New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Talk about airplanes! At last count, there are 39 (and growing) FAA certificated S-LSA (special light sport aircraft). These are factory-built ready to fly airplanes. If you can't afford a factory-built LSA, consider buying an E-LSA kit (experimental LSA - up to 99% complete).

Moderator: drseti

User avatar
designrs
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:57 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby designrs » Thu May 05, 2016 10:46 am

Looks like we will have a large Tecnam brigade on this forum!
Congrats guys!!
- Richard

Cluemeister
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:20 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Cluemeister » Thu May 05, 2016 1:18 pm

VL Roberts wrote: The Skycatcher interior looks like it was designed for a MAD MAX movie.


That is hilarious VL Roberts! Captures the look perfectly!

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Nomore767 » Thu May 05, 2016 1:21 pm

Merlinspop wrote:
MackAttack wrote:Great pics! I flew that Astore as I noted in the post - it has the 912iS engine - flown it twice, actually. Great airplane. Both of the Tecnams are built exceptionally well, very sturdy and stable. Not twitchy in the slightest. I liked both but lean towards the low wing, although I recognize the "sunburn" risk here in Texas! In response to Flocker, I am doing a Bristell demo the weekend of May 20 in Lancaster, PA, weather permitting.

Cheers

Did they happen to say what the empty weight was on that Astore?


In the AOPA flight review of the Astore they listed empty weight as 809lbs and 877lbs as tested.

Lovely airplane, here's the arcticle:-

http://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all- ... t/f_astore

Empty weight | 809 lb
Empty weight, as tested | 877 lb
Max ramp weight | 1,324 lb
Max gross weight | 1,320 lb
Useful load | 511 lb
Useful load, as tested | 443 lb
Payload w/full fuel | 338 lb
Payload w/full fuel, as tested | 270 lb
Max takeoff weight | 1,320 lb
Max landing weight | 1,320 lb
Fuel capacity, std | 29 gal (28.8 gal usable) 174 lb (172.8 lb usable)
Baggage capacity | 77 lb

For MYSELF, with a light sport mission whereby I typically fly solo, I could fly this Astore with full fuel and around 50-55lbs of baggage (I usually carry chocks, spare qt of oil, some light tools etc) so it would meet my needs, as with most other light sports. I could actually fly non-stop to PA from SC with fuel to spare whereas now it requires a fuel stop as I come up a bit short.
The rub , as always, is trying to fit two people, full fuel and bags. You typically can't do it and so the biggest compromise is usually vastly reduced fuel load which really impacts the utility of most LSAs.
The article mentions the parachute option that adds another 17lbs to these weights.
Looking at the Astore numbers in the above article, with my wife and I aboard, we'd have 48lbs available for fuel/bags.That's 8 gallons and no bags at all. If I used 3 gallons for reserve (its an 912iS engine) I have 30lbs left or 5 gallons which is about 1 hour 20 minutes cruise? This is with zero bags.

Add the parachute and the 17lbs weight means losing another 3 gallons leaving five remaining. With 3 as reserve thats 2 gallons to cruise, or about half an hour?

I LOVE the fit and finish of Tecnams, real quality built airplanes. The designs are beautiful and they have a lot of features I envy...easy cowl access to the engine, easier to check brakes/tire pressure, and the Astore has the option to have a nice baggage hatch making it easier to load bags. The P2008 is already pretty easy to get into and load bags.
Last edited by Nomore767 on Sat May 07, 2016 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SportPilot
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:39 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby SportPilot » Thu May 05, 2016 2:42 pm

.......
Last edited by SportPilot on Tue May 10, 2016 4:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MackAttack
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:22 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby MackAttack » Sat May 07, 2016 10:10 am

Merlinspop wrote:
MackAttack wrote:Great pics! I flew that Astore as I noted in the post - it has the 912iS engine - flown it twice, actually. Great airplane. Both of the Tecnams are built exceptionally well, very sturdy and stable. Not twitchy in the slightest. I liked both but lean towards the low wing, although I recognize the "sunburn" risk here in Texas! In response to Flocker, I am doing a Bristell demo the weekend of May 20 in Lancaster, PA, weather permitting.

Cheers

Did they happen to say what the empty weight was on that Astore?


Was able to confirm the empty weight of the Astore that I flew (and pictured on the previous pages) is 877 lbs - same weight as the plane in the AOPA article (but a different aircraft as it happens).

Cheers

Merlinspop
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:48 pm
Location: WV Eastern Panhandle

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Merlinspop » Sat May 07, 2016 10:17 am

MackAttack wrote:
Merlinspop wrote:
MackAttack wrote:Great pics! I flew that Astore as I noted in the post - it has the 912iS engine - flown it twice, actually. Great airplane. Both of the Tecnams are built exceptionally well, very sturdy and stable. Not twitchy in the slightest. I liked both but lean towards the low wing, although I recognize the "sunburn" risk here in Texas! In response to Flocker, I am doing a Bristell demo the weekend of May 20 in Lancaster, PA, weather permitting.

Cheers

Did they happen to say what the empty weight was on that Astore?


Was able to confirm the empty weight of the Astore that I flew (and pictured on the previous pages) is 877 lbs - same weight as the plane in the AOPA article (but a different aircraft as it happens).

Cheers

Thanks.
- Bruce

MackAttack
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:22 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby MackAttack » Sat May 07, 2016 2:45 pm

Happy to do it, Bruce! And for Nomore767's benefit, I have been told that the weight of the chute assembly is more like 30-35 pounds, not 17. The Astore is a slightly heavier airframe than the P2008 (all aluminum vs composite fuselage), so it's pretty tough to cram a 912iS or 914 into an Astore, along with 2-panel glass avionics and stay below 900 pounds empty weight. I believe you can just manage it in a P2008 if you don't get the fancy paint and leather ... But it's close even then. You can order a "chute kit" which includes the risers/wiring for a chute if you want to add one later but that has to be installed at manufacturing. There is no feasible way to install the risers after the plane is built, or so I am told.

Bristell has the same chute kit option as I understand it. Adding a chute to a plane with one of those kits is more expensive than getting it at the outset, but is do-able if you find (or your family insists) that you want one. And the kit only weighs 2-3 pounds (mostly the weight of the risers as I understand it).

Having said all of the above, the Managing Director of Tecnam, a Mr. Langer, had his special edition Astore delivered (military gray) with a chute, custom interior/paint AND the 40-lb Flycool air conditioner, or so the press reports go. But the picture shows a 2-bladed prop ... So I'm guessing he got his with the 912 ULS engine, which saves about 40 lbs. My guess is his plane still weighs over 900 lbs as a result ... Just a guess mind you! But I believe the Astore is certified to 1430 lbs (650 kg) in Europe so that makes a difference ... I don't have the URL handy but search for "Astore PPL" and you should find it ...

Cheers

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Nomore767 » Sat May 07, 2016 4:43 pm

MackAttack wrote:Happy to do it, Bruce! And for Nomore767's benefit, I have been told that the weight of the chute assembly is more like 30-35 pounds, not 17. The Astore is a slightly heavier airframe than the P2008 (all aluminum vs composite fuselage), so it's pretty tough to cram a 912iS or 914 into an Astore, along with 2-panel glass avionics and stay below 900 pounds empty weight. I believe you can just manage it in a P2008 if you don't get the fancy paint and leather ... But it's close even then. You can order a "chute kit" which includes the risers/wiring for a chute if you want to add one later but that has to be installed at manufacturing. There is no feasible way to install the risers after the plane is built, or so I am told.

Bristell has the same chute kit option as I understand it. Adding a chute to a plane with one of those kits is more expensive than getting it at the outset, but is do-able if you find (or your family insists) that you want one. And the kit only weighs 2-3 pounds (mostly the weight of the risers as I understand it).

Having said all of the above, the Managing Director of Tecnam, a Mr. Langer, had his special edition Astore delivered (military gray) with a chute, custom interior/paint AND the 40-lb Flycool air conditioner, or so the press reports go. But the picture shows a 2-bladed prop ... So I'm guessing he got his with the 912 ULS engine, which saves about 40 lbs. My guess is his plane still weighs over 900 lbs as a result ... Just a guess mind you! But I believe the Astore is certified to 1430 lbs (650 kg) in Europe so that makes a difference ... I don't have the URL handy but search for "Astore PPL" and you should find it ...

Cheers



MackAttack,

Thanks for the info about the chute.

I used 17lbs because that's what was written in the article whose link I provided:-

"There is also a Czech-designed recovery parachute option available for use during in-flight emergencies. The 17-pound Magnum 601 rocket-deployed parachute for the Astore is $6,500 installed."

If it's actually 30-35 lbs then the Astore, in the article, has even less 'useful' load and for me would simply be far too heavy to be of any use to my light sport 'mission' as nice as it is otherwise. Currently its empty weight would be 112 lbs heavier than my own LSA and 147lbs heavier with the chute!

MackAttack
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:22 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby MackAttack » Sat May 07, 2016 6:03 pm

Yes, the article is incorrect. On the Magnum website, the weight for the chute is given at just over 28 lbs, but that doesn't include the wiring/risers, etc. www.magnumparachutes.com.

Useful load is the issue, no question ...

Cheers

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Nomore767 » Sat May 14, 2016 9:53 pm

MackAttack wrote:Yes, the article is incorrect. On the Magnum website, the weight for the chute is given at just over 28 lbs, but that doesn't include the wiring/risers, etc. http://www.magnumparachutes.com.

Useful load is the issue, no question ...

Cheers

You're not kidding!

Astore 877 lbs empty weight

Passengers 395 lbs (1 x 210lbs, 1 x 185 lbs)

Parachute 32lbs (Mack Attack quoted 30-35lbs)

Total 1304 lbs

leaves 16lbs for fuel/bags. Assuming no bags this means a whopping fuel total of 2.6 gallons!!
If you figure .5-1.0 gallon unusable this leaves maybe 1.6 gallons to cruise!
No reserve and some LSAs have notes in the POH about exceeding certain climb angles below a certain
fuel level in the tank.


Solo Astore 877 lbs empty eight

Pilot 210 lbs

Fuel 180 lbs

Parachute 32lbs

Baggage 21 lbs


Total 1320 lbs

If I wanted to carry full baggage limit of 77 lbs I'd need to reduce fuel by about 9.5 gallons (about 33%) , and assuming the balance part of 'weight and balance' is within limits.

Here is an example of some 'safety' considerations facing potential LSA customers. If available, adding the parachute option can really impact the useful load. Added to an already heavier model of an LSA and the pilot might an owner be 'tempted' to fly over gross in order to exact some level of utility from the airplane? Sobering.
Last edited by Nomore767 on Sun May 15, 2016 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
designrs
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:57 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby designrs » Sun May 15, 2016 9:13 am

>>some LSAs have notes in the POH about exceeding certain climb angles below certain
in the tank.

Oh yes! I heard a first-hand story from a CFI. LSA, Heavy student + instructor, very little fuel, practicing power-on stalls. Plane went into a flat spin!! Instructor had to fight quite hard to get the nose down, including getting the heavy student to lean forward!!

I noticed that the Tecnams have a sliding seat arrangement with a long range of travel. Fantastic feature, but I'd definitely want to know more about the CG specs relative to the seat position, especially when loaded heavy with two people, bags, and low fuel.
- Richard

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5215
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby drseti » Sun May 15, 2016 9:22 am

I wonder if that student and Instructor had checked the wt/bal envelope before that flight? I'd guess they checked it after, and we're horrified to find themselves out of range!
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof. H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D., CFII, LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC, iRMT
AvSport of Lock Haven
fly@AvSport.org
http://AvSport.org
http://facebook.com/SportFlying

3Dreaming
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby 3Dreaming » Sun May 15, 2016 9:28 am

drseti wrote:I wonder if that student and Instructor had checked the wt/bal envelope before that flight? I'd guess they checked it after, and we're horrified to find themselves out of range!


My thoughts exactly.

MackAttack
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:22 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby MackAttack » Sun May 15, 2016 10:25 am

There is a utility to having a slightly heavier aircraft, all things considered ... slightly more stable in windy conditions and cross winds, higher wing loading, less float, and more structural metal resulting in higher overall robustness in the airframe. Of course, that's all things being equal ... each airplane is different.

I believe the Astore and P2008, for example, are certified to 650 kg (1430) in Europe and even higher in the Middle East (e.g., Qatar), where they come standard with the FlyCool air conditioner ...

I think it's tough to shoehorn a parachute into either the P2008 or the Astore (but particularly the latter because it is all metal and the P2008 has a composite fuselage and a little more wiggle room), along with the heavier 912iS or 914 engines and stay under 900 lbs empty. If you forego the parachute, I think a lot of folks can make the empty weight work for their mission.

One of the things I dislike about the 1320 weight limit is that there is no ability to increase that weight for safety equipment (putting Icon and it's lobbyists aside for the moment) ... if the FAA rule allowed you to increase the max weight for specified safety equipment (chute, maybe airbag restraints or an AOA add-on), without mandating that they be installed, we would not be presenting pilots with such a Hobson's choice. As noted in another thread, the Carbon Cubs pretty much max things out at a useful load of over 900 pounds for their SLSA.

Some aircraft, of course, carry it all (the Flight Designs come to mind, and the Sting comes with a chute installed but not sure about the standard engine or the weight, and there are others too), I don't want to get into a debate about relative merits of airplanes of course. But all aircraft are exercises in trade-offs ... to be able to cram a 914 engine and a chute into an airplane with leather seats and a fancy paint job, along with glass panel avionics (which are things the higher end buyers all want to a greater or lesser degree), to get to an empty weight that accommodates all of those things and leave a truly "useful load" - the designers have to make compromises. Some of which may be apparent to buyers, some of which may not be so apparent to buyers.

And these tradeoffs may have a bearing on the high level of landing accidents in SLSAs, much of which I believe is due to the light weight of these aircraft in windy conditions and flight characteristics at idle ... but I digress.

It's unfortunate that the weight limit (which is the rule we all have to live by) is so inflexible that it cannot accommodate some safety equipment which would likely save lives and reduce injuries.

I've thought about filing a rule making petition with the FAA personally on just this point, but have concluded that life is too short and it would take too long (years) to be resolved... but I wish the manufacturers would do it.

Sorry for the rant! Now back to our regularly scheduled programming!

Cheers

Nomore767
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Nomore767 » Sun May 15, 2016 10:52 am

MackAttack wrote:There is a utility to having a slightly heavier aircraft, all things considered ... slightly more stable in windy conditions and cross winds, higher wing loading, less float, and more structural metal resulting in higher overall robustness in the airframe. Of course, that's all things being equal ... each airplane is different.

I believe the Astore and P2008, for example, are certified to 650 kg (1430) in Europe and even higher in the Middle East (e.g., Qatar), where they come standard with the FlyCool air conditioner ...

I think it's tough to shoehorn a parachute into either the P2008 or the Astore (but particularly the latter because it is all metal and the P2008 has a composite fuselage and a little more wiggle room), along with the heavier 912iS or 914 engines and stay under 900 lbs empty. If you forego the parachute, I think a lot of folks can make the empty weight work for their mission.

One of the things I dislike about the 1320 weight limit is that there is no ability to increase that weight for safety equipment (putting Icon and it's lobbyists aside for the moment) ... if the FAA rule allowed you to increase the max weight for specified safety equipment (chute, maybe airbag restraints or an AOA add-on), without mandating that they be installed, we would not be presenting pilots with such a Hobson's choice. As noted in another thread, the Carbon Cubs pretty much max things out at a useful load of over 900 pounds for their SLSA.

Some aircraft, of course, carry it all (the Flight Designs come to mind, and the Sting comes with a chute installed but not sure about the standard engine or the weight, and there are others too), I don't want to get into a debate about relative merits of airplanes of course. But all aircraft are exercises in trade-offs ... to be able to cram a 914 engine and a chute into an airplane with leather seats and a fancy paint job, along with glass panel avionics (which are things the higher end buyers all want to a greater or lesser degree), to get to an empty weight that accommodates all of those things and leave a truly "useful load" - the designers have to make compromises. Some of which may be apparent to buyers, some of which may not be so apparent to buyers.

And these tradeoffs may have a bearing on the high level of landing accidents in SLSAs, much of which I believe is due to the light weight of these aircraft in windy conditions and flight characteristics at idle ... but I digress.

It's unfortunate that the weight limit (which is the rule we all have to live by) is so inflexible that it cannot accommodate some safety equipment which would likely save lives and reduce injuries.

I've thought about filing a rule making petition with the FAA personally on just this point, but have concluded that life is too short and it would take too long (years) to be resolved... but I wish the manufacturers would do it.

Sorry for the rant! Now back to our regularly scheduled programming!

Cheers


I take your points and agree. I've often thought that 1550-1600lbs would be better, especially if the aircraft is built, and certificated to that weight, in another country.

That said, all that would likely happen is that even more goodies would be installed and we'd have a new push to increase the weight again.

We need to remember that Light Sport flying has been a Godsend to most of us. We said we wanted economical simple VFR flying and that's what we got for the most part.

For every manufacturer who increases the weight of their LSA with heavier more expensive options there is another which does exactly the same mission but at a much lower weight. More sparse, yes , but it completes the mission, and at a much lower price.
For example, in the weight and loading examples I used in an earlier post, my wife and I could fly with fuel fuel and 30 lbs of baggage in my RV-12. If we got out and went over to the Astore...we'd just sit on the ramp at max weight unable to load meaningful fuel or and bags. This in another light sport airplane which also costs another $70k +

There is no chute option for me with the RV-12. However, if they did offer it, and add 30+lbs to the empty weight I would then have to compromise my 'mission' and I would have to think hard about it IF I had the option.

You're right, there are trade-offs and compromises for sure. It's not about which plane, or who's plane is better/worse than another. But it is the reason I've tried to bring attention to weight, mission, cost and safety to the discussion, over just drooling over shiny finish and sexy looks. The devil of the pilot's own 'personal mission' is in the details. I've spoken to several LSA owners with real buyer's remorse.

However, this is just my opinion and personal viewpoint, not intended to diss anyone or any plane.
Last edited by Nomore767 on Sun May 15, 2016 11:27 am, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “Light Sport Aircraft”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests