First post….new to forum as I’m getting back into into GA after a 20 year hiatus. Been flying French built jets for too long now. It’s grown stale.

I was just curious why you don’t really hear much about this model. I was flying with a guy who owned a 4 series Cessna….can’t rememberer which one and he had never even heard of the 411. That and I’ve never seen any discussion regarding the type.

My father owned one for a brief period of time when I was young and still working on my private. At the time, it was the largest sexiest plane I had ever been in. We flew it around for a year or two. Operated out of a 2500-3000 ft grass strip outside of Houston…..I think I remember him saying the rudder was known to be too small. But I have a feeling their were more issues with the type than that.

Not looking to get into one or even a 4 series. Just curious as to what its reputation was.

Cheers!

Tread carefully. It has the early GTSiO engines and not much rudder. There's a reason Cessna stopped production and there aren't many out there. I think a 335 would be a much better choice.

Aviation Consumer's take on the 411 (available on the web without a paywall)

Cessna 411
The 411 was Cessnas first 400 series twin, initially appearing in 1965. It used what was available at the time for power, which was again the GTSIO-520-C. An early generation engine, it has a poor rep for longevity.

The 411 sold well to corporations seeking a fast, comfortable people mover. When new, it was the top of the line but was complicated and required plenty of money to maintain. (The money part is still true.)

Of the 400 series, the 411s were the most demanding to fly and expensive to maintain, requiring constant need for careful inspections and preventive maintenance. The operational costs drove the price of a used 411 to shockingly low levels.

The predictable happened: The airplanes were simply not kept up. They were flown by operators on the lowest rung of the freight dog ladder because they were cheap and carried an impressive load or by skinflint owners who just wanted cheap.

In both cases, training was essentially nonexistent, so the accident rate was awful. The aviation plaintiffs bar latched onto a convenient lever and claimed that because the vertical stabilizer and rudder were smaller than on other 400 series, the 411 was uncontrollable on one engine.

An expert in a lawsuit against Cessna testified that the rudder force needed to keep the airplane straight at Vmc was more than 200 pounds and that Cessna had faked meeting the 150-pound limit during certification.

The 411 was thought to be so bad, in fact, that Aviation Consumer deemed it too dangerous and suggested that Cessna buy them all back and junk them.

However, it turns out the trial experts data was flawed due to an incorrect measuring method. So while the 411 requires skill and training to handle, its slightly less demanding than the Beech Duke on one engine. (Actual rudder force at Vmc is 145 pounds; high for twins but the Duke is higher.)

In retrospect, we think the 411 got a bum rap suggesting its recall was perhaps over the top. That said, we still dont recommend the 411 but for maintenance cost reasons, not safety. Instead, we recommend that an owner considering a 411 examine the 401/402 because they have newer technology systems and components are less expensive to maintain.

Theyre also easier to fly, if not quite as fast. The criticisms of the 411 historically have had to do with its ability to maintain directional control on one engine. Having flown 411s and followed up on the claims made against the type, we learned that the airplanes are fully controllable down to Vmc and, in many cases, below Vmc.

Failure to feather the propeller of the dead engine or close its cowl flap will probably cancel any ability to hold altitude on one engine, if heavily loaded.

Naturally, that can cause a pilot to keep pulling the nose up until the speed gets well below Vmc and then the airplane, as with any twin, rolls uncontrollably. For other regimes of flight, the 411 is quite nice to fly, in our view. The 411 moves right along. If youre willing to use supplemental oxygen, it will easily do cruise at well over 210 knots in the high teens.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/aircra ... s-cessnas/

Another "take" from the same folks, same link.

"The 411 was thought to be so bad, in fact, that Aviation Consumer deemed it too dangerous and suggested that Cessna buy them all back and junk them"

I'd like to know more about the Cessna factory pilot crashing during an engine fail demo.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/aircra ... s-cessnas/

^^^ This. Is this just aviation lore or is it a true story?

I doubt there are any 411's still active. Look at the vertical stabilizer and rudder on a 401/402/421 - all much larger in area than the vertical on a 411. There's good reason for that!

Don't know how many are still actually "active".

FAA
Aircraft Inquiry
MANUFACTURER ENTERED: CESSNA
MODEL ENTERED: 411

2075902 CESSNA 411

• CALIFORNIA - 2
• GEORGIA - 1
• MISSOURI - 1
• NEVADA - 2
• NORTH DAKOTA - 1
• WYOMING - 1

2075904 CESSNA 411A

• ARKANSAS - 1
• DELAWARE - 1
• FLORIDA - 1
• INDIANA - 1
• MISSOURI - 1
• NEBRASKA - 1

IIRC, Cessna made the 411 prototype into its icing tanker at one time. I rode in it once and survived.

This is described in Bill Thompson's "Wings for the World III: Development of the 400 series Twins".

The original 411 prototype was donated to a tech school, the tanker was the resident engineering prototype and converted to an icing tanker for the Fanjet 500 (later to be named Citation) program.

They later used various models of Citations as the tankers (including a 560 at one time).

Mike C.

Is there a VG kit for the 411? If so did it help?

Is Kelly overhauling the starter adapters?

Don’t know how much it helped, but I recall there was a VG kit.

Fascinating information. Glad I’m still around. I can’t recall the details because it was so long ago of how that particular 411 came into our possession or where it went afterwards. I know he didn’t have it long though.

He was fortunate to be able to rid himself of it in a timely manner. We used to call them the Cessna 9-1-1... l-o-n-g before that famous ill-fated date in history. Used to call the VW 411 the same thing. Anybody remember those jewels??

Tom McCrae (now deceased) owned one.

I got to know Tom as I was bringing my 182 to him for my mechanical work.

I remember him saying that there was nothing wrong with a 411's motors if you flew them correctly.

Don't ask me what correctly meant, just too many years ago!!

I flew N7361U for close to 1000 hours in the late 70s. I don’t remember any rudder issues except landing one time with a flat right main. Almost ended up in the ditch. Saved it with differential engine power. No VMC issues that I remember. As I remember 3500 ft was a short field and it was somewhat under powered for its size. I recall turbocharger issues and fuel injection issues. Also deiceing boot issues. Burnt a lot of gas.