Talk:Cessna Citation Sovereign

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cessna Citation Sovereign 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.

Article redesignation[edit]

As a part of the project to reorganize the entire series of articles on Citations, it is planned that this article will be rewritten to include the entire Excel family, one of 6 distinct Citation families. The Sovereign is the lastest version of the family, so the information will will be retained, but it is planned to rename this article as Cessna Citation Excel. Any objections, please speak now. Akradecki 02:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article restoration[edit]

What's the purpose in identifying the aircraft as transcontinental in this manner ... "with the capability to fly Los Angeles to Hawaii greater than 98% of the time" This sounds as if we lose about 2% on this transcontinental journey. I hope this is not the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.236.244.24 (talk) 05:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on weather, it requires a different amount of fuel for the same flight. I'm more worried about the description of being "transcontinental" but with no listed range.76.105.216.34 (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As explained at Talk:Cessna Citation Excel, I agree that the Sovereign is a separate design, and so am restoring this page, along with some needed improvements. The text needs expansion, and I'll rey to add that within a few days. - BillCJ (talk) 06:30, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For goodness sake, I am typed in the C680 and you guys keep claiming that it is based on the Excel fuselage. And now you have a link to an old and inaccurate story from Airliners.net that supports this. The Sovereign uses the Citation X fuselage and nose. The wings, engines, and empennage are different. Originally Cessna was going to use the Excel fuselage and stretch it, but they did not. The airliners.net article is old and inaccurate. Call Cessna in Wichita and ask them, or ask any C680 driver like myself. The Excel fuselage has nothing to do with the Sovereign. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.173.59 (talk) 06:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for setting us straight. The Airliners.net article is based on a print work (which I have) that was published in 2002. Because I have not seen any more-recent published sources that corrected that info to this point, I did not realize it was incorrect. We will need verifible published sources (this can include printed/online material from Cessna, including press releases, but not verbal reports), and I will be trying to find up-to-date-material to use in the corrections. If you can, check back in a week or two to see it I've made any progress. If you have published material that you can cite, feel free to make the corrections yourself. If your unsure about how to format it correctly, just add it anyway, either in the article itself or here, and someone (probably me) will take care of the nit-picky details. Thanks again. - BillCJ (talk) 07:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has production ended?[edit]

Is this aircraft still in production? An cryptic edit today by an anonymous user (Special:Contributions/2A02:21B0:644F:E035:3DA3:E609:CE43:98B1) indicates that production has ended, and the aircraft has mysteriously vanished from the Cessna Jets website, but Textron press releases and popular aviation news websites are silent on the matter. Carguychris (talk) 17:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted it. I'm not sure how an IP from Zurich knows this, but we can't make assumptions based only on its removal from the website list. You did right to tag it, but until we have the company itself or reliable sources specifically confirm this, we have to wait. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:MilborneOne found a source: Textron Aviation's King Air 90, Citation Sovereign End Their Rule. BilCat (talk) 21:25, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, added to main page. The AIN article evidently went up AFTER I checked their website this morning! Carguychris (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I should award you the Barnstar Executive Citation for that edit summary! BilCat (talk) 22:00, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does the the Barnstar Executive Citation use the II/CJ fuselage, the III/X/Excel fuselage, or the Latitude fuselage? Sorry, I just can't help it... Carguychris (talk) 23:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar Executive is an operator, not a variant. It uses any Citation that's available. :) BilCat (talk) 00:55, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]