O.K. I'm really not as angry with Honeywell as I seemed to be earlier. No, GE should not stay out of the engine buisness and I guess Honeywell shouldn't have to stay out of the braking buisness. It's just that I work for a aircraft braking company and I hate seeing Honeywell get some of the jobs that our company would probably be better suited for. Besides, Honeywell is a great electronics company-heck, I love my Honeywell digital thermostat. Saves me a bit of money every month in gas charges.
But back to the issue. The Falcon 900 is not flying, has not for years, will not untill Honeywell fixes their problem. Basically, it is a brand new plane. It's first flight is not even scheduled for another 10 days, but it doesn't look like it's going to make it.
The EMB-170 was of course supposed to make it's maiden voyage on 12/15/01, but as I said before is being delayed for apparently the same reason the Falcon 900 is.
Tech-Rep: First of all, thank you for your response. It was certainly intresting. And there is no need to appologise for a little constructive criticism. From what the engineers here are telling me, it is definitely a Honeywell problem. You say that the system going into the Falcon900 is basically an off the shelf system. How similar is it to the new Epic Primus 2000. Is it likely that the two systems are infact very similar and experiencing the same problem? I really want to know what the problem is and if it is a problem that has come up before in aircraft already flying with this system.
Although Honeywell is a risk sharing venture in the EMB programs, are they going to pay the fees due to Embrear when they can't make the final deadline for the first flight?