>>While I'll never be able to afford one, the Eclipse project is a radical reduction in cost for small business jets.<<
I suspect that on looking at the Eclipse 500, most people’s initial intuition is to make comparisons with other small corporate jets, and it just doesn’t measure up. The proper comparison is with piston engine twins like the Beech Baron or Cessna 300 series aircraft because of selling price and number of seats. Who in his right mind would buy a new B. Baron when they could get the safety, comfort and speed of a small jet?
Back when the first Cessna Citations appeared on the scene everyone, including me, thought gosh what a dog compared to a Lear jet or any of the others. But the Citation soon proved itself valuable in other ways such as shorter runway requirements and much easier to fly.

>>Tom, I remember the Fox Jet very well. I saw their mockups at Oshkosh back in the late 1980s. Interestingly enough, they were also supposed to be powered by small Williams turbofan engines.<<
Larry I’d almost forgotten about the Fox Jet. Also don’t forget about the Safire jet being developed in West Palm Beach (www.safireaircraft.com). I’m not nearly as optimistic though about Safire but it is a good looking airframe.

>>I don't know how much growth potential was engineered into the Eclipse for things like increased fuel capacity. The current specs call for a 4700 pound takeoff weight and an empty weight of 2700 pounds, leaving a useful load of 2000 pounds. Full fuel is 1330 pounds, so that only leaves you with 670 pounds for passengers. Unless they can increase the useful load, there's little margin for increasing the fuel capacity.<<
I too would like to see better numbers in the weight department. But the fact of the matter is there are darn few aircraft that allow you to fill all of the seats and the fuel tanks at the same time.

I’m so impressed when a guy like CEO Vern Raburn can take a neat idea like the Eclipes and take it to reality.
Tom C. (ahh--the smell of kerosene)