The question is whether a commitment to legacy support is a quality which helps sell new airplanes. If so, then legacy support is a part of running the company and shouldn't be treated simply as its own profit/loss center.

I just replaced one on my C210. $1,250 for the part and a couple hours labor.

It's called a Chinese wall. Standard operating procedure in many tech companies.


The issues here are not business issues though. Many of us have the expertise and tools to build many parts on our planes. (I've got ready access to a 5 axis cnc mill, cnc lathes and just about any other machining tool imaginable)

The issue is purely regulatory. We need to band together and take over the stinking FAA ourselves. AOPA isn't doing it. NBAA isn't doing it. EAA doesn't really care since they're already experimental.

Between parts and fuel, we've all allowed this crap to go on far too long. I don't know what the answers are. I fear the experimental thing because I think it would hose us on resale and turn prebuys into a week long affair that involves inspecting every single part on the plane to see how they were made.

Well, what I am proposing here is the way around that regulatory issue.

Well, what I am proposing here is the way around that regulatory issue.

Robair may be a source.

Just ordered from Robair. Will give a pirep.

It amazes me that Cessna has no real desire to support legacy airplanes.

IMO their best days are behind them. Will they ever come up with another idea or engineering as solid as a 172? Not a chance.

Will they ever create something as ambitious as a 421 or a P210? I doubt it.

Will they jump on the single engine turboprop bandwagon a day late and a dollar short? Maybe.

Will they continue to build several jets which essentially do the same thing and compete with themselves---likely. (sorta like the car auto manufacturers who produce 6 different SUV's)

Yes I know they supposedly make money on the jets. However if the middle class disappears the rich are not far behind with our global economy. Good luck selling jets to people after our government gets all the money. Then only politicians will fly.

If you do not sell an entry level airplane (Does this word even apply to a 500,000 plus investment?) you are slowly destroying the tree of aviation by picking the fruit while not watering the grass and putting down some fertilizer.

Without foresight we are no better than monkeys.

The sermon concludes.

With the exception of the Corvalis ... everything in the Cessna piston line is an entry level airplane. They're the only major mfr fielding a light sport plane. The 172/182/206 are all suitable as first planes. Cessna's problem, at least from our perspective, is that they don't sell any upgrade planes. The market they used to serve with the 210-441 has been totally abandoned.

Charles,

I know they sell entry level airplanes. They are one of the few that do. I own one. It is amazing well engineered but not necessarily well built. Lots of rivet dust. I was not necessarily referencing just them. I should of also qualified if you do not "support" entry level airplanes. I stand half-corrected.