What a beautiful plane! I am just starting out in my 1981 Cessna 421C. So far it's been a wonderful platform for 500-700nm missions.

How did the fuel selector part turn out? It looks beautiful. Any chance you have the CAD drawing? I'd love to make a part as mine is getting a bit old.

Thanks!
Austin

I just ran across this one that, sadly, has been wasting away outside for the last 3 years or so. It is owned by an older guy that I bought another plane from. I may buy it to part out. It was parked when a turbo went bad. He has a new turbo but never put it on. It reportedly has low time RAM engines but I haven’t seen the logs yet. Paint is bad but no corrosion in the typical places. It has a recent hot windshield. It could be saved if anyone is interested. I think it would ferry with some servicing and of course the turbo replaced. Has Garmin 530, color radar. Interior is pretty nice.

If that was a C model, I'd be very tempted!

Where is it?

Funny I prefer the B over the C model.

Why is that…could you expand?

Where is this…do you have more info on contact?

[/quote]Why is that…could you expand?[/quote]

There were many improvements on the C model airplanes. But every year had some evolution from the beginning.

I used to fly a 1971 421B N92PS with Robertson flaps and drooping ailerons. That setup flew really well with no trim change during flap extension. It did not have VGs when I first started flying it and later we added the VGs. Because of the serial number range it was not eligible for a gross weight increase. The cabin was a bit shorter behind the door and some other differences. Single pitot tube but it had boots, hot windshield.

The light original cloth interior helped and I removed the forward cabin partitions for more room in the cockpit.

This setup gave a light empty weight and it flew very well. Sadly in today's environment ATC does not understand the limitations as well and the Robertson airplane cannot have spoilers fitted. I had several times I had to tell the controller "I can go down or slow down but I can't do both".

Later the gross weight was increased but the empty weight creeped upwards also. The later trailing link airplanes lost almost a person in useful load so they may not work in a situation where a hired pilot was flying others or their family. Even a Kingair 200 has trouble with this so it's not just the 421.

I figured since the horsepower never changed I'd rather the lighter wing loading airplane for my runway at the time. 2000ft paved. Not recommending this but the airplane handled it day after day and night.

When I was a kid my father flew a 421B N124WG off the same runway 2000ft by 300 wide. But it was grass. Day and night operations no runway lights. The first time he landed here he took all the seats out to lighten the airplane before takeoff. It was fine so he kept it here after that. That airplane was no VGs and no Robertson kit.

Currently I have 3100ft runway here now and I have been checking out a new owner in a 1974 421B but it is late enough serial number to have known icing.

The empty weight is one reason I liked the B.
Fuel system is another. I grew up with twin Cessnas so I am used to the tip tank fuel system. I like being able to verify fuel by filling what tanks I need. I do rather have two nacelle tanks rather than the single with the hydraulic air conditioner. Nose mounted AC seems to work fine. You do have to watch when running the wing aux tanks low or almost dry then switching back to the tips (mains) that you pull the aux tank pump breakers on some airplanes. Originally there were no switches so the aux tank pumps would run with the main tank pumps when switched on. So if the aux tanks were dry the pumps could run dry and fail.

Later there was a service kit to fix this. Switches added to the fuel selector valve arm.

I needed the Lower vertical tail height of the B to fit in my shop door and especially on jacks with the ceiling height.

I liked the earlier B model turbo controllers and engine driven fuel injection system compared to the late C models.

Mechanical landing gear has been fine. Yes more complex, needs regular rigging checks and adjustment, slower cycle times but I don't have a hydraulic mule for the later gear. I can see and feel the problems with the mechanical gear. Not so much with Hydraulic. Regular hardware replacement is key.

The Micro VG kit did make them land a bit nicer but you could always make very nice landings with the standard B model and straight leg gear. I think it is easier to land and fly than the 310.

I did try some 414s and 340s. Never liked them much. 414 seemed like a castrated 421, 340 was too tight and I always hit my head on the AC parts in the back cabin. Long 421 nose is never in the way for visibility.

I've always had the bottom tier condition of each type I have flown. Working airplanes not show winners. Price is a big factor in getting one and the later C models were always out of budget. Seems I always need boots or paint, interior, radios etc.
They are all getting old and sadly nothing really replaced them. Maintenance in the wrong hands can be a disaster and just getting through a prebuy or finding one good enough to be worth a prebuy is hard. Bottom of the new parts barrel is showing through and overhaul shops are closing up. Right now used eBay parts from scrap yards are a bonanza if you can pick out what is good or bad. Plan for the future. Look what has worn in the last 2000 hrs. Stock more.

They are complex machines but actually not that hard to fly. The automatic waste gates and automatic fuel pump leaning really take care of things if adjusted right. With no cowl flaps to worry about and simple pressurization controls it's really nice. Just demands attention and monitoring of all the systems. I really like the cockpit layout. Far superior to the Kingair.

I flew the 1971 several times a week for 4 years (many short haul trips across PA and back). In that time I only had to cancel two trips due to mechanical. Once a bad squat switch and gear would not retract. Another time I had a bad spark plug after takeoff. I felt it go and the shudder. So nope not today and I came back around to land. Just was a bad plug on one cylinder but the airplane is so smooth you could feel that happen .
Engines made it to TBO without pulling a jug.

I wish modern airplanes flew like the old ones.

The trailing link gear started in 1980 and only added 90 pounds to the empty weight.

When Robertson added their STOL system the FAA had them cut the flap speed in half so all the extra lift could only be reduced gradually. It’s a pain to raise flaps.

1980 had the single stage fuel pump which is the best. after 1980 they had a two stage fuel pump which they no longer make. The L is the best GTISO520.

Yes but it's 90 lbs on top of already heavier airframe. I'm not trying to change opinions just listed some reasons I liked the B model better. The one I flew had a factory empty weight of 4987 before the Robertson kit installation (added 50 lbs) at 200" arm and after avionics refit in 2011 an actual weighed empty weight of 5134 lbs at 152.06" (full oil) The trouble with the 71 is it was before S/N 201 so the Gross takeoff weight was 7250 Even the VG kit installation will not raise the gross weight. But same wing structure. It appears there are gaps in the S/N range where they started a batch of S/N each year. Not sequential.

Never had an issue with raising the 421B Robertson flaps. I used them for takeoff and after gear up and done with its cycle put the flaps up. No problems. I didn't want to retract them close to the ground if there was any asymmetric type of failures in the system.

The first notch of B model Robertson flaps (10 deg) can be extended at 170 knots. 195 mph. (also takeoff position). They trail behind the trailing edge almost full flap chord at this point. Along with aileron droop. Flaps trailing behind the wing reminds me of the British Miles aircraft using flaps in this position. The T303 flap extension is a similar motion in some ways.
The Robertson kit includes an UP spring connected to the elevator to add up elevator as the flaps are extended. It's perfect with almost no trim change.

White arc for flap extension beyond 10 degrees is 145 mph. 126 knots.

C model Robertson may be totally different. I never was around one equipped that way to know. B model may have had a Flight manual change update from Robertson I never saw changing flap speeds also.

Gerald do you know why they switched to a different design pump? There are a few that were in Cessna flight test on here who might know what the ideas were.

Like most airplanes in the Cessna line the evolution was pretty extreme in the 70s. Totally different airplanes between the beginning and end of the decade. Just the model numbers carrying over.

I'd like to fly a C model with winglets sometime to see how that worked out especially at altitude.

Any first hand results of performance with the Hartzell wide chord propellers vs the McCauleys?

Charlie, we HAVE eight 421C’s at KCCR. A 1978 with winglets, 1981 Robertson STOL. Three 1980’s and two 1981’s. The two stage fuel pump is harder to adjust and maintain. They stop ed making them and they were only for the N engines.

The winglets are faster only at altitude, above 20,000ft. Winglets are only available for 1976 thru 1979 straight leg 421’s. 1980 is the only year with TL gear and the L engine.
In 1982 they only completed and sold 56 airplanes. There were 18 leftovers in various stages of completion.

There are no 1983 421’s because Cessna didn’t finish any airplanes that year. In 1984 Cessna finished 12 of those 18 airframes that had been outside in the weeds.

In 1985 they finished the last six with borrowed parts from the 425 production line.
These last 18 are the worst of the bunch. They have an extra 100 pounds of corrosion proofing from being parked outside.

People claiming they have the last one off the production line have no idea in what order the 18 were riveted together.
All they can say is they the last one sold and completed.

70 and 71 421B’s were the long nose and short wings. 72 thru 74 had a wing root extension and the engines further from the fuselage. 1975 is the ONLY 421B model with FIKI certification.

In 1976 Cessna took a pair of early Citation wings and put them on a 421 fuselage. This year had hydraulic gear and wet wings and a simpler fuel system. This was the first of the 421C models.

Wish I had some old pictures, but I didn't take all that many in the days prior to digital cameras. I used to fly Carburetor's out of Franklin, Indiana to Auto Assembly plants. That was back in the 80s.

My 421C that has flown all over North America.

Thanks Gerald. I must have a real oddballs. 1971 S/N 0134 has the long wing roots with inboard boots. Heated windshield but oddly a single center mounted pitot tube. No known ice.

Same span as the 1974 also here. But the 74 is N1946G S/N 846 and has Known Icing. (started with 801). I always was told that only 1975 B had FIKI but yet here it is. Cessna must have continued with odd carryovers into the 80s.

Amazing the corrosion proofing added that much weight on the final airplanes. It is interesting to me to walk around a later 421 and see how much they filled the seams and bumps. When we stripped our 310Q with original paint I could not believe how much filler was all over the cabin forward areas and tip tanks. My father bought it new from the factory so I know it was original paint for sure.

That's quite a fleet of 421s you're operating. Good to see them still working out there. Medivac flights?

The 74 I am working on used to be a medivac airplane in Colorado.

I have not flown one with the spoilers. If you have any equipped how effective are they?