Keith,

What was it that you did that got you expelled other than the issue you described here? I've met several Eclipse owners and they all seem like nice guys. I've read much of what is on their forum and it seems like everyone there is pretty supportive of each other. Yet, you and Theodore Wright have both had serious issues on eclipsejetpilots.org. Is the site administrators?

I have had Eclipse owners rave to me about One since Alan showed up but also speak glowingly of the company before that. Reading experiences like yours, where an outsider can't exactly understand the "whole story" there certainly is more discontent with the manufacturer than anywhere else. Cessna, Beech, Piper, Cirrus, Daher and Pilatus don't seem to have these problems despite an occasional grumble. And of course Mitsubishi's entire team is headed for sainthood...

Hey there... Good to see you on the Beechcraft forum, Ken.

Yes, Eclipses are great airplanes,



Warren

IT was The Decision of the board. All very nice guys as long as you have a 2.0 . They expelled all the guys who had 1.0 for one reason or the other

I'm sure that is NOT what Vern had in mind when he said "future proof", sticking various Garmin boxes in what little panel space you can find.

Redefine "success" as much as you want, but this is clearly not the original vision.

Mike C.

Well it was "almost future-proof" that Vern said. The plane already had multiple Garmin boxes in it when he said it, so your comment suggests unfamiliarity with the subject matter.

I don't think anybody believes aircraft will never need to have their radios and other electronics ultimately upgraded as the years go by--and it is, after all, pulling up on 10 years since the first Eclipse received its airworthiness certificate (hard to believe, but true). Heck, here's a nice old MU2 panel:



Lots of them have been upgraded to something newer and nicer than that one, and I don't see you grinding any axes over it. It's the way aviation goes, you know?

Ken

Thanks!

You still in the simulation business?

We're getting a good number of new owners lately, and a common request is for a desktop trainer to learn the IFMS system (regrettably, IS&S, unlike Garmin, does not produce a trainer for their panel products). Ever give any thought to revamping this very nice product of yours and including the latest aircraft panel behavior?--



I still use the simulator; works great! Thanks for making such a nice product.

Ken

What about "JT"? Did his plane get expelled?

I was a member of the eclipse flyers group for a while during which the likes of Theo had a plane. He was seriously at odds over the managment. And I will leave it at that. Great plane though. Just avionics and managment challenged IMHO.

Thanks!

You still in the simulation business?

We're getting a good number of new owners lately, and a common request is for a desktop trainer to learn the IFMS system (regrettably, IS&S, unlike Garmin, does not produce a trainer for their panel products). Ever give any thought to revamping this very nice product of yours and including the latest aircraft panel behavior?--



I still use the simulator; works great! Thanks for making such a nice product.

Ken

Because they are not condemned to have the original unicorn avionics like an Eclipse.

The plane wasn't designed to be "integrated" (or "closed" might be abetter word), so you can upgrade parts of it as you see fit, including having synth viz, ADS-B, weather, etc.

Mike C.

Agree, the MU2 was designed before the era of avionics integration. I've often thought it might be fun to be the curator of a historical aircraft myself, but I'd be more interested in something like this nice T2 Buckeye:



Ken

Cool stuff; I'll look forward to it.

Ken

... and here you are doing just that, making your outdated aircraft compliant with modern regulations.

What would I do with my airplane? Exactly the same, add some Garmins.

Welcome to the club.

Mike C.