Jump to content


Photo

Tecnam P2008 Turbo


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1 markmn

markmn

    Master Crew Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 80 posts
  • Locationminnesota

Posted 18 October 2012 - 04:28 AM

Tecnam is exploring the possibility of developing a P2008 with the Rotax 914.

This is a market that Flight Design has not explored so we are looking for feedback from CT owners.

The main advantages would be for owners using their aircraft for travel and want as much speed as legally possible.

The aircraft would be able to quickly and easily climb above the chop into smooth air and fly at the legal 10000ft altitude while maintaining the legal 120 kts calibrated airspeed Per LSA rules. This would translate to approx 147 kts true air speed at 10000ft at a very low fuel burn. This would be a very economical way to travel. we are hoping for 30-35 MPG. This would also be a great option for owners who fly in higher elevations.

We understand there will be some prop inefficiencies due to the fixed prop but believe we can minimize this with some new prop technology that is available. The aircraft would be equipped with a ground adjustable prop so it can be individualized for each owners desires.

There has been emphasis on weight reduction on the latest P2008s and we expect empty weights will be 20 to 25lbs heavier than the current CTLS with the 912 uls. The 914 is close to the weight of the new 912i.

We already have some depositors but would like a few more to get this project moving!

please contact me if you have interest.

Mark Gregor
Midwest Tecnam Sales
gregorma@bevcomm.net
507-327-9465

#2 CharlieTango

CharlieTango

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,288 posts
  • LocationMammoth Lakes - California

Posted 18 October 2012 - 04:02 PM

I get to fly some in the far west mtns behind a 914 in a Europa.

a 914 would be a tremendous improvement in speed and climb.

A flight to Los Angeles would permit me to cruise above the sierra nevada at higher altitudes and speeds.

#3 Jim

Jim

    Always Lands With Usable Fuel in the Tanks

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 496 posts
  • LocationLeft Coast USA

Posted 18 October 2012 - 06:47 PM

As a relatively broke CTSW owner, I'll not be buying any new airplane in the foreseeable future :)

"It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows"
--Epictetus


#4 CharlieTango

CharlieTango

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,288 posts
  • LocationMammoth Lakes - California

Posted 18 October 2012 - 06:59 PM

As a relatively broke CTSW owner, I'll not be buying any new airplane in the foreseeable future :)


ditto




#5 Patrnflyr

Patrnflyr

    Senior Crew Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • LocationLubbock, TX

Posted 20 August 2013 - 08:44 PM

Just saw this video on Dan Johnson's site. It really intrigues me. Why aren't they selling a bunch of these? Seems they should be all over the place. I've always felt that Flight Design had the market sewn up for years but this seems like a worthy competitor.
I'd really have to consider this if I ever went back to an LSA


John and Julie Johnson
N2172W, '07 Cessna T182T

Previously N227CT, 2008 CTLS

#6 paul m

paul m

    Co-Pilot Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 307 posts
  • LocationMassachusetts

Posted 20 August 2013 - 09:12 PM

Saw two on static display at OSH. Very sweet looking planes. The new paint job is slick. More Cirrus than CTLS. Don't know how many they sell though and considering Tecnam's worldwide sales can't figure out why the FD ecosystem in the US seems so much stronger than their's. That made a big difference to me in my purchase decision.

#7 Duane Jefts

Duane Jefts

    Senior Crew Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 217 posts
  • LocationTucson, Az and Lake St Louis, MO

Posted 20 August 2013 - 09:18 PM

Didn't see any mention of a BRS option. That would be a big deterrent for me.

#8 mocfly

mocfly

    Pilot Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 640 posts
  • LocationChattanooga, TN

Posted 21 August 2013 - 12:01 AM

How about building one and having it spend a month under te control of a few members of this board. You will get the good and bad of the aircraft in short order. Your company just has to leave its feelings with the keys.

Chris Marinello
2006 CTSW N530CT
KCHA

#9 Roger Lee

Roger Lee

    Master Star Fighter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,994 posts
  • LocationTucson, AZ

Posted 21 August 2013 - 01:23 AM

It would certainly help at altitude or high density take offs, but will be hampered by a ground adjustable prop. It really needs to be mated with an in flight adjustable prop to use it to its potential.

The 912ULS is an $18K engine and the 914 $31K. There are far and few people that have any decent knowledge of the 914 and it takes more care and maint. than the standard 912. There is nothing wrong with the engine and works very well, just go in with your eyes open. You'll need a computer at times to diagnose any problems and will almost certainly need a Rotax trained individual to work on it. I talk to many owners trying to do their own work and untrained mechanics and it's quite frustrating because you have more things going on and parts to consider for maint.

I like the engine it just takes a little more knowledge to own one and to maintain it.
Roger Lee
Ryan Airfield (KRYN)
Tucson, AZ.
LSRM-A Specializing in LSA Maintenance
Authorized Rotax Repair Center - Heavy Maint Rated
520-574-1080 Home Try home first
520-349-7056 Cell

#10 CharlieTango

CharlieTango

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,288 posts
  • LocationMammoth Lakes - California

Posted 21 August 2013 - 01:36 AM

My best friend's rotax is a 914 and the maintenance has been simple to date. The 914 performance with an in flight adjustable prop is phenomenal.

It would be painful to have the 914 but be stuck at a single setting. Recently we heard good reports on a flexible DUC prop, maybe there is a path there.

#11 Roger Lee

Roger Lee

    Master Star Fighter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,994 posts
  • LocationTucson, AZ

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:03 AM

Flexible DUC is more hype than reality. They have tried flex props over many years. If they were that great they would be what we all had and what was on the market from other Mfg's. When I tested the Sensenich they sent me flexible props and stiffer ones. They all flew the same. Someone would have to show me irrefutable proof about them now that I have already done some test. A conclusive test not an individuals one time use opinion.

Kind of like the old Slick 50 oil.
Roger Lee
Ryan Airfield (KRYN)
Tucson, AZ.
LSRM-A Specializing in LSA Maintenance
Authorized Rotax Repair Center - Heavy Maint Rated
520-574-1080 Home Try home first
520-349-7056 Cell

#12 CharlieTango

CharlieTango

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,288 posts
  • LocationMammoth Lakes - California

Posted 21 August 2013 - 02:07 AM

Flexible DUC is more hype than reality...


You already sold me, thats why I bought your old prop. Since then a member has posted that he has seen the remarkable results that DUC claims. Endorsements sell!

#13 MrMorden

MrMorden

    Flying Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,336 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, USA

Posted 21 August 2013 - 06:17 PM

Because of cost and maintenance, I wonder if a 130hp UL Power engine might be a better choice than the 914. That said, I trained in a Tecnam P-92 Echo Super, and it was the best flying LSA I have ever piloted.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot, ASEL (Set AP-5)
2007 CTSW N509CT

#14 paul m

paul m

    Co-Pilot Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 307 posts
  • LocationMassachusetts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 07:30 PM

Why didn't you buy one instead of the CTSW Andy?

#15 MrMorden

MrMorden

    Flying Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,336 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, USA

Posted 21 August 2013 - 08:09 PM

Why didn't you buy one instead of the CTSW Andy?


Good question! Useful load is lower, range is lower, speed is lower, cargo is lower, no BRS. If I was just buying a plane to enjoy flying around the patch and for short distances, the Tecnam is great. The CTSW is better as a traveling machine though, and is still plenty fun to fly.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot, ASEL (Set AP-5)
2007 CTSW N509CT

#16 Doug G.

Doug G.

    Top Gun Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • LocationMoorhead, MN

Posted 22 August 2013 - 01:28 AM

Three blade ground adjustable, not variable. Variable implies variable pitch.
Doug Grant
LSRM-A
CTLS-N962LS
KFAR-Fargo, ND

#17 Patrnflyr

Patrnflyr

    Senior Crew Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • LocationLubbock, TX

Posted 22 August 2013 - 02:22 AM

I guess the turbo 914 Rotax is a joke also. I don't know about all of you, but i sure wished I had a turbo on my CTLS going into Bryce canyon. It wasn't bad getting out of there but it sure would have given a little more comfort level when near gross wt.

Also, any type of glass cockpit is available.
John and Julie Johnson
N2172W, '07 Cessna T182T

Previously N227CT, 2008 CTLS

#18 CharlieTango

CharlieTango

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,288 posts
  • LocationMammoth Lakes - California

Posted 22 August 2013 - 02:29 AM

the 914 is the game changer, the question is to what extent?

#19 WmInce

WmInce

    Ferret Squadron

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 625 posts
  • LocationClearwater, Florida

Posted 22 August 2013 - 03:00 AM

. . . "The Tecnam p2008 is a joke compared to the CTLSi." . . .


Have you ever flown a Tecnam p2008?

Bill Ince
CTSW
Clearwater, Florida


#20 markmn

markmn

    Master Crew Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 80 posts
  • Locationminnesota

Posted 22 August 2013 - 04:11 AM

I am a Tecnam sales representative so I am admittedly a bit biased but I can give you some real input on what its like to fly the P2008 with the 914. Personally I have over 600 hours in the P2008 and about 50 in the turbo.
I understand this is a CT forum and I don't want start any negativity and I don't want to overstep my bounds. I have flown both the CTSW and the CTLS and they are clearly good aircraft.

To clear up some previous misinformation the P2008 has a 48 inch wide cabin and a large storage space behind the seats. Tecnam advertises the P2008 as having the largest LSA cabin combination of width and interior space. All P2008s are "parachute ready" meaning a chute can be installed at the factory or anytime in the future.
Tecnam has always been very conservative with their numbers. For example they show 28 or 29 gallons fuel capacity on the P2008. Several times I have put more than 16 gallons in per side. Lasts way longer than my bladder anyway.
This was my first experience flying behind the 914 and it has become my favorite engine. Besides the power which feels like a lot more than fifteen extra horsepower the engine is extremely smooth compared to the ULS. The prop doesn't stop so quick like the ULS during shutdown either. You cant hear the turbo at all and the engine is quieter than the standard engine.
There is definitely more going on under the cowl but Tecnam says the 914 has not been noticeably any more maintenance than the standard 100hp engine and they have a lot of 914s flying. They say a lot of 914 issues are caused by substandard installations in homebuilt aircraft.
The P2008 has always been about 20-25 lbs heavier than a CTLS. The 914 installation came in about three lbs less than the injected engine. The P2008 MTOW is 750 kilos(1650lbs)in many other counties with no changes to the airframe.
As far as flying it we are regularly seeing 12-1500 ft of climb. It easily makes 120kts but the main advantage is being able to maintain that indicated airspeed at higher altitudes which translates to higher TAS. We are still testing props but there is clearly something to the "constant speed effect" propeller. It is not going to perform like a real constant speed prop but we are seeing that some props definitely "unload" much faster at high altitudes than others.
We have and will continue to test several props from different manufacturers who are making props specific to this application. As of now a new sensenich is performing very well but we will approve other brands if it outperforms the sensenich.
I would be happy to give a demo to anyone. It is really fun to fly and would make a great cross country aircraft. It definitely performs beyond what I expected.

Mark




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users