Replies

Go to their website, there is indeed a manufacturing plant.

How ready is that WV plant for a production certificate? They're looking at building jets by hand in a great big hangar.

;[Epic] Experimental version is in production now, buyers spend time at the plant involved with the manufacture to satisfy the 51% rule.

Per the FAA, it doesn't, and Rick Schrameck (who, by the way, has a background in model airplanes; he's the Hardy Kruger character from the original Flight of the Phoenix) hasn't responded to the press on the issue. At all.

I'm not just making this up. Sources?

AIN, 10/05: "However, the first kit Epic LT has been built but not delivered since the FAA is probing the legality of the company’s “builder assistance” center." Here.
Here's an Aero-News story based on Statements from Rick Schrameck. It's all positive, although he quotes a completely different range figure to Aero-News.
And here's another about the specific problems Epic has with the FAA.

"Abuse of the 51% rule has recently come under scrutiny again with the revelation that the FAA has finally drawn a line in the sand with the recent refusal of an FAA inspector to allow the certification of an Epic LT turboprop under Amateur-Built Experimental guidelines. This appears to be the much feared "shot across the bow" that a number of SportPlane companies have been waiting for as some of their number continue to push the definition of what is, and isn't, truly 51% amateur-built.
In the words of one industry observer, "If Epic isn't pushing the FAA to enforce 51%, no one is."
Epic seemed to be almost begging for the FAA's critical attention through heavy promotion of the aircraft's custom-built nature, it's high-performance feature-set, and the company's self-set, highly public profile. To many, the company seemed to be "thumbing its nose" at the FAA."

I also note that now Epic is saying no certification, no problem, they'll get certification in Brazil and apply for reciprocal cert in the USA, based on both parties' adherence to ICAO. Their counsel has not been reading the case law. And they still have to go through the FAA, whose reps Epic has thoroughly antagonized, to get that to happen.
The guy I feel sorry for is the dentist in the story, who bought the Epic in good faith and now can't fly it. Boy's screwed. He will probably wind up suing both Epic and the FAA -- rotsa ruck.
I have personally seen this aircraft.
Yeah, the one flying example. It's been going to Oshkosh since, I believe, 2004, and isn't getting 100 hours a year. (It flew to Oshkosh in 04 without the time flown off, which says something about Epic's attitude towards regulations, and initially got the FAA annoyed).
Epic plans to produce a 7 seat FAA type certificated version for sale in 2008.
Ain't gonna happen. Epic isn't as well funded as Adam, let alone Eclipse, and the LT as it stands does not meet literally hundreds of Part 23 (14 CFR Part 23, the rules that govern certification of light GA aircraft) requirements. It has no hope of achieving Part 25 certification.
Epic has also shown no sign of building a company rather than building an airplane. Where will the service centers be? How will they train mechanics? How will they fulfill warranty expectations? These are all problems that new entries in aviation (like Cirrus and Eclipse) have to overcome.
Bottom line is that there's no shortage of new entrants into the LJ market
No, actually there is a surplus. Especially a surplus of pie-in-the-sky ideas. There's also no shortage of established players failing and withdrawing and getting absorbed or bought out.
no doubt Cessna is taking notice.
Cessna's next big project is an all-new piston single. This will consume considerable resources, and probably nothing drastic will be done with the jets for 5-10 years now.
This same thing happened back in the early 70's with the light helicopter market when Robinson Helicopter came on the scene.
Robinson essentially took 90+% of the training helicopter market and a similar percentage of the small owner-flown market by making a new piston helicopter (two of them, over the years). His only competition is Schweizer, which now that it is a fiefdom of Sikorsky is uninterested in competing in the open market. Enstrom and Brantly ship a couple helicopters each, and several makers that are out of the market (Hiller) do a couple of rebuilds.
It's a completely different thing. As far as the seriousness of their approach is concerned, Epic is better compared with Revolution Helicopter and the Mini-500 (except, the Mini is extremely hazardous, and I have no reason to believe the Epic LT is not safe).