Tecnam P2008 turbo

[jetcat3]

This forum is called "Sport Pilot Talk." We're not in Italy. We're in the USA talking about flying LSA with Sport Pilot privileges and limitations.

What he said.

Some are playing a semantics game that others have, in the past, used to justify flying over legal gross weight.

My suggestion is to just stop when you realize a loading is illegal, because it's illegal.

Whether it's legal or safe in Italy or on Mars might be interesting, but is not productive.

It's definitely productive to me. Knowing I'd be flying an aircraft well under its capabilities gives me confidence in its ability to withstand hard landings at a gross weight of 1320 lbs. I know I won't be stressing the airframe near as much flying it at this weight, albeit with a different useful load and mission capability as a result.

I'm disappointed in the way this thread has gone. I'm a kid who was excited about a demo flight he had taken and wanted to share that with a group of individuals I thought would appreciate it. Why can't y'all be happy for someonelse's positive experience? If you have a real concern, then Private Message me about it! No need to be so negative about it all. I know one thing, I'll never be posting on a light sport aircraft website again if this is how it's going to be. Thanks all. Y'all have a good day and let's look on the bright side of things!

Drew

[Nomore767]

Overblown?

I've mentioned it before, but someone flew my rental Citabria over gross once.

He died. So did a teenage passenger. N7596F if you care to Google it.

I don't care how many people fly over gross and don't crash, C150 or otherwise.

Most Conservative Action? Adhere to an aircraft's limitations. If you can't, you need a different plane.

As you stated, that plane was flying above certified weight. Would you fly the P2008 at 1380 lbs loaded if you were in Italy, where the plane is certified above that weight? Would you consider that safe or unsafe?

Same plane in the US. I would agree the plane is DEFINITELY illegal. And is a clear FAR violation. But overweight and jeopardizing the safety of its passengers? I can't see how you could make that argument if you answered that you would be safe flying this plane in Italy.

I understand it is a hypothetical argument as the plane is clearly ILLEGAL in the US at that weight. But I keep hearing it's unsafe at that weight, but somehow it's safe if you fly it an a different continent.

Cluemeister,

Here's the best way to resolve your questions.

I gather you are contemplating starting training for a pilot's license (SPL or PPL?). I gather you're looking at different airplanes types with a view to buy at some point? Correct me if I'm wrong?

At the end of your training program you will take a check-ride with the FAA. During the ground portion prior to flying the Examiner will likely have you do a weight and balance in the actual airplane that your flying. That's the various weights, and the way that weight is distributed.
At this point stop and ask the Examiner how much over the max gross you can go before you're considered 'unsafe' or 'illegal'.
Ask the Examiner if he wants you to do the problem using just US rules or can you use the weights for the same model of airplane certified in Italy.
Mention to the Examiner that the manufacturer's sales folk have told you its really no big deal if you fly the airplane 40 or 50 lbs over max gross weight and that you can just stuff the luggage area and anyway the airplane is certified to carry another 150lbs in a couple of European countries.
Report back here as to what the Examiner says.

If you can't wait till then go to your local FSDO and ask an Examiner there. Or even a good CFI. Serious suggestion.

[dstclair]

Drew -- I don't think anyone was trying to rain on your parade and many commented very positively on Tecnam from their own personal experience. The one comment that started a weight discussion ("...extra ooomph cut into the useful load?") was somewhat innocent. There is a cost to the performance you experienced and it is much steeper in the US due to regulations. There are some that feel the cost (i.e. weight) will be worth it for their mission and others that will feel otherwise.

[SportPilot]

.......

[Nomore767]

This forum is called "Sport Pilot Talk." We're not in Italy. We're in the USA talking about flying LSA with Sport Pilot privileges and limitations.

What he said.

Some are playing a semantics game that others have, in the past, used to justify flying over legal gross weight.

My suggestion is to just stop when you realize a loading is illegal, because it's illegal.

Whether it's legal or safe in Italy or on Mars might be interesting, but is not productive.

It's definitely productive to me. Knowing I'd be flying an aircraft well under its capabilities gives me confidence in its ability to withstand hard landings at a gross weight of 1320 lbs. I know I won't be stressing the airframe near as much flying it at this weight, albeit with a different useful load and mission capability as a result.

I'm disappointed in the way this thread has gone. I'm a kid who was excited about a demo flight he had taken and wanted to share that with a group of individuals I thought would appreciate it. Why can't y'all be happy for someonelse's positive experience? If you have a real concern, then Private Message me about it! No need to be so negative about it all. I know one thing, I'll never be posting on a light sport aircraft website again if this is how it's going to be. Thanks all. Y'all have a good day and let's look on the bright side of things!

Drew

Drew,

Hold on dude! I said several times that I have flown the Tecnam P2008 and have done a couple of demo flights in it! I came close to buying one in fact.
What in fact turned me off were the (then) sales folks and the attitude of the demo pilot. I have had a career as a professional pilot and so I feel confident in assessing when someone's dishing out some BS. Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining!

As Mark (TecnamUSA sales guy) correctly posted on here earlier, customers should look at each plane's pros and cons and compare. I did and much as I liked the more luxurious finish of the P2008 and some of the feature not available on other LSAs, like the fully opening cowling, in the end looking at MY personal mission and the fact that I'd likely fly 99% on my own, and the fact that I preferred an airplane made in the USA i decided against the P2008 in favor of the Vans RV-12 SLSA. I really liked the Tecnam P2008 but I got all the features I wanted in the RV-12 and I paid about $90k less for a new Vans versus a new Tecnam.

Let me be clear…this was MY choice and is not anything negative about the Tecnam other than my experience with the previous sales folk.

I posted a link to the AOPA review of the P2008, in fact the VERY demo airplane I flew at Sebring because…this forum IS called Sport Pilot TALK and here was a way to open the discussion building on the thread you began. It wasn't meant to burst your bubble and dampen your enthusiasm and if it did, well…sorry.

On the other hand, as I wrote, I met a guy who was sorry he had bought the Tecnam, not because he didn't like the way it looked, flew or handled but because of the higher empty weight which frustrated him and precluded his ability to fly with his buddy or his wife, and take full fuel and bags. He had added a BRS to make his wife feel 'safer' and in the process added more weight to his 'problem' as well as add to the cost.
This wasn't really the airplane for HIM, but it might be for someone else. It's here I urged others on this forum to take a good look at the weight and numbers before committing to an airplane and being disappointed, as this guy was. He's not the first by the way.

My airplane does all the things I personally want but…I don't view it as better or worse than others, it just is the best for me. It has pros and cons. I only have a 20 gallon fuel tank for example but…I can load 2 x 210lb people, full fuel and 30lbs of bags and always be within the weight and balance envelope. Simpler for ME. I have a 765 empty weight whereas the P2008 had almost 900lbs, the Skycatcher I looked at was 864, and so was the Legend Cub. I chose a lower empty weight airplane with a simpler (and lighter and less expensive ) finish.

I believe I posted both positive and negatives, as well as plain facts.

I'm happy that you're excited about the Tecnam P2008, it's a great airplane! As I said…when are you going to put down a deposit?

[Flocker]

We're not in Italy

I wish I was. My wife & I went there in 2014 - the food was incredible. (perhaps the reason for the increased MTOW of the P2008 in Europe? )

Here's a pic of a flight I took over Rome in a C-152:

[Cluemeister]

I would have appreciated this answer, as I believe it represents the truth.

"Yes, it's probably safe within the limits of the airplane's capabilities as it has been certified in Italy. I would have no hesitation to fly the plane in Italy at that weight. However, it's stupid and illegal to do it here. You may not like the 1320 weight limit, many of us don't, but that's the way it is. You fly over that, you're asking for trouble at some point. If there's ever an incident, even unrelated to weight, you'll get busted by the FAA for that. I wouldn't take that chance, and you shouldn't either."

[Nomore767]

I would have appreciated this answer, as I believe it represents the truth.

"Yes, it's probably safe within the limits of the airplane's capabilities as it has been certified in Italy. I would have no hesitation to fly the plane in Italy at that weight. However, it's stupid and illegal to do it here. You may not like the 1320 weight limit, many of us don't, but that's the way it is. You fly over that, you're asking for trouble at some point. If there's ever an incident, even unrelated to weight, you'll get busted by the FAA for that. I wouldn't take that chance, and you shouldn't either."

If you go to Italy and rent a P2008 with a local instructor then since that airplane is registered and certified in Italy then you can fly the airplane to Italian weight limits.

If you return to the USA and do the same thing you now fly the airplane as registered and certified in the USA.

I believe, if you were to fly your USA registered and certified P2008 over to Italy you are still bound to fly that particular airplane to the limits established when that airplane was certified and registered in the USA. You are of course bound to fly the airplane in Italian airspace subject to their airspace rules and regulations.

Its not that it's 'unsafe' to fly the airplane over USA LSA weight up to Italian certified weight its just that its the same plane type but which has been certified and registered in 2 different countries using 2 sets of regulations, rules and limitations.

What is 'unsafe' is to knowingly flying an airplane beyond the established weights and limitations for the country its registered and certified in. When you take your check ride the Examiner is going to demand that you operate and fly the airplane within the specs and limitations as certified in the USA. Anything else will be deemed unsafe.

From what you posted above it seems that you already know this, odd.

[SportPilot]

.......

[Mark Gregor]

Eddie,

I looked up your citabria Accident. It seems the pilot tried to initiate a aerobatic loop from only 50 feet above the water. WOW!! The cause of accident is listed as acrobatics at to low an altitude that did not allow for recovery. They did mention being over gross as a possible contributing factor. It seems they were also concerned about the integrity of the wing attach point that broke. How old was the airplane?

With all due respect I don't see how this accident is comparable or relevant to what we are talking about here.

I have not heard of any LSA aircraft accidents related to being over gross much less one that was certified heavier in another country but flown in the usa over 1320. How about you? There are common causes to accident but the guy who departs 50 lbs over does not seem to rank high on the list.

There are probably 8,000 Cessna 150s, many flying regularly and I have not heard of this being a problem here either. You picked an anomaly of an extreme aerobatic maneuver where the FAA cause was listed as aerobatics at low altitude. Over gross was mentioned as a possible contributing factor but not the cause of the accident.

How many pilots have ran out of fuel and crashed? Would it had been better had they filled the tanks and possibly made it to their destination? I don't think telling them to get a different airplane is going to solve this problem.

I have never said and never will say, flying over gross is ok. Please quit saying that. On the other hand I do not see aircraft falling out of the for this reason either. Lots of things are illegal. Go ask the state patrol if driving 60 in a 55 is legal. Go ask the IRS if every deduction you took on your taxes was legal. We all need to have some reasonable judgment. This is not a world of absolutes. We have to ask ourselves if the chances we take everyday are reasonable. You will not have much to enjoy in this life if you do not take a few reasonable chances. Getting out of bed is a chance we take every day!

I dont see anybody disagreeing about the illegal part. I just don't see any accidents or enforcement from being 50 lbs over either. It is illegal to drive 60 in a 55. Yes you can get a ticket for it but it does not happen often. I regularly see people driving 62 in a 55. I do not see the correlating to them soon driving 67 tomorrow and then 75 next week.
I think it is very reasonable for a pilot to choose an aircraft that is stronger and has additional safety features that may reduce usable load. If the market were to only offer bare bones military type aircraft it would kill aviation real quick.

I try to be more of a glass half full than half empty kind of guy.


Mark

[SportPilot]

.......

[Cluemeister]

I asked a question many posts ago.

Is it safe to fly a plane under the manufacturer's certified maximum weight?

For some reason, nobody wants to say yes. But the answer is yes.

It does not mean saying yes means you condone illegal activity. It does not mean saying yes that you are encouraging a fledgling pilot in training to be stupid. It does not mean saying yes that you are stating it is right.

I've been told what country we are not in, what an FAA official would do if he found out, how a plane that exceeded its maximum certified weight crashed, but nobody wants to answer the question. Is it safe to fly a plane under the manufacturer's certified maximum weight?

I will now prepare myself for additional feedback.

[Mark Gregor]

sportpilot,

I think you are enjoying this. Its the internet after all!

Nowhere did I condone speeding or cheating on taxes. I'm just saying that is not always that black and white.

When the traffic is moving 60 I will assume your the guy driving 55 in the front with a line of 20 cars behind them.
I'm sure you run every deduction past the IRS for approval before allowing your accountant to take the deduction also!

[Nomore767]

I asked a question many posts ago.

Is it safe to fly a plane under the manufacturer's certified maximum weight?

For some reason, nobody wants to say yes. But the answer is yes.

It does not mean saying yes means you condone illegal activity. It does not mean saying yes that you are encouraging a fledgling pilot in training to be stupid. It does not mean saying yes that you are stating it is right.

I've been told what country we are not in, what an FAA official would do if he found out, how a plane that exceeded its maximum certified weight crashed, but nobody wants to answer the question. Is it safe to fly a plane under the manufacturer's certified maximum weight?

I will now prepare myself for additional feedback.

Is it safe to fly a plane UNDER the manufacturer's certified maximum weight? YES!!

It's not illegal either!!

[FastEddieB]

Eddie,

I looked up your citabria Accident. It seems the pilot tried to initiate a aerobatic loop from only 50 feet above the water. WOW!! The cause of accident is listed as acrobatics at to low an altitude that did not allow for recovery. They did mention being over gross as a possible contributing factor. It seems they were also concerned about the integrity of the wing attach point that broke. How old was the airplane?

With all due respect I don't see how this accident is comparable or relevant to what we are talking about here.

I mentioned it largely so some might see where overweight conditions can lead, and perhaps why my view on the subject is rather black and white.

I think it was a 1967 model. So it was about 30 years old.

They did not think anything "broke", but that hardware was missing. Hardware that was there at the annual just a few hours prior. It was suspicious enough that it was turned over to Broward Homicide, but I never heard anything further.

As far as all the contributing causes, its the old "links in the chain" analogy. Possible that no item on that list would have resulted in a fatal all by itself. Put them all together and it spells tragedy.