Talk:Cessna

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Kansas (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Kansas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Companies (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Aviation / Aircraft (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 
 
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Most Produced Aircraft???[edit]

The article says, "After World War II, Cessna created the 170 - which, along with later models, notably the 172, became the most widely produced light aircraft in history." I suspect that it's the most widely produced aircraft (of any weight category). Does anybody have real numbers to support that? --RoySmith 21:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't know how relevant it is, but I know that in Portugal any light/GA aircraft is referred to as a Cessna Galf 13:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

pronounce[edit]

How does one pronounce "cessna"? --195.148.191.82 21:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

SES-nuh - DavidWBrooks 23:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
SES-nah in the United States, but in most other countries, especially Spanish-speaking lands, it is pronounced "CHESS-na" or "CHASE-na"

Interesting new product developments[edit]

Cessna has a couple of interesting projects in the works including new design semi-composite aircraft in the 152 (LSA http://se.cessna.com/lsa/) and 172 (NGP http://se.cessna.com/ngp/) "class"...it might be good to see a section on new development. - AbstractClass 00:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

These two aircraft actually have their own pages at Cessna NGP and Cessna LSA Concept, although some mention of them in the body of the article might be worthwhile. Ahunt 00:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, why hasn't this happened yet? We need a section titled "Recent product development" or something similar.
--Compdude123 (talk) 21:32, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to rename Category:Cessna to Category:Cessna aircraft[edit]

This proposed change would bring the category in line with other categories in Wikiproject Aircraft such as Category:Piper aircraft, Category:Grumman aircraft, etc.

Are the Buzzwords Needed?[edit]

I don't think the buzzwords are needed in an encyclopedia. Just my $.02MystikRyder 14:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)MystikRyder

Please tell us what words you're talking about - Adrian Pingstone 19:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
There's a section in the article on "buzzwords", but I very much disagree with MystikRyder. When a company invents terminology that becomes used in the industry, describing that company as the origin of the words is appropriate for the article. Akradecki 20:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
(Sorry, I hadn't looked at the article properly when I wrote my comment above). I agree with Akradeck, if Cessna did invent those words (and not just reuse them) then they are appropriate to the article - Adrian Pingstone 15:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
That's not what "notable" means. The terms would have to be widely referred to in the industry. If they are of niche interest only they probably ought to be removed. Matt Whyndham 11:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah but that is the key thing! Cessna's marketing dept did invent these words, other companies have either adopted them or felt that they had to make up their own equivalents (NB American Aviation made up "Face-Saver Landing Gear " in response to Cessna's "Land-O-Matic Gear"). Pilots also use these Cessna terms, sometimes sarcastically. These marketing buzzwords have become an ingrained part of aviation culture as a result. They are definitely significant and constitute some of Cessna's contributions to aviation, for better or worse. Ahunt 14:31, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The section should not be called buzzwords because these listed are mostly not buzzwords, they're trademarks. Buzzwords by their nature are generic terms, like "cloud computing" or B2B, things offered across an industry that are part of the buzz. 71.190.70.163 (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Long list of aircraft models : really needed?[edit]

Is it necessary to have the list of every single aircraft produced? How about some indication of the significant, innovative or popular models? A separate article could hold the list, if it was really thought worthwhile. Matt Whyndham 11:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Since the Cessna model "box" has been widely instituted at the bottom of each Cessna aircraft page perhaps this list needs to have its focus changed. Perhaps it should include a single line of detail about each model to enable people reading it to find the model that they are interested in, even if they don't know the model number or name? I would hate to see the list just axed. Ahunt 14:31, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I think creating a List of Cessna aircraft is a good idea as well, and with each model a brief description of the aircraft. Perhaps even put it in a table that includes the year built and number built. Anyone also think it's a good idea? --Pilotboi / talk / contribs 20:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
If a List of Cessna aircraft is made, it should be broken into several sections, The Clyde Cessna years, 1911-1933; Dwayne Wallace period 1933 until 1945, the classic period from 1946-1986(piston engine shutdown), and 1986-present.--TimothyMN (talk) 23:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I am thinking it could go like this.
  • 1911-1933
  • The piston shutdown (1946-1986)
  • 1986-2008
  • Currently manufactured aircraft.

129.3.173.156 (talk) 00:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

We need a table showing Cessna aircraft that are currently in production. Could someone please add this? --Compdude123 (talk) 20:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I have added them as a list, not sure if that is all the information you had in mind? - Ahunt (talk) 21:22, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I think it would be nice to have more info besides what you added. In a table, we could add things such as the date of the first flight, nickname(s), number built, variants currently in production and out of production, and a short description of each aircraft. See this table on the Boeing Commercial Airplanes page - it's a pretty good example of what I'm talking about as it shows the aircraft that Boeing currently has in production. -- Compdude123 (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Okay I see what you mean. Certainly all that info is available in the individual articles linked to, it would just take some digging to put together a table. - Ahunt (talk) 14:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Think I would be more inclined to take a lot of the detail out of the Boeing article, ugh! MilborneOne (talk) 15:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The Boeing article table certainly has much more info that the WikiProject Aircraft manufacturer template suggests is standard. - Ahunt (talk) 16:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Chinese production controversy[edit]

I don't think that "some website gets negative comments" is a terribly newsworthy thing anymore, so why is there so much space dedicated to this section? There's no evidence to back up the idea that it's "one of the largest controversies involving the company". The sources referenced confirm that the airplane is made in China but there's no press about the company having a real PR image issue about it. If this was real, the New York Times (or at least AVweb) would be calling it controversial. Lots of stuff comes from China now. It's not that big a deal. --70.168.126.154 (talk) 03:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that to a large extent this controversy has "blown over" and doesn't warrant as large a section as it had. When the situation started it was very big news and got lots of press coverage in many aviation publications, including AvWeb. In reading the blogs and other comments over the summer of 2008, I think that those opposed to 162 production in China have largely decided to not buy the product and have moved on, whereas those who support the decision have bought one. There doesn't seem to be an enduring campaign to keep this in the press or to try to convince Cessna to change its mind. I have cut the text down to indicate the basic issues and refs. - Ahunt (talk) 11:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Cessna GIS map[edit]

With http://gis.wichita.gov and http://www.cessna.com/contact/locations.html I'm trying to see whether the Cessna HQ is inside or outside the Wichita city limits. I can also see which Kansas township it is in. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Please add more history[edit]

It looks like there's not much in the way of history for this article. What I'm talking about is not Cessna's recent history but their early history. Cessna has been around since 1927, but a quick glance at this article suggests that the bulk of this history section is recent history for the past three years. Could we please add more to this section? Thanks, Compdude123 (talk) 21:25, 29 December 2010 (UTC).

Military aircrafts?[edit]

Didn't they make some military aircrafts around the time of the Vietnam war? Template:Sust:unsigned

Yes, the Cessna L-19, Cessna O-2, Cessna T-37 and the Cessna A-37. - Ahunt (talk) 14:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)