What do you folks think of the new Cessna TTx

Beauty has a price. :D
GRG55 said:
Still attached is it? :D :p

(Backstory: My hangar partner and good friend owned a series of Bonanzas through several decades. Complained bitterly about having the "property value" being degraded by the presence of my lowly Pipers. My retort was to point to his cuff mod and gently explain that Pipers didn't litter the skies by habitually leaving vital airframe parts behind in the slipstream)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Vernier aren't antique they are appropriate to our power plants. Throttle quadrants on our planes are trying to appeal to the want to fly a jet set, imho, like the silliness of swept tails on 110kt airplanes :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The design of both the Columbia 300/400 and the SR22 are similar since both were done under the NASA Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments (AGATE) project. But the Cirrus outsold the Columbia from the beginning and eventually the company was sold to Textron (Cessna). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_Aircraft

Textron eventually closed the Bend, OR plant and had to re-certify the plane (Columbia 400 became the Corvallis TT) after a wing disbonding incident in a test flight and fine from the FAA). In 2011 the Corvallis TT was renamed the TTx. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_400

The Cirrus throttle is more than a handle. It is also the prop control. Ergonically the setup removes the need to hold an arm/hand up to the panel to manipulate throttle/prop and mixture.
 
Speaking of vernier throttles and boats. One of the more confusing things is my boat has a vernier throttle and it works backward from aircraft (pull to go faster).
 
GRG55 said:
Isn't that deliberate on the part of Cirrus? To make it look like a car interior? The cabin heater/environment controls look like they are right from a nineties Dodge Caravan. I thought that was part of the appeal?
Click to expand...

Boy I hope they're not trying to copy Chrysler in anything. LOL!
 
denverpilot said:
Boy I hope they're not trying to copy Chrysler in anything. LOL!
Click to expand...

If they want the approval of the soccer-Mom set they could do worse than making it mini-van familiar... :D
I'm just waiting for the Gen 7 rear seat drop-from-the-headliner DVD player option to be announced. ;)
 
flyingron said:
One of the more confusing things is my boat has a vernier throttle and it works backward from aircraft (pull to go faster).
Click to expand...
The one on ours was used to kill the diesel.. pull it out and it cut the fuel in a pseudo mixture knob fashion
 
GRG55 said:
If they want the approval of the soccer-Mom set they could do worse than making it mini-van familiar... :D
I'm just waiting for the Gen 7 rear seat drop-from-the-headliner DVD player option to be announced. ;)
Click to expand...

Ever been in a cabin class jet? Or maybe ridden in first class on a commercial plane? Real flying begins with leather seats and glass panels.
 
GRG55 said:
If they want the approval of the soccer-Mom set they could do worse than making it mini-van familiar... :D
I'm just waiting for the Gen 7 rear seat drop-from-the-headliner DVD player option to be announced. ;)
Click to expand...

LOL! Needs at least twelve cup holders.

citizen5000 said:
Ever been in a cabin class jet? Or maybe ridden in first class on a commercial plane? Real flying begins with leather seats and glass panels.
Click to expand...

We'll let the folks flying all the stuff without leather seats and glass panels know that they're not doing any "real flying" then. ROFLMAO.

You're such a CirrusTool/CirrusTroll @citizen5000.
 
citizen5000 said:
Real flying begins with leather seats and glass panels.
Click to expand...

daily-afternoon-randomness-49-photos-26.gif
 
citizen5000 said:
Ever been in a cabin class jet? Or maybe ridden in first class on a commercial plane? Real flying begins with leather seats and glass panels.
Click to expand...

This month marks my 40th anniversary in the international petroleum business. I may have more time than you in both executive jets (among others the Chairman of the company I co-founded in the Persian Gulf owned a G-550) and the forward cabins of long haul commercial airliners. ;)

I fly a twin without leather or a glass panel (other than the GNS-430/530) and there is no piston single, including a Cirrus, that would be acceptable for many of the flights I make. The picture below is over the Continental Divide on an eastbound trip from the west coast. We had been over the forecast solid cloud layer for more than 2 hours at the time the picture was taken. No way I would have ever done that in a piston single, any piston single. YMMV.

IMG_0174.JPG
 
eman1200 said:
Too bad you clearly hate showing pics of your panel. Really, u should jump on more opportunities to show off pics of your panel.

Click to expand...

I think we should pile on gsengle and give him grief about those ancient gas display King radios he's carrying around. No self respecting Mooney owner should be putting up embarrassing photos of panel stuff like that, when a mere few dozen AMUs could fix it. :D :rolleyes:
 
GRG55 said:
I think we should pile on gsengle and give him grief about those ancient gas display King radios he's carrying around. No self respecting Mooney owner should be putting up embarrassing photos of panel stuff like that, when a mere few dozen AMUs could fix it. :D :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The funny thing is the king radio has better audio quality than the 530...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
GRG55 said:
I may have more time than you in both executive jets
Click to expand...

Very little time in either an exec jet or riding in first class. But I have flown in junkie small planes with round gauges and lumpy seats. And the king of the heap Cirrus with leather and glass. I'll take the leather and glass.
 
citizen5000 said:
Very little time in either an exec jet or riding in first class. But I have flown in junkie small planes with round gauges and lumpy seats. And the king of the heap Cirrus with leather and glass. I'll take the leather and glass.
Click to expand...

Embrace the shallowness.
 
Now if you wanna have fun in the air, no glass in sight... #veryrealflying

2c350049383f4eae7346bbe73742a594.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
One man's opinion, but,

I trained on an Archer, instead of a 172, in no small part due to my thinking that push/pull knobs seemed antiquated vs a handle. My first airplane, a Sunsowner, had the handle as well. Then I bought a T182T, and learned to love the vernier push pull knobs. If I had a choice, that's the way I would go. All my subsequent planes have had throttle quadrants rather than push/pulls. I miss the push/pull with the fine control a vernier provides. It doesn't look cool, but it works better.

Also, I like the Columbia/Corvallis/TTx sidestick better than the Cirrus sideyoke. The TTx nose gear looks like your average experimental but I am not aware of any failures so it must work ok. Plus how many brake fires have they had?????
 
flyersfan31 said:
I miss the push/pull with the fine control a vernier provides.
Click to expand...
I agree, the Archer throttles don't feel right and I prefer the 172 to it. But I can't imagine flying the Cirrus or something more substantial with knobs. The beloved Bo and many other well revered planes have throttles and aren't critiqued for it. In something like a Mooney I can see how it makes sense, the same way a manual trans makes sense in some cars

But personally I'd like one handle that combines prop and throttle. The mixture is easy in the Cirrus with lean assist and the altitude compensating fuel pump
 
Tantalum said:
I agree, the Archer throttles don't feel right and I prefer the 172 to it. But I can't imagine flying the Cirrus or something more substantial with knobs. The beloved Bo and many other well revered planes have throttles and aren't critiqued for it. In something like a Mooney I can see how it makes sense, the same way a manual trans makes sense in some cars

But personally I'd like one handle that combines prop and throttle. The mixture is easy in the Cirrus with lean assist and the altitude compensating fuel pump
Click to expand...

It's actually better in high performance planes because you want to fine tune for efficiency in cruise. Leaning absolutely requires a vernier imho....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My 310hp io550 found in Mooneys Bos and Cirruses are higher performance than many twins engines.... and I run LOP which is fine tuning...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Leaning in an SR22T is not about tweeking throttle it's about the mixture control. Pull back throttle to 30.5MP and the magenta assist appears then the mixture is pulled back till the white indicator points at the magenta indicator, easy peasy. The biggest problem with the panel mounted Vernier throttle is having to keep your arm outstretched (pulling and twisting). In the Cirrus ya get to rest your arm on the console during flight while moving throttle, mixture, boost pump and switching tanks.
 
Last edited:
GRG55 said:
This month marks my 40th anniversary in the international petroleum business. I may have more time than you in both executive jets (among others the Chairman of the company I co-founded in the Persian Gulf owned a G-550) and the forward cabins of long haul commercial airliners. ;)

I fly a twin without leather or a glass panel (other than the GNS-430/530) and there is no piston single, including a Cirrus, that would be acceptable for many of the flights I make. The picture below is over the Continental Divide on an eastbound trip from the west coast. We had been over the forecast solid cloud layer for more than 2 hours at the time the picture was taken. No way I would have ever done that in a piston single, any piston single. YMMV.

View attachment 53713
Click to expand...

Plenty of people fly on a single engine across the US.

flyersfan31 said:
One man's opinion, but,

I trained on an Archer, instead of a 172, in no small part due to my thinking that push/pull knobs seemed antiquated vs a handle. My first airplane, a Sunsowner, had the handle as well. Then I bought a T182T, and learned to love the vernier push pull knobs. If I had a choice, that's the way I would go. All my subsequent planes have had throttle quadrants rather than push/pulls. I miss the push/pull with the fine control a vernier provides. It doesn't look cool, but it works better.

Also, I like the Columbia/Corvallis/TTx sidestick better than the Cirrus sideyoke. The TTx nose gear looks like your average experimental but I am not aware of any failures so it must work ok. Plus how many brake fires have they had?????
Click to expand...

I've flown in the Cirrus but how does the TTX feel during maneuvers? I need to try it!
 
citizen5000 said:
Leaning in an SR22T is not about the tweeking throttle it's about the mixture control. Pull back throttle to 30.5MP and the magenta assist appears then the mixture is pulled back till the white indicator points at the magenta indicator, easy peasy. The biggest problem with the panel mounted Vernier throttle is having to keep your arm outstretched (pulling and twisting). In the Cirrus ya get to rest your arm on the console during flight while moving throttle, mixture, boost pump and switching tanks.
Click to expand...
This for me. Others may call it automotive but it works great. Arm is right on the console, and if you turn your hand to a natural resting position you can manipulate mixture with 3 and 4th finger and throttle with the first two and thumb. It's comfortable. Or go balls to the wall on both simultaneously if needed. It's very easy to manipulate the mixture (and throttle for that matter) to a fine degree in my experience. Another friendly user experience adding to the reasons I went SR22T over TTx
 
Last edited:
I have a Cessna and a Cirrus, and while the vernier controls absolutely allow you a bit more accurate fine-tuning, either way you're going to get so used to your plane you can put the mix or throttle right where you want it whichever controls you have. I just like the throttle more because I don't have to lift my hand the whole time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
It's actually better in high performance planes because you want to fine tune for efficiency in cruise. Leaning absolutely requires a vernier imho....
Click to expand...

Anyone should be able to lean out an engine efficiently no matter what system they're flying behind.
 
FloridaPilot said:
Well, they are making 2017 models. What do you think about the speed brakes on the Cessna? very Mooney Ovation like.
Click to expand...
They work well. They've been installed since the very first 400 came out, in 2004.
 
OkieAviator said:
Anyone should be able to lean out an engine efficiently no matter what system they're flying behind.
Click to expand...

No one said otherwise. But the vernier is very useful for fine tuning, and it's a feature a throttle quadrant doesn't have. You can still shove the control forward however even with a vernier....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top