New Cessna - what features would you like in it ?

Armageddon Aviator

Armageddon Aviator

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
1,073
Location
Israel
Display Name
Display name:
Alon Smolarski
According to the latest issue of Flying magazine, Cessna is designing a new piston single.
No technical details were available so we are free to speculate...

Personally, I'd love to see a modern reincarnation of the C-177 Cardinal.
I always admired the clean, sleek design and wondered why they haven't resumed its production when the re-started the manufacture of the other models (C-172, 182, 206...).

Of course it should come with a glass cockpit, be equipped with a fuel-injected engine (FADEC controlled) and a BRS parachute...

I'd like to hear your comments - who knows - perhaps Jack Pelton (Cessna's boss) reads this forum...:)
 
I am expecting a high-wing, strut-free design, cabin slightly higher than a 177, and almost the same laterally. Siginfican composite content (but not composite structure overall); used where appropriate and time/cost saving.

Look for factory option of a diesel powerplant.

Designed from the git-go around G-1000, soup-to-nuts.

Am I remotely correct? Anyone's guess.
 
Something simple, basic and inexpensive to buy/operate. They've already got more planes that I can't afford. Of course, this is wishful thinking as my wife would veto just about anything. :dunno:
 
Payload, economy and speed.
 
Based on the 2 new CE172's I've seen, a few less labels that say "...failure to heed all safety instructions can result in bodily injury or death." The lawyers may like that quote but it can't be good sales tactic and it creeps me out.

Honestly I have no idea what I would like in a new plane anymore. The variety of old stuff out there has much more appeal with time proven designs. Something with a tailwheel and floats would be nice...there's not much of a market for that though.
 
They need to compete with Cirrus, Lancair, and Mooney for the high-end buyers.

So they need something fast, with a good useful load. A 177-style airplane with 310 HP might do the job if they can get it clean enough for speed.
 
maybe a new design, composite materials, with the BRS to compete with cirrus again.
 
fgcason said:
"...failure to heed all safety instructions can result in bodily injury or death."
Click to expand...

Can you imagine seeing a similar label as you enter a McDonalds.

Len
 
I'd want something simple and affordable. Because all new planes have G1000's and parachutes and whatnot, I know I will never be able to afford something new. Ever. This is somewhat demoralizing. Couldn't they just start making new 152's again? Wouldn't that be awesome? Probably not a good business plan for them... but that's why I'm not in the business of selling things and making money. Haha.

--Kath
 
kath said:
Couldn't they just start making new 152's again? Wouldn't that be awesome? --Kath
Click to expand...
Well, they (the generic "they" not Cessna) already do. There's some really neat LSAs which fill the 152 gap, and are much, much, cooler than 152s. Some of 'em are even taildraggers :yes:
 
Bring back the Cardinal, clean it up, maybe a different wing and more horsepower. I might even consider trading in the Mooney. Loved flying the C177RG but it was real doggy in the climb.
 
kath said:
I'd want something simple and affordable. Because all new planes have G1000's and parachutes and whatnot, I know I will never be able to afford something new. Ever. This is somewhat demoralizing. Couldn't they just start making new 152's again? Wouldn't that be awesome? Probably not a good business plan for them... but that's why I'm not in the business of selling things and making money. Haha.
Click to expand...

I was vaguely thinking that too. Maybe a CE140? The problem is if they did restart the 152 line, they'd probably be $130K+ a pop. Of course In the bigger is better SUV society of today they probably wouldn't sell many. From what I've seen even the legend cub is supposed to be rolling out the door for around $75K. GAK! :eek: Simple plane; pretty much. Affordable; that would depend on someone elses definition of affordable.
 
TMetzinger said:
They need to compete with Cirrus, Lancair, and Mooney for the high-end buyers.

So they need something fast, with a good useful load. A 177-style airplane with 310 HP might do the job if they can get it clean enough for speed.
Click to expand...

Bingo...my guess is that they are focusing on a "Cirrus" killer.....fast, lots of glass, a chute, and pricey...

Greg
182RG
 
I'd love to see them come up with something like the P210. They need to compete with the Meridian, but they need a less draggy design. (I think the P210 is about 20 knots slower than the Piper.) What else would make sense? they already have the entry level 4-seater, the powerful 4-seater, and the utility 6-seater. Unless they want to make a new 2-seat trainer, I don't know where they'd go from here. . . .
 
ejensen said:
Bring back the Cardinal, clean it up, maybe a different wing and more horsepower. I might even consider trading in the Mooney. Loved flying the C177RG but it was real doggy in the climb.
Click to expand...
The Cardinal is not really a good choice, unless they give it a real engine. The 200 hp RG was nice, but it won't compete with your bird for speed. Now, if the put the C182 engine in a Cardinal RG, that might be nice. . . .
 
wangmyers said:
The Cardinal is not really a good choice, unless they give it a real engine. The 200 hp RG was nice, but it won't compete with your bird for speed. Now, if the put the C182 engine in a Cardinal RG, that might be nice. . . .
Click to expand...
They already had the C182 engine (at least in HP) in a nice retractable. The C182RG. A great plane with a lot of payload and good speed.

Bump that engine up to 260 HP or 300 HP and it would be a REALLY nice plane.

All I need now is an extra $70K to do the AirPlains 300 HP conversion to my plane...
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
According to the latest issue of Flying magazine, Cessna is designing a new piston single.
No technical details were available so we are free to speculate...

Personally, I'd love to see a modern reincarnation of the C-177 Cardinal.
I always admired the clean, sleek design and wondered why they haven't resumed its production when the re-started the manufacture of the other models (C-172, 182, 206...).

Of course it should come with a glass cockpit, be equipped with a fuel-injected engine (FADEC controlled) and a BRS parachute...

I'd like to hear your comments - who knows - perhaps Jack Pelton (Cessna's boss) reads this forum...:)
Click to expand...

Personally I would like to see what ever they come up with actually be affordable to the average GA pilot. But it'll probably be some sort fo 210 replacement with carbon fiber, G1000, and cost close to $700,000
 
SCCutler said:
I am expecting a high-wing, strut-free design, cabin slightly higher than a 177, and almost the same laterally. Siginfican composite content (but not composite structure overall); used where appropriate and time/cost saving.

Look for factory option of a diesel powerplant.

Designed from the git-go around G-1000, soup-to-nuts.

Am I remotely correct? Anyone's guess.
Click to expand...

Spike,

I hope you're correct. That would be a pretty sweet plane.

I'm expecting a high-wing Cirrus clone with diesel power and composite wings.
 
NC Pilot said:
Payload, economy and speed.
Click to expand...

Pick two.

Heavy and fast? Gas guzzler. Economical and fast? Low payload. Heavy and economical? Slow.

That's from the old computer industry saying: Price, performance, support... Pick two.
 
wangmyers said:
I'd love to see them come up with something like the P210. They need to compete with the Meridian, but they need a less draggy design. (I think the P210 is about 20 knots slower than the Piper.) What else would make sense? they already have the entry level 4-seater, the powerful 4-seater, and the utility 6-seater. Unless they want to make a new 2-seat trainer, I don't know where they'd go from here. . . .
Click to expand...

Need to compete with the Meridian? Not really. How many Meridians does Piper sell in a year? I'm guessing not a whole lot. Remember, this is a "Cirrus killer," which probably means piston single, not turbine (though it may be diesel).

Despite their currenty entries in the three market segments you mention, I think they're going to have to do another 4 or 6 seat fixed-gear single. It'll be better-looking, more efficient/faster (read: less boxy/draggy airframe), and a departure from what we're used to seeing from Cessna. It will NOT be a wildly new-concept airplane.

I'd guess they'll replace the 206 if they replace anything. Cirrus is not a trainer type of airplane, and this won't be either unless they have two different airplanes with a similar design. I like the idea of something like the Cardinal being brought back.

However, I think they'll keep stamping out 172's and 182's until people quit buying them.
 
ejensen said:
Bring back the Cardinal, clean it up, maybe a different wing and more horsepower. I might even consider trading in the Mooney. Loved flying the C177RG but it was real doggy in the climb.
Click to expand...

Trade in a mooney for a cessna? OOOH Al Mooney and Gordon Baxter are going to haunt you tonight. Better than a bonanza though, I guess.
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
According to the latest issue of Flying magazine, Cessna is designing a new piston single.
No technical details were available so we are free to speculate...

Personally, I'd love to see a modern reincarnation of the C-177 Cardinal.
I always admired the clean, sleek design and wondered why they haven't resumed its production when the re-started the manufacture of the other models (C-172, 182, 206...).

Of course it should come with a glass cockpit, be equipped with a fuel-injected engine (FADEC controlled) and a BRS parachute...

I'd like to hear your comments - who knows - perhaps Jack Pelton (Cessna's boss) reads this forum...:)
Click to expand...
In that I own a Cardinal RG I'd certainly vote for an updated Cardinal. As you may know, Cessna stopped building the Cardinal in 1978. I doubt they have any plans to bring the Cardinal back. I've heard that the costs of building them was the reason they stopped. It was a different decision than the one that stopped all piston single production in 1985.
 
Here's what I hope they do. Make 2 different models of whatever plane it is. The cheap model, with steam guages and normal fabric seats, maybe smalled fuel tanks, slightly smaller motor, and the expensive model that has everything any rich person would want.

And low wing.

I'm talking two models with prices like $40K new to $500K new. Or just let us customize some stuff, determining the price ourselves. Someone's gotta be able to make a plane for 40 to 50 grand that doesn't weigh less than I do.
 
There is no way to make a new airplane and sell it for 40K - so I hope that's a misprint. A new certified engine costs almost that much by itself.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Heavy and fast? Gas guzzler. Economical and fast? Low payload. Heavy and economical? Slow.

That's from the old computer industry saying: Price, performance, support... Pick two.
Click to expand...
Agreed. One could also quote from an old physics saying:
f434bc69b2913f63b0c95e9949846f63.png
and
cb12e2898a8be8225bc4a0ee950e6429.png
and
8b4934e07167327de30a11e0c7ce3dab.png

Work --> increase in kinetic energy = 1/2 m v^2....

--Kath
 
Last edited:
44-46 inch wide cabin, High wing , rear leg room at least equal to a 182, 800lb full fuel usefull load, 150kt+ cruise (fixed gear), Climb 900+f/m, diesel/jet A, fuel burn max 9gph in cruise. Base price of 220K.
 
TMetzinger said:
Trade in a mooney for a cessna? OOOH Al Mooney and Gordon Baxter are going to haunt you tonight. Better than a bonanza though, I guess.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. My fingers burned as I typed that. But I really like to look down. And the wife likes two doors.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Pick two.

That's from the old computer industry saying: Price, performance, support... Pick two.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing when I wrote it.
 
Hmmm...where should they start?

I'd start with a late-model Cardinal. Widen the cabin to 48 inches but do not take a drag hit (Cirrus didn't). Beef up the sagging doors. Put 172-type windows in it.

Make the baggage door larger than a mail slot.

If it's going to be an RG model, retract the gear somewhere out of the way. PLEASE do not take up cabin or cargo space for that.

G1000 on the inside. Oh, and 3-4 fuel drains worked just fine for decades. Do we really need more than a dozen?

Lycoming IO-540 under the cowl, derated to the 250-260hp range or go with the TIO at 300+hp.
 
Len Lanetti said:
Can you imagine seeing a similar label as you enter a McDonalds.

Len
Click to expand...

There are lawyers who are suing again and again to accomplish just that.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I'd guess they'll replace the 206 if they replace anything. Cirrus is not a trainer type of airplane, and this won't be either unless they have two different airplanes with a similar design.
Click to expand...
Turn the 206 into an unpressurized Extra 400 and make it available with and without turbos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top