Anyone want a Cessna 350 or 400?

[Darkwing]

I do!

Cessna wins Columbia Bid

Cessna Aircraft will acquire the assets of Columbia Aircraft of Bend, Ore.,
following a successful bid for the firm in U.S. bankruptcy court on Nov. 27.
Cessna says it wants to "broaden its single-engine product portfolio."
Cessna's winning bid was $26.4 million, but the transaction will not be
completed until Dec. 4. Cessna officials said Columbia will take on the
Cessna name, and the dual-turbocharged 310-horsepower Columbia 400 will
become the Cessna 400, while the normally aspirated 310-hp Columbia 350 will
be renamed the Cessna 350. Both use the Continental 550 engine.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in
:

> I do!
>
> Cessna wins Columbia Bid
>
> Cessna Aircraft will acquire the assets of Columbia Aircraft of Bend,
> Ore., following a successful bid for the firm in U.S. bankruptcy court
> on Nov. 27. Cessna says it wants to "broaden its single-engine product
> portfolio." Cessna's winning bid was $26.4 million, but the
> transaction will not be completed until Dec. 4. Cessna officials said
> Columbia will take on the Cessna name, and the dual-turbocharged
> 310-horsepower Columbia 400 will become the Cessna 400, while the
> normally aspirated 310-hp Columbia 350 will be renamed the Cessna 350.
> Both use the Continental 550 engine.
>
>



Holy crap, it's already in Wickepedia.

They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50 anyway...

Bertie

[Darkwing]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in
> :
>
>> I do!
>>
>> Cessna wins Columbia Bid
>>
>> Cessna Aircraft will acquire the assets of Columbia Aircraft of Bend,
>> Ore., following a successful bid for the firm in U.S. bankruptcy court
>> on Nov. 27. Cessna says it wants to "broaden its single-engine product
>> portfolio." Cessna's winning bid was $26.4 million, but the
>> transaction will not be completed until Dec. 4. Cessna officials said
>> Columbia will take on the Cessna name, and the dual-turbocharged
>> 310-horsepower Columbia 400 will become the Cessna 400, while the
>> normally aspirated 310-hp Columbia 350 will be renamed the Cessna 350.
>> Both use the Continental 550 engine.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Holy crap, it's already in Wickepedia.
>
> They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50 anyway...
>
> Bertie
>

I wonder if someone at Cessna made the changes or a fanboi? I would think
Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias before long.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> "Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> I do!
>>>
>>> Cessna wins Columbia Bid
>>>
>>> Cessna Aircraft will acquire the assets of Columbia Aircraft of
>>> Bend, Ore., following a successful bid for the firm in U.S.
>>> bankruptcy court on Nov. 27. Cessna says it wants to "broaden its
>>> single-engine product portfolio." Cessna's winning bid was $26.4
>>> million, but the transaction will not be completed until Dec. 4.
>>> Cessna officials said Columbia will take on the Cessna name, and the
>>> dual-turbocharged 310-horsepower Columbia 400 will become the Cessna
>>> 400, while the normally aspirated 310-hp Columbia 350 will be
>>> renamed the Cessna 350. Both use the Continental 550 engine.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Holy crap, it's already in Wickepedia.
>>
>> They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50
>> anyway...
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> I wonder if someone at Cessna made the changes or a fanboi?

Sure was quick, that's for sure.


>I would
> think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias before
> long.
>
>
>

If thye put a Warner in it I might feign some interest in it..

Bertie

[[email protected]]

On Nov 30, 8:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

>
> They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50 anyway...
>
> Bertie

No, no, no: the 190/195. Beautiful airplane, the last of
Cessna's artful flying machines. All the following high-wingers are
crude in comparison.

Dan

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

wrote in
:

> On Nov 30, 8:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>>
>> They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50
>> anyway...
>>
>> Bertie
>
> No, no, no: the 190/195. Beautiful airplane, the last of
> Cessna's artful flying machines. All the following high-wingers are
> crude in comparison.
>

Absolutely, they are. I've flown the 195, and while it's a nice butch
looking airplane, it's positively crude next to any of the Airmasters, or
the DC6, or the AW..... OK, I'd still get one, though..And if i lived in
the bush I might even have a 170, theough I'd rather have an Aeronca Sedan,
I think. Any other single? nah..
They did have a moment with the 310, though.
Saddest thing wth the singles is; the efficiency went through the floor as
well.
How is it a 1934 airplane is still more efficient in every way to a 2007
airplane?
And better looking into the bargain..



Bertie

[Yes - I have a name[_2_]]

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in message
...
> the dual-turbocharged 310-horsepower Columbia 400 will become the Cessna
400

Will that be subject to the Cessna 400 series wing spar AD?

[Darkwing]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> wrote in
> :
>
>> On Nov 30, 8:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50
>>> anyway...
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> No, no, no: the 190/195. Beautiful airplane, the last of
>> Cessna's artful flying machines. All the following high-wingers are
>> crude in comparison.
>>
>
> Absolutely, they are. I've flown the 195, and while it's a nice butch
> looking airplane, it's positively crude next to any of the Airmasters, or
> the DC6, or the AW..... OK, I'd still get one, though..And if i lived in
> the bush I might even have a 170, theough I'd rather have an Aeronca
> Sedan,
> I think. Any other single? nah..
> They did have a moment with the 310, though.
> Saddest thing wth the singles is; the efficiency went through the floor as
> well.
> How is it a 1934 airplane is still more efficient in every way to a 2007
> airplane?
> And better looking into the bargain..
>
>
>
> Bertie

Then you need a Skyhawk TD - The Turbo Diesel!
http://se.cessna.com/skyhawktd

I wonder what that thing sells for compared to a comparable Skyhawk SP? I
have a Chevy 2500 Diesel and it was almost $5000 more than the gas engine
and last time I filled up diesel was $3.59 a gallon, gas was $2.49, WTF!!!!!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> wrote in
>> news:d5cd26bf-e3ed-496b-8bd0-ba7427d5c2a6
@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com
>> :
>>
>>> On Nov 30, 8:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> They haven't made anything that would interest me since the T-50
>>>> anyway...
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> No, no, no: the 190/195. Beautiful airplane, the last of
>>> Cessna's artful flying machines. All the following high-wingers are
>>> crude in comparison.
>>>
>>
>> Absolutely, they are. I've flown the 195, and while it's a nice butch
>> looking airplane, it's positively crude next to any of the
>> Airmasters, or the DC6, or the AW..... OK, I'd still get one,
>> though..And if i lived in the bush I might even have a 170, theough
>> I'd rather have an Aeronca Sedan,
>> I think. Any other single? nah..
>> They did have a moment with the 310, though.
>> Saddest thing wth the singles is; the efficiency went through the
>> floor as well.
>> How is it a 1934 airplane is still more efficient in every way to a
>> 2007 airplane?
>> And better looking into the bargain..
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Then you need a Skyhawk TD - The Turbo Diesel!

Oh Jesus no.
A Chevvy diesel would be the last thing on my shopping list, honest to
god.



> http://se.cessna.com/skyhawktd
>
> I wonder what that thing sells for compared to a comparable Skyhawk
> SP?



I wonder if getting hit by a truck feels worse than getting hit by a
bus?


I have a Chevy 2500 Diesel and it was almost $5000 more than the
> gas engine and last time I filled up diesel was $3.59 a gallon, gas
> was $2.49, WTF!!!!!


Run it on sunflower oil then...


Bertie

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Darkwing" wrote:
> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias before
> long.


Small chance of that. Cessna hates Lycoming, even though they're both
Textron. Cessna already has permission from Textron to use whatever engine
they want in the NGP.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Darkwing]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Darkwing" wrote:
>> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias
>> before long.
>
>
> Small chance of that. Cessna hates Lycoming, even though they're both
> Textron. Cessna already has permission from Textron to use whatever
> engine they want in the NGP.
>
> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM
>

Wow, that is surprising.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Darkwing wrote:
> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Darkwing" wrote:
>>> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias
>>> before long.
>>
>>
>> Small chance of that. Cessna hates Lycoming, even though they're
>> both Textron. Cessna already has permission from Textron to use
>> whatever engine they want in the NGP.
>>
>> --
>> Dan
>> T-182T at BFM
>>
>
> Wow, that is surprising.

Well they are using a Cont in the Skycatcher.

[Darkwing]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Darkwing wrote:
>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Darkwing" wrote:
>>>> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias
>>>> before long.
>>>
>>>
>>> Small chance of that. Cessna hates Lycoming, even though they're
>>> both Textron. Cessna already has permission from Textron to use
>>> whatever engine they want in the NGP.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan
>>> T-182T at BFM
>>>
>>
>> Wow, that is surprising.
>
> Well they are using a Cont in the Skycatcher.
>

I just figured Lycoming didn't have something the proper size for the
Skycatcher.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in
:

>
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Darkwing wrote:
>>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Darkwing" wrote:
>>>>> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias
>>>>> before long.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Small chance of that. Cessna hates Lycoming, even though they're
>>>> both Textron. Cessna already has permission from Textron to use
>>>> whatever engine they want in the NGP.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dan
>>>> T-182T at BFM
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow, that is surprising.
>>
>> Well they are using a Cont in the Skycatcher.
>>
>
> I just figured Lycoming didn't have something the proper size for the
> Skycatcher.

Teh o-235 is a good bit heavier than the o-200, which must surely give it
the edge in the LSA stakes...
Bertie
>
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Darkwing wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Darkwing wrote:
>>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Darkwing" wrote:
>>>>> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-
>>>>> Columbias before long.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Small chance of that. Cessna hates Lycoming, even though they're
>>>> both Textron. Cessna already has permission from Textron to use
>>>> whatever engine they want in the NGP.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dan
>>>> T-182T at BFM
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow, that is surprising.
>>
>> Well they are using a Cont in the Skycatcher.
>>
>
> I just figured Lycoming didn't have something the proper size for the
> Skycatcher.

With all the weight the designers burned up you are probably right the Lyc
O-235 wouldn't fit.

[Matt W. Barrow]

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote in message
...
>
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Darkwing wrote:
>>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Darkwing" wrote:
>>>>> I would think Cessna would put Lycoming engines in the ex-Columbias
>>>>> before long.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow, that is surprising.
>>
>> Well they are using a Cont in the Skycatcher.
>>
>
> I just figured Lycoming didn't have something the proper size for the
> Skycatcher.
Do they have something similar to the twin turbo TSIO-550 for the Columbia?

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <> wrote

> With all the weight the designers burned up you are probably right the Lyc
> O-235 wouldn't fit.

It is surprising that they figured out how to make a conventional engine
work out, weight wise, with a 200, so any more weight than that would be out
of the question.
--
Jim in NC

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:45:01 -0500, "Darkwing"
<theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote:

>I do!
>
>Cessna wins Columbia Bid
>
>Cessna Aircraft will acquire the assets of Columbia Aircraft of Bend, Ore.,
>following a successful bid for the firm in U.S. bankruptcy court on Nov. 27.
>Cessna says it wants to "broaden its single-engine product portfolio."
>Cessna's winning bid was $26.4 million, but the transaction will not be
>completed until Dec. 4. Cessna officials said Columbia will take on the
>Cessna name, and the dual-turbocharged 310-horsepower Columbia 400 will
>become the Cessna 400, while the normally aspirated 310-hp Columbia 350 will
>be renamed the Cessna 350. Both use the Continental 550 engine.

IF I had the money, health, and time I'd go for either the 350 or 400
over most any other single on the market.

Roger (K8RI)
>

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Darkwing wrote:
> I do!

I wish I could... <G>