Eclipse announces the Eclipse 400

Teller1900

Teller1900

En-Route
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,644
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
I am a dad!
Sorry if this has been posted already...

Eclipse Aviation Introduces Eclipse 400 Single-Engine Jet

Eclipse website said:
The four-occupant Eclipse 400 jet cruises safely at 41,000 feet, or three miles above its closest competition. It will feature the most sophisticated flight deck and complete aircraft integration available in general aviation. Its robust V-tail design provides superior handling and it is powered by the Pratt & Whitney Canada PW615F, delivering unrivaled fuel economy.

The Eclipse 400 is priced at $1.35 million in June 2008 economics. Similar, single-turbine engine aircraft range from seven to 107 percent more expensive than the Eclipse 400. Deliveries for the Eclipse 400 are expected to begin in 4Q 2011.
Click to expand...
E400.jpg
 
Robust V-tail? Did that come out of Beech marketing materials????:D
 
Another proposal? Where's the delivery promised on the 500?
 
It will feature the most sophisticated flight deck and complete aircraft integration available in general aviation
Click to expand...

Given that the avionics in the Eclipse 500 are so crippled it's barely possible to navigate, I'd say they've got a long ways to go in this department.
 
lancefisher said:
Given that the avionics in the Eclipse 500 are so crippled it's barely possible to navigate, I'd say they've got a long ways to go in this department.
Click to expand...

Sorry Lance, but that just struck me as really funny...it's aviation smack talk - "Oh ya, well, your avionics are so crippled, you're barely able to navigate!"

Anywho, back to the thread at hand.
 
flyersfan31 said:
Robust V-tail? Did that come out of Beech marketing materials????:D
Click to expand...
Probably. Did you know that most Beech V-Tails are utility category airplanes? 4.4Gs? Quite a bit stronger than any direct competitor I can think of.
 
sba55 said:
Probably. Did you know that most Beech V-Tails are utility category airplanes? 4.4Gs? Quite a bit stronger than any direct competitor I can think of.
Click to expand...

Not that you're biased, right Felix?? :goofy::no:
 
Loss of that single engine at 41k is really going to hurt your ears.

I'll be interested to see how the pressurization problem is fixed/worked around.

Looks to be a really neat airplane, too bad I'll never be able to afford one!
 
infotango said:
Loss of that single engine at 41k is really going to hurt your ears.

I'll be interested to see how the pressurization problem is fixed/worked around.

Looks to be a really neat airplane, too bad I'll never be able to afford one!
Click to expand...
Certification above 25,000 feet requires a second source of pressurization. I don't know how Eclipse handles that. I'm flying a 500 in a couple weeks and I'll try to find out then how the single handles it.

My personal bias is that single engine above 25K is probably not a good idea. Well, physiologically maybe 30, but the certification requirements to go higher than 25K add so much weight and complexity that you might as well just go whole hog and spring for a second engine.
 
lancefisher said:
Given that the avionics in the Eclipse 500 are so crippled it's barely possible to navigate, I'd say they've got a long ways to go in this department.
Click to expand...
Eclipse says adding the Garmin 400s completes the avionics installation on the 500. It's not a stopgap; they no longer intend to further integrate the avionics. My guess is that they won't spend the development bucks to do it in the single either, but just use the same solution they use in the 500.
 
Ken Ibold said:
Eclipse says adding the Garmin 400s completes the avionics installation on the 500. It's not a stopgap; they no longer intend to further integrate the avionics. My guess is that they won't spend the development bucks to do it in the single either, but just use the same solution they use in the 500.
Click to expand...

When you fly the Eclipse ( I assume the twin) be sure to ask how long one has to idle the plane to recharge the batteries before departure if an APU isn't available (battery start). Also, what happens to the FADEC when there is a full electrical failure (and there is no way to turn off the fuel or adjust the throttle.). I can send you some more info on this if you want it.

I think you'll find this to be---entertaining.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
When you fly the Eclipse ( I assume the twin) be sure to ask how long one has to idle the plane to recharge the batteries before departure if an APU isn't available (battery start). Also, what happens to the FADEC when there is a full electrical failure (and there is no way to turn off the fuel or adjust the throttle.). I can send you some more info on this if you want it.

I think you'll find this to be---entertaining.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
I never thought about FADEC with regard to turbine control. Now, I'm very curious.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
When you fly the Eclipse ( I assume the twin) be sure to ask how long one has to idle the plane to recharge the batteries before departure if an APU isn't available (battery start). Also, what happens to the FADEC when there is a full electrical failure (and there is no way to turn off the fuel or adjust the throttle.). I can send you some more info on this if you want it.

I think you'll find this to be---entertaining.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

You may be alluding to some information that you are already aware of so I will keep this brief. Do share if you have something. The FADEC's on the airplane I fly are powered by PMAs or Permanent Magnet Alternators. The PMA's are capable of powering the FADECs in the event of a total electrical failure including the batteries going dead. I would imagine that they developed some sort of similar system.
 
Hope they put a regular throttle in it. By my recollection, it had some sort of rotary knob that looked gimmicky. Otherwise...I lust for an eclipse 400....and the money to afford it!

I keep my freebie V-tailed Eclipse hat at my desk at work...
 
KennyFlys said:
I never thought about FADEC with regard to turbine control. Now, I'm very curious.
Click to expand...
FADEC is basically the brains of the engine and it's totally dependent on electrons. I recently was talking to a mechanic who said he was amazed when he first saw throttles being taken out of an airplane with FADEC. There were no cables or linkages, only cannon plugs. Like Auburn CFI, the airplane I fly now has permanent magnet alternators to supply electrical power to the FADEC once the engine is running.
 
I saw this plane fly at Oshkosh last year. Very snappy flying bird from my vantage point on the ground. Software has been the bugger of Eclipse for the past year or so. Funny and not at all surprising since it's an ex-Microsoft techie's money that started it.
 
These two lines are rather disconcerting...

a. Engine control is lost
b. Engine shut-off capability is lost
Click to expand...
So, what do you do then? Simply fly it and hope the fuel runs out about the time you want to land and dead stick it down to the runway?

Why design a system that does not provide for backup power from a cruise altitude down to landing? I'm confused.
 
KennyFlys said:
So, what do you do then? Simply fly it and hope the fuel runs out about the time you want to land and dead stick it down to the runway?

Why design a system that does not provide for backup power from a cruise altitude down to landing? I'm confused.
Click to expand...

Is there a mechanical (e.g., non-electric) way to dump or cut-off fuel? What a scary concept... kill the fuel and turn it into a big glider at FL410 because the electrical system popped off.

Does the Eclipse have an in-flight deployable generator?

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
astanley said:
Is there a mechanical (e.g., non-electric) way to dump or cut-off fuel? What a scary concept... kill the fuel and turn it into a big glider at FL410 because the electrical system popped off.

Does the Eclipse have an in-flight deployable generator?

Cheers,

-Andrew
Click to expand...
I don't think you want to cut off the engine that high. What's gonna pressurize the cabin? Hopefully, you're already on a pressurized oxygen supply.
 
I was told the emergency procedure is to fly until fuel is exhausted; then, glide it. Obviously, one would want to get near and airfield at below 12,000 feet when the plane ran out of fuel for the reasons you state.

Best,

Dave
 
Ken Ibold said:
Certification above 25,000 feet requires a second source of pressurization. I don't know how Eclipse handles that. I'm flying a 500 in a couple weeks and I'll try to find out then how the single handles it.

My personal bias is that single engine above 25K is probably not a good idea. Well, physiologically maybe 30, but the certification requirements to go higher than 25K add so much weight and complexity that you might as well just go whole hog and spring for a second engine.
Click to expand...
That would be very interesting to find out Ken. I can't imagine that they would limit the thing to 25K, although I'd bet that ATC wouldn't mind if they did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top