Sport Pilot Talk

jake · Joined: 25 Oct 2009 Posts: 80 Location: minnesota

A while back I posted interest in the TL 3000 sirius. I have since decided that was not the plane for me.

Now I am planning on a P2008 tecnam. I test flew the demo plane in sebring and was impressed. Anyone have tecnam experiences and opinions they would share?

Jake

CharlieTango · Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:23 pm Post subject:

Plane & Pilot published an article on the P2008 and said it had an empty weight of 890lbs leaving 256lbs of payload with full fuel.

jake · Joined: 25 Oct 2009 Posts: 80 Location: minnesota

There is a correction in this months issue.
correction says 890 empty, 540 useful.
Hope its correct.
Jake

CharlieTango · Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:37 pm Post subject:

jake wrote: There is a correction in this months issue.
correction says 890 empty, 540 useful.
Hope its correct.
Jake

lets see, 890 + 540 = 1,430

1,320 - 1,403 = -110

the correction doesn't sound correct.

jake · Joined: 25 Oct 2009 Posts: 80 Location: minnesota

This time its my typo, should have been 780 empty weight.

jake

CharlieTango · Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 8:52 pm Post subject:

the 780 number comes from the tecnam brochure. http://www.tecnam.net/files/brochures/P2008.pdf

"Standard Equipped weight 780 lbs." the standard equipped version is pretty bare bones and published weights in may cases are lighter then the actual aircraft, so check on this.

http://www.tecnam.net/files/pricing/LSA_PriceList_2010.pdf

from the price list you can see there are many upgrades and options including a chute to add to the empty weight.

also notice the limited fuel and therefore range and limited baggage. last complaint are the small wheels/tires.

i bet the article was right, the loaded model would weigh well over 800lbs empty.

i think its a pretty nice aircraft if it held more fuel and weighed less (or if it wasn't registered SLSA and limited to 1,320lbs)

I'm spoiled, my CT weighs 719lbs well equipped, holds 7 hours of fuel, no wing strut, 110lbs of baggage and tundra gear and TAS up to 130kts.

the P2008 is sexy looking but not that usefull for traveling long distance with 2 people and luggage.

an 06 CTSW would cost about 1/2 as much.

jake · Joined: 25 Oct 2009 Posts: 80 Location: minnesota

Charlie,
I think your just trying to keep the value up on the CTSW. :D
I get the feeling you might wear Flight Design underwear!!!
Nothing wrong with loyalty as long as you can be somewhat objective.

I do appreciate your feedback though. Gives me things to consider. I sent an email to tecnam asking to clarify the possible range of empty weight.

When you say small tires are the tecnam tires smaller than the tecnam tires? Or are you comparing your tundra tires to the standard tecnam tires?

Jake

CharlieTango · Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:32 am Post subject:

jake,

believe it or not i'm trying to be objective. usefull load, range, baggage and sporty handling make the pilot enjoyment factor go way up.

long range also means far less avgas required.

i do see my "tundra" 6x600 as only normal and that is what i am comparing to.

i'm glad i gave you things to consider that's all i'm trying to do.

while you are talking to tecnam about empty weight get an empty weight on a plane that is equipped as you would buy it.

pietermk · Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 25

jake wrote: A while back I posted interest in the TL 3000 sirius. I have since decided that was not the plane for me.

Now I am planning on a P2008 tecnam. I test flew the demo plane in sebring and was impressed. Anyone have tecnam experiences and opinions they would share?

Jake

check out the Eaglets, they have a good ~600lbs useful load, great planes to fly and you can have them in glass or steam gauge version

where are you located?

Pieter

CharlieTango · Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:33 am Post subject:

i mentioned older CTSW's because the weight was lower then.

Eaglets with 600lb useful load, thats the sweet spot.

pietermk · Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 25

CharlieTango wrote: i mentioned older CTSW's because the weight was lower then.

Eaglets with 600lb useful load, thats the sweet spot.

the CT's are great planes, and from what I heard the improvements to the new models make it handle better x-winds. not starting a discussion that subject !

If I had enough funds to buy an LSA, the CT would certainly be on the list, but with a composite plane you better have a hanger to keep it in.

Pieter

CharlieTango · Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:08 am Post subject:

from Phil Solomon

I am the CEO of Tecnam North America and was reading with interest the various comments on this site. I would like to apologize for the confusion surrounding the weight that appeared in the Plane and Pilot article on the P2008. The corrected article (there were a few other errrors) appears on the Plane and Pilot web site. As one of the posters indicated the empty weight is, in fact, 780lbs. Understandably, people do get very excited about weight, useful load and other performance numbers but I would like to give you some insight into the thinking and process behind the empty weight number, which is higher than the other Tecnam aircraft that qualify as LSA's.

Aircraft mannufacturers are always looking to find the perfect compromise between size, weight, performance, comfort, safety, price etc. In other words trying to achieve the impossible! Tecnam designed the P2008 to be a fully certified aircraft under the CS/VLA regulations in Europe and in other parts of the world with a much higher gross weight limit than is allowed under the LSA regulations (about 200lbs more). They also wanted it to be much larger than the previous Tecnam models to accommodate more equipment and fill the luxury niche sought by many pilots who are trading down from heavier metal. As a result the whole structure is built to support higher loads than are allowed for LSA's so is by necessity a little heavier than it would be if 1,320lbs was the only goal. The aircraft includes as standard a large number of items that are optional on the other models and has a finish level that befits its role as the luxury offering in the market. Tecnam could have chosen to offer a basic P2008 with no carpets, no center console, less comfortable seats, no toe brakes, no wheel pants, composite landing gear etc so as to advertize a lower base price and a lower standard empty weight. They, and we, did not feel that this was a good direction to go in as Tecnam already has a full range of models to meet pretty much every price and performance level starting at $109,900 (Echo Classic, fully equipped for day VFR GPS Navigation and 700lbs empty weight), through to the P2008 starting, fully equipped, at about $155,000.

The P2008 is not designed to be the model that will meet everybody's needs but to fill a niche for the discerning buyer who wants his or her plane to be as close to the comfort they have been used to in their previous flying life and are willing to recognize, as with what they currently fly, that sometimes weight and balance requirements will need to be factored in. Aviation is full of such compromises with the latest version of the King Air C90 having a useful load of under 500lbs with full fuel and full equipment....

The whole LSA movement is the shot in the arm that aviation needed even if it does involve some degree of frustration when expectations do not meet reality. The "cheap" LSA does exist but is not the norm and that certainly has disappointed many people. We are working hard on ways of bringing access to LSA's to a wider variety of people using the fact that even if the acquisition costs are higher than most people can afford the operating costs are a fraction of what those people are used to. LSA's will become the standard trainers of the future and help reverse the very long established decline in pilot numbers.

Tecnam is the largest manufacturer of Light Sport type aircraft in the world with the widest product range but we recognize that we are in a competitive market with some very respected companies so the public does have a substantial choice of price levels and models to choose from and that is how it should be.

Some posters have expressed concern about the increasing likelihood of some tightening of the regulations and increased oversight. The oversight is really about ensuring that the existing standards are being respected and that the quality control systems to ensure consistency of product are in place and working. Industry is being consulted on the direction being taken by the FAA and I believe that the result will deal with the FAA concerns without turning the process into a FAR23 "lookalike", which is to be avoided at all costs.

Critical debate is good!

jake · Joined: 25 Oct 2009 Posts: 80 Location: minnesota

Charlie,

Just curious, how is it that you are posting for Phil soloman and what is your opinion of his coments?

Jake

jake · Joined: 25 Oct 2009 Posts: 80 Location: minnesota

Peter,

I am in minnesota.

CharlieTango · Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:15 am Post subject:

jake wrote: Charlie,

Just curious, how is it that you are posting for Phil soloman and what is your opinion of his coments?

Jake

There was a similar thread on the clfier forum and Phil responded. http://ctflier.com/index.php?/topic/136-tecnam-p2008/

I took the liberty to paste it here fyi.

I think he sidestepped the question a bit as he is going with the standard equipped weight as correct when the article and discussion were about a fully equipped version.

Phil mentioned the CS/VLA certification and that IMHO is where this model fits pretty well but as a SLSA there is a lot of compromise. If CS/VLA with larger fuel tanks it would be pretty nice.