So that leaves us with the composite fuselage and glass avionics?
Aviathor wrote:
So that leaves us with the composite fuselage and glass avionics?
Yep !
But composite light aircraft construction is not even 21st Century : 1969 the Eagle I was certified by the FAA, the Lancair Columbia was certified 1997 and the SR20, 1998 .
And of course, those avionics are supplied by Garmin and are available to all, nothing proprietary there …
If Cessna had a strutless design in 1934 I wonder why they choose to use struts on every single they produce to this day, including the Caravan. Maybe it’s because until materials technology improved, for example with the introduction of composites, struts still provide a strong construction which is both cheaper and lighter, and probably doesn’t cost a significant amount of speed.
I think we should welcome new entrants who try to advance aviation, however minor the improvement may seem to be. It seems that every new aircraft just attracts a chorus of criticism on this and other forums.
Choice is a good thing, I wish Flight Design, Tecnam, and the rest great success.
Neil wrote:
f Cessna had a strutless design in 1934 I wonder why they choose to use struts on every single they produce to this day, including the Caravan. Maybe it’s because until materials technology improved, for example with the introduction of composites, struts still provide a strong construction which is both cheaper and lighter, and probably doesn’t cost a significant amount of speed.
Cessna 177 and Centurion 210 is strutless since 1969 !
The main draw-back is the COST of the hefty spar carry-through, NOT the strength or structrual integrity .
Neil wrote:
It seems that every new aircraft just attracts a chorus of criticism on this and other forums.
What draws a Chorus of Criticism is the Marketing BS that is touted over-and-over again, including the “New Fangled, Super-Duper Space Age Hyper Tech” BS for stuff that’s been around since your Daddys’, Daddy’s era … 
Michael wrote:
What draws a Chorus of Criticism is the Marketing BS that is touted over-and-over again, including the “New Fangled, Super-Duper Space Age Hyper Tech” BS for stuff that’s been around since your Daddys’, Daddy’s era …
Also, the fact that the writer of this particular marketing hype has made several obviously incorrect statements about engines and avionics doesn’t help the credibility of his claims about the C4.
Michael wrote:
Cessna 177 and Centurion 210 is strutless since 1969 !
But the strutless designs were not commercially successful!
The 210 was discontinued 30 years ago, in 1985.
The 177 was dropped even earlier, and only lasted 10 years from 1968 to 1978.
Neil wrote:
But the strutless designs were not commercially successful!The 210 was discontinued 30 years ago, in 1985.
The 177 was dropped even earlier, and only lasted 10 years from 1968 to 1978.
Both the Cessna Cardinal (4,295 sold) AND the Cessna Centurion (7,000 sold post 1969 !!) OUT-SOLD the entire Cirrus fleet to date and you say it’ was a flop ???
As my wife would say: whatever …
Michael wrote:
Both the Cessna Cardinal (4,295 sold) AND the Cessna Centurion (7,000 sold post 1969 !!) OUT-SOLD the entire Cirrus fleet to date and you say it’ was a flop ???
As my wife would say: whatever
It’s no skin off my nose whether Tecnam or Flight Design win market share from Cessna, Cirrus or whoever. Indeed I wouldn’t buy either as they are still more money than I would spend on a single. I’m just saying that it’s good for GA that companies are choosing to invest in bringing out new aircraft.
I don’t know why you don’t agree with that general philosophy if you are a professional making a living in GA
