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

"ET" wrote in message
...
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??

Cessna has always gotten it better than any other aircraft company. They
have much more utility than Cirrus could even dream about. Wanna load a
bulky heavy object into a Cirrus in the rain? Not me. Wing position has
nothing to do with performance. People don't spend $350K based on
"perception." Most people I know do not believe in your "perception." To
sum it up you are simply wrong on all accounts. If you have stock in Cirrus
now would be a good time to sell.

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
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



Attention passenger of Blue Sky Flight 999. There will be a slight delay
before boarding.

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
I have heard and read (meaning stumbled across) very little about the
Extra 400 and 500 - saw some at OSH, that's it. I wonder if it's because
so few are flying?

As far as I know, the 400 is no longer being produced, and the 500 isn't
certified yet. That information isn't exactly current though.

However, that doesn't mean that the airplanes aren't viable, and especially
not because of their wing position. Their lack of success in the market has
to do with issues like price, pilot qualifications, lack of "brand name" (in
the non-aerobatic world) and (in the case of the 500) lack of a deliverable
airplane.

IMHO, the price is the biggest issue. Just as they finally got the 400 into
production, the stock market collapsed, and around that same time several
light jet proposals appeared, promising twin-engine jet performance at the
same price as the 400. Given the slow production rate, I think a lot of
people figured if they were going to be on a waiting list, they might as
well wait for a jet.

I seriously doubt that the position of the wing has anything to do with the
relative obscurity of the 400/500 line.

Pete

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

Attention passenger of Blue Sky Flight 999. There will be a slight delay
before boarding.

I forwarded this to a friend, and he didn't see "preflight". He saw kitties
lining up for a buffet immediately following a landing.

- Andrew

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
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.

Frankie

"Dave Stadt" wrote in
m:

People don't spend $350K based on
"perception." Most people I know do not believe in your "perception."
To sum it up you are simply wrong on all accounts. If you have stock
in Cirrus now would be a good time to sell.


Actually, people DO buy many things based on perception, including $350
+K aircraft.

How many threads on this newsgroup have talked about "Cirrus pilots have
"the wrong stuff""..

How many people buy a $25-$30k Harley for the "cool" factor, even though
a $9K Kawasaki may be every bit as good a bike???


How many of your wives out there would have (again, right or wrong)
climbed into the cockpit with you sooner if the plane had a BRS
installed??

Call it Perception... call it Emotion.. That's what drives sales. Not
talking about a better plane... it's "marketing"

--
-- ET :-)

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

Montblack wrote:

I have heard and read (meaning stumbled across) very little about the
Extra 400 and 500 - saw some at OSH, that's it. I wonder if it's because
so few are flying?

Extra was in financial trouble. (I think they actually went bankrupt.)
At the Aero this spring I talked to a representant of them, they found
investors and are in production again, but I don't have any numbers.

Stean

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.

Just my speculation

Brian

"How many of your wives out there would have (again, right or wrong)
climbed into the cockpit with you sooner if the plane had a BRS
installed?? "

The BRS is a wife pleaser, no doubt about it. But how many wives would
like an airplane with huge SUV sized doors that don't require any
climbing at all? An airplane they just step into to, like they do their
Ford Explorer?

That would be a Cardinal or C210 with a BRS.

In article ,
Stefan wrote:

http://community.webshots.com/photo/...80638909QTqtNi

Yes, and to walk around outside the airplane (on top of the wing)
without getting eaten.