Talk:Cessna 400

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cessna 400 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Aviation: Aircraft

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Name and article name

There have been several recent attempts to add the word "Corvalis" to every mention of the Cessna 400 in this and other articles, including attempting to rename this article to "Cessna 400 Corvalis TT". In general these attempts have been reverted because that article nomenclature would contradict the consensus-agreed naming standards of WikiProject Aircraft, which states: "US civil aircraft: Manufacturer and name or number as appropriate according to common usage: Boeing 707, Cessna Citation, Cessna 172, Convair 880 (not "Convair Skylark" or "Convair Golden Arrow"). Try to avoid using name and number unless it is clearly needed for some reason." It is for this reason that the Cessna 172 article is under Cessna 172 and not "Cessna 172 Skyhawk" and the Cessna 182 article is under Cessna 182 and not "Cessna 182 Skylane" etc.

Please note that the FAA Type Certificate Data Sheets do not recognize these names, as they are not part of the type designation and are merely marketing names.

The article does mention the marketing name Cessna has given the aircraft, including its origins and that is sufficient - it doesn't have to be included in every mention of the aircraft or in the article title. If you disagree then discuss it here and gain consensus rather than edit warring. - Ahunt (talk) 18:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No longer fastest piston-single

The Cessna may have held this record for a short while:

"The Cessna 400 is the fastest FAA-certified fixed-gear, single-engined piston aircraft in production today, reaching a speed of 235 knots true air speed at 25,000 feet (7,600 m)."

But I do believe that this honor now belongs to the Mooney Acclaim type S at 242 KTAS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.133.86.38 (talk) 00:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Mooney is not a "fixed gear aircraft" and it is also out of production as Mooney is has almost ceased operations and is not building aircraft right now. - Ahunt (talk) 11:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be large differences in performance for a/c using nearly identical 310hp engines. C400 is 235kn and 1100nm, Cirrus 22T is 210kn and 850nm, and M20TN is 237kn and 1440nm. The EA500 has a 450hp turbine yet its cruise speed is 209kn. I suspect some manufactures are a little optimistic with their figures.220.244.86.63 (talk) 08:55, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cessna 400. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:50, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- Ahunt (talk) 18:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cessna 400. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fly by wire

can anyone tell me if this Cessna a Fly-by-wire (FBW) or a Hydro-mechanical (manual flight controls) type aircraft ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly mechanical controls, no hydraulics. - Ahunt (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks~ do you think I should edit that info the Lead ~ if you just look at a picture and see the side stick, as a pilot, the first thing on you mind is the Airbus 380 ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 18:49, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of recent light aircraft have mechanical sidesticks, but none are fly-by-wire. Even if you had a ref for this to cite, it really isn't notable. - Ahunt (talk) 18:51, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mitchellhobbs (talk) 19:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Max. & cruise speeds the same?

Under the heading "Specifications" it states "Maximum speed: 235 kn (270 mph, 435 km/h) calibrated airspeed Cruise speed: 235 kn (270 mph, 435 km/h) true airspeed at 25,000 ft (7,600 m)". I am unaware of any aircraft where the maximum and cruise speeds are the same; the former is typically a few percent greater than the latter, such as the Cessna 172, whose maximum speed is 170 mph, versus its cruise of 167 mph. Can anyone verify if this is correct? Bricology (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You answered it yourself above, one is calibrated airspeed and the other is true airspeed. - Ahunt (talk) 20:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]