Sneeze & Freeze is our annual sojourn to KCAD for a weekend of ski plane ops,
hangar flying and good food & fellowship.

I've been at this flying thing for 41 years ... and I never knew that Cessna's
single-engine model numbers were derived from the economy cruise TAS,
expressed as mach.

I'm not sure I buy that... Maybe the first couple models, but I'd really like to see a 401 cruise at 258 knots, and a 208 at 134 knots? A 120 at 77 knots sounds about right..

Jason

Yes, I need some additional evidence before I can accept this theory as fact. (Cool theory, though!)

Interesting how adding a nose gear always added .002 Mach! (170/172; 180/182)

Also interesting that the retractables don't gain any speed over the fixed gear models....

I believe the numbers were tied to the square footage of the wing area. At least for the singles.

I dont buy it.
172, 180, 182, 185, 206, 207 have all the same wing area.

100 / 200 single engine
300 / 400 twins
500+ jets

> single-engine

>> I'd really like to see a 401 cruise at 258 knots

I don't believe that Cessna ever built a single-engine 401.

Seems that Cessna Flight Test's patch for the 162, had
a rocker that says, "Fun at Mach 0.162"

There was discussion around the wood stove re: the
200-series aircraft ... doesn't seem to hold-up for them.

I don't know for sure, but I think 140's are no faster than 120's, and 150's are slower. The conversion seems to work generally, though.

Years ago (following the Mathias Rust flight to Moscow) there was a "fun patch" making the rounds. It was a round patch with a Cessna 172 in the center and around the border at the top: CESSNA 172 STEALTH, and around the bottom: MACH .17".

The only two models I still have manuals for are the 172 and 152 with 174 and 159 square feet respectively for 1980 models.

Did not say it held true just that is supposedly the genesis of the nomenclature.

The original 195,120,140,150,170, ect all had airspeed redline at those numbers.