Layoffs at Diamond - D-Jet Dead

Inverted said:
I am trying to find more info on it, but a modern Microturbo TRS 18-1-202 (used in the BD-5J) I would imagine it isn't completely destructive on fuel capacity as the BD-5 is pretty small.
Click to expand...

BD-5 endurance is pitiful with a turbine. It is actually a good example of the fuel consumption of turbine engines when you compare the different engine options.
 
bartmc said:
Beech isn't the reason Hawker Beechcraft is broke. They're broke becayse they have a lineup of jets that they can't give away. It's not a bad market, they just have bad planes.Folks building business jets that aren't 15 years behind the curve are doing just fine.
Click to expand...


No kidding. TKS on a midsize jet? Really? All the external doublers on the fuselage? The cockpit floors are a :mad2:. No baggage door? The wings skins are what?..bolted to the spars and ribs. Steel fasteners in countersunk aluminum holes primary structure.

How many of the 1000's and 4000's have they sold?

I guess if a guy loves to torture themself maintaining a Brittish engineering marvel is perfect :thumbsup:
 
weilke said:
From the clubs underground storage tank, with a pump.



Chicken-egg problem.



If we keep repeating this diligently, it may actually come true.

There are other boutique fuels and industrial chemicals available through the pipeline network. The biggest problem with Avgas is that it has to be shipped by rail or truck. An unleaded aviation gas product would not be subject to 100LLs distribution constraints.
Click to expand...
I think you make my point. Sure your club had a tank. For floating around your airport that's fine, but if you want to go somewhere you were out of luck

It's not chicken and egg. If you want to use your GA airplane for travel as opposed to hobby, you need to use a fuel that's available anywhere. Like it or not, that's jetA. No "boutique" fuel with or without lead will be practical. Commercial jetliners and the military use jetA. It's a losing proposition to fight this. Better to encourage companies to solve the problems of lower hp, lower altitude applications for kerosene. IMHO, of course.
 
bnt83 said:
No kidding. TKS on a midsize jet? Really? All the external doublers on the fuselage? The cockpit floors are a :mad2:. No baggage door? The wings skins are what?..bolted to the spars and ribs. Steel fasteners in countersunk aluminum holes primary structure.

How many of the 1000's and 4000's have they sold?

I guess if a guy loves to torture themself maintaining a Brittish engineering marvel is perfect :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Hawkers are hard enough to sell. The Premier and the 400A are probably the worst 2 Hawker/Beech aircraft in the jet market. They are so undesirable it is pathetic. The 400A got lucky and was bought up by the military for primary jet training.

Not sure about the 4000 as far as sales go but it is a nice aircraft. So is the 900xp. I see plenty of them around in my travels so they must be selling.

Which aircraft are you referring to that has TKS?
 
Inverted said:
Hawkers are hard enough to sell. The Premier and the 400A are probably the worst 2 Hawker/Beech aircraft in the jet market. They are so undesirable it is pathetic. The 400A got lucky and was bought up by the military for primary jet training.

Not sure about the 4000 as far as sales go but it is a nice aircraft. So is the 900xp. I see plenty of them around in my travels so they must be selling.

Which aircraft are you referring to that has TKS?
Click to expand...

700,750,800,850,900
 
bartmc said:
700,750,800,850,900
Click to expand...

Inverted said:
Hawkers are hard enough to sell. The Premier and the 400A are probably the worst 2 Hawker/Beech aircraft in the jet market. They are so undesirable it is pathetic. The 400A got lucky and was bought up by the military for primary jet training.

Not sure about the 4000 as far as sales go but it is a nice aircraft. So is the 900xp. I see plenty of them around in my travels so they must be selling.

Which aircraft are you referring to that has TKS?
Click to expand...

700,750,800,850,900---> That should say series ie even the XP's, the 125's etc etc.

Which most of them... I've only seen one 4000, and handfull of 1000's

Edit: and the 1000's are TKS.
 
Last edited:
Inverted said:
I was completely unaware. I figured it had heated leading edges like the rest.
Click to expand...


Easier to say ALL Hawkers, except the 4000's, the beechjets & Mitsubushi Diamond and the Premier, are TKS.
 
cirrusmx said:
I never understood the vlj. For that amount you can get into a more capable turboprop.
Click to expand...


I would disagree. The D-Jet was priced almost 400,000 less than a new Piper Meridian. A new PC-12 is probably close to a million more. Although I wouldn't put the PC-12 against any VLJ, they can be very competitive in the single engine turboprop space.
 
Inverted said:
I would disagree. The D-Jet was priced almost 400,000 less than a new Piper Meridian. A new PC-12 is probably close to a million more. Although I wouldn't put the PC-12 against any VLJ, they can be very competitive in the single engine turboprop space.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I liked the D-Jet because of the size
 
Inverted said:
Hawkers are hard enough to sell. The Premier and the 400A are probably the worst 2 Hawker/Beech aircraft in the jet market. They are so undesirable it is pathetic. The 400A got lucky and was bought up by the military for primary jet training.
Click to expand...

Nexant doesn't seem to be having trouble re-building 400's into 400XT's, which breathes a bunch more life back into the airframe.
 
Skylane81E said:
Yeah, I liked the D-Jet because of the size
Click to expand...
But its size is probably what hurts it in the market. They say it seats five but that back bench looks pretty crowded with three across. Also, when you are talking about business jets you usually only count the seats available for passengers, which means it would only seat three passengers comfortably, one in the right front and two in the rear. Any company looking at it would probably opt for a bigger cabin turboprop which would only leave personal buyers with small families.
 
Everskyward said:
But its size is probably what hurts it in the market. They say it seats five but that back bench looks pretty crowded with three across. Also, when you are talking about business jets you usually only count the seats available for passengers, which means it would only seat three passengers comfortably, one in the right front and two in the rear. Any company looking at it would probably opt for a bigger cabin turboprop which would only leave personal buyers with small families.
Click to expand...

You are correct, not much of a business machine, but I looked at it from a personal jet that I would be the one piloting.

Hey a guy can dream right?!:goofy:
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Nexant doesn't seem to be having trouble re-building 400's into 400XT's, which breathes a bunch more life back into the airframe.
Click to expand...


I've worked several Beechjets (Hawker 400A & XP) I didn't hate them...but the British (actual) Hawkers (700,750,800,850,900)...is another story.

Hawker = Coinslot headed fastener, and THOUSANDS OF THEM. :mad2:


The Hawker 400XP is really a Beechjet 400A which is really a Mitsubishi Diamond.


The Premier/Hawker 200 line is actually a Beechraft/Raytheon dream


The real Hawker line is actually Raytheon/British BAE/Hawker Siddley/de Havilland

A convoluted love story:goofy:
 
Skylane81E said:
You are correct, not much of a business machine, but I looked at it from a personal jet that I would be the one piloting.

Hey a guy can dream right?!:goofy:
Click to expand...
Yeah, it would be great for me too, but not very practical for most.
 
bnt83 said:
I've worked several Beechjets (Hawker 400A & XP) I didn't hate them...but the British (actual) Hawkers (700,750,800,850,900)...is another story.

Hawker = Coinslot headed fastener, and THOUSANDS OF THEM. :mad2::
Click to expand...
I flew an 800 for a while and I know the mechanics hated it. Then there was the TKS system...

Now I fly Cessna's answer to the Hawker (680) which is a big improvement, but it's much newer technology and design.
 
bnt83 said:
The Hawker 400XP is really a Beechjet 400A which is really a Mitsubishi Diamond.
Click to expand...

Yup. I've seen the actual Mitsubishi in the flesh, next to a 400A. Exact same airplane, just different name.

The Nexant 400XT looks like a good improvement on the airframe.
 
Everskyward said:
I flew an 800 for a while and I know the mechanics hated it. Then there was the TKS system...

Now I fly Cessna's answer to the Hawker (680) which is a big improvement, but it's much newer technology and design.
Click to expand...



Cessna are Cessnas. Some are easier to work than others, but they are all ok IHMO. 750's get confusing when trying to F/T stuff with half the electronics mssing, batteries etc, because the whole system is highly intregrated. I remember trying to F/T the standby rudder hydraulic pump with the ADC out, can't do it.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Yup. I've seen the actual Mitsubishi in the flesh, next to a 400A. Exact same airplane, just different name.

The Nexant 400XT looks like a good improvement on the airframe.
Click to expand...


Can't remember for sure but I think thrust reversers were optional on the Diamonds, different radios. Not sure about engines. The oxygen fill port is hidden on the 400A's and they fixed that with a dedicated quick access door on the XP's because Netjets wanting that way, so I was told.
 
The other thing I hated about Hawkers was they had thier OWN SIZE WRENCHES for fittings. Niether metric or standard wrenches fit correctly.
 
bnt83 said:
The other thing I hated about Hawkers was they had thier OWN SIZE WRENCHES for fittings. Niether metric or standard wrenches fit correctly.
Click to expand...
What I always heard from the mechanics was that to get to one part you had to remove others. Just looking in the hellhole it was stuffed tight compared to the 680 which is pretty empty.
 
Everskyward said:
What I always heard from the mechanics was that to get to one part you had to remove others. Just looking in the hellhole it was stuffed tight compared to the 680 which is pretty empty.
Click to expand...


:rofl: Yep, poor bastards. I was on a Hawker team for about 3 months before I nearly died, literally. Maybe life was trying to tell me something? :dunno:
 
bnt83 said:
:rofl: Yep, poor bastards. I was on a Hawker team for about 3 months before I nearly died, literally. Maybe life was trying to tell me something? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Lol, I'll stick with my piston planes thanks
 
bnt83 said:
The other thing I hated about Hawkers was they had thier OWN SIZE WRENCHES for fittings. Niether metric or standard wrenches fit correctly.
Click to expand...

Most likely Whitworth standard. You needed 3 sets of wrenches in Australia.
 
bartmc said:
Well, they're sort of selling them to themself. Their biggest customer is their CEOs other company.
Click to expand...

Interesting. It breathes new life into the 400A which is great. Existing owners have an option to revamp the aircraft. I only wonder if they can sell to new customers.
 
Inverted said:
Interesting. It breathes new life into the 400A which is great. Existing owners have an option to revamp the aircraft. I only wonder if they can sell to new customers.
Click to expand...

It seems like a decent route to go, if you want an entry level jet that's practically new. Buy the oldest, most clapped out 400A you can find, then take it to them, to bring up to 400XT standard.
 
Over the last 18 months I've flown a Hawker fairly regularly. Both 800 and 800XP. I feel I should uphold their honor because I think it's a pretty nice airplane. It's not the fastest or highest flying, but the range with its 10,000# fuel load is quite good. It's a nice flying airplane with straight forward systems.
I don't see the big deal with the TKS. The idea of an anti/deice system is to allow you to get out of the ice. By not taking thrust robbing bleed air to do this a TKS system has an advantage. From the pilot's standpoint you bleed it for a minute on the ground and turn on a timer if you need it. Simple.
I don't know about special wrenches. I'm sure you need them for a Hawker. But there's not any modern aircraft or car for that matter that doesn't require some special maintenance tools.
So quit knocking Hawkers.I'm greatly offended.:D
And btw the dispatch reliability, at least for the trips I've been on, has been 100%.
 
Last edited:
At what price?

KSCessnaDriver said:
It seems like a decent route to go, if you want an entry level jet that's practically new. Buy the oldest, most clapped out 400A you can find, then take it to them, to bring up to 400XT standard.
Click to expand...
 
Lance F said:
Over the last 18 months I've flown a Hawker fairly regularly. Both 800 and 800XP. I feel I should uphold their honor because I think it's a pretty nice airplane. It's not the fastest or highest flying, but the range with its 10,000# fuel load is quite good. It's a nice flying airplane with straight forward systems.
I don't see the big deal with the TKS. The idea of an anti/deice system is to allow you to get out of the ice. By not taking thrust robbing bleed air to do this a TKS system has an advantage. From the pilot's standpoint you bleed it for a minute on the ground and turn on a timer if you need it. Simple.
I don't know about special wrenches. I'm sure you need them for a Hawker. But there's not any modern aircraft or car for that matter that doesn't require some special maintenance tools.
So quit knocking Hawkers.I'm greatly offended.:D
And btw the dispatch reliability, at least for the trips I've been on, has been 100%.
Click to expand...


Start fixing them and get back to us. :lol:


TKS leaks, promotes corrosion, toxic and all over the damn plane, the hangar floor etc. :vomit:
 
bnt83 said:
Start fixing them and get back to us. :lol:


TKS leaks, promotes corrosion, toxic and all over the damn plane, the hangar floor etc. :vomit:
Click to expand...
Hey this is PILOTS of America. I'm allowed nonsensical mechanical comments on this forum.

As an observation I've seen a lot more of the problems you described caused by the stuff coming out of the lav than the TKS. Try to get the owners to give that up.
 
Lance F said:
Hey this is PILOTS of America. I'm allowed nonsensical mechanical comments on this forum.

As an observation I've seen a lot more of the problems you described caused by the stuff coming out of the lav than the TKS. Try to get the owners to give that up.
Click to expand...


Toilet is the dumbest device ever put into an aircraft... unless your a structural repair shop.
 
Lance F said:
Hey this is PILOTS of America. I'm allowed nonsensical mechanical comments on this forum.

As an observation I've seen a lot more of the problems you described caused by the stuff coming out of the lav than the TKS. Try to get the owners to give that up.
Click to expand...
Oh, the lav. That was another weird system with the "donut" and all. :D

The airplane flew just fine but it was a maintenance hog which is why the owner finally got rid of it. Lance, you are lucky with the 100% dispatch reliability. Our was not nearly that good.
 
Inverted said:
Acquisition price or upgrade price versus new purchase?
Click to expand...

Seems the nextant is a sign then fly proposition. You dont bring your own hull. The whole package is 4 mil. If you want to upgrade your rig, HBC has come up with the 400XPr. I'm sure nextant would work something out if you already had a 400a and wanted to spruce it up.
 
4 mil isn't bad I guess. But now that Beech has no support services offered for the 400 program, I wonder how desirable that option is.
 
Inverted said:
4 mil isn't bad I guess. But now that Beech has no support services offered for the 400 program, I wonder how desirable that option is.
Click to expand...

Beech said they wouldn't be providing any support for unapproved mods and called out the 400xt by name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top