Cirrus Killer? Cessna just doesn't get it...

Jim Logajan wrote:
ET wrote:
When have you seen a jet fighter with a high wing??
[ ... ]

Sorry about the follow-up to a two week old post. Either my NSP is getting
duplicate posts that were held-up somewhere or my news-reader is acting up.
(I just noticed the post I replied to was first posted September 30th.)

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
Sorry about the follow-up to a two week old post. Either my NSP is getting
duplicate posts that were held-up somewhere or my news-reader is acting
up.
(I just noticed the post I replied to was first posted September 30th.)

It's your news server. I use the same one, and am having the same issue.
Some of the old posts never showed up previously, but many others are
duplicates of ones already seen.

"Peter Duniho" wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote:
Sorry about the follow-up to a two week old post. Either my NSP is
getting duplicate posts that were held-up somewhere or my news-reader
is acting up.
(I just noticed the post I replied to was first posted September
30th.)

It's your news server. I use the same one, and am having the same
issue. Some of the old posts never showed up previously, but many
others are duplicates of ones already seen.

Thanks for the sanity check.

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 05:40:25 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote:

ET wrote:
When have you seen a jet fighter with a high wing??

Corsair. Supersonic carrier based fighter with variable incidence wing
for lower landing speeds. Big sucker, looks like a flying stove pipe
with a wing stuck on top.

There is one to the right of the ME262 in the photo, but unfortunately
only a small portion shows. http://www.rogerhalstead.com/me262.htm
although the high wing is quite prominent.

Some where around here I have a couple of good photos of that Corsair
as well. I'd have to dig out the information, but the pilot became an
ace in it. BTW the 262 in the photo is the one that was disassembled
to use as a model for building the ones that are now flying. This
photo was shot at Willow Grove Naval Air Station back in the 80's.
Actually I just had a shot of memory recall. It was October 1984 when
I shot those photos.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


The Heinkel He 162:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_162

To the public at large, a low wing plane is just a sexier, faster
"look" to it.

Perhaps - but add a touch of sweep-back to the wings and a more graceful
fuselage and a high-wing will look sexy enough.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:54:51 -0400, "Icebound"
wrote:


"ET" wrote in message
. ..


..snip...
I predict for that reason alone, the new "Cirrus Killer"
Cessna will fail, not because it won't be a superior airplane, it
probably will be, by the mere fact that it is designed to be, but
because it will not "look" sexy enough with the high wing... no matter
how well it performs, it will still have at its heart, the look of a
150/172.....

...snip...

When I spend 350grand I want people to look at my plane and say ohhhh,
ahhhh, not just pilots either…. A high wing will design will not make me
feel like Maverick on "Top Gun"…


While not very sexy, catering to the masses may be a lot more likely to be
"successful", financially, than catering only to "top guns". You sell a lot
more Chevys than Corvettes. Even a lot more Cadillacs than Corvettes.

When I spend 350grand on an airplane, I won't really care whether people
look at it or not. I will want to be able to carry me and my passengers and
lots of luggage in it safely, efficiently, cheaply, for reasonably long
hauls, and for a long, long time.

Of course the masses have to find the 350g to spend. But then if only "top
guns" have the money for GA, it is doomed anyway.

Compare the price of the Cirrus or Columbia 400 to that of a new
Bonanza. The older technology has a much higher price.
Even the F-33 had a higher base price than a fairly well equipped
SR-22 when it was discontinued in the... I believe, late 80's?

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:03:02 -0500, "JJS" jschneider@remove socks
cebridge.net wrote:


I'd suggest Cessna take the already clean and fast Cardinal, make it

Suprisingly the early Cardinals didn't do well. They were underpowered
for one thing and I believe the 182 still out sold them even though
"to me" they were far superiour. The Cardinal just isn't a typical
representation of a high wing aircraft.

even slicke. Aircraft design has come a long way since 1968, there are
a n easy 15 knots left in the basic airframe. They should sell the
fixed gear version with a 200hp motor and the retract with a 230hp

Awh, come on... Put in a 300 HP turbocharged deisel.

turbocharged motor. Throw in glass and FADAC. Lower the glareshield,
as Mooney did recently, giving even better visiblity.

The one thing I hated about the Cessnas was the high glare shield.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Cessna would be swamped with orders for a plane like that.

Cirrus wouldn't be killed, but it would be hurt really really bad.

Jim Howard

This was exactly the vision I had. Unfortunately I'll have to hope for winning the Sporty's Pilot Shop give away
version I'm afraid.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On 30 Sep 2005 14:08:06 -0700, "Brian" wrote:

Wouldn't surpise me if that is what they have in mind is a Fixed Gear
Late Model 210.

Fixed gear simplfies the systems and pilot skills required. A
Cantelevered wing from the 210 would give some speed inprovement. It
would probably be a bit slower than the Cirrus for equivalant Horse
power, but you would gain almost 500lbs of useful load and probably 2
more seats.

Actually if the could sell compriably equiped late model 210's for the
same price as the Cirrus they would probably put a large dent in the
Cirrus sales.

It depends on what you like.
Handeling you are compairing a sports car to a Mac truck in feel.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Just my speculation

Brian

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:39:39 GMT, "Frankie"
wrote:

The Cirrus is a great plane, but its not a really pretty one. I
parked next to a new Columbia the other day, and that airplane is
really pretty....

Straying off topic......I think the Cirrus looks better than the Columbia.
The only problem with the Cirrus is its landing gear: the main wheels are
too far apart and the nose strut looks chunky since it's straight. Install a

Wide gear is good. Narrow is bad.
Just think in those terms.
Wide means stability on the ground.

nice arched nose wheel strut - like on the Grumman Tiger - and move the main
gear together and the problem would be corrected.

The proportions of a Columbia just don't look right to me, especially the
window lines. It looks too much like an experimental (still) - kinda goofy.

You're right about Cardinals: they look great and have much airspeed
potential if cleaned up.

To me the Cardinal is the niced plane Cessna built, right after the
310.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Frankie

"Roger" wrote in message
...
Compare the price of the Cirrus or Columbia 400 to that of a new
Bonanza. The older technology has a much higher price.
Even the F-33 had a higher base price than a fairly well equipped
SR-22 when it was discontinued in the... I believe, late 80's?

When the F33A was discontinued in 1994, it's base price was $236K.

Model Year Prices
F33A 1975 $126,000
1980 $151,000
1985 $167,500
1990 $205,000
1994 $236,000


I suspect a lot of that was liability insurance as the law was revoked later
that year.