![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Thomas Borchert" wrote in message ... Blueskies., You said vaporware - vaporware doesn't fly, maybe a vaporplane... Something flew, yes. Was it a product from Cessna? Hardly. Vaporware in my book is something you demo to great effect but with nothing even remotely approaching a finished product in sight, let alone a firm date for a finished product "on the shelves". Often, the purpose is to keep the impressed masses from buying an available product from the competition while playing catch-up with that competition after you have badly dropped the ball. IMHO, what Cessna did qualifies fully and in all aspects. I think many would disagree with your definition. Vaporware to most, is a plan, some nice specifications, and some 3-D cad pictures. Have the computer crash, and what do you have to show for your airplane? Nothing. Vapor! -- Jim in NC |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Morgans,
I think many would disagree with your definition. Hey, that's what usenet is all about, isn't it? ;-) Here's what I'm trying to say: If one looks beyond the Ah's and Oh's of the excellently executed Cessna marketing presentation, one sees two "proof of concept" airplanes. Both are destined for market categories that are already well filled with other company's products. As an aside: That means there are no concepts to prove, really, other than the concept of Cessna entering those markets. So what we really see is Cessna waking up to market trends that have been apparent and established for years, if not decades. What we also see is that a certified product from Cessna in either category is years away. And all that together, in my view, shows a failure of Cessna rather than a success. It's still great that they might(!) enter those markets, but the presentation was underwhelming to me in that it was too little too late and no firm commitment. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Thomas Borchert" wrote in message ... And all that together, in my view, shows a failure of Cessna rather than a success. It's still great that they might(!) enter those markets, but the presentation was underwhelming to me in that it was too little too late and no firm commitment. -- It does look like Cessna is coming late to the party in both the LSA and the "Cirrus Killer" arena. Another company showing up late to the LSA party is Van's. They've had the RV-12 on the drawing board since before I started building my 601 back in 2002 and they have yet to get a kit to market much less a completed S-LSA. Piper it seems isn't going to come and play in either sandbox and are counting on Honda's VLJ to make them relevant. Good luck with that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
It does look like Cessna is coming late to the party in both the LSA and the "Cirrus Killer" arena. Another company showing up late to the LSA party is Van's. They've had the RV-12 on the drawing board since before I started building my 601 back in 2002 and they have yet to get a kit to market much less a completed S-LSA. Or one might say that Vans has surveyed the LSA specs and market and is carefully developing the RV-12 instead of rushing to market. I'd be willing to bet that five years from now that the RV-12 will outnumber all of the other flying homebuilt LSAs. - John Ousterhout - |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "John Ousterhout" wrote in message news:bG9Cg.883926$084.394004@attbi_s22... Gig 601XL Builder wrote: It does look like Cessna is coming late to the party in both the LSA and the "Cirrus Killer" arena. Another company showing up late to the LSA party is Van's. They've had the RV-12 on the drawing board since before I started building my 601 back in 2002 and they have yet to get a kit to market much less a completed S-LSA. Or one might say that Vans has surveyed the LSA specs and market and is carefully developing the RV-12 instead of rushing to market. I'd be willing to bet that five years from now that the RV-12 will outnumber all of the other flying homebuilt LSAs. I have little doubt you are right Van's knows how to create a great kit and if they had had the RV-12 anywhere close to market when I started building I might well have been building it instead of the 601XL I'm building now. My statement was that Van's is coming to the party late not that their aircraft would be in any way inferior. My bet is the reason they didn't have an LSA type kit before they did is that they were too busy with the RV-10. Which given their market was probably a good idea. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Ousterhout wrote:
I'd be willing to bet that five years from now that the RV-12 will outnumber all of the other flying homebuilt LSAs. In what way will the RV-12 be superior to the Zenith Zodiac? On what basis is the RV-12 going to overtake market share from a very similar plane that is already flying as well as from a host of other available LSA models already flying? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Logajan wrote in
: John Ousterhout wrote: I'd be willing to bet that five years from now that the RV-12 will outnumber all of the other flying homebuilt LSAs. In what way will the RV-12 be superior to the Zenith Zodiac? On what basis is the RV-12 going to overtake market share from a very similar plane that is already flying as well as from a host of other available LSA models already flying? It will actually fly at it's rated speed. The match hole drilling will actually match... The Zodiac is a great little plane, it was on my short list of 2 of planes to build. but it has never met it's advertized speeds (go to the matronics Zodiac list and read the archives of posts of Zodiac builders if you dont believe me) and many have also complained about poor fit of the pre-drilled components. -- -- ET :-) "A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."---- Douglas Adams |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
ET wrote:
The Zodiac is a great little plane, it was on my short list of 2 of planes to build. It's still on my short list. What was the other plane on your short list, if you don't mind my asking? but it has never met it's advertized speeds (go to the matronics Zodiac list and read the archives of posts of Zodiac builders if you dont believe me) Actually I've researched the written material on the Internet regarding the Zodiac and unless I missed something, those complaints refer to older 601 models. I haven't seen any complaints regarding the Zodiac model making its rated speed, which I believe has redesigned wings. I haven't ordered the Kitplane's January 2004 issue to see what the article "Zenith vs. Zenith Showdown (Zodiac 601 XL - Stol CH 701)" said about it meeting its claimed speed. Unfortunately the usefulness of Matronics postings is about on a par with the usefulness of Usenet postings - at best merely suggestive, but they always need more authoritative confirmation. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thomas Borchert schrieb:
If one looks beyond the Ah's and Oh's of the excellently executed Cessna marketing presentation, one sees two "proof of concept" airplanes. Both are destined for market categories that are already well filled with other company's products. As an aside: That means there are no concepts to prove, really, other than the concept of Cessna entering those markets. So what we really see is Cessna waking up to market trends that have been apparent and established for years, Why does this remind me of Windoze? Stefan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
("Thomas Borchert" wrote)
If one looks beyond the Ah's and Oh's of the excellently executed Cessna marketing presentation, one sees two "proof of concept" airplanes. Both are destined for market categories that are already well filled with other company's products. As an aside: That means there are no concepts to prove, really, other than the concept of Cessna entering those markets. So what we really see is Cessna waking up to market trends that have been apparent and established for years, if not decades. What we also see is that a certified product from Cessna in either category is years away. Cessna's VLJ, Mustang, comes to mind. We think we'll do this - a few years later, there it is. The giggle I had at OSH was Cessna reps stating their good looking new Cessna LSA would do 120 knots. Hearing that, I'm calling it ...."The Cessna Killer." Montblack |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Oshkosh Reflections | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 54 | August 16th 05 09:24 PM |
Oshkosh Reflections | Jay Honeck | Owning | 44 | August 7th 05 02:31 PM |
Oshkosh Reflections | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 45 | August 7th 05 02:31 PM |
Oshkosh EAA Warbirds ??? | Paul | Restoration | 0 | July 11th 04 04:17 AM |
How I got to Oshkosh (long) | Doug | Owning | 2 | August 18th 03 12:05 AM |