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

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

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Cluemeister » Sun May 15, 2016 10:53 am

If I understand correctly, Icon got another 250 lbs from the FAA on top of 1430. Icon has said they only needed 80 to go up to 1510. Why did they ask for 250? Are they going to test to 1680?

I would love to see those specs of takeoff distance etc, with a 912is at either 1510 or 1680 gross weight. Are they published yet?

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 12:59 pm

And I would like to know who their lobbyist was ... *laughing*

In response to Nomore767, I completely agree ... Fortunately for me, being single with grown children far away, most of my flying will be solo. My friends will all want rides ... But knowing them, I doubt they will want more than $100 burger runs. My GF and I are a combined 310-320 lbs (I comprise about 2/3 of that!) so the two of us can go places in a Tecnam with a reasonable amount of fuel. I could also lose about 4-5 gallons worth (25-30 lbs) without harm ... :roll:

But I completely understand how some folks load 'em up to the max then realize they can't do what they really wanted to do in the first place ... Sometimes less IS more.

Having said that, I don't think there is a SLSA out there that wouldn't be safe at 650 kg vs 600 if 650 kg were the limit. But alas, such is not the rule we have to live by ...

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 1:37 pm

"Having said that, I don't think there is a SLSA out there that wouldn't be safe at 650 kg vs 600 if 650 kg were the limit. But alas, such is not the rule we have to live by ..."

If it's limit, and the rule, why even say that? When you do...someone out there might think 'hmm' and do it.


Just saying.

jetcat3
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:01 pm

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby jetcat3 » Sun May 15, 2016 9:46 pm

Hey y'all,

My Dad had his first lesson yesterday and it went really well! He's going to be writing here and giving updates as he goes. Hope y'all like the pictures!

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7410/270 ... 0723_b.jpg
Last edited by jetcat3 on Mon May 16, 2016 8:34 am, edited 1 time in total.


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

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Cluemeister » Sun May 15, 2016 9:54 pm

Just a beautiful aircraft. Interested in your Dad's progress, keep us updated!

jake
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:36 pm
Location: minnesota

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby jake » Sun May 15, 2016 11:14 pm

In aviation it seems everything is a trade off. The main advantage of the RV12 is its light empty weight. If one were to compare RV12 side by side to a Tecnam LSA you might first notice the finished interior of the Tecnam but the vast majority of the weight difference is in the basic structure of the aircraft and the landing gear.

The Tecnam LSA design and empty weight are not by happenstance. Look at GAMAs official numbers and you will see that Cessna/Textron is the only company to produce more aircraft worldwide to date than Tecnam and most of the Tecnam aircraft are the two seat LSA type. If we were to ask Tecnam they would say its basically impossible to design a reasonably durable and safe two seat aircraft with a 550 lb useful load and remain under 1320lbs. This is based on nearly 70 years experience building aircraft. This is why Tecnam chose to build LSA aircraft like they do. In order to be where they are today safety has to be taken seriously.

Landing accidents and incidents due to poor crosswind handling and/or inadequate landing gear has been a real concern for many LSAs since LSA started. You wont find all the information in the FAA reports because unless there is serious injury it is not regularly reported, but there have been plenty of LSA landing accidents. If you want to research further talk with any insurer who has experience in LSAs and see what they say.


Obviously neither I or anyone is recommending anyone fly over the USA legal LSA weight limit. I will say that from an aircraft design standpoint the exact same Tecnam LSA sold here is certified to much higher gross weights in other countries so the aircraft can handle it.

A gross weight exception for safety related equipment was proposed to the FAA but has not gone anywhere. Disappointing but I guess they have bigger fish to fry.

What if a pilot purchased a less safe aircraft or decided to forgo the parachute so they would always be under the USAs LSA limit and the day came that they needed it? Would it be the right decision then? Aviation can be dangerous and unforgiving. I believe this is a decision each pilot needs to make for him or herself.

Every aircraft has strengths and weaknesses. Some will choose to occasionally takeoff overweight because the tradeoff for additional safety and capability is worth it for them. Some will chose to stay within the letter of the law and have to accept some things such as having the fuel tank in in the cabin with them and/or a landing gear that may not be forgiving if the winds suddenly picks up and they are not 100% on their game.

Tradeoffs!


Mark Gregor

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

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Nomore767 » Mon May 16, 2016 12:55 am

"Obviously neither I or anyone is recommending anyone fly over the USA legal LSA weight limit. I will say that from an aircraft design standpoint the exact same Tecnam LSA sold here is certified to much higher gross weights in other countries so the aircraft can handle it."

But that's the problem with heavier LSAs such as the Tecnam with high empty weights as quoted earlier in this thread. As a salesman you have to agree that using the actual weights in the Astore article (linked in an earlier post), and with the other Astore MacAttack mentioned, both at 877 lbs empty...the trade-off is obvious, because the weight limits the 'mission' . That's the trade-off.

Since you brought it up , the aircraft may very well 'handle' higher gross weights in other countries but this is misleading. As you well know in the USA Tecnams unfortunately come up against the Light Sport max weight limit just like all other LSAs but with higher empty weight they have more 'issues' with useful load.

This topic has been discussed before. Some get it, some try and spin or parse it, and some are in denial.

Caveat Emptor.
Last edited by Nomore767 on Mon May 16, 2016 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Nomore767 » Mon May 16, 2016 1:16 am

"What if a pilot purchased a less safe aircraft or decided to forgo the parachute so they would always be under the USAs LSA limit and the day came that they needed it? Would it be the right decision then? Aviation can be dangerous and unforgiving. I believe this is a decision each pilot needs to make for him or herself. "

Mark, are you implying that if a pilot added the parachute and that they would then sometimes fly OVER the weight limit that this would be the right decision, the safer choice?

I met a guy who was selling his P2008 for a Mooney because it couldn't do all the things he wanted to do...carry golf clubs, long trips with wife or buddy and bags etc.
He said he and his buddy (both around 230lbs he said) both flew for the $100 burgers and he liked full fuel because it was a mogas airfield. He tried in vain to get his wife to fly with him, and even added a 30lb chute to appease her.
He was putting a For Sale on the airport noticeboard and when I did some quick math based on his listed specs he would have been regularly flying at about 140-150lbs over weight, conservatively.

You're right aviation can be dangerous and unforgiving, and this is a decision each pilot needs to make for themselves.

This discussion has been around before....so I'll leave there.

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 » Mon May 16, 2016 5:58 am

I strongly believe that "the aircraft can handle it" is one of those "wink wink, nudge nudge" comments that hints at an attitude of disregard for both safety and regulations, and has no place on this forum.
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

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

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby Cluemeister » Mon May 16, 2016 7:28 am

Respectfully, is that any different than the "nudge, nudge, wink, wink my medical expired" hinting at an attitude of disregard for both safety and regulations?

User avatar
FastEddieB
Posts: 2130
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA

Re: New P2008 Owner and short flight review!

Postby FastEddieB » Mon May 16, 2016 7:37 am

Cluemeister wrote:Respectfully, is that any different than the "nudge, nudge, wink, wink my medical expired" hinting at an attitude of disregard for both safety and regulations?


Who said that?
Fast Eddie B.
Sky Arrow 600 E-LSA • N467SA
FastEddieB@mac.com

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 » Mon May 16, 2016 7:40 am

If a person flies with an expired medical, in an aircraft that requires one, there is no difference at all. If a person with no known disqualifying medical issues chooses to let his or her medical expire, in order to fly an aircraft that has already been deemed both legal and safe to fly without a medical, then there's all the difference in the world.

Should FAA ever deem it both legal and safe to fly an LSA over gross, then I will withdraw my objection.
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

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 » Mon May 16, 2016 8:01 am

drseti wrote:I strongly believe that "the aircraft can handle it" is one of those "wink wink, nudge nudge" comments that hints at an attitude of disregard for both safety and regulations, and has no place on this forum.

Conjecture leading to censorship?

It's a very thin line between openly advocating breaking regulations or promoting an unsafe attitude and providing factual information about a particular airframe. How a bit of information like that is received is up to the receiver.

For example, the wings, landing gear and fuselage structure of the CarbonCub have been tested to provide Normal Category safety margins at a GW of 1865 pounds (EAB kit build examples can be certified up to 1865#). Does that statement suggest one may 'fudge' the rules with an LSA (most are converted to ELSA, but same weights, of course)? Well, I suppose someone intent on doing so may interpret it that way, but I would prefer to simply take comfort in the knowledge that at the 1320# LSA max, this aircraft is pretty darn stout. This makes me keep the CC on my short list.

Compared to the SoNottaCub LSA (just to make up a name nothing like any current LSA offering) that was never physically tested to failure (because there's no requirement to do so) and that the paper analysis shows failure modes beginning to be likely at 1330#.

Big difference, to me, that I would want to know.

Say you're talking to two people that you only barely know about crime in the area and you say, "I know it's bad elsewhere, but my neighborhood is so safe that we don't bother to lock the doors, even when we leave for the day."
First guy hears this and thinks, "Wow, I think I'll look to see if any homes are for sale in that neighborhood!"
Second guy hears this and thinks, "Wow, I think I'll have to 'visit' this guy's house tomorrow while he's at work!"

Knowing that the an airframe is certified at a higher weight somewhere (or somehow) else just provides more comfort to me. It's all in how you hear it, I guess.
- Bruce

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 » Mon May 16, 2016 8:20 am

Merlinspop wrote:Conjecture leading to censorship?


Thankfully, Bruce, we've never had to resort to censorship on SportPilotTalk, mainly because even our most impulsive members have, so far, had the good sense to self-censor. :)
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


Return to “Light Sport Aircraft”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests