What do you folks think of the new Cessna TTx

gsengle said:
Um its not new... 13 years old...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well, they are making 2017 models. What do you think about the speed brakes on the Cessna? very Mooney Ovation like.
 
gsengle said:
Um its not new... 13 years old...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I think he's referring to the new model TTx. Although the Cessna 400 has been in production for over a decade, the "TTx" model didn't become a thing until they added the G2000 suite to the airplane not too long ago.
 
Yes that said the Cirrus had steam gauges and Avidyne before the Garmin panel too...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Yes that said the Cirrus had steam gauges and Avidyne before the Garmin panel too...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Soo...Avidyne vs. Garmin :stirpot:
 
Something about the TTX bothers me.. well a few things:
-nose gear looks odd
-tail sweep is strange
-window angles and layout don't look right

Overall aesthetically it lacks cohesion. And no chute (not that I think planes need them but it's obviously a Cirrus competitor and the lack of a chute is not going to be overlooked by buyers)

Personally if I want "the fastest" I'd get a Mooney. The most comfortable and "modern" feel then Cirrus. And for overall utility and "brawn" a 206

Don't really get the target audience

Also, can we please stop putting push pull knobs for throttles, prop, and mixture on new planes? Esp luxury non-trainers
 
You guys like the T-handle thing that makes it look and drive like a minivan?

Of course, Cirrus could spiff up the t-handle thing a little like this one... LOL...

5b614580f9af2eb9eeaa0f500267a69e.jpg


Or if thy want two red handles...

8d49feadb8e63d7e1e7dd2e82ec570eb.jpg


Hehehe.
 
Honestly the center t-handles remind me of my Jeep Cherokee from 17 years ago.

c35ded79d550c6332790e720189db6d3.jpg
 
denverpilot said:
You guys like the T-handle thing that makes it look and drive like a minivan?
....
Click to expand...

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?
 
Tantalum said:
Something about the TTX bothers me.. well a few things:
-nose gear looks odd...

...Don't really get the target audience...
Click to expand...

That nose gear is a bit of a Lance Neibauer trademark. Although the Evolution is a retract, that nose gear configuration is still evident.

As for the target audience, what else does Cessna have for a customer wanting a single piston step up from a strut-braced high wing? The aging Bonanza?

IMG_0251.JPG
 
Tantalum said:
Something about the TTX bothers me.. well a few things:
-nose gear looks odd
-tail sweep is strange
-window angles and layout don't look right

Overall aesthetically it lacks cohesion. And no chute (not that I think planes need them but it's obviously a Cirrus competitor and the lack of a chute is not going to be overlooked by buyers)

Personally if I want "the fastest" I'd get a Mooney. The most comfortable and "modern" feel then Cirrus. And for overall utility and "brawn" a 206

Don't really get the target audience

Also, can we please stop putting push pull knobs for throttles, prop, and mixture on new planes? Esp luxury non-trainers
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want my Mooney with anything other than vernier controls. You can't twist a throttle quadrant for fine control...

Sometimes I wonder if people realize they don't just push pull...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
I wouldn't want my Mooney with anything other than vernier controls. You can't twist a throttle quadrant for fine control...

Sometimes I wonder if people realize they don't just push pull...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Does your mooney have vernier throttle or just prop/mixture? That Bo I've been flying has the throttle as well and I love it.
 
eman1200 said:
Does your mooney have vernier throttle or just prop/mixture? That Bo I've been flying has the throttle as well and I love it.
Click to expand...

All three are vernier and I LOVE it...

90c285edfb70897312150ea091194c61.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
All three are vernier and I LOVE it...

90c285edfb70897312150ea091194c61.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

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





 
Tantalum said:
Something about the TTX bothers me.. well a few things:
-nose gear looks odd
-tail sweep is strange
-window angles and layout don't look right

Overall aesthetically it lacks cohesion. And no chute (not that I think planes need them but it's obviously a Cirrus competitor and the lack of a chute is not going to be overlooked by buyers)

Personally if I want "the fastest" I'd get a Mooney. The most comfortable and "modern" feel then Cirrus. And for overall utility and "brawn" a 206

Don't really get the target audience

Also, can we please stop putting push pull knobs for throttles, prop, and mixture on new planes? Esp luxury non-trainers
Click to expand...
Pray tell, why?
 
IMG_1264.JPG
Or this^...

denverpilot said:
You guys like the T-handle thing that makes it look and drive like a minivan?

Of course, Cirrus could spiff up the t-handle thing a little like this one... LOL...

5b614580f9af2eb9eeaa0f500267a69e.jpg


Or if thy want two red handles...

8d49feadb8e63d7e1e7dd2e82ec570eb.jpg


Hehehe.
Click to expand...
 
How many single engine airplanes go 235 in cruise? Those are pretty impressive numbers. If you don't like the way it looks...well, that is a little subjective. I would fly it to see for myself why things are the way they are.

Just on a "Looks" standpoint. IMO it's not very attractive, I just don't like the way the landing gear looks. It would've been really interesting to see them make this model with retractable gear but it seems like fixed gear is the rave these days.
 
citizen5000 said:
It's as close as you can get without being an SR22T. Except it's not and therefore does not sell as well. It has a smaller cockpit, less seating, no CAPS and lacks the Perspective system.
Click to expand...

It does have the G2000, which would be cool. But yes... those are basically the reasons I didn't get one.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
...with the Bonanza tail. :D
Click to expand...

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)
 
FloridaPilot said:
...Just on a "Looks" standpoint. IMO it's not very attractive, I just don't like the way the landing gear looks. It would've been really interesting to see them make this model with retractable gear but it seems like fixed gear is the rave these days.
Click to expand...

"They" did. It is called the Lancair IV.

To think that the present day TTx is an attempt to copy the Cirrus SR series is to fail to understand the origins and evolution of the planes. From the ES to the IV/IV-P to the Columbia and the present day Evolution piston and turboprop.

The IV was setting speed records around the USA in 1991, when the SR-20 was still on the drawing board.

Not difficult to see the family resemblance, including the "trademark" vertical oleo nosegear.

IMG_0252.JPG IMG_0254.JPG
 
Last edited:
FloridaPilot said:
I just don't like the way the landing gear looks
Click to expand...
Same here... something about it just doesn't see cohesive with the design. I know it's been around for a while and was not originally designed to "copy" anything, but looks wise it seems kind of like a Cirrus was put into photo shop and stretched out, the perspectives just don't flow. The Cirrus gear looks much more "at home" on the SR20 and 22. But looks are completely subjective, I completely understand that

RE: Vernier controls

If I'm flying the Skyhawk / Archer then I agree, the red twist knob on the Skyhawk is easier to fine tune when you're listening with the ears.. leaning, even with a JPI, is a bit of an art and in the Archer I'm never necessarily "happy" with it (I can be a perfectionist with things like that, and what else is there to do when cruising along for hours besides try and dial everything in to be perfect)

But at the same token, that whole thing seems kind of "antique" to me. I get that we're stuck with engine tech that is many decades old, and due to cert costs, small market, etc. we'll likely see these powerplants for the next several decades, but it doesn't feel fitting on a modern, fast, composite airplane with top of the line avionics, etc., to have those Vernier knobs there (thanks @gsengle for the term).

**It's like people who prefer sailing with a tiller vs a wheel. Purist sailors will tell you how much more feel and "one-ness" you get with a tiller.. but on modern composite boats it would feel out of place.

Those are entirely subjective remarks, and it's just my opinion for what that's worth

Here's a "collage" (as my wife just called it) of what I mean. Not saying one is by default right or wrong. But for something like a Cirrus, Panthera, TTX, etc., the knobs just seem out of place
upload_2017-5-21_12-27-43.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top