Having an airplane supported by a real company, that uses materials and practices well understood by the aviation ecosystem, that will have good resale value when the time comes, that lacks numerous idiosyncrasies.

Mike C.

Tony, you have a true moral obligation to the rest of us here to document your jet shopping experiences in obscene detail with copious amounts of photos. This isn't about you. It's about us living vicariously through you. Get on board man.

The Eclipse is very tempting, I'll give you that. The price / performance is quite alluring but reading Theodore's experiences with the avionics has that airplane forever off my wish list. If I ever spend that type of coin on an aircraft, it's going to be an option that is exceptionally well supported and absolutely solid all around.

Having an airplane supported by a real company, that uses materials and practices well understood by the aviation ecosystem, that will have good resale value when the time comes, that lacks numerous idiosyncrasies.

Mike C.

Any 10 year old aircraft that cannot be upgraded beside going back to the factory or kept airworthy without breaking the bank does not get any vote from me.

I may.

I had the opportunity to fly a Mustang Demo on the 8th with a factory pilot and Ryan Potucek our local Textron rep. Ryan and I have been visiting for a couple of years now and in that time it seems like Cessna is building fewer and fewer Mustangs as the M2 sales climb and the used Mustang market attracts most of the buyers. They had two left overs late last December that they were wheeling and dealing with and only have plans to build 4 this year.

Michael the Mustang is also an awesome airplane in my very inexperienced opinion. Between the Eclipse and Mustang I give a slight edge in pilot comfort to the Mustang. I flew a CJ1 with a friend and found its cockpit to be cramped and the seat uncomfortable. So, the Mustang wins here. Clearly, the back end of the Mustang is more comfortable than the Eclipse as it is also larger. The honey pot is available for emergencies I guess but its a better place for a safe to hold the extra cash needed for fuel.

In addition to cockpit comfort the G1000 panel, while different in presentation from my Cirrus, looked and felt familiar. Although the engines are FADEC starting is a bit more involved than the Eclipse because we jockeyed the throttle during the start and needed to pay attention to temps in case we had to abort. You can hot start one of these where supposedly its about impossible in the Eclipse.

The airplane is dead quiet and ground handling is very easy. They do have this big U shaped thing that comes out of the middle of the panel to assist in turning the plane in flight. What's up with that in a modern aircraft? Side yokes rule! You get a clue that this plane might have been designed for owner pilots when you buckle the automotive style seat belt and shoulder harness. No 5 point aerobatic harness like I had in my Waco for this airplane.

The day I flew the Mustang the wind was gusting close to 40 knots. It was the kind of day you stay on the ground in a SE piston unless you just want to get your ass kicked. A pilot at the FBO who came in just before we loaded up said it was very turbulent below 6,000 feet. So, I was really anticipating my first jet take off...

All I remember was Cessna NXXX contact OK Departure on 124.6 and thinking "holy crap! What happened to 6,000 feet!" Was there turbulence? I don't know, we were through there in a blink of an eye and then at 10,000 feet and then 20,000 feet and 15 minutes or so later at 41,000 feet. . We tooled around awhile flying by hand which was ok and then we were practically in Texas and had to turn around to land.

To land from 41,000 feet you push the nose over and then start pulling back the throttle. That was the hardest thing about flying the plane - managing speed. Sure makes autothrottles look attractive...Anyway, spoilers can be deployed when you need them and they help bring the plane down in a hurry. All the while it's as quiet as church on Halloween.

We got the visual for Rwy 35R and flew the ILS to an arrival that would have been exciting in the Cirrus but seemed pretty darned easy in the Mustang. All the salesmen in the back said they were surprised we were on the ground. .

All in all it the Mustang was pretty easy to fly and I remember now why its so easy to trim a Cessna. When all else fails use the big wheel. The G1000 is familiar and the Garmin AP is awesome. For going on trips with luggage it beats the Eclipse for convenience for sure with a very large luggage compartment. After shutting down I climbed in the back with Ryan and my friend Alex who had come along for fun. As we sat there with the fuselage rocking quietly in the wind I thought how comfortable we all were even though I was probably shortest at 6 feet. I also kept wondering "where's the beer machine?" I think flying in the back would be a great experience.

The Mustang is slow of course, only 340 knots in cruise on a good day compared to the Eclipse's 375. But it climbs faster and, according to Cessna, gets to the end of a 1,000 NM trip ten minutes later.

Anybody know where a guy can get a ride in a P100?

Bruce Byerly.

[/quote]
The Mustang is slow of course, only 340 knots in cruise on a good day compared to the Eclipse's 375. But it climbs faster and, according to Cessna, gets to the end of a 1,000 NM trip ten minutes later.

Anybody know where a guy can get a ride in a P100?[/quote]

The Eclipse goes closer to 360kts, usually slower; sometimes much slower if it's hot. I've never been in one that went 375kts and I've flown 10+ different airframes.

Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed my Eclipse but I don't think I will own another one. I'd much rather burn more fuel and go slower but get the support of Cessna. I didn't listen to TR Wright and you probably won't listen to me either when trying to talk me down.

I'm sure a brand new aircraft with the 4 year warranty would be a totally different experience though.

Tony,
My instructor types who is 6'7" types folks in Eclipse's and P100's I was curious on which aircraft he prefers. He said it depends on the seat he is in. In the front the Eclipse in the back the P100.

Tony, glad you had a nice demo in the Mustang. I find it to be an amazing airplane. It sounds like you flew on a noteworthy day with the surface winds going strong. You're correct in that the Mustang handles turbulence very well with the 11 degree sweep on the leading edge of the wing. Much better than its straight-wing cousins. Also, it's nice to be able to climb out of the rough surface air in a hurry. Regarding cruise speeds, you'll find the Mustang often performs better than book. I often get 350-355 KTAS in cruise depending on conditions. Cessna seems to have been overly conservative with their performance data, which I find odd, but other Mustang owners have confirmed it as well. It's a dream to fly and glad you enjoyed it.

The Mustang is slow of course, only 340 knots in cruise on a good day compared to the Eclipse's 375. But it climbs faster and, according to Cessna, gets to the end of a 1,000 NM trip ten minutes later.

Anybody know where a guy can get a ride in a P100?[/quote]

The Eclipse goes closer to 360kts, usually slower; sometimes much slower if it's hot. I've never been in one that went 375kts and I've flown 10+ different airframes.

Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed my Eclipse but I don't think I will own another one. I'd much rather burn more fuel and go slower but get the support of Cessna. I didn't listen to TR Wright and you probably won't listen to me either when trying to talk me down.

I'm sure a brand new aircraft with the 4 year warranty would be a totally different experience though.[/quote]
Michael,
Here's a picture of 372 knots sorry it's blurry

FSW is a bit odd and needs unique repairs practices, but the aluminum isn't the major issue.

Avionics are odd ball.

Circuit breakers are odd ball.

Actuators are odd ball.

Windshields are odd ball.

Pitot probes are odd ball.

And so on.

The Eclipse has a lot of proprietary things not found anywhere else. That makes it harder to support, costlier to support, and limits the people who can support it.

Mike C.

I had the pleasure to fly 2 weeks ago in a Eclipse 500, in the right seat
Loved it
What a great bird
I was so impressed with the avionics
By the time we were on the way back, mid flight, I could have taken over the flight. It was that intuitive. Super simple to operate/ Nothing like the Citation that I fly right seat once in a while.

Great job with the avionics.

FSW is a bit odd and needs unique repairs practices, but the aluminum isn't the major issue.

Avionics are odd ball.

Circuit breakers are odd ball.

Actuators are odd ball.

Windshields are odd ball.

Pitot probes are odd ball.

And so on.

The Eclipse has a lot of proprietary things not found anywhere else. That makes it harder to support, costlier to support, and limits the people who can support it.

Mike C.

Mike,
The motors on the eclipse are loafing at MCT the same core powers the Mustang and P100 I have been told.

Also the only reason those aircraft were parted out was economics . The guys who sell the most Eclipse's tell me that there are only 5 non upgraded planes left and 3 of those are south of the border

So we won't see many more parted out.

FSW is a bit odd and needs unique repairs practices, but the aluminum isn't the major issue.

Mike C.