I got some T303 time in service tests. Did an unplanned single engine go-around in checkout (lucky it was Kansas) and scared myself in icing once. CEFC had one for a short time, but it was taken back and sold when Cessna stopped making them.

Slower than a T/P 210.

I always wondered if it would have been better to have a standard un-turbocharged IO-520.

Good examples of the 303 that come up for sale are pretty scarce. There's one on the Crusader Facebook page that was posted yesterday. It's high time but I know the owner and suspect it's in really good shape.

I've posted elsewhere on BT over the years about Crusaders and I"m in my 10th year of ownership (2 airplanes). Of the 14 airplanes I've owned, the Crusader is my favorite for all the reasons Zeke gave earlier in this thread. Of course, it all depends on your mission. I owned a 421C for a while which was great for carrying a load of people on long trips but it cost twice as much to operate as the Crusader and was a lot less fun to fly.

For everything there is a season.

S/N 301 is coming up for sale soon. US registered, Low time with 0 time SOH engine right and about 500 on the left. Cargo door, FIKI, STC Air conditioning, larger main tires, Good paint, interior, no damage, Garmin G500 touch screen, GTN750 SL30, ADSB IN/out and Radar.

I’ll post ad when its ready to fly. Hanging right engine now.

I've always admired the 303, and thanks to Zeke, know more about them. The big plus for me is that it's a cabin class twin with an air stair door.

Paul,

The air stair door was one of the attractions for me. I needed something my aging father could get in.

Now, many years later, my mission has changed again. A year ago I sold half of the plane (the left half) to a friend who i partner with in other aircraft as well. I’m just not using it much anymore. And this year I will sell him the other half, too. My wife and I just don’t use it anymore.

I reread my original (big) post and I still agree with everything I wrote on that post. I remain especially pleased with the handling. Just a delight to hand fly. I recently needed to relocate the 303 and my Texan to Oshkosh. So a good friend flew my Texan and I flew the 303 as a flight of two into Osh. We’re both carded and current formation pilots, we briefed the flight, so it’s not like we’re a couple of hillbillies doing this. Well, we might be hillbillies but not about this. The 303 was a very nice formation platform. And it was fun in the break to runway 27 as well. It was light on the controls, responsive throttles, good visibility, etc. Just a joy to fly.

If anyone is still considering a 303, I recommend them highly.

Best wishes,

Zeke

p.s. I didn’t wear my flight suit nor helmet in the 303. Maybe I should have and then thumped my chest to the roar of the crowd when I disembarked. Alas, another opportunity missed. Perhaps next time.

One thing to look out for is the cylinders. They are not "normal" 520 cylinders and I'm pretty sure they are unique to the 303 - which means they are probably rare & hard to come by.

Another difference is these engines are "hung" via rear mounts like Lycomings which means the rear case is totally different.

Makes me wonder if they were originally planning on using Lycomings.

I think the mount legs are similar idea to the IO-346 engines on Beech Musketeers.

I've wondered if there is a IO-550 case that has the same areas tapped for studs. Then the T303 legs could be mounted to a normally aspirated 550 and greatly simplify the engine installation.

It should fit in the same cowl using the same rear T303 induction pipes. That may be the only way forward with the airframes as support for the LTSIO-520AE becomes harder to get. Overhaul shops with test stands for this engine mount and left turning prop are hard to find. It's similar to a Lycoming dynafocal but not the same mount spacing.

How hard will it be to change from opposite turning engines to two of the same is quite a STC question.

The power could be limited to 250hp with a mainfold pressure restriction and you would have the 250hp still available to a fairly high usable altitude. Compare closer to the turbocharged engine. What props to use is also a question. The original small diameter props / 2400 rpm I think were not the best choice but good for noise. An increase in noise would be a problem unless some type of muffler was used or the 300hp rate of climb could get it higher over the microphones in a noise test.

Weight should be similar for both installations. Maybe a bit lighter on the IO-550 total package.

I have not found the cylinders to be hard to get. Continental supports the engine. The best thing about these engines is the 2,200 hour TBO - and most make it.

There are some scarce airframe parts.That said, most parts are available from Cessna and the salvage yards. The Crusader parts situation is no worse that other legacy aircraft, IMO.

The take-away here is that these engines are NOT "normal" 520s (as has been suggested in previous posts).
There are some very significant changes that are unique to this engine, the cylinders and the mounting system for a start, there are most probably others.

With the clean sheet design of the 303 it seems they had to bastardize an engine to fit the airframe, rather than design the airframe to accept common variants of engines in production.

Was this the cause of the demise of a very nice airplane, or was it robbing 340 sales? Bring it back; too many pilots are giving up planes because they have to climb onto the wing and duck into the cockPIT.

Robbing 340 sales wasn't the issue -- Cessna stopped making all the twins. The last 340s were from 1981, though there were some unfinished airframes that were finished and sold as 1983s. I think the 303 run was 1982-1984. My understanding was that it was meant to replace the 310. If they hadn't ceased production of all the twins, my guess is the 303 would have continued being made as well.

We did encounter an odd characteristic. Find a POH copy and look for the hot weather takeoff leaning procedure.

A normal start and then takeoff on a hot day things are normal.
If you stop for fuel and then go to takeoff again I believe there is a trap.

The alternate air door springs are very light mounted to the back of the induction airboxes. With the turbos and oil hot from previous flight the cowl air is hot. The top cowl flaps should allow this to escape but for whatever reason on a hot day when you start the takeoff roll odd things happen both engines. There could possibly be a difference in suction pressure between the original and STC Brackett filter elements.

The airplane would sometimes not reach full MP unless you lean the mixtures back allowing the turbos to spin up and then enrich the mixtures during the takeoff roll. If not leaned MP will eventually come up after the gear is up and there is enough ram air into the flush NACA intakes to hold the doors shut.

I blocked the alternate air doors closed with some tabs as an experiment and the problem went away.

Cessna knew they had a problem and added the leaning procedure to the POH. A cable operated or magnetic door would have been better. The flush Intake ducts have an airflow trip strip mounted to the cowl. Not sure if this was an attempt to fix the issue.

I think this was the cause of the fatal accident just after takeoff in NJ a few years ago.

The other is begin to rotate a bit early just before VMC. If you hold the airplane on the ground longer especially when heavy for extra speed then rotate the trailing link gear swings forward towards the CG causing a tendency to overrotate on takeoff. It can be done smoothly but it is different than other earlier Cessna twins. I have not flown the other trailing link Cessna piston twins to compare or the T303 with 6.00X6 mains.

Rigging the main gear is interesting. To get the correct hydraulic actuator travel for down locks the cylinder shafts will bow/flex when extended. It's a simple system and works but looks a bit odd.

Check for cabin floor cracks just behind the spar carry thru. Pilot and copilot step here when pivoting out of the front seats.

Check with your mechanic for what is needed to inspect the fuel inlet valves. This is a recurring AD and needs some special equipment.

Also there is a Mandatory recurring eddy current inspection of the rear wing spar every 5 years. Note 5 of the TCDS and maintenance manual. Calendar time is the issue with most. It's not an AD or SB but required as part of the Type Certificate so Mandatory. Originally it was due at 20,000 hrs but after a certain calendar year. I believe 30 years it becomes every 5 years or 2500 hrs.

See TCDS Note 5, T303 Maintenance Manual 5-21 Wings (S) #6
Chapter 57 Part 60 and Note 12 of the Special inspections.

I'll check with the owner of our local T303 but I believe it was about 3K last inspection. He bought a "Standard" from Cessna to calibrate the machine and keeps it with the airplanes logs. Aluminum strip with riveted joint. The tech needs this to calibrate the machine for the test.

It's frequently overlooked.

Also the original Steel or Kevlar O2 bottles are all calendar life timed out by now. Check if replaced.

Check the rivet lines below the nacelle where it joins the wing skin. The flexing in this location frequently pops rivets and wears the holes.

Aileron trim tab horns have no bushings so they wear with horn replacement the only option

1000hr turbocharger oil check valve replacement is also frequently overlooked. There are mandatory replacements for a lot of items and a low calendar time replacement for the trim actuators in the maintenance manual. They are not on the TCDS like the spar inspection but it may be an indicator of expense. Same with engine control replacement at engine overhaul. It does not say recommended only Mandatory for all. If signing off annuals per the maintenance manual instead of 43appendix D it could be a catch.

The gas struts for all the doors and baggage doors are extremely expensive from Cessna. They are painted white originally and I think painting them drives the cost up. There are equivalent automotive out there but the heads are larger and can wear on the structure.

The mixture levers are missing the clicker patches on other twin Cessnas. There is one friction lock for all knobs. Because of this if the friction lock is set for good throttle movement throttle changes affects the prop and mixture settings. Cessna tried to Cheapen up the quadrant assembly.

Cabin door steps are light built. Have heavy passengers keep their heels close to the pivot points so the steps are not kinked about 1/2 way out.

Tail inspection panels on top of horizontal and on the side of the vertical attach with structural steel screws. I find those replaced with stainless non structural screws.

The engines are prone to oil leaks from the fittings. The specified O rings are not for immersion in hot engine oil. There are alternate part numbers for oil resistant O rings but it goes against the parts manual.

There are a few variations of turbocharger attach brackets. Cessna Service Kit updates for the latest version that makes replacing the oil filter much easier.

Good info Charlie. A couple of observations:

I've owned two Crusaders over the last 10 years and never had to use the "hot day takeoff procedure." It's simple though: if you can't get full RPM on the takeoff roll, lean the mixture slightly. Never needed it.

The NTSB report on the NJ crash said the cause of the engine power loss was unable to be determined. The rumor mill among people who knew the pilot was that there was a known engine issue.

A few years back the requirement for the eddy current inspection was eliminated. I have the details somewhere but can't recall them here. Maybe Zeke can elaborate on this. Otherwise I'll dig into my files. At 20 years (2002), a few owners had the inspection done. To my knowledge no cracks were found. Recurring ADs are minimal on the Crusader compared to most other airplanes I've owned.

I would not trust a $3,000 Annual on the Crusader or any other airplane for that matter - unless maybe it was owner-assisted. It's a simple airplane compared to other Cessna Twins but not that simple.

The 303 was built in Cessna's single engine factory and shares some common parts. One downside is Crusaders suffer from nose wheel shimmy. The cure is the same as for the singles. Replace the bolts and bushings in the upper gear structure. Not a big deal.