Hawker Beechcraft's future.

[Flying Mechanic]

With no deal with China, and the Hawkers jets future production in jeopardy, what's people thoughts on the future for these jets?
Personally/ selfishly I hope the UK government buys the biz jet production line and brings it back to UK!!
I never flew Hawkers, but worked on Hawker 800's and found them good Aircraft and well built.
Hate to see a biz jet icon come to a end.

[stuckgear]

it's probably a good thing it didn't go to china...

however...
Aircraft maker Hawker Beechcraft outlines new bankruptcy plan | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/29/hawker-plan-idUSL1E8LTFFM20121029)


NEW YORK, Oct 29 (Reuters) - Aerospace manufacturer Hawker Beechcraft Inc on Monday unveiled a bankruptcy (http://www.reuters.com/finance/deals/bankruptcy?lc=int_mb_1001) exit plan that would give control of the company to secured creditors after a proposed sale to a Chinese firm fell through.

The Wichita, Kansas-based firm filed a disclosure statement in Manhattan bankruptcy (http://www.reuters.com/finance/deals/bankruptcy?lc=int_mb_1001) court revealing plans to hand 81.1 percent of its new equity to senior lenders, which include Angelo Gordon & Co, Centerbridge Partners, Sankaty Advisors and Capital Research & Management. The rest of the equity would go to senior and junior noteholders, according to the filing.

The move comes 11 days after Hawker's announcement that its plan to sell itself to China's Superior Aviation Beijing Co for $1.79 billion had fallen through. Hawker said at the time that it would pursue a backup plan under which creditors would receive equity and general unsecured claims would be canceled.

Hawker CEO Steve Miller said at an Oct. 18 conference that China (http://www.reuters.com/places/china)-bashing by U.S. presidential candidates may have contributed to the failure of the sale talks.

"Global politics may have interfered," said Miller, who had been in Beijing the previous week trying to sell the firm. Miller cited competing calls from Democrats and Republicans for toughness on China's currency policies.

The new plan should allow for Hawker to emerge as a standalone company in early 2013. The plan requires creditor and court approval, though Hawker said it already has the support of major creditors.

The company has said it would rename itself Beechcraft Corp and would likely get out of the corporate jet business (http://www.reuters.com/finance?lc=int_mb_1001), focusing on turboprop, piston, special mission and trainer/attack aircraft.

Owned by Goldman Sachs's private equity unit and Canada's Onex, Hawker went into a tailspin after the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent economic downturn. It filed bankruptcy in May with about $2.5 billion in debt, including roughly $1.8 billion under a senior credit facility.

[robbreid]

Sad side of a free market, equity funds can buy great companies, pocket millions, no hundreds of millions of real dollars - and leave a company with so much debt it drowns in debt.

Welcome to the world of hurt of Raytheon, Onyx, GS, and HBC - never mind the Hawker line has been shut down, workers have been laid off - how many Hawkers do you have to sell to service a 3+ billion dollar debt.

Never mind GS got over 10 billion in TARP funds all well destroying HBC!!, however there is zero chance the Hawker line will shut down.

A sales bluff to state they would shut it down, realistically, the 1.79 billion asking price is way to much, and buying it at that would only leave the Hawker line with an insane debt - where it already is.

At the same time, the line is worth hundreds of millions, and there is zero chance the new Beechcraft is going to walk away from hundreds of millions - in fact it'll be in the fine print of an approved bankruptcy - I doubt legally they could shut it down if they wanted to.

Anyway, it will sell, for whatever it is truly worth, six companies have bid on the entire HBC, and 'several' have returned to bid on the Hawker line. Rumoured are two Chinese groups, Nextant, Ford Motor, Cessna, and M&M India.

The Premier 1A/200 ???, Hawker 4000 ???, but the Hawkers will be fine.

Just my two cents.

[robbreid]

Reading from today's press reports from NBAA2012, Beech want to keep the Premier, stretch it, and put a single turboprop on the nose!!, for one crew and 8 passengers.

They have also applied to cancel all warranties on the Premier 1A and Hawker 4000 - (in a New York Court overseeing the bankruptcy).

If successful in coming out of bankrutpcy, the new owners are the previous lenders in HBC.

Stay tuned . . .

[hawkerjet]

It appears the Premier and 4000 will share the same demise that the Starship had. The 4000 took way too long to get to an already maturing super mid size market and when they finally made the party, the world economic crisis greeted them with open arms. While I'm no expert on the matter, the delay seems to have been caused by poor relations with the FAA and HBC.
While the HS-125 line is bulletproof, it is lagging behind new innovative clean sheet designs being offered by Embraer, Gulfstream* ( I know the 280 isn't clean sheet but very competitive with 4000) Bombardier and Cessna. I believe they will have a difficult time selling the Hawker line. Any prospective buyers may be interested in the carbon fibre technology which HBC possesses, but can't seem to capitalize on. Best of luck to all those who have lost their jobs or will be losing them.

[His dudeness]

The Premier lagged behind massively as well. On the 4000... my old boss had both on order, PRM1 and the 4000. They offered him an 800 as intermidiate solution with a fixed return price etc. He took that aircraft, flew it and when the initially agreed lease was over the 4000 still wasn´t certified. So he wanted to continue the lease, but HBC said 'no way'. The guy then cancelled the contract, bought a CL300. After having been a Beech customer for many years...several KA200, 350, a 400 and said 800 over more than 20 years. The PRM did not materialize 6 years after being ordered, so he bought a CJ2... if Beech worked like that with not just him, then I understand why they are going down the drain. The communication and customer support was also...sort of non existant. Cessna does a way,way better job in this respect.
I fly KingAirs since 1990 and I always loved the airplanes. Its a shame.

[gaunty]

Bankrupt business plan trying to keep warmed over 1962 type certificates going, why would you bother.


The saying that a Hawker is the fastest way to the nearest service centre says it all.

[fairflyer]

It's well worth someone picking up the design rights to the Hawker 125, with some 1500+still flying around and its structural integrity, they'll keep flying for decades hence.

As a (very) mature design the dispatch reliability for most other than the odd friday afternoon aircraft has been superb - that's why it's always been the best selling mid-size business jet all it's life, regardless of what Cessna or Lear or IAI/Gulfstream came up with.

The airframe and systems are indeed basic, but virtually indestructable - the legend is there forever about the Botswana 125 which had it's engine shot off by a sidewinder missile over angola whilst all essential systems remained in tact and the aircraft safely landed with a myriad of pipes coming out of the side and serious holes all over the cabin structure. It's the only jet I think that can still be flown with no electrical power up front at all. One could keep changing the engines and avionics periodically and the airframe would just keep going. The original design had a structural life well in excess of 100 years of intense, airline type utilisation. It is the proverbial brick out-house.

Someone could keep those flying for another 50 years with the tools and jigs to replace the odd component. Spares sales for a 1500 strong fleet of bullet-proof stand-up cabin, good range jets is going to reap tidy rewards for whoever picks that up.

One cannot say the same for the Premier and Hawker 4000 models however which are inevitably doomed and you'd be a brave person to take on the support of those.

[stuckgear]

Bankrupt business plan trying to keep warmed over 1962 type certificates going, why would you bother.




by that argument the 737-NG is also a 1960's TCDS, the next gens run under the same TCDS as the first 100 series, which of course was bastardizaion of the earlier boeing commercial jet.

[fairflyer]

The 'de Havilland Jet Dragon', as the HS125 was originally known, has a sort of Chinese angle to it - maybe they'll come back, pick up that model alone, re-name it the '125 Jet Dragon' and bang them out at half the cost Wichita ever could. A new 125-800/900 (and why not re-build the 1000 whilst they're at it) with a better wing, latest engines, avionics at say US$8-9m would wipe the floor in the value for money stakes with proven pedegree, loads of support infrastructure already globally etc. etc., masses of type rated pilots everywhere, loads of flight simulators.... Fuji Heavy Industries (Japan) could build the new wing which would make sense.

No-brainer. Trouble is, it was hard enough transfering knowladge and skills from Chester (UK) to Wichita when BAe flogged it. Doing the same again to China is a whole different ball-game.

It's all built by hand with quirky assembly requirements.

Ideally, fly them over green though to Little-Rock still and have those boys do the decent besppoke interiors, whilst more utilitarian 'standard' finish cabins could be completed in China.

The basic airframe is ideal for hard-working special variants in military or utility roles for several decades.

No doubt nobody will have the balls and the ambition in this economic climate though to take up what would be a massive, scary challenge.

And as for global ceertification requirements, that would just about kill anything dead with red tape and delays.

The Hawker 4000 was originally the Hatfield-BAe-developed 'NBJ' for which a fulll-scale mock-up existed 20 years before the wretched thing came out of production and certification. Almost as bad as Sweringen's SJ30 gestation period. Good aeroplane killed by ridiculous delays.

[sooty3694]

Twenty years ago the Hawker 800 was competing with the Citation 3. Those selling the Hawker had to deal with two objections. The internal baggage was a major disadvantage, and the TKS was a minor reason not to buy.

More recently HBC took a gamble on the 4000. Like many others before them, and since, it took a while to get to grips with the plastic technology, and the company paid dearly for it.

The vision of hindsight is always 20/20. With the benefit of it perhaps they would have been better off concentrating on improving the 125 to circumvent the only two reasons not to buy. In every other respect the airplane is pretty much bullet proof. The fact that it has remained in production since the late sixties is a testament to a design that was right in so many respects, and like the 737 I have a feeling that it is not yet ready for the graveyard. It is a strong and robust airplane that you can fill with pax and fuel, and distribute them just about any way you please. It will work well in any environment, including a war zone (as was proved when it landed in one piece after having an engine shot off) and if there is ever a reason or need to fly through a storm, a Hawker is the airplane to do it in. If I had to, I would do it every day - it it is built like a brick sh1t house, and the only way to break a Hawker is to hit terrain extremely hard!


My hopes and expectations are that it will survive, and perhaps get a make over. Hawker Pheonix would be a good name, and it would come with an incredible heritage and strength of character.

[His dudeness]

More recently HBC took a gamble on the 4000. Like many others before them, and since, it took a while to get to grips with the plastic technology, and the company paid dearly for it.

Which makes one wonder if they ever learn? They paid more than dearly on the Starship way before they started the Premier and then the 4000 (or Horizon as it was called in its early days...) And comparing the numbers, I don´t really see the advantage of the plastic.

[gaunty]

Desperate times usually mean desperate measures.

Rolled the dice twice, crapped out. Smart money moves on. :E

[sooty3694]

Yes, agreed. However the Starship project was not one of HBC's.

[His dudeness]

However the Starship project was not one of HBC's.

You mean because it was Beechcrafts? Then the 4000 and the PRM1 were 'Raytheons' projects...

[LGW Vulture]

Beechcraft emerges from Chapter 11 - without the Hawker name as previously advised.

http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/BeechcraftSplashImages/News_Release_Chapter_11_Emergence_FINAL.pdf

I wonder what will happen to the Service Centres?

[Evanelpus]

Whats outrageous is the way that this fantastic brand, riCh in heritage and achievement has been driven into the ground and plundered for cash year after year.

You of all people should know that a fantastic brand and rich heritage counted for nothing when it was BAe/Corporate Jets/Raytheon. Talk about heritage and look at the way Hatfield was summararily dismissed for the price of aggregate and then land price.

Beechcraft emerges from Chapter 11 - without the Hawker name as previously advised.

I was amazed it took the Yanks this long to get rid of the Hawker name.