Airline Pilot Forums

http://www.cessna.com/NewReleases/New/NewReleaseNum-1192355835218.html (http://www.cessna.com/NewReleases/New/NewReleaseNum-1192355835218.html)

Not much range for a bigger plane but looks beautiful inside

Two new types announced in the past 14 days, but no mention of the Columbus.
Do you know if the Columbus is officially dead in the water or still sitting on a back burner in a different room?

USMCFLYR

When I left there it was dead. They gave KS back its $33 million incentive and removed the office trailers brought on property for engineering. Even if they wanted to do it now there is not a plant big enough to build it. If they do choose to revive it, I would venture a guess it will be in Mexico.

http://www.cessna.com/NewReleases/New/NewReleaseNum-1192355835218.html (http://www.cessna.com/NewReleases/New/NewReleaseNum-1192355835218.html)

Not much range for a bigger plane but looks beautiful inside


I saw the mock-up at NBAA. Interior was great, I was dissapointed with the range though. But then again, who wants to spend that much time in a citation!?

I saw it NBAA was very nice love the flight deck too.

Cessna-Textron really should have continued building the Columbus. Both the timing on the development cycle and the market niche it was aimed at were correct. New designs take 5 years to bring to market, and while the recession is going on is the perfect time to be developing a new model in anticipation of a recovery. When the bizjet market recovers, Cessna will have nothing in the lucrative super-midsize category and even during the recession, the super-midsize category has remained strong. Inter-continental jet buyers are generally self-financed and Gulfstreams, Challengers, and large Falcons are selling as well as they ever did. Why Textron pulled Cessna out of its CE-850 development program is something I will never understand. It may have had to do with cash flow, because it had nothing to do with smart planning.

I saw the mock-up at NBAA. Interior was great, I was dissapointed with the range though. But then again, who wants to spend that much time in a citation!?

With a cabin cross-section larger than any existing midsize jet (and only a few inches narrower than the Legacy 450), I'm guessing comfort won't be a factor.

I'd also bet a c-note that the range of the Latitude goes up at least 10%, based on Cessna's history of sandbagging initial performance estimates.

As far as Fatation goes...didn't Cessna finish that large building at the factory that was destined for Columbus production in ICT? The shell was up in early 2009 when we were taking delivery of our plane and I was told plans were to complete the facility.

...As far as Fatation goes...didn't Cessna finish that large building at the factory that was destined for Columbus production in ICT? The shell was up in early 2009 when we were taking delivery of our plane and I was told plans were to complete the facility.

The Columbus plant was never built. Cessna built several new buildings between 2005-08 since the small jet business was booming. You may be thinking about the interiors shop which is close to the runway at ICT. They added lots of new buildings and parking lots during that time. It was a strong growth period.

Put in <37°39'0.51"N, 97°24'52.80"W> in Google Earth. The dirt pad for the CE-850 building was built in 2008 and is visible in the G-E photo. That was to be the Columbus 850 plant, and nothing but the pad is there now. Heavy equipment built the pad in 2008 near Hoover Road. The bulldozers quit suddenly in late 2008 when the recession set in. They seeded it with grass, and that was the last of the Columbus 850 program. Engineers were dispersed to other programs and many thousands- 8,000 people in all including yours truly, half the entire company, were let go.

In the current Google Earth photo you can see what's left of the 30-something engineering trailers that were brought in just for the CE-850 project. In the G-E photo most of them are gone, and a few are still visible ready to be towed out. I remember that week clearly. Textron made them bail out and Cessna has never been the same. I wish them well.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll8/Techman8/apc%20photos/CE850pad.jpg

Cessna-Textron really should have continued building the Columbus. Both the timing on the development cycle and the market niche it was aimed at were correct. New designs take 5 years to bring to market, and while the recession is going on is the perfect time to be developing a new model in anticipation of a recovery. When the bizjet market recovers, Cessna will have nothing in the lucrative super-midsize category and even during the recession, the super-midsize category has remained strong. Inter-continental jet buyers are generally self-financed and Gulfstreams, Challengers, and large Falcons are selling as well as they ever did. Why Textron pulled Cessna out of its CE-850 development program is something I will never understand. It may have had to do with cash flow, because it had nothing to do with smart planning.


Wow I agree 100%.. I was actually thinking the exact same thing almost word for word just 2 days ago....... IMO Cessna dropped the ball huge on that one.....

Only wild card would have been the Netjet orders that would have been cancelled. That would have probably been a fairly large amount of initial orders... It would have still most likely sold well, but NJA would definitely had been a catalyst for the programs start.

There was a building going up in early 2009 on the north side of the factory that was much taller than anything south of it; I was told that was for Columbus. Like I said, there was a steel frame up at that time and it looked to be at least semi-active.

As a multiple plane 680 operator the Latitude is exactly what we were looking for next, EXCEPT the range. Looks like a Gulfstream 280's or Challenger 300's now.
VERY disappointed!

There was a building going up in early 2009 on the north side of the factory that was much taller than anything south of it; I was told that was for Columbus. Like I said, there was a steel frame up at that time and it looked to be at least semi-active.

Do a screen grab from Bing- Google and mark the building on it. I was not there after mid-2009 but I can ask someone who was. I am sure it had nothing to do with the Columbus. Construction was always going on even after the program was canceled. They added a large interiors factory at ICT and the process equipment was always getting rearranged for better efficiency. I remember seeing that building you are talking about, but it was not an aircraft assembly line. It might have been an autoclave building.

You worked there so your intel is almost certain to be better than mine...

Cessna is concentrating on maintaining its existing market share right now, and will not be on the offensive for a while. That's ok because there are a lot of serious competitors out there. Cessna never really made it to composites, and they are going to have to make the move at some point. In the meantime, they must struggle to distinguish their existing models which is what they are doing with the various derivatives. All the new models are highly derivative- Latitude= Sovereign M2= CJ1+ Citation Ten= Citation X. Cessna has not brought a clean sheet airplane since the Mustang and their technology is basically stuck in the early '00s. That sounds worse than it is because the new tech is fairly easy to bolt on, but R&D was reduced too much during the Recession and they are going to have to fix that pretty soon. I would not be surprised if they build a composite plant and a come out with composite airplane next.

Latitude is a derivative airframe of the Sovereign?

Is its "widest Citation cabin ever" not clean-sheet?

All the new models are highly derivative- Latitude= Sovereign M2= CJ1+ Citation Ten= Citation X. Cessna has not brought a clean sheet airplane since the Mustang and their technology is basically stuck in the early '00s.

I agree. Cessna seems to be happy serving warmed up leftovers. While the Latitude may officially be "clean sheet" due to the cabin width, it doesn't seem to be anything really new in terms of range, speed, payload, technology, etc.

Latitude is a derivative airframe of the Sovereign?

Is its "widest Citation cabin ever" not clean-sheet?

It's got a Sovereign wing, tail, and most other systems. They have not announced a turbine for it yet.

Announcement I got was P&W 605 engines.

GF

So it has the same engine as CE-650 as well.

So it has the same engine as CE-650 as well.

The 650 series has TFE-731s...

Variant of CE-680 engine

GF

What's wrong with derivative products? Brings improvements to market faster and cheaper than a bunch of clean-sheet designs.

The Falcon 900EX has the same basic wing (and engines) as the original Falcon 50.

The G550 has the same fuselage cross-section as the Gulfstream I turboprop.

The Global Express XRS shares the same fuselage cross-section as the Challenger 600.

Its completely reasonable to expect "Latitude" fuselage to lead to a "Longertube" replacement for Sovereign with range that makes it competitive in the supermid class.

GLEX has the same dimensions ONLY, the fuselage is a completely clean sheet design. But, point taken

GF

Typo, meant CE-680.

What's wrong with derivative products? Brings improvements to market faster and cheaper than a bunch of clean-sheet designs.


Nothing, but Cessna never came out with a super mid to base derivatives on, and never ventured into composites or fly by wire. Clean sheet designs are needed for those tasks. Columbus was going to knock out the super-mid and fly-by-wire mixed flight controls.

Cessna-Textron really should have continued building the Columbus. Both the timing on the development cycle and the market niche it was aimed at were correct. New designs take 5 years to bring to market, and while the recession is going on is the perfect time to be developing a new model in anticipation of a recovery. When the bizjet market recovers, Cessna will have nothing in the lucrative super-midsize category and even during the recession, the super-midsize category has remained strong. Inter-continental jet buyers are generally self-financed and Gulfstreams, Challengers, and large Falcons are selling as well as they ever did. Why Textron pulled Cessna out of its CE-850 development program is something I will never understand. It may have had to do with cash flow, because it had nothing to do with smart planning.
And to think they don't have anyone like you with your insight. :rolleyes:

As a multiple plane 680 operator the Latitude is exactly what we were looking for next, EXCEPT the range. Looks like a Gulfstream 280's or Challenger 300's now.
VERY disappointed!

Have you seen the price? About 60% of a 280 or 75% a 680. Looks like an XLS/Hawker replacement?

If I might pose a question it seems that the Citation III, IV, VI and VII were the last of the swept wing small performance oriented Cessna's...what gives?

And to think they don't have anyone like you with your insight. :rolleyes:

Since when is speaking an opinion with good reason to support it so objectionable to you? Don't be small and take cheap shots like this. Stand up and make solid arguments if you oppose mine. There is nothing wrong with making solid arguments, even if they are wrong sometimes. If your argument is the best then it will hopefully be recognized as being the best. If it is the weaker argument of several, then hopefully by virtue of good sense and the presence of better arguments, the truth will prevail. I have lost many arguments and I have won some, but I never make cheap shots at my opponent because doing so would be to dishonor the truth itself.

If I might pose a question it seems that the Citation III, IV, VI and VII were the last of the swept wing small performance oriented Cessna's...what gives?

You mean speed oriented? If you mean the smaller Cessnas are slower now and they used to be faster, that is because the company wanted to show its ability to produce fast bizjets and they did so by using swept super-critical wings. At a later point they realized that speed was not as important as short-field performance to this market segment and the IV and VI are non-entities as far as production numbers are concerned. The VII was intended to be a LearJet killer because at the time Cessna was worried about its brand being perceived as slow. The Citation X ended that perception if there ever was one, and to this day remains the fastest production business jet in production although Gulfstream is about to change that by a tiny margin.

Well said Cub. The Latitude will be HUGE hit in Europe. Every year at EBACE we would hear from operators over there that they needed greater range than the XLS+, but didn't need the range of the 680 (plus there is a very large price difference between the two).