The New Innovators: Cessna? by Robert Goyer

Ten years ago a small, nimble, entrepreneurial company called Cirrus Design began to make a name for itself by doing small airplane stuff differently, things like installing whole-airplane parachutes in every airplane; pioneering the low end of the flat-panel market (kudos to Avidyne on that count, too); and almost single-handedly legitimizing the fixed-gear high-performance market. Make no mistake: Cirrus has been great for innovation.

But there's a new leading player in that game to give the folks from Duluth some competition in that regard, and, surprise, surprise, it's Cessna, the old, staid, button-down mega corporate player who, over the last few years, has shown that it's in the little airplane game not just to participate but to compete to win, and it's doing that by changing the way it does business at the light end of the market.

When Cessna announced more than ten years ago now that it was getting back into the little airplane game, thanks to legislation that limited its liability tail, there was widespread optimism that the company would come out with an exciting, dynamic new lineup of singles.

It didn't.

What it did, however, was come out with a completely updated lineup of its former stars, the 172, 182 and 206, that featured upgrades across the board, from better interiors, avionics, fit and finish, and safety, and at attractive price points.

It was a smart, conservative response to the challenge of restarting an entire line. But it was unimaginative, and many were disappointed by the lack of new models. None of which stopped Cessna from resuming its place at the top of the piston single marketplace.

But there are signs that Cessna really is doing things differently these days, and there have been signs for a while. They were the first major manufacturer to adopt seat belt airbags, they bought into the Garmin G1000 avionics suite early on, they've jumped into the LSA market with the SkyCatcher, they're developing a lineup of composite singles, and they just announced their intention of acquiring the Columbia lineup of composite piston singles. Not only that, but they're near certification with a diesel powered Skyhawk, an airplane that will be worth the effort internationally if they never sell a single one in the USA (though they'll sell a lot of them).

What's up with Cessna? Two words, one name: Jack Pelton. The company's president is an airplane guy--he regularly flies himself around and his wife, Rose, has dibs on the first SkyCatcher--he knows and respects the history (his personal bird is a beautiful vintage Cessna 195--and he has a keen understanding of the corporate world and the demands of big money and big business--after all, Cessna's light airplane business is a very small part of this giant bizjet maker's picture. But most of all, Pelton seems to understand that standing still in the lightplane world, with all of the exciting innovation in every corner of it, is a surefire prescription for failure.

So what will Cessna do next? I used to think I knew. Now, the only thing for certain is that surprises will ensue. A single engine jet? A turboprop four-seater? A new light twin? At this point, I wouldn't rule anything out.

Comments

[Fast Fred]

Ouch!! Seems ole Jack is Walmarting Cessna. Betchya the Chinese haven't read Edwards Demmings book or partner with their suppliers & double betchya the QA & rework costs on the Skycatcher are gonna be a bit more then anticipated...AD heaven or what!!

[benjamin]

I have to say I am deeply disappointed with Cessna's choice to produce the 162 in China. I'm also disappointed in the specs on the 162. What a weak useful load. What a really have to seriously question is Cessna's claim in this months' Flying magazine that if they produced the plane in the United States, it would cost $70,000 more. Who does Cessna think they are kidding with this statement? They might have gotten the writer of the story to believe it, but simple economics blows that figure completely away. Take this as an example.....There are several very well made european LSA out there, but let's stick with two that are from Germany (won't mention names) but they exceed Cessna's 162 in performance and price, while using the latest technology and not old 1930's rivets and continental engine. One even has foldable wings which could revolutionize and greatly reduce the cost of ownership by allowing the plane to be stored off field. Now these German planes are produced in Europe, shipped (extra cost) to the US, and still sell for less than the 162 even with the Euro/dollar exchange rate being as disparate as it is. The German companies already are already including in their sales price a premium of around 30-40% for this exchange rate. Now...imagine if they could build in the US and save that exchange rate as our labor and materials are cheaper when paying in US dollars, and there's no shipping/freight charge and insurance on the shipping. they would be selling their aircraft for at least a 30% discount if they built it here. And those are amazing planes. So how can Cessna start with a price that is the same if not slightly higher than the Germans and then claim..the only way they can sell at this price is by building it in China? the statement is ridiculous. Oops I also forgot to mention the sheer size difference between Cessna and the German LSA producers would ensure that Cessna's much larger size would also enjoy the economies of scale. (This means they can already produce the same item at a lower cost based on their sheer size and purchasing power) Come on Cessna, you're lying to your fan base. These kinds of statements are making me shy away from your company. And I've always been a Cessna lover.

by the way..I didn't know that Remos is building a plant here. If so, they will Blow Cessna away in price and performance. Watch out for Textron/Cessna ... they'll try to buy them!

[Larry the Tech]

Call Cubcrafters. Get a real plane, one that you can actually do things with, and it's made in the USA.

[Mike]

As much as I love FLYING magazine, the editorial and writing staff have no desire to question these political and economic issues surrounding this venture. Each article, no matter what the plane, is like an extended advertisement for that company. Flying needs to become more like Car and Driver, where they aren't afraid to let you know if a car is crap, in relation to others in its category. Call a spade a spade! Enough of this cheerleading; the readers are smarter than Flying gives them credit. It's bad enough that we have to read Richard Collins every month whining about the 'good ole days' of general aviation.

[Leo McCloskey]

Given aquisition Cessna 350/400, what is the "new" date(s) for next public exhibition of Cessna NGP. What is the release date of C182D Diesel?

[Carlo]

I refer to various comments regarding building the 162 in China. Contrary to what a few individuals have stated, I think its an excellent decision. Those who are concerned about quality control haven't a clue as to what is going on. Today there are thousands of products being produced in China, many of them with excellent workmanship and reliability. Granted, some mistakes happen, but nothing of any great importance. Certainly, the benefits far out weigh the disadvantages, one of which is PRICE !! The reality is.....building this aircraft in the US would cost three times as much. Sorry fellows.....I agree with Cessna....A GREAT DECISION....

[Matt]

Wow... I can't believe that some people support building an aircraft in China. I would love to see the lead and radioactive content in each aircraft. Also, does the US not realize that they are in a recession? Why eliminate more jobs and make China (Communist Country) richer?

[C Fred Crawmer]

Betchya if the Catcher was marketed by Walmart the price would be a heck of alot lower. Thinking about multinational manufacturing & marketing makes my hair hurt. We're producing Hondas, Benzs, Bimmers & Toyotas in the good ole USA for now me thinks because the Euro/Dollars exchange rates' stinks; yet similar LSAs from Europe are selling for the same as the China-Catcher. What's wrong with this picture....who's doing what to whom?!