Cessna Declares Speed War, Raising Ten to Mach 0.935

AINalerts » August 28, 2012
Cessna Citation Ten
Cessna boosted the speed of the Citation Ten to Mach 0.935, besting the stated speed of the soon-to-be-certified Gulfstream G650. The Citation Ten is expected to be certified later next year. (Photo: Cessna)
August 28, 2012, 4:20 PM

On Friday, Cessna announced that it has raised the top speed for its Citation Ten to Mach 0.935, which would make it the fastest civil aircraft in service once certified. This eclipses the speed of its Citation X predecessor by Mach 0.015 and the currently stated top speed of the soon-to-be-certified Gulfstream G650 by Mach 0.010.

Cessna attributes the speed increase to the Ten’s 7,034-pound-thrust Rolls-Royce AE3007C2 turbofans (more powerful than the X’s 6,442/6,764-pound C/C1s) and the addition of winglets, the latter allowing for an mtow increase to 36,600 pounds (500 pounds more than the X) and a 274-nm range extension to 3,170 nm.

“As our founder Clyde Cessna said, ‘Speed is the only reason for flying,’ so at Cessna we design, engineer, manufacture and fly the fastest civil aircraft in the world…so [customers] can work faster, more efficiently and get the job done,” said Cessna president and CEO Scott Ernest. “The Cessna team took the already powerful Citation X and made it that much better.”

Asked for comment about the Citation Ten leapfrogging the G650’s previously stated Mach 0.925 top speed, a Gulfstream spokeswoman told AIN, “We congratulate Cessna on this achievement.” The Gulfstream G650 has yet to receive full certification and thus the final performance numbers have not yet been released for the ultra-long-range jet, so time will tell how long Cessna’s claim stands.

Share this...

Comments

No Avatar
Eric Teng
on September 3, 2012 - 11:43am

Citation X/TEN is always my most favorite bird. Let along her speed, she simply looks pretty and sexy on the ramp. However it doesn't really make much sense if a fast aircraft doesn't fly far and fly efficiently. Cruising at 0.9+ is great, but the figure makes relatively much more sense for ultra long range G650 then the TEN. Cessna does have a chance to win a big market prize if they can make the med-size TEN to a TEN-ER. There is simply no mid-size jet can fly fast and long range/ultra long range today. While the economy continue growing in Asia, the demand for a mid-size jet which can carry less people with less luxury cabin but with greater speed is increasing dramatically. But it seems no major OEM has yet see the potential in this market. Like US companies have been practicing for years, the Asian companies will be requiring more and more business jets to move their mid-ranking employees. However, unlike the US companies, these Asian firms not only need to move their staffs within Asia, they have to move them inter-contientally . There will be ... actually there IS a BIG market requiring a business jet with smaller cabin(comparing with the G550/Global series) but same range now. Since a light jet cabin is too small for a really workable potty and extra crew to fly long range, a mid-size is the most economy and acceptable cabin to develop the long range mission. Therefore, I suggest Cessna to shift their focus from the 0.01 mach faster to the range (not 300nm increase but much longer) increase which everyone overlooks that a mid-size jet can do. Cessna has the potentials and advantage to meet this market now. They can use the TEN as a base to develop one which could carry less passengers who require narrower, less luxury cabin but more economically to operate. Cessna has just overlook the TEN's potential and miss what the TEN can really be shine in different direction.

No Avatar
JG Boivin
on September 6, 2012 - 4:25pm

Mr Teng has a very good point....I also think another 500NM in range is very useful; however there is not enough room in the CE750 fuselage for the fuel needed to reach 3600NM....the aircraft would need to be lengthened and re-engineered again. Buying either a G280 or a Falcon 2000EX is a great solution for those wanting a "small cabin" and still have 3,600NM range....

No Avatar
Blake
on September 11, 2012 - 5:23pm

I don't think its a straight range at 0.9 Mach. Its more fuel management and tankering fuel (round trip fuel), which saves time and money for the operator...

Please Register

In order to leave comments you will now need to be a registered user. This change in policy is to protect our site from an increased number of spam comments. Additionally, in the near future you will be able to better manage your AIN subscriptions via this registration system. If you already have an account, click here to log in. Otherwise, click here to register.

 
X