Cessna Archives - Page 2 of 4 - Golf Hotel Whiskey

A fraction of a jet for a fraction of the cost

If god had meant us to fly he’d have given us more money. Buying a jet is expensive. Even an ‘entry-level’ jet like the lovely Cessna Citation Mustang is just under $3m.

This is where fractional ownership operators like NetJets come in. (Full disclosure, NetJets is a client of my company Articulate Marketing.) Like timeshare holidays, you don’t pay for the whole plane, just a share of it and you get to use all the planes in the network. If you’re flying less than 300-400 hours a year, this makes a lot of sense.

The same concept works well for smaller planes. For example, I fly a Cirrus in the Freeflight group which works on a similar basis and I wrote about AirShares Elite recently.

But you still have to stump up a big chunk of capital to buy your share plus fixed costs and per-hours costs like fuel. Cheaper but still not cheap. Now, NetJets Europe has launched a direct financing product that lets companies and individuals bridge the gap between leasing and acquisition with a 25% deposit and competitive interest rates.

This approach could cut the capital cost of buying a fractional share in a jet and sidestep potential problem in an illiquid lending market by going to the vendor for finance rather than the banks.

I asked my bank manager if he’d lend me $58m for a new Gulfstream G650. He just laughed. So I know what I’m talking about.

Two night landings that went awry

Night landings, takeoffs and approaches can be a tricky business even for experienced pilots as two summaries of recent National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident reports from General Aviation news reveal. The first accident report from September 2009 covered an incident that resulted in one minor injury and a heavily damaged Cessna 172 in Minnesota.

According to the accident report, the pilot was attempting to land at night in VFR conditions and he performed a go-around on the first attempt. For the second attempt, he landed mid-field and performed a touch-and-go landing with 10° of flaps on takeoff which he retracted when he reached about 100 feet above ground level. However:

He felt that the airspeed was a little low so he pushed the nose over. He stated that he did not think he was in a descent, but the airplane hit the ground about 100 feet from the end of the runway.

The impact caused the nose gear to collapse and both wings were also damaged. An investigation of the accident site revealed eight ground scars in the grass that were consistent with propeller strikes while the pilot himself had about 112 hours of flight time with 9 hours at night (including two hours of night experience when he was pilot-in-command). Hence, the pilot’s failure to maintain a proper climb rate during a night takeoff was ruled the cause of the accident.

The second NTSB accident report also dated September 2009 involved a Cessna 210 in Texas where there was one fatality. The pilot had 1,276 total hours which included 475 hours in the same make and model airplane plus he had landed five times at the airport where the accident occurred.

However and this time around, he was attempting to land in dark night conditions with visibility at 3 to 5 miles in drizzle or light rain with overcast clouds. Moreover, the airport was a private rural airport whose lighting system was inoperable due to a recent lightening strike. Hence, a local resident radioed the pilot to inform him of this while another resident attempted to illuminate the runway with the headlights from a car.

According to witnesses, the pilot was not aligned with the runway and also appeared to be too high to land. The pilot radioed at 50 to 150 feet that he would perform a go-around but instead the aircraft began a descent, hit trees on the edge of the runway and then crashed into an empty house.

The investigation ruled that night and poor weather conditions meant that spatial disorientation was the probable cause of the accident as the FAA’s “Instrument Flying Handbook” (FAA-H-8083-15A) states that:

A rapid acceleration…can create the illusion of being in a nose up attitude. The disoriented pilot will push the aircraft into a nose low, or dive attitude.

In other words and if you plan to do any night flying, it would be a good idea to keep these incidents in mind.

Are low-cost light sport aircraft only a dream?

Recently, both AVweb and the AOPA Pilot Blog reported the announcement from Cessna that they can no longer hold down the cost of the Skycatcher, their light sport aircraft (LSA) – meaning that prices in 2012 will rise to $149,900 (but I should add that many previous “options” will become standard features). Alton K. Marsh’s AOPA Pilot Blog article noted that the Skycatcher had started out at $110,000 and then the price rose to $115,000 but even at these prices, the aircraft was still selling at below cost. Alton also pointed out that the dream of having an LSA that would start at $20,000 for the basic option and rise no higher than $60,000 once its all “tricked out” appears to be a dream as the lowest priced LSA now starts at the $80k level.

Meanwhile, Paul Bertorelli in AVweb pointed out that Cessna has now gone from being middle of the pack pricewise, to almost near the top on base price. On the other hand, Paul has also pointed out that Cessna has always been profitable and has managed to keep its dealer network. Given how many aircraft makers have come and gone, its in the interest of aircraft buyers that Cessna remain profitable and keeps a strong network of dealers.

However, Paul also recalled how he had received an email from an engineer working in general aviation who was trying to understand why new aircraft prices have exceeded the rate of inflation. For example: A new Skyhawk cost $27,667 (typically equipped) in 1976 which adjusts to $105,000 in 2011 dollars but a new Skyhawk will now sell for more than $300,000.

Of course, glass cockpits and other fancy gadgets can account for some of the price rise but Paul then ended his post by pointing out that:

Cessna is the only LSA manufacturer well established with manufacturing in China. If a company with Cessna’s economy of scale and marketing acumen can’t make an LSA more affordable by building it in China, the notion of low-cost aircraft may very well be the myth that many people think it is…

Sadly for many pilots or would-be aircraft owners, both Paul and Alton are probably right.

Pilot misjudges runway and lands too fast and too far down it

General Aviation News often reprints excerpts from US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident reports, including this one from October 2009 that involved a Cessna 182 in White Plains, New York where there was substantial aircraft damage but no injuries. According to the accident report, the pilot was attempting a night landing and was told by ATC to expect to use runway 29 at the best forward speed in order to expedite his landing. The pilot looked at his approach charts and noticed that the runway was more than 4,400 feet long. He choose to land with no flaps.

The Cessna 182 touched down past a runway intersection with 2,854 feet of runway remaining to the departure section. However, the pilot could not stop the aircraft as it slid off the runway, down an embankment and then onto a service road resulting in the nose landing gear collapsing. The aircraft’s pilot-rated-passenger would later report that the aircraft’s estimated speed to the runway had been 110 knots.

After the mishap, the pilot learned that the runway’s displaced threshold meant that it only had about 3,164 feet available for landing instead of the 4,400 feet he thought was available. Hence, the probable cause of the accident was ruled the pilot’s failure to land at the runway’s proper spot plus excessive airspeed in order to comply with ATC’s request to expedite landing.

Are you the Skymaster?

Several planes were running up and waiting to take off, many Cessnas including a 337. With all the students and several similar call signs, the
controllers were getting a tad confused. The controller finally asked:

“Cessna 123YZ, are you the Skymaster?”

A slightly confused voice with an indeterminate accent replied, after a moment: “Well, my instructor says that I am very good, but I do not think
that I would yet be considered the ‘Skymaster….’”

– Submitted by ‘Mr Merlin,’ Sydney, Australia to the Basair Aviation College’s Aviation Humour page.

A review of the Cessna Skycatcher from a CFI’s perspective

Meg Godlewski has written a very lengthy article for General Aviation News about the Cessna Skycatcher from the perspective of a CFI. In fact, the Skycatcher was designed as a light sport aircraft (LSA) as well as an inexpensive training platform and Meg noted that at the flying club where she evaluated the aircraft, it has proven to be popular with both the club’s student pilots and with its fully licensed members.

However, Meg also wrote that despite having a familial resemblance to a Cessna 150, comparing the Skycatcher to one is like comparing a 1966 Ford Mustang with a 2011 model. Hence, here are just a few of the differences as well as characteristics that Meg noted about the Skycatcher:

On the Ramp. Meg wrote that the wing-strut on the Skycatcher is anchored behind the door rather than in front of it as the door is a gull-wing type that opens upward – something that other Cessna pilots would not be accustomed to. Moreover, the door is extremely light as it does not contain any insulation. This also means that you do not need to slam it shut but you will also need to ensure that it is securely latched before taking off as it could open upward during a flight and cause damage to the aircraft.

Pre-Flight. Meg pointed out that the Skycatcher does not have electronically actuated fuel gauges but rather there are well-marked tubes at wing level inside the cockpit – just like what you would find in a Piper Cub. Since there is no way to switch tanks, there is a warning placard to remind the pilot that takeoffs are not allowed with less than one quarter tanks.

However, Meg expressed some concern that having the Garmin 300 calculate weight and balance could mean pilots will, at some point, no longer be able to read tables and graphs or do the calculations longhand. On the other hand, the representative of the flying club who owns the aircraft she was testing commented that many pilots don’t even bother to do weigh and balance calculations before taking off as they (mistakenly) believe what fits inside an aircraft must be safe.

Take-Off. Meg wrote that the Skycatcher is intended to be a day-time and VFR flight only aircraft. Hence, a pilot will probably not need any back-up instruments and navigation for safe flying.

Otherwise, meg pointed out that the Skycatcher has toe brakes, making it easier for student pilots to transition to other Cessna aircraft, but the angle at which one’s heel will rest on the floor in relation to the pedals also makes it challenging not to “ride the brakes during ground operations” while the aircraft’s castering nosewheel meant her first attempts to keep the nose on the yellow taxi line had “all the grace of a drunken rhinoceros.” Moreover and due to the lack of sound proofing, the Skycatcher is louder than other Cessna aircraft while landings will take some practice as the aircraft “doesn’t want to stop flying.”

Meg’s entire and very detailed review of Cessna Skycatcher is well worth reading by both would-be pilots who may receive their training in one as well as by experienced pilots who may find themselves either flying or owning one.