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

Reading Avwebs latest addition (avweb.com) I'm reading all about how
Cessna is developing (very hush hush) their "cirrus killer", new high
performance 4 place single. They are being very hush hush about the
whole thing, except for one point; the new design will be a high
wing....

Without debating the idea of high wing vs low wing as far as flying
advantages, the "perception" (right or wrong)of the high wing is a lower
& slower plane . When have you seen a jet fighter with a high wing??

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

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"… (Tell me honestly you don't see almost
every Cirrus buyer playing "highway to the danger zone" mentally in his
head at some point while flying his new Cirrus…heh)

And if it doesnt have the BRS or GRS or equivelent, it will also fail.
Many pilots wives are much less nervous about flying with a BRS
installed (again, right or wrong, what is important in this level of the
market is perception... if it was all about money, they would all be
buying 20 year old 180's..)

--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

Well, high wing and shoulder wings come to mind...
AV8 Harrier
FA18
F14 Tomcat
B52
FA22

Probably more but I'm not a military type... Let others chime in...

The $350K Cirrus driver on our field sold it, and his brand new hangar,
after he wrecked the plane - twice... Dunno what was playing in his
head at the time, but it should have been the theme from Get Smart...

denny

"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.

"ET" wrote in message
...

Without debating the idea of high wing vs low wing as far as flying
advantages, the "perception" (right or wrong)of the high wing is a lower
& slower plane . When have you seen a jet fighter with a high wing??


He 162, La15, F8U, Yak-28, F-111, Mirage, Tornado, Jaguar, Harrier, F-14,
F-15, MiG-23, MiG-25, MiG-31, etc.

"ET" wrote in message
...
When have you seen a jet fighter with a high wing??



A-7 Corsair

ET wrote:

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

I dunno... if Cessna were to sweep the high wing back, I think it might
look sexy.

Also, my guess if this aircraft is going to be Cessna's attempt at "killing
off" the Cirrus marketshare, you can count on it having a BRS, along with
seatbelt-mounted airbags.

--
Peter


















----== 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 =----

I will take being able to stand up out of the weather under the
protection of the high wing any day over trying to hold an umbrella
while loading pax and baggage.

john smith wrote:

I will take being able to stand up out of the weather under the
protection of the high wing any day over trying to hold an umbrella
while loading pax and baggage.

Not to mention stepping up onto the wing to enter the cabin. I have been
flying more Angel Flight patients lately who are having a problem with
this.

--
Peter
(a low wing aircraft owner)

















----== 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 =----

...When have you seen a jet fighter with a high wing??

F-15, F-14, Panavia Tornado, AV-8B Harrier.....

To the public at large, a low wing plane is just a sexier, faster
"look" to it. I predict for that reason alone, the new "Cirrus Killer"
Cessna will fail....

....but, you have an interesting perspective.

I tend to agree, but there is much that can be done with creativity. Just
how creative Cessna can be is open to debate. If the design is left up to a
few passionate people, it could succeed. If design by committee prevails,
then probably not. Look at the attractive designs from Ted Smith such as the
Twin Commanders.

More important for Cessna is what this will mean for product direction. Will
this new design be a stand-alone product in their line up, or will it be
part of a larger re-design of their whole family tree (172, 182, 206)? A
stand-alone airplane will stand out and be a clean break with traditional
Cessna design and, unless that new design is incorporated in their other
planes, Cessna will lose their "family" look. A strutless, glass airplane
certainly won't fit in, and will validate competitor Cirrus.

An interesting question, no...?

And if it doesnt have the BRS or GRS or equivelent, it will also fail.

Debatable.

It is interesting to note however that the arguments against BRS are similar
to anti-parachute arguments in WWI (ex: pilots won't stay and fight,
prematurely leave airplane, lower the skill level....).

Frankie

john smith wrote:

I will take being able to stand up out of the weather under the
protection of the high wing any day over trying to hold an umbrella
while loading pax and baggage.

You mean like this:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...80638909QTqtNi

Stefan