The first couple times it happened, I threw a bunch of money at changing probes out. Then I realized it did nothing to actually fix the problem. It's just one of those things you have to live with ... Like several other issues, there is no correcting this.

I use the same approach also, im on my 6th upgrade.

Best back of the napkin approach I've heard is fillup cost. If you can fill the plane up and the cost doesn't register as significant - you're good.

Most logical comment I have heard in a while.

No matter how many engines you prefer.. ... ...

I like this approach.
I use the same one for car fill ups and grocery bills.
They don't register....
That's bad, isn't it.

I do too and that's my point. All this math and guessing and truth is I don't think anyone ever knows what it costs. You can't predict everything . I think it's a futile exercise.

You already have an expensive bird to run. But at least you know you can get parts etc… Second hand if need be. I'd be really wary of a low production run jet with no parts.

IMHO that's hogwash.

In 6 years of ownership, flying through all kinds of conditions, I've never seen a false stall warning. You've got an issue with the air data system--maybe it's a bad probe, bad ADC, an anomaly with the plumbing, a sneak leak somewhere, failure to comply with the probe AD (that could and did cause exactly this scenario in the past), or failure to completely drain the system and keep it from accumulating moisture (my money's on that one). Whatever the cause, you've got an issue with that airplane. Don't blame the design; ensuring the aircraft is maintained in an airworthy state is *your* responsibility.

Do you have any idea how galactically stupid you would look if you crashed the plane and somebody found out you'd had an air data failure on the previous flight that scared the hell out of you, but you decided it wasn't worthy of repair before further flight because you really wanted to get where you were going?

Ken

Ted has said above he has tried multiple things and spent $$$$ trying to fix it to no avail. You might fault him for continuing to fly the plane, but it wasn't like he didn't try.

Given all the variations/changes in the Eclipse line over such a short timeframe, it's also entirely possible that gremlins do lurk in some percentage of the fleet such that a single ship might continually have problems and another not despite both being maintained.

I do too and that's my point. All this math and guessing and truth is I don't think anyone ever knows what it costs. You can't predict everything . I think it's a futile exercise.

You already have an expensive bird to run. But at least you know you can get parts etc… Second hand if need be. I'd be really wary of a low production run jet with no parts.

Ken- your posts are reminding me how great it is to no longer be on the Eclipse owner's club board. Thanks for that.

1. It is not this plane. It was the 1.0, my current 1.5, and someone else's 1.5 I flew. All three aircraft, same issue. On two of them I have had pitot/AOA tubes replaced and the issue still was experienced at least once afterwards. You can believe it or not and I don't care. I know how defensive you guys are when someone tries to tell you that there are problems with Eclipse. 'Denial?' or 'Everyone's an advocate?' You guys all keep telling me that ANY issue I have just must be an isolated problem on that 1 plane. Keep thinking that if you like. It doesn't bother me.

2. What does bother me is that you have made several posts on this thread where you have completely fabricated things about me and questioned my character. I am getting really tired of reading these posts. I have never decided a repair wasn't worthy as you say. Anytime I have a problem, it gets looked at by a mechanic. However, I can only take my car to the mechanic for a check engine light and have them replace the same parts so many times without correcting the problem before I just accept the fact that I might have to deal with an occasional check engine light.

3. 'I need to get there' never comes into the decision making process for ANY of my flights. Never.

4. I don't get scared.

I agree that Ken is out of line.

Ted, you told us you flew multiple flights in which this serious issue occurred without getting it fixed. Now you're saying anytime you have a problem, you get it looked at.

You sound like you're deceiving yourself. If the plane's not airworthy, it's not airworthy no matter how inconvenient that might be for you. You aren't the only guy on this forum who had to track down a stubborn problem that wasn't fixed the first time the mechanic looked at it. If everybody took the approach that "I tried, but they can't fix it" and flew anyway, the already lousy general aviation safety record would become abysmal.

I wish you good luck finding an old vintage jet to buy that never has any issues that are tough to diagnose and correct.

Ken

It sounds like Ted is getting good at these air data computer problems. The eclipse SOP is partial pane and/or air data computer failures.

Ken ,

Your differential diagnosis left out one very probable cause. Software glitches are so common with anything that involves computers. They are unexplainable and unfixable by MIT grads. Do not get so hostile just because someone has had multiple failures and is now good at dealing with them. %#$@ happens, believe me, I know.

I could keep replying to your posts Ken, but there is no point. You are here to defend the jet and in doing so feel that you need to attack my credibility. I think everyone here 'gets it.'