Is this the end of PoA?

Yeah, you need to create a clean sheet design every 40 years or so. Boeing, how's keeping those squatty gear legs on the 737 working for y'all?
To be clear, it's not lack of engineering imagination, just wanton rent-seeking. They're not afraid to kill people in the process either. "Externalities", the soft-palmed academics that peddle that econ propaganda euphemistically call it.

That out of the way, Happy Thanksgiving! :biggrin:
 
Two doors for a start. I suppose a BRS.
Might as well lock the gear down if you're going there. Reduces insurance premiums. And now you've got a whole new airplane. Gonna continue making it from aluminum, or is composite the wave of the future? And whether composite or aluminum, you're all over the space now dominated by Cirrus, which thumped the Cessna offering that was bought from Lancair. And the Bo.

Beyond that, even if your airplane is equivalent or better, can you beat Cirrus at the marketing game? My take is that Textron is pretty good on the engineering side, but woefully lacking on the sales/marketing side, at least in the small GA arena. When I visit Oshkosh and compare the Cirrus and Textron displays, it looks like Cirrus is all-in and Textron is there for the free cookies. <Note, there aren't really any free cookies at Oshkosh.>

The market has shown the Bo and Baron are dead/obsolete from a new buyer's perspective. Beechcraft would have to do something way different to regrow its light GA business to where it was in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and early 80's. Make a bold move. Kinda like dropping the Bo in the market in 1947. That move paid off for decades...
 
I'd rather buy that than any of the body-styles Ford is currently making.
An airplane and a car are tools. I buy tools for what they can do, not how they look. Of every car I've owned the one I miss the most is my Honda Element. Looked like a shipping crate but packed like one too. I covet Gipps Airvans.

Nauga,
loaded
 
I buy tools for what they can do...

You buy modern cars so they can send your location data to the manufacturer (and insurance company) as well as much data as the car can scrape from your phone every time you use Bluetooth? Weird flex...
 
AI could easily replace POA anyway.
AI cannot replace POA without POA! There's at least one newer member here who found us because AI kept showing POA links with its answers. WE ARE AI! WE ARE IMMORTAL!

Along the same line of questions, other than interior or avionics, what's changed with a Cirrus since it was introduced?
Redesigned engine mount for lower vibration
Aerodynamic changes for lower drag
Easier maintenance access points
Seat Belt airbags
XM Weather
Turbonormalization, then turbocharging
TKS ice protection, followed later by a more robust FIKI-certified system
New wing
Longer landing gear
Increased fuel capacity
Increased gross weight
Electronic Ignition
5th seat
USB ports
Tubeless tires
Increased flap speeds & extension
Angle of Attack
LED lights
Remote access features
Remote unlock
Illuminated steps
Safe Return emergency autoland
Automatic database updates via WiFi/LTE
Runway Occupancy Awareness
Smart Pitot Heat

And I'm sure I missed a bunch... But the point is, Cirrus has been really good about innovating new features that aren't available on other airplanes, and continually improving their planes. They do this because there's a pretty significant group of buyers that will trade in their old Cirrus for a new one every time a new generation comes out (they're on G7 now). And, it keeps them at the forefront of the industry and in the pages of the magazines.

Meanwhile, I don't think the Bo has been touched since 2007.
 
You buy modern cars so they can send your location data to the manufacturer (and insurance company) as well as much data as the car can scrape from your phone every time you use Bluetooth? Weird flex...

We had an Element and miss it, although it wanted Honda's V6 some days. I think it predates your tin-foil hattery era. Happy to be proven wrong though. I think they stopped them in... 2012? Ours was an '03 5-speed.

We still gawp appreciatively when we see one in the wild. :)
 
AI cannot replace POA without POA! There's at least one newer member here who found us because AI kept showing POA links with its answers. WE ARE AI! WE ARE IMMORTAL!


Redesigned engine mount for lower vibration
Aerodynamic changes for lower drag
Easier maintenance access points
Seat Belt airbags
XM Weather
Turbonormalization, then turbocharging
TKS ice protection, followed later by a more robust FIKI-certified system
New wing
Longer landing gear
Increased fuel capacity
Increased gross weight
Electronic Ignition
5th seat
USB ports
Tubeless tires
Increased flap speeds & extension
Angle of Attack
LED lights
Remote access features
Remote unlock
Illuminated steps
Safe Return emergency autoland
Automatic database updates via WiFi/LTE
Runway Occupancy Awareness
Smart Pitot Heat

And I'm sure I missed a bunch... But the point is, Cirrus has been really good about innovating new features that aren't available on other airplanes, and continually improving their planes. They do this because there's a pretty significant group of buyers that will trade in their old Cirrus for a new one every time a new generation comes out (they're on G7 now). And, it keeps them at the forefront of the industry and in the pages of the magazines.

Meanwhile, I don't think the Bo has been touched since 2007.
...other than interior or avionics,...

A lot of those fall under "avionics" such as XM weather, USB ports, Safe Return, "Angle of attack" (indicator?), runway occupancy awareness, automated updates, etc. Tubeless tires- couldn't any plane get those?
However, you do make the point that Cirrus does incorporate advances, and the marketing reasons they do so.
 
Beech rolled the bones - hard - when they designed the exquisite Starship 2000, and lost - mostly because the FAA, wary of composites, interjected so much overdesign requirement that the plane's mission was destroyed by dead (and unnecessary) weight. A trail blazed, but unrewarded (in fact, punished for the audacity of innovation).

At that point, the chances of another trailblazing innovation were slim and none, and slim was way out of town.

Raytheon was never interested in developing the brand or the product line, and the Textron purchase was strictly for the turbine line, with the Bo and Baron as unwanted stepchildren - run out for all the cash they could extract, then - poof.

Even Cirrus (brilliant product) was on the ropes financially because of the cost of development of the jet, and had to be rescued by sale to Chinese ownership. Yay, us.

Opportunities lost? The single-engined pressurized turboprop - based upon the proven P-Baron fuse - would have been a nice niche aircraft and likely sold, and Beech would have been well-positioned to develop an analogue to the PC12 well before the PC12 became the Next Big (and profitable) Thing, but they did not think a single-engined turbine would sell. And, of course, a timely-developed new composite single (back when Beech had more experience in non-military composites than - the rest of the world) would in hindsight have been a marvelous and likely effective way to be Cirrus before Cirrus was a glimmer. Oh, well.

Or, what the hell, they could have simply acquired the already-certified (and beautiful) First Composite retractable single, the Windecker Eagle, breathed some Beech magic (back when they still had Beech Magic available in-house) on it, and beaten Cirrus with a Better Mousetrap.

While we're at it, Piper should have completed their jet - they were remarkably close.

It all comes down to passion - or the lack thereof. There was little, and it diminished to none.
 
Jim Morrison could write a song about that. Too bad he's been in hiding for 50 years.
When I managed a TV station in Duluth, Minnesota, we had a special sales promotion going on in nearby Ironwood, Michigan. Our sales manager was calling on a prospect there, when the guy said, "You know, Jim Morrison is still alive. He comes in here now and then and jams with the local guys."

Sales guy: "Wow! Does Elvis ever join him?"

"Now you're just making fun of me. Goodbye. "
 
lulz, the ecological damage that would occur by energy demand if LLM derp derp attempted to mockingbird my written style lol.
Heck, I'm already full on accelerationist since the latest article 88 veiled threats at work, so I welcome the challenge. Come at me HAL :rockon:
 
lulz, the ecological damage that would occur by energy demand if LLM derp derp attempted to mockingbird my written style lol.
Heck, I'm already full on accelerationist since the latest article 88 veiled threats at work, so I welcome the challenge. Come at me HAL :rockon:
Prompt: just keep adding big words until I say stop…………..
 
Prompt: just keep adding big words until I say stop…………..
*neighborhood browns out*
*Uncle Hindsight does like jesus on a speedboat, cranks up the diesel generator and keeps on pontificating*

Wife just gifted me some metal LED wall art for the home studio......oof you guys are in for a treat. :fingerwag:
 
lulz, the ecological damage that would occur by energy demand if LLM derp derp attempted to mockingbird my written style lol.
Heck, I'm already full on accelerationist since the latest article 88 veiled threats at work, so I welcome the challenge. Come at me HAL :rockon:
Dude, your signal to noise ratio...
 
Dude, your signal to noise ratio...
:) 99% sure it's on purpose. It's like when Buddy Hackett was on the tonight show, and they'd put him on a 30 second tape delay so the censors could bleep out the swearing. Except he didn't swear then, he told a filthy joke that the censors couldn't figure out in 30 seconds. With HS, he's writing dark things that those that would make goofy comments about don't get at all...and if they do it's still deniable as that's not what was meant.

Because to say the big B company could redesign the famous airplane with the little tiny gear, but it only wiped out some foreign folks who's pilots aren't trained as well as ours are, and hey, BFD to the US stock holders; that would be too mean to say. And that's probably not what was meant. Back to cars, why would you sell people a car that will last 50 years, when you can effectively rent them one. My take on the current reliability of cars is that they have to make them last long enough, barely, to afford the 5+ year loans that people have to take out on them.

But I'm too negative about this stuff, and way off topic.
 
A lot of those fall under "avionics" such as XM weather, USB ports, Safe Return, "Angle of attack" (indicator?), runway occupancy awareness, automated updates, etc. Tubeless tires- couldn't any plane get those?
However, you do make the point that Cirrus does incorporate advances, and the marketing reasons they do so.
And I included them because they aren't just "avionics". They were in most cases the first GA manufacturer to offer them, and many of them you still don't/can't get by adding avionics to other manufacturers' planes.

I thought "Cirrus Perspective" was just a G1000/G3000 until I got to experience it. They really did add some nice stuff to it, and IMO it likely helps their safety.

Raytheon was never interested in developing the brand or the product line, and the Textron purchase was strictly for the turbine line, with the Bo and Baron as unwanted stepchildren - run out for all the cash they could extract, then - poof.
Beech really hasn't been Beech since Beech was Beech.

Opportunities lost? The single-engined pressurized turboprop - based upon the proven P-Baron fuse - would have been a nice niche aircraft and likely sold, and Beech would have been well-positioned to develop an analogue to the PC12 well before the PC12 became the Next Big (and profitable) Thing, but they did not think a single-engined turbine would sell. And, of course, a timely-developed new composite single (back when Beech had more experience in non-military composites than - the rest of the world) would in hindsight have been a marvelous and likely effective way to be Cirrus before Cirrus was a glimmer. Oh, well.
Were they actually working on a SETP?

While we're at it, Piper should have completed their jet - they were remarkably close.
IMO, Piper would have failed even if they finished it. They tried to sell it like it was a Gulfstream - IE, give us a hundred grand and THEN we'll let you sit in the mockup. Exactly the opposite of Cirrus, and Cirrus is wildly successful with their methods...
 
Beech really hasn't been Beech since Beech was Beech.


Were they actually working on a SETP?


IMO, Piper would have failed even if they finished it. They tried to sell it like it was a Gulfstream - IE, give us a hundred grand and THEN we'll let you sit in the mockup. Exactly the opposite of Cirrus, and Cirrus is wildly successful with their methods...
1. True - so true!
2. Yep - the "Lightning"; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft_Lightning
3. Stupid sales tactics, but they were pretty close on the design.

And don't forget - Cirrus was hurting badly enough from the development costs of the jet that they sold the company to China, Inc.
 
Looks like all they had to do was grab some parts off the shelf! B58P fuselage, B36TC wing, Garrett on the front, and go!

Can't believe I hadn't heard of that one before.

BTW, I couldn't remember exactly when Beech was acquired by Raytheon, and when looking up that history I saw that Walter Beech founded Beechcraft along with a guy named C.G. Yankey. That sounded *awfully* familiar, and when I went looking around to figure out why, rediscovered that Yankey was also heavily involved in founding and funding Mooney Aircraft Corporation. Beech, Yankey, and the Mooney brothers were all also involved in Culver Aircraft during WWII.

3. Stupid sales tactics, but they were pretty close on the design.
It was okay. It was a jet, it was a single, it would have been more affordable to acquire and maintain than other jets that were available.

It was not exciting except for "hey, a jet". Piper does not know how to sell airplanes like Cirrus does, and I think they would have ultimately failed to sell enough PA-47s to make it worthwhile. It's possible they'd have done OK, though, they seem to be catching on with the PA46T/M Series turboprops. In 2024, they just barely outsold the competing but much more expensive TBM 960, but the two combined just barely outsold the Vision Jet.

And don't forget - Cirrus was hurting badly enough from the development costs of the jet that they sold the company to China, Inc.
Making new airplanes is undoubtedly very expensive. What was the last company to be founded and certify an aircraft without starting in the experimental market to stay afloat, as Epic, Columbia, and Cirrus all did? Diamond maybe? (They started with the HK36 motorglider in the early 80s, DA20 in the 90s, DA40 in 2001, DA42 in 2004, etc...) And they failed to complete their jet as well, though all three certainly had headwinds as a result of the economic conditions at the time the idea of VLJs/PJs was getting popular.
 
I believe that would require redesigning the airframe and hence a new certification. If so, the investment would be tough to recoup.
I'm unsure. I mean, they are available for some Cessnas and others as retrofit. I"m sure some aeronautical engineer at least spent some time on a feasibility study before they decided not to offer it. I think if they could have gotten it approved fro the A36, they would have sold a LOT of them in the last 10 years and it would have kept up the "Bonanza is leading" talk track.
 
Meanwhile, Cirrus continues to recapture their target market.

Available for late-model SR Series aircraft and all generations of Vision Jets, the program includes a “Guaranteed Transition” that aligns the trade-in process with the delivery of the new aircraft. The manufacturer-backed program manages valuation, logistics and paperwork. while also providing a factory evaluation and refurbishment process for pre-owned aircraft. According to the company, the initiative aims to work alongside the existing authorized pre-owned network of Cirrus brokers to provide verified inspection records and transition support.

 
I’ll take a modern car over the classics.

I think I would talk a 59 Lincoln over those other 1950’s models.
Reason : was at a demolition derby . A 59 Lincoln won its 3rd contest in a row.
Lots of iron front and back.
 
Back
Top