Ken,

I appreciate your counterpoint to Ted's review of his Eclipse ownership experience. I think it's valuable for those of us with inquiring minds to be reminded that one person's experience can, in fact, be an outlier. Or it can be typical. Only as we have the opportunity to hear from more people can anyone make a realistically accurate judgement.

That said, Ted is pretty well known here and I think most of us doubt very seriously (well just flat don't believe it) that misbehavior on his part was the reason he is no longer welcome on the Eclipse board. But, in the end, it doesn't really matter because we also don't want spats from other communities to come here and pollute the civil discussions we have.

Please tell us more about your Eclipse ownership experience. That is something, like Ted's, that I think is interesting.

EAI will have to work with owners if they want to sell new jets.

Socata use to be single suppliers for ovhl of components and everything was sent back to the factory or overseas. Now that more aircraft are flying, TBMOPA as forced Socata to release Mx manuals to allow for 3 rd party overhaulers and that is helping to reduce operating costs. Airframe parts are expensive but not anymore than comparable aircraft and there is good worldwide dstribution. Bulbs are standard stuff and I can buy my tires were I want.
Maintenance cost is down with the new 200 hrs between inspections also.
Socata knows that if the aircraft cost too much to maintained it will cost them in sales of new aircrafts.

I see Eclipse owners stuck because of the low amount of airframes out there and the factory is keeping them hostage, not a good relationship with its owners and will cost them in new sales of aircraft in the futur.

Clearly you've spent no time on BeechTalk. Why do you assume all forums go the wrong way without censorship. That's totally not true. And as you can see, just because you censor over at the Eclipse board doesn't mean the info won't end up here and I promise it's much worse ending up on BT because everyone is here.

If Ted isn't being truthful, what's his motivation?

I can have my plane serviced anywhere. There's really not much to it. It has a PT6 and there are many, many PC12's flying.

As for "fair"……… "Fair" is where they ride the ponies

I purchase the "spinner to tail" warranty for about $15K every year. Covers just about everything but the PT6. I've had a ton of stuff switched out but my plane is extremely low time as the previous owner bought it and never flew it so I think most of the issues I had were because of it sitting around before I owned it. Nothing major though.

Is that a similar deal to Cesscom ?

Jason, here on BeechTalk we have rules very similar to those the Eclipse Owners Club has, among them are these:

"Personal attacks ("flaming") are not tolerated. Personal attacks are defined as any attempt to short-circuit the debate by diverting attention to the shortcomings or attributes of the other parties in the debate rather than their arguments. We encourage you to challenge other points of view but please do so in a respectful and thoughtful manner...."

Interestingly enough, Ted's original post that started his problems at the Eclipse group is still there. He pointed out that the key ingredient of the Eclipse Safety Enhancement Package is an anti-skid braking system that can be installed by the same supplier on other planes for around $25K and questioned why the whole package on an Eclipse costs $200K. I thought it was a good question and a valid point. The answer, FWIW, is that the Eclipse version includes software to integrate the brakes with Avio, a first-in-its-class autothrottle system, and a cool integrated multifunction standby unit:



...and of course it includes their profit, which one can begrudge them, but they need to make a profit, no?

Anyway, my point is this: Ted wasn't kicked off for pointing out that the brakes are available directly from the manufacturer for less or suggesting EAI is making too much money. That post is still right there on the Eclipse site. It wasn't censored; it was actually well-appreciated by other members. What's not there is some nasty stuff about one of the group's members--the nasty stuff had to be removed and I'm guessing maybe management decided so did Ted . I'll miss him; I enjoyed his contributions.

Ken

Sure. Bryan Merrill got it spot on, in my view. Eclipse is a fun, fast, economical jet. If the mission is 4 people 1000 nm or less, and you want to cruise above the weather in a quiet, vibration-free cabin without paying a whole lot, it's a pretty good choice. You can stick as many as 6 seats in an Eclipse, but with 4, it's really pretty capacious. The rated range (NBAA IFR 100 nm alternate) is 1125 nm, but of course nobody gets that in the real world.

Mine has been very reliable, very few problems over the 250,000+ miles I've flown it. The direct cost (fuel plus maintenance) is under $1.60 per nm, which compares pretty well with what I was paying when I flew a twin Cessna.

Downsides? The company is a bit monopolistic in its policies--presumably they're trying to harvest most of the parts sales and as much of the maintenance as they can. There is a certain overhead in maintaining the type certificate (engineering support and the like), and if we didn't pay it in parts pricing, we'd probably pay it in an annual fixed fee.

I looked at the prospect of getting a CJ1 before I took delivery of the Eclipse. That's a real nice plane, but you just can't run it for anything like the cost of an Eclipse; it's about twice as much per mile to operate as an Eclipse. Ditto a Citation I--it's even more per mile than a CJ1 and of course then you're talking pretty old equipment.

It's not for everybody, but in its niche an Eclipse is hard to beat.

Ken

Is that a similar deal to Cesscom ?

Ok, Ken, spill the beans, then... What nasty stuff? Ted has over 1,000 posts here, and he's been a total gentleman all this time. If you are going to throw accusations like this, you better back them up with something.

I never suggested EAI is making too much money. For all I know, they aren't making any money at all. Anyway, I am a capitalist by any definition of the word and I am all for them making money. I posted the information and asked the question, "If a third party vendor could make ASB brakes available for the Eclipse close to the price of the kits being offered for other aircraft, how many owners would be interested?" I was told that discussing the costs of sub components is 'not fair' to EAI, had my character questioned and was called a couple nasty names. My response was, "ignore me or exit the conversation if you don't like what I have to say." I was told that as a relative newcomer, I could not talk to a 'Lifetime member' like that.

That is now the third time in this thread I have explained what happened and believe it should be the last. It is simply not possible to have a fair and balanced discussion on the Owner's Club. Will they allow a small negative on the airplane or company to occasionally slip by? Sure, but it is still extremely one sided. I have an email list with about 30 owners who are afraid to make posts, not so much for fear of being banned, but for fear of being personally attacked by those who think Mason and EAI walks on water. I can't count how many times I have posted something to be told that I didn't know what I was talking about, or that I am obviously not experienced enough to draw that conclusion, or clearly I was just angry at the company so I was making things up. They wouldn't try to dispute the evidence, they just move in to attack the character of the person making the post. I am sorry, but I do not wish to be part of a community that plays by those rules.

And for the record to other BT'ers, Ken was one of my favorite members. He and I were in agreement on things far more often than I was with many of the other members .....

370 Knots TAS at 410 is not possible. That is inaccurate and misleading. Only when the temps are below ISA and you are below FL330 will you ever see those speeds, and the fuel flow will be closer to 65 gallons an hour.

In my opinion, mind you I don't fly the plane anymore, but after logging 600 hours in them, I have found that buying an eclipse is a crap shoot. About 1/3 of the owners say they don't have any issues with them, and maintenance is fairly straight forward, but from my experience better then 50 percent are not getting the same results. As a result it is very difficult to say how much it is going to cost to own an operate one.

They do fly nice, and it is very easy to become so enamored with the flight and fuel burn characteristics, that one loses sight of the big picture.

Lets face it folks, talking about your plane is like talking about your children. Even if it has issues, it is very hard to be objective.

TR's experience is exactly what I expected when I made my very first post to his eclipse type rating thread. I figured it was only a matter of time before major system components started failing, and eventually this would catch up enough to sour his experience.

His decision to purchase a Citation 500 I feel is not a bad choice at all.

He gets a "real jet" I.E. one that is certified to require balanced field length, and minimum single engine climb requirements, that is roomy and comfortable inside, and is also single pilot capable. He can buy new and used parts from just about anywhere around the country with out having to spend an arm and a leg, can have it serviced both scheduled and AOG maintenance at virtually any airport he lands at.

Down side, instead of block averaging 75 to 80 gallons an hour, he will be burning closer to 160 gallons an hour at the same speeds he has been going with the Eclipse.
But being his acquisition price was a cool 1 million dollars less then an eclipse, that sure leave a lot of room to buy gas for both his Citation and the L-39.

Good luck TR, I think you did the right thing

PC12 dont just get an annual like a Bonanza.
There is phase inspection and timed components on your PC12 just like my TBM.
Yours is probably too new and wont kick in until its 5-6 years old.
Maybe legally you dont need to do it because you fly part 91.
But... The new buyer will deduct all this defered maintenance when you sell it.




[/quote]

Is that a similar deal to Cesscom ?[/quote]
Not really. PC12 gets an annual just like a Bonanza. CJ's are on "phase inspection".

Mine is just a warranty for avionics and airframe and components. It's pretty good and cheap coverage. They've been very liberal in replacement with me.[/quote]

Agree you won't see 370 knots at FL 410, but I'm not sure he actually meant you get highest speed and highest altitude simultaneously. Like other jets, you get the best performance at lower altitudes and colder temperatures in the Eclipse. 370 knots takes the right conditions and those don't include FL 410. But lest we leave the wrong impression, 360+ knots true airspeed is really quite common for the plane without the benefit of either lower altitude or particularly cold temps:



[360 knots at 38,000 feet at ISA burning 60 gph]

People often ask why one would buy an Eclipse over a Mustang. This photo shows one reason: the Eclipse is consistently 20 knots or so faster than the Mustang. And the Mustang burns 35-40% more fuel mile per mile while going slower.

Ken

Ken,

How does the MX costs stack up between the Eclipse and the Mustang?

Tim

In that case, there are timed components on a Bonanza too. It's no different than my Bonanza. No, there is no 'Phase Inspection". It goes in the shop once a year for annual. All the newer aircraft do this. Every plane has timed parts like "prop overhaul".