04 May 2025, 08:17 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 23 Jun 2013, 16:16 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 07/12/12 Posts: 566 Post Likes: +31 Company: CBE Company Location: Acworth, GA / Santa Rosa Beach, FL
Aircraft: Sold Everything
|
|
Had a Cessna Factory technical representative stop by my hangar looking for a particular Citation needing his expertise. He handles the Southeast region. He has to fly commercially or drive, company policy does not permit him to fly using GA aircraft.
Anyone heard of this before with Cessna?
_________________ Flyings not a hobby, it's a way of life.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 23 Jun 2013, 18:51 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/11/10 Posts: 1872 Post Likes: +297
Aircraft: pa 31
|
|
I had a friend who needed service and Cessna sent their tech down from Orlando. The tech was from England but lives here now and he drive down, did not fly. Seems stupid that a company making the planes would not fly them down! R Username Protected wrote: Had a Cessna Factory technical representative stop by my hangar looking for a particular Citation needing his expertise. He handles the Southeast region. He has to fly commercially or drive, company policy does not permit him to fly using GA aircraft.
Anyone heard of this before with Cessna?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 23 Jun 2013, 20:54 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/16/12 Posts: 859 Post Likes: +184 Company: Mathis Inspection Services Location: KOFK Norfolk, NE
Aircraft: Piper Warrior 180
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Nothing to do with anti-GA policy. The sales staff and some engineers/managers get to use company planes. Everyone else, nope. It is simple math. -- The mechanics time, if not on a warranty call is paid by the customer -- The mechanics time, if on warranty the time savings does not come close to the cost of the plane. -- The associated liability costs and PR management if the mechanic crashes the plane are not even close to the potential benefits,
If I was running Cessna, I would make the same call.
Tim Exactly. I doubt the PR advantage of seeing a mechanic flying in with a new Cessna would beat the savings.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 00:35 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 02/21/11 Posts: 496 Post Likes: +50 Location: St George, UT
Aircraft: 340A & R44II
|
|
Just had a visit from Cessna last week and we mentioned the same thing. Apparently a guy crashed back in 86 and corporate put the kybash on reps flying GA. Too much liability.
_________________ Mark McAuliffe
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 01:26 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 02/15/09 Posts: 707 Post Likes: +177
Aircraft: 1984 B36TC
|
|
This is what's wrong with our country. One guy has a bad day and we punish the entire class. stupid thinking. To much I have to pee, but wait let me check with the attorney and HR first. I'm so glad NOT to be working for corporate Amerika!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 07:15 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 12/12/07 Posts: 23768 Post Likes: +7611 Location: Columbia, SC (KCUB)
Aircraft: 2003 Bonanza A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It is probably an insurance thing that is driving a company police. I know the company I work for has a strict travel policy in many aspects. Particular to aviation is the fact that it only allows travel on airlines and in some cases some part 135 with specific pre approval after vetting of the 135 company safety policy. This is all driven by the corporate insurance.
I also have a friend who is a CEO of a company he built. Specific to his insurance policy it says the any airplane he is in must have 2 commercial pilots, he cannot even go for a ride with me on a pleasure trip. I repeatedly tell the people that I work for that the day I loose my medical is the day that I retire. If I don't fly I don't work.
_________________ Minister of Ice Family Motto: If you aren't scared, you're not having fun!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 14:52 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 02/15/09 Posts: 707 Post Likes: +177
Aircraft: 1984 B36TC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It is probably an insurance thing that is driving a company police. I know the company I work for has a strict travel policy in many aspects. Particular to aviation is the fact that it only allows travel on airlines and in some cases some part 135 with specific pre approval after vetting of the 135 company safety policy. This is all driven by the corporate insurance.
I also have a friend who is a CEO of a company he built. Specific to his insurance policy it says the any airplane he is in must have 2 commercial pilots, he cannot even go for a ride with me on a pleasure trip. If I were the CEO it would be a cold day in hell before I let someone else tell me what I can and can't do. Again it's what's wrong with the country. To many wussies listening to insurance company lawers. Puke. Hence why I work for myself.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 15:13 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 10/27/09 Posts: 53 Post Likes: +45
Aircraft: Varies
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Just had a visit from Cessna last week and we mentioned the same thing. Apparently a guy crashed back in 86 and corporate put the kybash on reps flying GA. Too much liability. Mark, Might check that - don't think there was a Cessna employee crash in 1986. Entire time I worked there I flew GA if the economics worked, airlined or drove if not. Warmest regards, Rick
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 16:18 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 02/21/11 Posts: 496 Post Likes: +50 Location: St George, UT
Aircraft: 340A & R44II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Just had a visit from Cessna last week and we mentioned the same thing. Apparently a guy crashed back in 86 and corporate put the kybash on reps flying GA. Too much liability. Mark, Might check that - don't think there was a Cessna employee crash in 1986. Entire time I worked there I flew GA if the economics worked, airlined or drove if not. Warmest regards, Rick
I will have to talk to my rep about pulling my chain. Either way the guy had to come in from WI as he inherited 5 more states.
_________________ Mark McAuliffe
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy Posted: 24 Jun 2013, 17:31 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 07/12/12 Posts: 566 Post Likes: +31 Company: CBE Company Location: Acworth, GA / Santa Rosa Beach, FL
Aircraft: Sold Everything
|
|
The company that makes light bulbs uses kerosene lanterns to light the home.
_________________ Flyings not a hobby, it's a way of life.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|