Recently, Dave Stadt posted:

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"karl gruber" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...


BTW, an Eclipse 500 at SL will TO in 2297 feet, a King Air C90GT
in 2392 feet. The E500 has an IFR range with four occupants of
1,300 nm, the King Air has 931nm range. For landing, 2155' vs.
2355'.

In the six years I've had my B36-TN, I've had five of six seats
filled maybe ten times, and that was the whole family, nine of
those times. Last August, my wife and I became "empty nesters".


--
Matt

That's assuming the Eclipse will ever be built!

Besides not meeting their design goal it is just plane UGLY.

Their design goal was...what?

The initial design was based on an engine that didn't pan out. They
now must use a heavier engine which means nearly all their original
design goals are out the window.

I don't think this is an accurate statement. Their original objectives
couldn't be met with the new Williams engine that was under development,
true. However, their design goals have remained the same AFAICT; the
airframe is pretty much the same, the performance has improved, and the
price is still desirable to those who have purchased it in advance. From
where I sit, it doesn't look all that different from the introduction of
any other revolutionary aircraft. And, I really like the company's
attitude w/r/t training and purchase qualifications.

Neil