The Baron is perfect just the way it is. Doesn't matter if it isn't spin proof. Is the King Air? Is the Citation series?

If you get in the situation where the aircraft goes into a spin, perhaps you should not be flying that aircraft and stick with spin proof trainers.

Try telling the lawyer whose client's husband was killed in one while botching an engine out and sues you quite successfully for $3M. Won't happen? Already has, and in Barons too. Cessna quit making twins for this exact reason.

If you are asking why is it only piston twins that lead to these wrongful death lawsuits, it has to do with their weak engine out performance. But any aircraft can lead to a lawsuit if the lawyers think there is some money in it and the airplane has an issue or looks like it has one.

Come on, this is just wishful thinking. History shows the class of buyer with too much money will bu far more airplane than they have the skills to safely fly. Many wrongful death lawsuits have been successfully brought over the last several decades by relatives of fast piston airplanes, not just light twins, and there is no law keeping a rich idiot from buying one and crashing it. Why do you think this is going to change? Rich people buy all kinds of aircraft including light jets. This group of people nearly killed general aviation in this country with their lawsuits. Sim instructors can deny a type rating to a client if the airplane requires one, and I have seen that happen, but with non-typed aircraft the buyer only has to gather insurance mins using a safety pilot and get a casual signoff from a 500 hour CFI and it's off to the races with a Baron or worse.

A bonanza with a lycoming up front?

Is there such a thing as *spin PROOF* or is it *spin RESISTANT*?
An important differentiation in legal terms.

Trial attorneys don't care. When a 152 crashes after flying into IMC they convince the family that they should sue because the 152 wasn't equipped with ground avoidance radar.

Nice article on this.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Textron Looks To Keep Beechcraft As Separate Brand

(K. Lynch, 01/07/14, Aviation Week) Textron executives maintain a number of decisions lie ahead with the company’s planned $1.4 billion acquisition of Beechcraft, but the initial plan would appear to maintain the brand separate of Textron’s Cessna brand and keep at least the top leadership intact at both operations. Textron on Dec. 26 announced it would acquire Beechcraft by mid-2014, a move that would bring together two of the longest running industry rivals and most historic names in general aviation under a single owner. Beechcraft’s equity holders have approved the agreement, which is subject to the customary approvals. Textron Chairman and CEO Scott Donnelly, who has long expressed interest in the Beechcraft programs, calls the acquisition “a tremendous opportunity to extend our general aviation business.” The acquisition would provide Textron with a King Air twin-turboprop family that has experienced significant growth this year, along with a stable piston product line. But it also will provide a support network that when combined with Cessna’s, will be an extensive global support provider. Perhaps most importantly, the acquisition will bring with it an installed base of close to 36,000 Hawker and Beechcraft aircraft that must be serviced.

Textron also is acquiring the type certificates for all of the former Hawker and Beechcraft business jets, including the Premier and Hawker 4000, programs that Beechcraft has been actively shopping since it shuttered the lines more than a year ago. “From our customers’ perspective, this creates a broader selection of aircraft and a larger service footprint— all sharing the same high standards of quality and innovation,” Donnelly says. He praises the twin-turboprop King Air product line as “a fantastic global brand that fits very, very nicely” with Cessna Aircraft’s Caravan [single-turboprop] and Citation jet lines. Beechcraft CEO Bill Boisture says, “Textron’s experience in the industry and its willingness to invest in and maintain the iconic Beechcraft brand make it an ideal parent company, one that will help us continue to satisfy our customers and meet our business objectives at a faster pace.” Textron is assembling a transition team to help facilitate the acquisition, including the evaluation of potential synergies in the Cessna and Beechcraft businesses. Textron sees about $65 million in cost overlaps and other synergies between the companies and up to $85 million over three years.

I expected them to keep the brands separate for the forseeable future. If they were looking at markets largely outside the US, it might make sense to "cessna-ize" Beech and make it a monolithic brand.

But since the US is such a cornerstone of their market it's probably worth keeping the brand differentiation to emphasize product options in the marketplace. The choice would still be there with separate products even if they were all labelled Cessna, but this makes it easy to see.

Rich people keep general aviation partially afloat in the US whereas all the other new aircraft are sold overseas.