Eclipse 500
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eclipse 500
Anybody flown one of these yet?
Do tell if you have as I am being sorely tempted to put a deposit down and need some negative info to balance out the rave review I just read.
(My wife would like you to be as negative as possible so she can spend the money on shoes and handbags instead).
SB
Do tell if you have as I am being sorely tempted to put a deposit down and need some negative info to balance out the rave review I just read.
(My wife would like you to be as negative as possible so she can spend the money on shoes and handbags instead).
SB
Eclipse
Where did you read the review? Do you have a link?
The biggest question is the performance figures are not yet available. Load\range\speed make or break the plane and so far they are not being circulated.
I heard they are requiring a negligence waiver from the buyer and the buyers insurance to Eclipse, which sound pretty strange.
Your wife will have to buy a lot of shoes to equal the cost of that puppy.
20driver
The biggest question is the performance figures are not yet available. Load\range\speed make or break the plane and so far they are not being circulated.
I heard they are requiring a negligence waiver from the buyer and the buyers insurance to Eclipse, which sound pretty strange.
Your wife will have to buy a lot of shoes to equal the cost of that puppy.
20driver
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Alba sor
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The review I read was also very complementary, first ones being delivered next week to an air taxi outfit in California (I think).
My question is, (cant remember from the flight test article) is it single pilot? If so it must be like your own private fighter jet....
My question is, (cant remember from the flight test article) is it single pilot? If so it must be like your own private fighter jet....
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First ones are being delivered right about now, so no one other than an Eclipse Test pilot would be able to answer your question. Beautiful machines, oh and good luck you filthy rich 
(Sorry )
And if you need anyone to fly it for you....
(Sorry )And if you need anyone to fly it for you....
The best advice is to seek proper advice from a professional who can asses the detailed specification and your needs. Get a proper proposal made up so that you can make a reasoned decision.
Regards
MM
Regards
MM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rave review was in Flyer magazine (UK) November edition, www.flyer.co.uk
6 testbed aircraft are currently flying with eclipse test pilots however aviation journos are starting to be let loose on the aircraft.
We will hopefully get some more flight reviews to chew over soon.
It is single pilot approved.
Performance data is what I was looking for.
First available delivery date for an aircraft ordered now is last qtr 2008.
2000+ deposits down so far.
Sorely tempted,
SB
6 testbed aircraft are currently flying with eclipse test pilots however aviation journos are starting to be let loose on the aircraft.
We will hopefully get some more flight reviews to chew over soon.
It is single pilot approved.
Performance data is what I was looking for.
First available delivery date for an aircraft ordered now is last qtr 2008.
2000+ deposits down so far.
Sorely tempted,
SB
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Marriotts & Hiltons
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't believe the hype, there are some real problems with this aircraft with some big obstacles to overcome before deliveries can really begin. http://eclipseaviationcritic.********.com/
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eclipse 500 reality check
Thanks DA, That's just what I needed to balance all the advertising hype.
I'll be waiting and watching prior to putting down a deposit,
SB
I'll be waiting and watching prior to putting down a deposit,
SB
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pergatory
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a side note: I got to see the airplane at NBAA and was surprised at how small it is. The cabin volume is about 15-20% smaller than what I had thought based on pictures.
"The INTRODUCER"
Eclipse flight test
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Marriotts & Hiltons
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From AIN
Eclipse Comes Clean on Confounding Problems
Eclipse Aviation is facing further issues in its effort to begin deliveries of its very light jet and sent a 12-page letter to customers November 14 outlining wing-attach fitting and cockpit window cracking problems. Following receipt of FAA type certification on September 30, Eclipse has yet to deliver its first airplane but expects to do so within days, president and CEO Vern Raburn told AIN. The limited functionality of the Avidyne avionics is not causing the delay, he added. The primary cause is that Eclipse is working to obtain FAA production certification by year-end, and the agency is inspecting freshly produced Eclipse 500s with a view toward conforming with production certification requirements. Raburn added that flight-test airplanes have a “no-flight limitation” while an incorrectly installed wing aft attach fitting bushing is modified. “We have found no evidence of this condition on production aircraft,” the customer communication stated. Prematurely cracking cockpit windshield and side windows caused Eclipse to issue new inspection and replacement intervals of 50 and 100 flights, respectively, for windshields and 50 and 250 flights for cockpit side windows. Eclipse is working on a fix to bring those intervals back to normal levels.
Eclipse Aviation is facing further issues in its effort to begin deliveries of its very light jet and sent a 12-page letter to customers November 14 outlining wing-attach fitting and cockpit window cracking problems. Following receipt of FAA type certification on September 30, Eclipse has yet to deliver its first airplane but expects to do so within days, president and CEO Vern Raburn told AIN. The limited functionality of the Avidyne avionics is not causing the delay, he added. The primary cause is that Eclipse is working to obtain FAA production certification by year-end, and the agency is inspecting freshly produced Eclipse 500s with a view toward conforming with production certification requirements. Raburn added that flight-test airplanes have a “no-flight limitation” while an incorrectly installed wing aft attach fitting bushing is modified. “We have found no evidence of this condition on production aircraft,” the customer communication stated. Prematurely cracking cockpit windshield and side windows caused Eclipse to issue new inspection and replacement intervals of 50 and 100 flights, respectively, for windshields and 50 and 250 flights for cockpit side windows. Eclipse is working on a fix to bring those intervals back to normal levels.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Marriotts & Hiltons
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From AIN online Alert
Eclipse’s Relationship with Avidyne Terminated
VLJ developer Eclipse Aviation announced last week that its relationship with avionics supplier Avidyne has ended. Eclipse plans to announce shortly which companies will supply components for the Model 500’s Avio integrated avionics system. AIN has been told by a source close to the process that Honeywell will be sharing the job with another specialist, thought to be Innovative Solutions & Support (IS&S). Also, the FAA Flight Standardization Board (FSB) this week released its draft Eclipse 500 report, which specifies “master training, checking and currency requirements applicable to flight crews.” Certain mandatory training prerequisites include studying jet operations and single-pilot resource management; a Myers-Briggs type indicator test complete with a psychologist’s review of the results; and emergency procedures training (physiological and hypoxia training and upset training in Eclipse’s L-39 jet training airplane). All Part 91 pilots will be required to participate in Eclipse’s mentoring program. The FSB report noted that the FAA considers the Eclipse a centerline-thrust twin “since no VMC speed is published,” and pilots who are not multiengine rated will have a limitation placed on their type rating specifying centerline thrust only.
VLJ developer Eclipse Aviation announced last week that its relationship with avionics supplier Avidyne has ended. Eclipse plans to announce shortly which companies will supply components for the Model 500’s Avio integrated avionics system. AIN has been told by a source close to the process that Honeywell will be sharing the job with another specialist, thought to be Innovative Solutions & Support (IS&S). Also, the FAA Flight Standardization Board (FSB) this week released its draft Eclipse 500 report, which specifies “master training, checking and currency requirements applicable to flight crews.” Certain mandatory training prerequisites include studying jet operations and single-pilot resource management; a Myers-Briggs type indicator test complete with a psychologist’s review of the results; and emergency procedures training (physiological and hypoxia training and upset training in Eclipse’s L-39 jet training airplane). All Part 91 pilots will be required to participate in Eclipse’s mentoring program. The FSB report noted that the FAA considers the Eclipse a centerline-thrust twin “since no VMC speed is published,” and pilots who are not multiengine rated will have a limitation placed on their type rating specifying centerline thrust only.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: In The Ether
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like...
The same syndrome with the Premier 1 to me, Sounds good on all the marketing spiel but when it comes down to physical aircraft performance when planning things are starkly different!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: London ( once in a while )
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly, correct
Nope, Phil in a word it can't. The EASA is 'most unlikely' to approve these VLJs single pilot Commercial operation in the near or distant future.
Eclipse is having problems with loading/weight and balance envelope and range, and this could impact heavily on operating targets for the proposed US 'Air Limmo' services.
My company did a feasibility study on this exact issue for a group of EU based investors, and with the profit layers required and their proposed price point we had to advise then ( with a heavy heart ) to walk away from the project even before they got started.
I'm sure that if the issues with training and the avionics suite ever get fully resolved, the Eclipse could prove to be a good owner flown ship, but likely only that.
Eclipse is having problems with loading/weight and balance envelope and range, and this could impact heavily on operating targets for the proposed US 'Air Limmo' services.
My company did a feasibility study on this exact issue for a group of EU based investors, and with the profit layers required and their proposed price point we had to advise then ( with a heavy heart ) to walk away from the project even before they got started.
I'm sure that if the issues with training and the avionics suite ever get fully resolved, the Eclipse could prove to be a good owner flown ship, but likely only that.
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: unknown
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has only been well over a decade and I have finally started reading the Eclipse Critic site. It is quite interesting. Regarding the post above and for a little history, just in case that website ever disappears....
"EAC cannot help themselves with their duping of the public, take the delivery of SN-1. This plane has not been delivered to the owner, yes he took the keys, and has done some flying in the plane, but Eclipse is still crewing and maintaining the aircraft. Why? Well the plane would not be accepted by anyone in it's current state. The avionics has limited functionality, there is no DME, there is no RVSM, the mods are not complete, and yes there are a couple of other items like the plane needs to travel with a mechanic because the FAA has mandated that the spar needs to be inspected once a day to ensure that there is no movement of the rear attachment bushing. Shocking isn't it, and I am sure that we will have some of the usual detractors step up and deny this is the situation, but I have one challenge to those that do this, get EAC to deny that publicly that any of the above is not true….
So the point is EAC delivered this one plane with all of these limitations just to say they delivered a plane in 2006. The others won't be delivered for some time yet, there is a lot of work on the PC and other issues to be resolved yet.
I am told that the problem with the rear attach bushing was a little bigger problem than what EAC has let on. Apparently the rear attach mount for the wing is part of the rear bulkhead, which of course is friction stir welded to the entire fuselage section, including the aft of the pressure vessel. The problem was not the sighting of the hole that caused the problem, it was the dimension of the rear attach mount that was wrong, and the bushing which is a tight tolerance fit did not fit properly. The correction to this would have been the installation of a new bulkhead, but this could not be achieved because this is a integral part of the airframe that is friction stir fried in place, it would have been easier to scrap the airframe than change this out. EAC then came up with another fix to get a bushing to fit the oversize attach point, it is for this reason that there is a requirement for a daily inspection of this 'fix'. So again this company tries to hoodwink the world that they are transparent and are doing everything that way they should but they are duping the public and their shareholders by not being forthright with them. Remember the story when this bushing problem became evident to EAC, they lied to the public by announcing that EAC would not attend the AOPA in PSP because they were concentrating on getting the certification on the plane which was imminent, and this was the reason that they were not going to be at AOPA."
"EAC cannot help themselves with their duping of the public, take the delivery of SN-1. This plane has not been delivered to the owner, yes he took the keys, and has done some flying in the plane, but Eclipse is still crewing and maintaining the aircraft. Why? Well the plane would not be accepted by anyone in it's current state. The avionics has limited functionality, there is no DME, there is no RVSM, the mods are not complete, and yes there are a couple of other items like the plane needs to travel with a mechanic because the FAA has mandated that the spar needs to be inspected once a day to ensure that there is no movement of the rear attachment bushing. Shocking isn't it, and I am sure that we will have some of the usual detractors step up and deny this is the situation, but I have one challenge to those that do this, get EAC to deny that publicly that any of the above is not true….
So the point is EAC delivered this one plane with all of these limitations just to say they delivered a plane in 2006. The others won't be delivered for some time yet, there is a lot of work on the PC and other issues to be resolved yet.
I am told that the problem with the rear attach bushing was a little bigger problem than what EAC has let on. Apparently the rear attach mount for the wing is part of the rear bulkhead, which of course is friction stir welded to the entire fuselage section, including the aft of the pressure vessel. The problem was not the sighting of the hole that caused the problem, it was the dimension of the rear attach mount that was wrong, and the bushing which is a tight tolerance fit did not fit properly. The correction to this would have been the installation of a new bulkhead, but this could not be achieved because this is a integral part of the airframe that is friction stir fried in place, it would have been easier to scrap the airframe than change this out. EAC then came up with another fix to get a bushing to fit the oversize attach point, it is for this reason that there is a requirement for a daily inspection of this 'fix'. So again this company tries to hoodwink the world that they are transparent and are doing everything that way they should but they are duping the public and their shareholders by not being forthright with them. Remember the story when this bushing problem became evident to EAC, they lied to the public by announcing that EAC would not attend the AOPA in PSP because they were concentrating on getting the certification on the plane which was imminent, and this was the reason that they were not going to be at AOPA."
