd take a flamethrower down there, but I'm too old, too damn tired, and too blind. Eclipse got it in the pooper, and that is the most important thing.
My favorite line in the 25 page report is:
I think that's a fair critique and why a lot of us will be forever biased. The process was ok, the FAA just didn't care enough, and local FSDO's like ABQ who screamed bloody murder were told to shut their mouths. Even the Dallas FSDO, who took them next, was awash in confusion over how Eclipse was allowed to continue production. Also an airplane was allowed half assed certifications to better benefit the sales department but in no way reflected an adequate certification level for anything other than day vfr in the pattern.
The real rub here is the FSDO's had tons of qualified and influential people who wanted the job to be done right. Somehow, their qualified objections were shouted down by morons who knew nothing, and just wanted this VLJ market to takeoff because the benefits outweighed the drawbacks. I would ask the people who worked for years under this theory, where is the economic boom? For screwing around with a safety process, where are are the thousands of 500's flying around making money and saving congested airspace? Where is the win-win? The answer is: there never was any such thing. Some people bet on the wrong horse and sacrificed safety for some magic beans. This report, I feel, gave them a pass too. However, I do enjoy the wording in the report that politely says this 10 or 15 year old project was simply too fast paced for FAA to keep up with. My God that's hilarious. The only thing that went fast was the shell game of avionics systems, the plane was terribly slow in development and the FAA guys who called the shots couldn't keep up. I guess, maybe, you do have to pity them a little bit. You can't fix stupid.
Never fear though, Eclipse is "under new management" now and things can only get better, but simply because they couldn't possibly get any worse. I think a couple nagging questions are left; is the FAA's house finally in order? Why would someone take such a worthless turd (the 500) and try to polish it up? Are they just trying to sell off the rest of the planes and then focus in on MX as was originally the plan? Do we have another convert in the VLJ paradigm?
Whatever the case, we have plenty of converts left in the industry, and plenty who are willing to give Eclipse and the FAA a pass on their stupidity and sloth.