BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:02

Username Protected wrote:

And the only plane uglier with the gear down than the SR22 is the TTX.

-6
Well....I disagree and your just :crazy:

and your nanny dressed you funny as a kid

I started to say sumpin ugly bout yer Pilatus but :scratch:

, dang,
wanna trade is all that pops in me brain

I don't really give -1s

:cheers:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:03

Username Protected wrote:

And the only plane uglier with the gear down than the SR22 is the TTX.

-6
Well....I disagree and your just :crazy:

and your nanny dressed you funny as a kid

I started to say sumpin ugly bout yer Pilatus but :scratch:

, dang,
wanna trade is all that pops in me brain

I don't really give -1s

:cheers:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:11

Username Protected wrote:

Nobody is in the Textron booth looking at the TTX. In fact, the only TTX I saw at Oshkosh was in the Textron display.

I will say that Textron's sales people have been very welcoming, accomodating and helpful when talking about the KA250 and M2. It's obvious that is because it's what they want to sell and see as the future of the their company. I think they long ago gave up on the idea of being really seriously competitive in the higher end SE piston market and their behavior has reflected that. .

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:16

My comment wasn't a statement on the aircraft per say, but the whole experience. As many have said, Textron either doesnt get it, or doesnt care.
A prime example was the new plane 4 years ago. They showed it to us in Kansas, and proudly talked about the new Fadec engine, and the new(B36tc) airframe, then promptly killed the project.
It could be done, but they don't care. The new interior in the thread yesterday is prime example. Textron could remarket the G36 with this interior, the new fadec engine, and maybe some new avionics, and possibly recapture some market share. Or do the same with the TTX.....
But they have given up.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:26

When Cirrus starts production on twin engine jets, Textron will see some serious competition. :coffee:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:34

Username Protected wrote:

My comment wasn't a statement on the aircraft per say, but the whole experience. As many have said, Textron either doesnt get it, or doesnt care.
A prime example was the new plane 4 years ago. They showed it to us in Kansas, and proudly talked about the new Fadec engine, and the new(B36tc) airframe, then promptly killed the project.
It could be done, but they don't care. The new interior in the thread yesterday is prime example. Textron could remarket the G36 with this interior, the new fadec engine, and maybe some new avionics, and possibly recapture some market share. Or do the same with the TTX.....
But they have given up.

Textron doesn't care and I wouldn't care either if I were them. The future is JetA. Cirrus created their own SR22 killer with the SF50. Not many companies have that kind of vision.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:35

Username Protected wrote:

When Cirrus starts production on twin engine jets, Textron will see some serious competition. :coffee:

Cirrus never will......

But Pilatus already did as did Embraer.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 12:40

Username Protected wrote:

My comment wasn't a statement on the aircraft per say, but the whole experience. As many have said, Textron either doesnt get it, or doesnt care.
A prime example was the new plane 4 years ago. They showed it to us in Kansas, and proudly talked about the new Fadec engine, and the new(B36tc) airframe, then promptly killed the project.
It could be done, but they don't care. The new interior in the thread yesterday is prime example. Textron could remarket the G36 with this interior, the new fadec engine, and maybe some new avionics, and possibly recapture some market share. Or do the same with the TTX.....
But they have given up.

Textron doesn't care and I wouldn't care either if I were them. The future is JetA. Cirrus created their own SR22 killer with the SF50. Not many companies have that kind of vision.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 14:08

Username Protected wrote:

I started to say sumpin ugly bout yer Pilatus but :scratch:

, dang,
wanna trade is all that pops in me brain

Lol

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Feb 2018, 18:28

I will support the seals and ducts for this model..

Since 1996

Tooling was free

first articles were free

The thunderstorm in Bend / hail damage caused the bankruptcy as they were waiting on a avionics supplier to finish certification..

That bankruptcy cost me 186k

:beechslap:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Feb 2018, 15:43

Shame to see Cessna shut it down. I've had my 2007 Columbia 400 for about a year and a half now. Really great machine and one of the best travelling machines ever. Tooling along at 200kts in the midteens, LOP at 15gph is awesome. Comfortable and quiet and the relatively high wing loading really cuts through turbulence.

I wish Cessna could have figured out how to sell them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Feb 2018, 20:14

Considering how fast the 400 is... who cares if the gear is hanging down!

As far as looks go... the TTx and for that matter all Lancairs are beautiful!

I like what Lance said about the IV... it's the fastest piston single in the sky! Throw a spare engine in the back seat and it's the fastest piston twin!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Feb 2018, 20:16

Username Protected wrote:

Shame to see Cessna shut it down. I've had my 2007 Columbia 400 for about a year and a half now. Really great machine and one of the best travelling machines ever. Tooling along at 200kts in the midteens, LOP at 15gph is awesome. Comfortable and quiet and the relatively high wing loading really cuts through turbulence.

I wish Cessna could have figured out how to sell them.

Agree with all!!!

Especially wishing Cessna could have figured it out. Remember when Lancair had back orders for years?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Feb 2018, 12:13

Maybe they did quit on it because they knew they couldn’t compete with that airframe. If they revive the Turbo 210, 6 persons with full fuel, cruise in the 20’s with 190 knots speed nobody could touch them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Feb 2018, 14:00

I recall the author of the book "Rich Dad Poor Dad" telling a story about a person taking exception to his writing style and saying he was not one of the best authors. His response was that his goal was to be a "Best Selling" author, not a "Best Writing" author.

His story reminds me of the people that pick at all the technical "short-comings" of the Cirrus. At the end of the day, Cirrus is selling a lot of planes; very solid, reliable, high-performance and safe planes I might add. Cirrus understands the market.

I might suggest that the technical experts that tout how the TTx is far superior to the Cirrus should buy the rights to the TTx and show the market how it is done.

Cessna Ends TTX Production