Im rich, and I'm buying an Eclipse

zaitcev said:
A Gulfstream is not thinking big. Larry Brin bought himself a 767 for a personal bizjet. That may qualify for "big".
Click to expand...

It's Sergey Brin and Larry Page, but I guess the two are kinda inseparable. :wink2:
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Ben: I spend a lot of time looking into Eclipse; I'd lease, not buy :).

I have a 58P and was looking at upgrading and it's the size of my plane, same general range and payload with a reasonable price.

First, all planes are a trade off: range, payload, size, cabin class etc. all have advantages and disadvantages. A problem one has in posting on board where folks aren't flying the different birds is they mix them all together.

My six seat Baron has no potty and isn't cabin class. The trade off is it's more affordable, pressurized and a twin. I go a bit faster than the Cessna cabin class twin, but they may travel more comfortably as far as room and ease of access. The Eclipse is like a Baron with jets in that respect.

When one compares a King Air or Pilatus to a Baron (or Eclipse) they are comparing apples and oranges as far as acquisition and operating cost.

I really liked Eclipse but they have real issues; so, one has to decide if one wants to spend a lot of money AND have a plane with issues. That means down time, perhaps ADs, SBs, etc., a lack of service centers and question about future production and support v. a more proven plane where that isn't an issue.

I looked at a local Eclipse partnership and told the owner I would lease until the issues were cleared up, but not invest. Even if you get a new Total Eclipse jet, think about if they will be around, where service centers are and how much isn't proven. The first Citation jets had a bunch of ADs. Eclipse is still young. If you purchase an existing plane that needs the upgrades, you will have a lot of time spent working through issues and getting the plane to a service center for upgrades. I have an acquaintance with one parked in a hanger. (Neighbor of a close friend). He left it there and bought a Mustang. I'm sure you could buy it from him.

I really hope things work out for them. I'd really like to have that plane available without the big issues and have confidence in it's future support, but if I was paying over $2,000,000 (which is what you'll have in one with all certs and compliance with all AD/SBs), I'd rather spend it in a place where I had more confidence in their future.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

Well put, Dave. Every plane is a compromise. It's a question of which compromises work for you.

An Eclipse wouldn't do much good for puppy missions I suspect, but if someone donated one, I'm sure we'd figure out a way. ;)
 
The Eclipse is snug inside. For the right mission, though, you're not in it long enough to matter.

I still want a PC12.
 
I would probably buy an old military fighter. maybe an F5 or I heard the other day that someone just purchased a private ex-israeli de-militirized F16...all the thrust of the military version without the weight!! That would be awesome!
 
fastair5 said:
I would probably buy an old military fighter. maybe an F5 or I heard the other day that someone just purchased a private ex-israeli de-militirized F16...all the thrust of the military version without the weight!! That would be awesome!
Click to expand...
Does a demilitarized version still have the hydrazine-fueled emergency power unit? That could be problematic. Maybe without the ordnance you wouldn't need to worry about a hot brake landing, which could also be a problem.
 
Hey Ken...I know nothing about them. seems pretty unreal to fly though! Have you flown military fighters?
 
fastair5 said:
Hey Ken...I know nothing about them. seems pretty unreal to fly though! Have you flown military fighters?
Click to expand...
Just a P-51. Nothing more modern than that.

I'm doing some consulting work at an airport that has an active F-16 air national guard squadron, and the presence of hydrazine on board the aircraft and the potential for hot brake landings (from landing overweight) create some significant issues.
 
fastair5 said:
I would probably buy an old military fighter.
Click to expand...
L-39s seem quite popular. I just completed my PP long cross-country and saw 3 of them: one tucked in hangar at SKX, one at transient parking at SAF, and another landed at SAF. L-39 gives you all the performance of a 3gen..4gen fighter (except supersonic dash), but at much lover cost. No problem with factory support or spares.

Another realistic option is MiG-15, but that thing was out of production for 50 years. I do not know how the owners keep them flying still. Picture of one:
http://zaitcev.mee.nu/flying_santa_fe
 
Last edited:
zaitcev said:
Another realistic option is MiG-15, but that thing was out of production for 50 years. I do not know how the owners keep them flying still.
Click to expand...

You're kidding, right? You know what's in the toolkit of a MIG-15 mechanic? A hammer, a screwdriver, and a fifth of Stoli. Name ONE problem with a MIG-15 you can't fix with a combination of the threee....
 
Everskyward said:
I've noticed that even with fuselage mounted engines some jets have much more asymmetric thrust than others. I can't speak for either the Eclipse or the Mustang. Manufacturers use various methods such as rudder boost to dampen the effect. I have been told that there is a maximum amount of rudder pressure required during engine failure beyond which the aircraft cannot be certified.
Click to expand...

and I'm pretty sure the legacy Lears use every ounce allowed
 
flyersfan31 said:
You're kidding, right? You know what's in the toolkit of a MIG-15 mechanic? A hammer, a screwdriver, and a fifth of Stoli. Name ONE problem with a MIG-15 you can't fix with a combination of the threee....
Click to expand...
A fifth? So only one mechanic can work on it at a time?
 
flyersfan31 said:
You're kidding, right? You know what's in the toolkit of a MIG-15 mechanic? A hammer, a screwdriver, and a fifth of Stoli. Name ONE problem with a MIG-15 you can't fix with a combination of the threee....
Click to expand...

Gotta love Russian aviation.

"Yuri, how are we going to defeat the Americans with their technology?"

"Easy, Boris. They overthink everything. We'll get the biggest engine we can find and attach a pair of wings to it. We can make it out of whatever materials we find coming out of the mine. It will be easy and they'll think we have some secret technology."

Redneck engineering. People after my own heart.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Gotta love Russian aviation.

"Yuri, how are we going to defeat the Americans with their technology?"

"Easy, Boris. They overthink everything. We'll get the biggest engine we can find and attach a pair of wings to it. We can make it out of whatever materials we find coming out of the mine. It will be easy and they'll think we have some secret technology."

Redneck engineering. People after my own heart.
Click to expand...
What's the old space race story ... something along the lines of NASA spending a couple million to develop pens that would work in microgravity and the Russians just using pencils.
 
Ken Ibold said:
What's the old space race story ... something along the lines of NASA spending a couple million to develop pens that would work in microgravity and the Russians just using pencils.
Click to expand...

One may not like the Soviet Union, but I like the style of their engineers.

Then again, I have an affinity for big old tractor engines that make things go up in the sky and run on mechanical fuel injection and magnetos.
 
Ken Ibold said:
What's the old space race story ... something along the lines of NASA spending a couple million to develop pens that would work in microgravity and the Russians just using pencils.
Click to expand...

An entertaining story, but not true.

NASA and the Russians both started out with pencils - the problem with those is that when you break the "lead" you have nice conductive bits of graphite floating around in a weightless enviromenet surrounded by electronics...

NASA put out a spec. for what they wanted. A pen company designed the pen on their own dime and sold a bunch to NASA at $20 or $30 each. Then the Russians bought them too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top