Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-24-2015, 09:33 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Jim Gandee's Avatar
 
City: Los Angeles
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Fire Escape
Vessel Model: Bayliner 3888
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 80
What's wrong with Cessnas?

TF Site Team Note: This thread has been split from the "What's Wrong with Bayliners" thread.


Brand bashing is nothing new. I have a Cessna which routinely gets bashed by the brand B owners, who btw, paid a lot more for their birds. Buy what you can afford any enjoy the experience to the fullest no matter what brand you have.
__________________
Advertisement

Jim Gandee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2015, 09:56 PM   #2
TF Site Team
 
FlyWright's Avatar
 
City: California Delta and SF Bay
Country: Sacramento, CA, USA (boat in Vallejo)
Vessel Name: FlyWright
Vessel Model: Marshall Californian 34 LRC
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Gandee View Post
Brand bashing is nothing new. I have a Cessna which routinely gets bashed by the brand B owners, who btw, paid a lot more for their birds. Buy what you can afford any enjoy the experience to the fullest no matter what brand you have.
Beechcraft owners are the worst...until they meet Gulfstream Owners. It's all relevant. In most cases, it's more about looking down one's nose at another perceived lesser plane/boat/car/truck than it is about the actual quality of the object. It's a reflection of the man, not the object.

BTW, I was a Cessna guy throughout my training and CFI days and still have a soft spot for just about every model I flew (which was almost every post-1970 single and twin recip model). Just wasn't a fan of the straight-leg Cardinal due to poor performance for its class.
__________________

__________________
Al

Custom Google Trawler Forum Search
FlyWright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2015, 12:09 AM   #3
Guru
 
Codger2's Avatar
 
City: San Diego
Country: US
Vessel Name: "Sandpiper"
Vessel Model: 2006 42' Ocean Alexander Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWright View Post
still have a soft spot for just about every model I flew (which was almost every post-1970 single and twin recip model). Just wasn't a fan of the straight-leg Cardinal due to poor performance for its class.
My experience with Cessnas was very similar except I flew a lot of the pre 1970 models. I agree with the Cardinal (177) comments but I did manage to cram a few hours in them. I must admit that the omission of the wing strut was nice. (Nothing in the way to hinder boarding and deplaning.)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	C-177.jpg
Views:	97
Size:	77.5 KB
ID:	37704  
__________________
Codger2

My passion for improving my boat(s) exceeds my desire to constantly cruise them.
Codger2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2015, 01:16 AM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Jim Gandee's Avatar
 
City: Los Angeles
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Fire Escape
Vessel Model: Bayliner 3888
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 80
I do appreciate the cantilever wing on the 177 Cardinal but I like the T210 wing even better!
Jim Gandee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2015, 01:44 AM   #5
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Got my Private in a Piper, got the rest of my ratings in Cessnas, flew a 1968 Cessna 206 for a number of years for work and pleasure in Hawaii, moved here, got a seaplane rating and then got checked out in the de Havilland Beaver.

That plane was near perfection for me and my wife and we've not flown anything else since other than a Turbo Beaver, a bit of time in the Vazar Dash-3 (turbine conversion of the single-engine Otter) and a checklout in a Cub Crafters Top Cub on floats for a magazine review.

I prefer the look of low-wing planes but high wing is where it's at for floatplanes.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2015, 02:37 AM   #6
TF Site Team
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,952
Wow guys! I feel bad

I flew a Taylorcraft BC12D4-85 on factory EDO 1320 floats out of my home in Alaska for a solid decade!

That little plane saved me, my family and my house during the 1996 Millers Reach forest fire.

Ever do a night landing on floats, in a plane with no electrical system?

That'll put hair on your chest!
__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
www.mvlisasway.com
ksanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2015, 03:15 PM   #7
TF Site Team
 
FlyWright's Avatar
 
City: California Delta and SF Bay
Country: Sacramento, CA, USA (boat in Vallejo)
Vessel Name: FlyWright
Vessel Model: Marshall Californian 34 LRC
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Gandee View Post
I do appreciate the cantilever wing on the 177 Cardinal but I like the T210 wing even better!
I heartily agree!! Even better was the Robertson Conversion kit on the T210 wing. My chief flight instructor at our FBO taught me how it'll fly out of ground effect with the airspeed needle just barely coming off the peg...I think it pegs at 40 kts. It's an amazing performance kit on an already great performing airplane!! One of my single-engine favorites.

My uncle and godfather owned one of the last 210s built. I think it was 1986. It was normally aspirated since he lived and flew in the Midwest. The unusual aspect of that plane was the upturned wingtips rather than the downturned cambered wingtip. It looked cool and reportedly enhanced the performance more than the cambered tips. Not too many were made like this before production was suspended in 1986. Another favorite 210 model was the pressurized P210. It was quiet, fast and comfortable, but the visibility was reduced due to the smaller windows.

Of the Cessna recip line, I never had the opportunity to fly the 340 or 421 twins, but liked the 310 and 402. Got a couple of flights in the 303 Crusader, but was not impressed. Surprisingly, the 337, pressurized and non-P, was a fun and fast flying plane. The T182RG was also an impressive performer. We flew a lot in AZ, so I liked the 172XP for its hot and high capability improvements over the 172. And the 152 acrobat was just plain fun!

I never owned an airplane. Never had the resources to afford it, but flew them professionally for most of my 40 years of flying. Each upgrade was a flight full of discovery and new experiences and I almost always liked the latest airplane the best.

One exception was in an airplane that I liked and was very reliable and efficient, but it wasn't well suited for our mission of NAVAIDS flight inspection throughout the western United States. I had been flying a Rockwell Saberliner 80 (similar to the 75A) in the late 1980's when Congress, at the direction of DOT Secretary Elizabeth Dole, approved the purchase of 19 King Air 300s which were the end of the production run for Wichita, KS based Beechcraft where she and her husband, Bob Dole, practiced their own brand of politics. Beechcraft was eager to move onto the King Air 350 with Part 23 certification instead of the 300's Special Part 41C certification and needed to unload these albatrosses from their neck. So the FAA got these 300's crammed down their throats for a mission for which it was ill-suited. These planes were outdated when purchased and have been money pits for the FAA since then. They are now spending more than $1M per plane to bring the cockpits and navigation systems up to date.

When we moved to the Learjet 60 in the mid-1990's, we returned to being able to fly to any destination in our area of responsibility and conduct the 2+ hrs flight inspection mission without refueling during our lunch stop. Our speed, efficiency, comfort (ie less fatigue, turbulence effect and noise) and full nav capability returned and exceeded that of the Saberliner. That was the plane I flew until I retired from the FAA after flying it for 17 years. It's still my favorite!

I like to say that I used to cruise at 8 miles per minute and now I cruise at 8 miles per hour... and I'm still having loads of fun!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Learjet001.jpg
Views:	86
Size:	158.4 KB
ID:	37712  
__________________
Al

Custom Google Trawler Forum Search
FlyWright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 03:42 PM   #8
Member
 
City: Atlanta, GA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Dauntless
Vessel Model: Carver 355
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 15
I am not sure why, I owned a 1968 C182 with Robertson Conversion kit for almost three years. I LOVED that plane! It was not the sexiest, or speediest, or most efficient...but it was one safe, rugged, "go just about anywhere" truck-luck plane I could have asked for.

Damn I miss it...but boy I do not miss the cost of owning!
Boathooked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 03:48 PM   #9
Guru
 
No Mast's Avatar
 
City: Atlantic Highlands, NJ
Country: US
Vessel Name: Moana Huaka'i
Vessel Model: Selene 53
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 816
The last plane we owned was a Turbo Saratoga. I have to second I like the look of the low wings better.

But i do think for initial training the reduced ground effect of a higher wing is probably advantageous more most.
No Mast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 05:35 PM   #10
Guru
 
Carolena's Avatar
 
City: DC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carolena II
Vessel Model: Nordic Tug 32/34
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 605
I've flow the 172 and 152. Enjoyed both and found them very forgiving for a new pilot. However, my favorite was always the Piper Warrior that our club owned. There is something about low wing planes that I find very attractive.
Carolena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 09:15 PM   #11
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolena View Post
There is something about low wing planes that I find very attractive.
I agree. Before switching to a flight school that was all-Cessna, I got my Private in a PA-28 Cherokee 140, and then moved up to a Cherokee 180 and finally a Cherokee Six. I liked all of them although the earlier versions of the Cherokee (like the ones I flew) make a poor choice as a trainer because of the interconnected rudder and differential ailerons. I had to learn to use a rudder properly when I moved over to flying Cessnas for my Commercial and other ratings.

I also flew a Mooney Chaparral and a Rockwell Commander 114 for awhile in Hawaii. The Rockwell had been a factory demo so besides the rather loud orange and black paint scheme it also had all sorts of then-state-of-the-art goodies like a three-axis autopilot. Very nice plane to fly and having an entry door on each side of the fuselage was a lot more convenient than Piper's single, crawl-over-the-seats door.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 10:36 PM   #12
QB
Senior Member
 
QB's Avatar
 
City: San Diego and Gabriola
Country: USA and Canada
Vessel Name: Skookum Maru
Vessel Model: Ed Monk design #1924
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 215
My last plane:



Just cruising a little lower and slower now.
QB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 10:55 PM   #13
Guru
 
Codger2's Avatar
 
City: San Diego
Country: US
Vessel Name: "Sandpiper"
Vessel Model: 2006 42' Ocean Alexander Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWright View Post
Surprisingly, the 337, pressurized and non-P, was a fun and fast flying plane. !
My partner and I owned a 336 SkyMaster & replaced it with a 337P, which is my all time favorite. Later, the flying bug really bit and we sold the 337, stepped up to a P Navajo, then a Piper Cheyenne II, a Cessna Citation IIP, a Citation 1, another C-1 with thrust reversers and finally a Citation 5. Those were some fun years.
__________________
Codger2

My passion for improving my boat(s) exceeds my desire to constantly cruise them.
Codger2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 11:25 PM   #14
Guru
 
N4712's Avatar
 
City: South FL
Country: U.S.A
Vessel Name: Oliver
Vessel Model: Nordhavn 47 Hull# 12
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,613
The old family sled, a Learjet 31. My dad was the pilot so I couldn't tell you much about it other then what a waste of money they are. Better off buying a boat.
Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTrawler Forum1425097491.411104.jpg
Views:	108
Size:	163.0 KB
ID:	37787
__________________
Thanks, Oliver
M/V Oliver
Nordhavn 47 Hull #12
N4712 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2015, 01:11 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Rebel112r's Avatar
 
City: Birch bay wa
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rogue
Vessel Model: North Pacific 42
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 390
QB. Is that a Thorpe? Looks like one, but can't make out the wing in the pic.
Rebel112r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2015, 01:16 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Rebel112r's Avatar
 
City: Birch bay wa
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rogue
Vessel Model: North Pacific 42
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 390
Oops RV6!
Rebel112r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2015, 01:23 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
City: MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Blue Yonder
Vessel Model: 37
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 346
FlyWright, I was at the Air Force Flight Standards Agency in the late 90s. We worked with you flight check guys a lot.
BlueYonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2015, 08:06 AM   #18
Guru
 
kthoennes's Avatar
 
City: Sioux Falls, South Dakota
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Xanadu
Vessel Model: Mainship 37 Motor Yacht
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 857
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksanders View Post
That little plane saved me, my family and my house during the 1996 Millers Reach forest fire.
I remember that fire. I was living out on Knik Road in Wasilla, Settlers Bay. Loaded all the photo albums and some clothes into my much-too-small car. Had to decide what to save and what to let burn if it got that far. Ultimately of course it never did get that far, but that was a rough time. Spent one night with friends in Anchorage but eventually snuck back home around the evacuation barriers on a dirt road and decided to try to save my house and stuff if necessary. That was a bad one.
kthoennes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2015, 12:00 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Jim Gandee's Avatar
 
City: Los Angeles
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Fire Escape
Vessel Model: Bayliner 3888
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 80
Airplanes certainly are expensive but definitely not a waste!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	78
Size:	96.9 KB
ID:	37828  
Jim Gandee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2015, 05:44 AM   #20
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codger2 View Post
My partner and I owned a 336 SkyMaster & replaced it with a 337P, which is my all time favorite. Later, the flying bug really bit and we sold the 337, stepped up to a P Navajo, then a Piper Cheyenne II, a Cessna Citation IIP, a Citation 1, another C-1 with thrust reversers and finally a Citation 5. Those were some fun years.
Of the few twins that I have flown I thought that the 'push me pull me' was a lumbering truck of the sky. Slow, thirsty, noisy, leaks oil out the rear engine; but looks quite cool in a military sort of way....

...where as the twin com with the tip tanks is lively, twitchy, economical, fast and very sexy! (And very dangerous)

My tie down neighbour crashed his 336 into a mountain on a leg he had completed hundreds of times; unfortunately he was killed along with his two sheep Dogs; no reflection on the a/c.
__________________

__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012