Talk:Cessna Citation Sovereign

Article redesignation

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)

Article restoration

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Has production ended?

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)

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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

U.S. Marine Corps

I attempted a citation check (the other type of citation...) for the USMC since I can't find any pictures of a Sovereign in USMC or USN livery. The article cites the FlightGlobal 2021 World Air Forces report, which is deadlinked, but the newer reports don't actually refer to the Sovereign specifically; they list the "Citation Encore/Sovereign/Ultra". The Encore and Ultra are variants of the Citation V, and I have no idea why FlightGlobal lumps them together. I think the listing is spurious. Carguychris (talk) 13:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The 2021 report also bundles the Sovereign in with the Encore and Ultra, which appears to be unchanged since at least 2013 - as does the 12 in service and two on order. The 2009 survey has 12 Encore/Ultras in service (none on order and no Sovereigns), so it isn't clear whether any Sovereigns were delivered, even if they were ordered.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I did a deep dive over the weekend. The Marines took delivery of 2 UC-35C Citation Bravos and 11 UC-35D Citation Encores, 13 total, but one UC-35D was lost in a fatal accident in 2004 before the last new UC-35D was delivered in 2006. In 2021, both UC-35Cs were retired and sent to AMARG, leaving 10 UC-35Ds in service.

The 2022 Marine Aviation Plan says that the UC-35D will be replaced by the UC-12W (King Air 350) starting in FY2027 and finishing in FY2030, and says nothing about obtaining any new Citations of any flavor. The 2019 Marine Aviation Plan says nothing significant about the UC-35 or a potential replacement. I speculate that the USMC talked to Textron in the late 2000s or early 2010s about obtaining two Sovereigns to replace the UC-35C because Citation V production was winding down, and this was leaked to FlightGlobal; however, the USMC decided to kick the can, and FlightGlobal never confirmed this and hasn't updated their table. Carguychris (talk) 15:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)