Cessna 408 SkyCourier
Moderator
It is what it is, with design probably very strongly influenced by a FedEx requirement. The FedEx current and future orders would justify production.
Not the first proposal in this class of aircraft but this may be the first to actually be built. "Wizard" aka Flukey Luke was also pushing a similar type but larger aircraft some years ago, stating, with his usual impeccable honesty, that he's bought a couple of hundred off the plan! It was the Utilicraft FF-1080, twin PW150s, 20,000 kg disposable load, single pilot, which it appears never progressed beyond a wet dream. I'm not sure how they thought twin PW150s would push a 40 ton aircraft to 250 kts?
I suspect this aircraft will feature strongly in FedEx hub and spoke feeder operations in the USA. The PT6 is ideal for this purpose, despite the probably high cycles.
I suspect it will struggle as a commuter, for the same reason the Shorts SD3-30 and SD3-60 struggled, speed, lack of pressurization and payload/range limitations.
Same pax capacity as a Twin Otter for around 40 kts (25%) increase in speed but loss of STOL ability? Interesting the choice of a couple of 1,100 HP -65's to carry 19 pax, versus two 650 HP -34's on the DHC6-400. The Beech 1900D has similar engines, same pax capacity, pressurised but 50 kts faster.
Not the first proposal in this class of aircraft but this may be the first to actually be built. "Wizard" aka Flukey Luke was also pushing a similar type but larger aircraft some years ago, stating, with his usual impeccable honesty, that he's bought a couple of hundred off the plan! It was the Utilicraft FF-1080, twin PW150s, 20,000 kg disposable load, single pilot, which it appears never progressed beyond a wet dream. I'm not sure how they thought twin PW150s would push a 40 ton aircraft to 250 kts?
I suspect this aircraft will feature strongly in FedEx hub and spoke feeder operations in the USA. The PT6 is ideal for this purpose, despite the probably high cycles.
I suspect it will struggle as a commuter, for the same reason the Shorts SD3-30 and SD3-60 struggled, speed, lack of pressurization and payload/range limitations.
Same pax capacity as a Twin Otter for around 40 kts (25%) increase in speed but loss of STOL ability? Interesting the choice of a couple of 1,100 HP -65's to carry 19 pax, versus two 650 HP -34's on the DHC6-400. The Beech 1900D has similar engines, same pax capacity, pressurised but 50 kts faster.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uhhh, yeah, but the Bandit can't carry 3 LD3 shipping containers, which I expect, is a lot more relevant to Fed-ex and Cessna than how if compares to the Bandit as a passenger hauling machine.
Thread Starter
I'm sure the nose of the 408 is exactly how they want it, despite the input from the know-alls on Pprune. After all, they have certified more designs that any other manufacturer on the planet.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might have to do with the fact that it's designed around 3 LD3 shipping containers, which are kinda square.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems they pilfered the design from another well known company.
https://www.hobbywarehouse.com.au/le...rgo-plane.html
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, no, there's not. But there are shipping containers immediately behind the cockpit. If the fuselage necessarily must have a large, rectangular cross section 6 inches aft of the pilots seat, there's probably not much point in making the cockpit narrow and sleek like a Learjet.