Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Cessna 400 TTx deliveries started (and production ends)

Charlie_Alpha wrote:

It was a purely strategic choice from Cessna and had nothing to do with the quality of the plane though.

The certainly did not sell many and somehow it never fit into their portfolio anyhow. I wonder why they bought it in the first place or was it bought by the group Cessna belongs to and stuck onto them? I never had the impression they were fond of it, which of course is a bad pretext of marketing any airplane.

The main question has to be why it failed against the Cirrus and I suppose we all know the answer. It failed on the market like everyone else once Cirrus introduced the shute.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

As one of the few European pilots that fly a Cessna TTx, I can only say that this is one of the best planes I have ever flown since I started flying 19 years ago. The airframe is very robust and as I understand, the issue with MLW is basically a choice to skip these expensive FAA certification tests. The airframe itself is more than capable to land with MTOW. However not allowed as we all know :-)

To be honest, It was disappointing (to say the least) that Cessna decided to stop production. It was a purely strategic choice from Cessna and had nothing to do with the quality of the plane though.

Charlie_Alpha
EHBD, Netherlands

Manufacturers struggle to engineer repairs IMO. Firstly the company may not have designed the structure originally, and secondly even if they did the individuals who did that work are usually long gone. Also, the materials and processes used for field repair are not the same as those used to make structure originally. As a result people with broad experience in composites design for field manufacturer and field repair are often at least as good at engineering repair schemes as the TC holder.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 27 Jan 01:48

Silvaire wrote:

typically engineer the repair themselves and get FAA DER review and approval.

That is of course an option, but always better to go the high road and go straight to the Manufacturer’s Structural Engineering Dept., if some such does exists.

FAA A&P/IA
LFPN

Friends doing structural repairs on certified composite aircraft typically engineer the repair themselves and get FAA DER review and approval. The last iteration of this process took a year because the airframe manufacturer had written into the maintenance manual that repairs beyond a certain (trivial) level could not be performed by anybody but themselves. It took a while to find the right FAA people who would admit that an FAA error had been made in approving that MM, and that this MM requirement was illegal.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 24 Jan 14:32

Cobalt wrote:

how does one ensure integrity of the wing spar and other structural elements?

The same way you do on a spam can: extensive inspection and close collaboration with the constructor’s (Cessna) structural engineering dept.

Any structural repairs are also engineered by the constructor.

The wing on the Columbia/Corvalis is seriously over-built. Consider that it has TWO “main” spars, where 99% of the GA fleet have just one.

Now consider that BOTH the spars are one-piece – continuous over the full wing span.

FAA A&P/IA
LFPN

Jujupilote wrote:

how did the plane was recovered from Vejro ?

I was not involved in the recovery, but I did speak with the crew that did – they used a local tractor and put it on a barge.

FAA A&P/IA
LFPN

Michael wrote:

Let me just say that despite the nose gear & the right wheel getting ripped off, the main landing gear support and the firewall did not budge one iotta !

It is very solidly built…

I would guess that when they designed it, they spent a bit of thought on what they want to break off first so no damage is done to harder to repair items.

(although that composites are harder to repair is a myth, the one I flew had a repair to the empennage, which was probably easier to make than the equivalent on a metal aircraft. As usual, it depends).

Out of curiosity – after an accident like that, how does one ensure integrity of the wing spar and other structural elements?

Biggin Hill

Maybe it is not the right thread, but how did the plane was recovered from Vejro ?

LFOU, France

The “story” is here: https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=211866

I surveyed the plane & now I’m repairing it.

Let me just say that despite the nose gear & the right wheel getting ripped off, the main landing gear support and the firewall did not budge one iotta !

If it had been a spam can, the firewall would have been shoved back a foot and the gear would have been ripped out of the fuselage …

Last Edited by Michael at 23 Jan 17:26
FAA A&P/IA
LFPN
187 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top