banner
banner

03 Mar 2021, 23:22 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Stevens Aerospace (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 20 Mar 2020, 22:42 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 11/22/12
Posts: 1726
Post Likes: +1355
Company: Retired
Aircraft: TN36, building Evo
Heard today that Epic laid everyone off this week.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 13:36 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 05/30/17
Posts: 92
Post Likes: +46
Unfortunately, that's the case. Details can be found here: https://ktvz.com/money/2020/03/20/bends ... urbulence/

Apparently the FAA has pulled back from reviewing the finished aircraft necessary to get the production type certificate; the company decided to furlough 300 people and keep a skeleton crew until the FAA gets back in the swing. Can't generate revenue without the ability to produce the aircraft in quantity. Hopefully the can weather the storm - I like the airplane.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 13:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 04/20/15
Posts: 238
Post Likes: +112
Location: KFAT
Man, that's terrible news. Those guys can't catch a break. They're owned by same group that owns S7 airlines and MROs in Russia--those can't be doing well right now either. What a curveball


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 22 Mar 2020, 12:09 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 03/09/11
Posts: 1513
Post Likes: +551
Company: Wings Insurance
Location: Eden Prairie, MN / Scottsdale, AZ
Aircraft: 2016 Cirrus SR22 G5
Not to make matters worse …but….The insurance market options for the E1000 are very very limited. As such anyone considering a position should be speaking with their insurance broker before they get too far down the path on a decision. Essentially only two underwriting companies at present will quote standalone single-ship policies as an owner/pilot would carry (pleasure and business use). The Epic LT has the same two options as well with approximately 40 ships insured worldwide. I just recently explored coverages for an early s/n prospect on an E1000 who was coming from an M500. Only two underwriting companies would consider quoting it (Great American and IAT) - and their premium tables were substantially higher than the rates he was accustomed to on the M500 (adjusted for approx. $1m variance in hull value). Premiums were 2.5 to 3X what he was paying on the M500.

Epic is going to face a daunting insurance obstacle as premiums for a $3m E1000 are going to be significantly higher than a comparable $3m TBM or $3m M600. The bottom line is similar class products from Socata, Piper etc (pre-owned in some cases to meet the $3m valuation) have a much broader underwriting market acceptance.

Frankly I don't see the Epic insurance landscape improving in the near future and until there is a significant amount of their production product in the insurance premium pool yielding very positive loss ratios for the carriers. Obviously it took a mountain of money and time to certify the E1000 so hopefully the latest setback coupled with the less than favorable insurance market acceptance won't railroad an otherwise great product.

_________________
Tom Hauge
Wings Insurance
National Sales Director
E-mail: thauge@wingsinsurance.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 22 Mar 2020, 12:48 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 1688
Post Likes: +1788
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
Username Protected wrote:
Interestingly, the Epic shut down and restarted within less than 10 minutes (seemed closer to 5). Do the Epics not have hot-start concerns for some reason?

hK


Carl, you should be able to restart in Meridian in 10 or even five minutes after shut down. You may need to use a dry motor technique, to bring the temps below 200, preferably 150, but it should start just fine With a good battery and proper fuel flows. Another reason to upgrade to that M600, Is that with the new Woodward FCU, you can start up right after shutdown, and not exceed. I see starts as low as 635° with a cool engine. About 130-150 cooler than my old M500 or even my last M600 with the old style FCU. ;-)

_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 22 Mar 2020, 16:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 04/20/15
Posts: 238
Post Likes: +112
Location: KFAT
Tom, we shopped for King Air 350 insurance last month and had (what I think is) a bad outcome with respect to availability and liability limits. Only two underwriters came back to us from something like 10.

It's a transition plane for us (no experience in type), but pilots are normal bill of health 2500+ hour ATPs. Some with not much ME turbine time, but still--hosed on our premium and lack of coverage.


Don't think this is a fun time for anyone transitioning, no matter the type. Can't imagine what it'd be like with write ups, prior claims, or any other dings


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 22 Mar 2020, 17:04 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 03/09/11
Posts: 1513
Post Likes: +551
Company: Wings Insurance
Location: Eden Prairie, MN / Scottsdale, AZ
Aircraft: 2016 Cirrus SR22 G5
Username Protected wrote:
Tom, we shopped for King Air 350 insurance last month and had (what I think is) a bad outcome with respect to availability and liability limits. Only two underwriters came back to us from something like 10.

It's a transition plane for us (no experience in type), but pilots are normal bill of health 2500+ hour ATPs. Some with not much ME turbine time, but still--hosed on our premium and lack of coverage.


Don't think this is a fun time for anyone transitioning, no matter the type. Can't imagine what it'd be like with write ups, prior claims, or any other dings


You are right - turbine transition insurance is tight but under $2m hull or thereabouts still remains decent capacity for 'reasonable' premiums.

The 350 is a little apple and orange with the Epic - twice the pax seats and type rating requirements. The insurers generally want to see 3000-4000 total time and 500-1000 turbine experience to garner more market interest in quoting a KA350 single-pilot. The KA is also not usually owner/flown - versus an Epic which is likely more than 50 percent 'owner/flown' - 1/2 the seating (ie passenger liability exposure) and for the LT all under $2m valuation. Most of those 10 markets you reference insure King Air 350's - just perhaps weren't interested in quoting your submission for one reason or another. The point being there are only 2 insurers in TOTAL quoting Epic's right now - 2 that's it regardless of if you are astronaut qualified :)

_________________
Tom Hauge
Wings Insurance
National Sales Director
E-mail: thauge@wingsinsurance.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 24 Mar 2020, 13:13 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 05/30/17
Posts: 92
Post Likes: +46
Tom (and Wings in general) knows what he is talking about. We just had Ryan Konrath at Wings help us get a renewal for our M600; we got a nice reduction (you heard me right) from last year's premium at the same limits and were able to get smooth coverage vs sublimits. But our hull value is just over $2 mm on our 2016 bird. And last year was our transition year/first year in a turbine and retract, both pilots on the policy are between 600-800 TT; the transition year is typically higher. Still it was nice to see that number go down ... but unfortunately, the other issue is liability limits.

I appreciate the insight into the Epic vs other SETP airframes in this insurance market. Love the plane and hope they can get everything back together.

The folks at Wings are superstars in my book - highly recommended!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 24 Mar 2020, 14:01 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 03/09/11
Posts: 1513
Post Likes: +551
Company: Wings Insurance
Location: Eden Prairie, MN / Scottsdale, AZ
Aircraft: 2016 Cirrus SR22 G5
Username Protected wrote:
Tom (and Wings in general) knows what he is talking about. We just had Ryan Konrath at Wings help us get a renewal for our M600; we got a nice reduction (you heard me right) from last year's premium at the same limits and were able to get smooth coverage vs sublimits. But our hull value is just over $2 mm on our 2016 bird. And last year was our transition year/first year in a turbine and retract, both pilots on the policy are between 600-800 TT; the transition year is typically higher. Still it was nice to see that number go down ... but unfortunately, the other issue is liability limits.

I appreciate the insight into the Epic vs other SETP airframes in this insurance market. Love the plane and hope they can get everything back together.

The folks at Wings are superstars in my book - highly recommended!


Thank you for the kind words Joel - re: Ryan in my office - much appreciated. As I have mentioned prior if you have an asset close to that $2m or under valuation or perhaps you have transitioned into a turbine over the last policy period - you have a better chance of securing a favorable renewal as opposed to that (plug in any $3m owner/flown single-pilot turbine) renewal and related capacity in the higher hull value arena. There are always some exceptions to the above as insurance is not one size fits all but by and large those in the turbine world flying assets in this class can still see decent overall capacity with minimal increases and reasonable first year insurance pricing (reductions in some cases).

I'm currently working with a Piper dealer on a pre-owned M600 valued in the low $2m range for a 425 hrs guy coming from an M350. Frankly I don't think his first year insurance will be as bad on the M600 as his first year insurance was on the 1.4m M350 18 months ago (when he had only 150 hrs total time). There are a few bright spots in an otherwise dreary overall insurance climate. :thumbup:

_________________
Tom Hauge
Wings Insurance
National Sales Director
E-mail: thauge@wingsinsurance.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2020, 13:18 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 01/23/13
Posts: 3989
Post Likes: +2080
Company: Kokotele Guitar Works
Location: Albany, NY
Aircraft: C-182RG, C-172, PA28
This lovely lady showed up at my home airport yesterday. When I only saw pictures I want sure I loved the look, but damn is she sexy in person.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2020, 03:21 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 04/20/15
Posts: 238
Post Likes: +112
Location: KFAT
Two fun updates:

1. RVSM substantiation runs are doable with GPS test equipment in cabin. No more tail cone and wiring, etc needed. Should simplify things quite a bit. Testing is a one day process flying around at a few different altitudes.

2. G3X panel just started going together. Finally, an AP that the plane deserves. Borrowed audio panel here and we're considering swapping the L3 ESI 500 standby for a GI 275 if it integrates well with the rest of the panel. Won't be thrilled going from 4 hours of standby time to 60 minutes. Would have been nice to reuse the G5, but it's max altitude is 30,000'. Hope to get RVSM done as soon as the panel is done.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2020, 15:20 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 11/11/17
Posts: 451
Post Likes: +533
Location: KOLV
Aircraft: A36, 767
Username Protected wrote:

1. RVSM substantiation runs are doable with GPS test equipment in cabin. No more tail cone and wiring, etc needed. Should simplify things quite a bit. Testing is a one day process flying around at a few different altitudes.



Is that a change? In 1996, we were using portable GPS units and flying over calibrated ground stations to RVSM certify our USAF KC-10s. I figure the only change in the last 24 years would be to get rid of the ground station requirement.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2020, 15:57 
Offline


 WWW  Profile

Joined: 08/24/13
Posts: 4275
Post Likes: +1518
Company: Aviation Tools / CCX
Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
Username Protected wrote:

1. RVSM substantiation runs are doable with GPS test equipment in cabin. No more tail cone and wiring, etc needed. Should simplify things quite a bit. Testing is a one day process flying around at a few different altitudes.



Is that a change? In 1996, we were using portable GPS units and flying over calibrated ground stations to RVSM certify our USAF KC-10s. I figure the only change in the last 24 years would be to get rid of the ground station requirement.


It is a change for GA/Commercial, in years past gps was just used for operational approval, airframe approval and SSEC curve development was still trailing cone.

I kicked off Duncan's RVSM program in 96/97. I proposed we use differential GPS with ground station reference, but got shot down, they went with the conventional trailing cone. I really wish we had used GPS.... but you still need accurate pressure readings at the altitude certified, my proposal included weather balloons with diff gps payloads.

The current cert still has to compare the aircraft being certified with other RVSM "targets of opportunity".

Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2020, 21:17 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 04/20/15
Posts: 238
Post Likes: +112
Location: KFAT
Username Protected wrote:

1. RVSM substantiation runs are doable with GPS test equipment in cabin. No more tail cone and wiring, etc needed. Should simplify things quite a bit. Testing is a one day process flying around at a few different altitudes.



Is that a change? In 1996, we were using portable GPS units and flying over calibrated ground stations to RVSM certify our USAF KC-10s. I figure the only change in the last 24 years would be to get rid of the ground station requirement.


It is. Originally we were planning on using a trailing cone. Unfortunately we didn't install the UHaul hitch receiver, so it was a little tricky to figure out where to mount it (the E1000 used Epic's own boom under the wing).

We still haven't done it yet, so things may change. We'll see!

Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the Epic LT
PostPosted: 27 Jan 2021, 12:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 1542
Post Likes: +250
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
Username Protected wrote:
I'm pressing on with figured out flight in RVSM airspace. I hadn't dug into the altimetry system error (ASE) piece of the puzzle because it smelled like it'd cost a lot. After communication with the FSDO and few dead ends, that clearly became the next hurdle.

Originally, I thought this would be a $100k+ test flight and a week's downtime flying around with a cone off the tail. Not fun and not worth it.

RVSM altitudes presented a few benefits in my view: 1. clearing weather, 2. extending range, and 3. getting in the way of everyone else

Still working out kinks, but it may be a fraction of my expected cost (still expensive, but something like ~$15k) and doable in a day. I got in touch with Aero Mech. They have authorization to issue RVSM STCs with their DER and do lots of work for OEMs and one-off projects.

They'll will supply substantiation for the plane's ASE monitoring. An Epic LT wouldn't need an STC since there's no TC to stick it to, so I literally just need to have paperwork checking ASE and the required training.

Overarching assumption is I meet part 91 appendix g requirements. I'd assume flight test will determine flight envelope min and max speeds.



The rest of my considerations laundry list:
1. better pilot/copilot o2 masks. TUC at 34k is 1/3 to 1/5 the time of 28k. Maybe a second bottle behind pilot/copilot seat? Plenty of room there.
2. revising the experimental type cert/POH to show a higher service ceiling. Right now it's 28000 because for RVSM
3. confirm cabin pressurization annunciation. We have an arduino display that shows red if cabin altitude goes over 10,000', and a CO guardian that displays a red "cabin pressurization" CAS on the G900X and a chime if over 10,000'
4. convert and calculate Mmo (.64 mach) to IAS for altitudes between 28000'-34,000'
5. Staying warm. ISA temps at 34,000 are in the mid -50 can be 10ºC colder
6. fuel temps. Don't have heated fuel
7. revised drift down time for in flight restart


34,000' comes to mind because that's what's being used in the E1000 program. Practically, I may not want to go higher, but it's interesting to consider the possibility.

Some cabin altitude figures:
-atmospheric pressure at 34k' ISA is 3.63 psi. With 6.7 diff P, that's a ~9500' cabin.
-A 10,000' cabin is ~35,300'
-A 12,500' cabin (9.16psi - 6.7 diff P) is... 42,000'? This is above the engine's service ceiling, way above my comfort level, and frankly, above RVSM altitudes. I don't want to be anywhere up there anyways with the stubby wings

This may all be pie (way, way up) in the sky, but still working through things.

Not sure how your heater system differs from mine in the Evolution, but I was flying home from Oregon at FL280 during the polar vortex from last year. My OAT was reading -63 C. I was plenty warm and didn't have fuel issues either.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next



Marsh Brothers Aviation (Banner)

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2021

.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.ForeFlight_85x200.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.instar.jpg.
.luminary-85x50.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.southseas-85x50-2021.png.
.dynon-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.EagleFuelCellsTriple.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.avidyne-85x50-2017-11-22.jpg.
.Microkit_85x50.png.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.
.Summit_Logo_85x50.png.
.greenwich-85x50-2020-08-10.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.westsky.jpg.
.echelon-85x50.png.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.rtc-85x200.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-01-11.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.airplanesusa-85x50.png.
.heartlandsm.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.Marsh.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.STLAir_85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.McPeck_85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.ps_engineering.gif.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.truecourse.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.methodseven-85x50.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.