Jump to content

Tecnam P2008


Patrnflyr

Recommended Posts

John,

 

Wondering if most of the CTLS`s are coming in right at published weight when fully loaded?

 

Mark

I have no idea, but these CT guys call my plane a "porker" compared to theirs. The CTSW guys flit around me like an annoying mosquito while I'm a lumbering pig!!! (or that's the way they like to put it)

I think mine's pretty much normal for a CTLS that's loaded up. That's why I'm so happy with my plane- it's useful load is phenomenal when you consider all the options, range, room and speed. There's

nothing that even comes close! Maybe that's why so many have been sold. When you put everything into the basket, there's only one really capable X-C LSA.

 

John

 

PS and don't give me that "BRS isn't needed so the weights are similar" baloney. Think about not having one when you have a "mild" midair that pops off an aileron and you become a passenger. I think it's a must have option. Even had one on

my 182.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I have signed a purchase order for a P2008 with Phil solomon at tecnam NA.

The plane has been shipped from italy and will arrive in the states soon.

 

There has only been approx twenty P2008s built with none in the states except for

the preproduction demo that has been at the shows. I would like to find a way to contact

some oversea owners to discuss ownership experiences. Does anyone have any ideas?

 

I would also welcome any thaughts or suggestions from other LSA owners.

No need to comment on my insanity to spend this much on an LSA. My wife

has already made me well aware of it!

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just looked on the flight design website. CTLS lists empty weight of 770. Not much different than the P2008 at 780.

 

What have the actual empty weights of the CTLS been?

 

Mark

 

Mark, my friend's 2008 CTLS with Dynon panels, BRS, 2 axis A/P, Garmin nav/com SL30 radio, Garmin 496 and tundra gear has an empty weight of 810 lbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

The flight design website says 780lbs for the ctls. Are you sure 771 is correct?

That would be 10lbs under published weight.

 

Dicks friends plane sounds more realistic at 810lbs

 

What does the tundra package add for weight?

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My P2008 has been weighed at the factory and with full avionics, the heavy duty nose gear

but no parachute is expected to be 830 so it is definitely heavier than CTLS but the plane is

more substantial in my opinion and the same plane is certified to 1540 in europe.

Its always a trade off. I will never be negative on the CTLS. Both have advantages.

 

Does anyone have an idea on how I might contact the european owners?

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Dave. Baring the fuselage there are many commonalities that we all share in the LSA brotherhood of aircraft.

 

 

On the other forum there was a string a while back where someone asked what everyone's CT weighed, and a bunch of folks replied. My 2007 SW is 740 with all the trimmings. WF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other forum there was a string a while back where someone asked what everyone's CT weighed, and a bunch of folks replied. My 2007 SW is 740 with all the trimmings. WF

My SW has somehow creep up to 348kg. [765lbs], When I analyse it its all accountable, full carpets,stiffened spats,[i think you call them pants], bookracks,etc,etc. It weighed 322kg when it left the factory but added instruments have all added up. The Truth is the aircraft never seem to lose weight.......just like us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say, while we're singing cumbiya just looking at the number of adds and the premium prices for technams, they must be viewed/marketed as the bonaza of the light sport world by some. Guess sales and numbers registered by end users worldwide are similar? Wonder what their SB list looks like and how their parts availability racks up in the brotherhood of foreign made machines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi Guys,

 

While this came up on the forum a little while ago now, there are some interesting points that come out of it.

I have a friend with a P2008, it is reasonably well equipped, Twin 10" Skyviews with autopilot, a Garmin GL30, TXPR and a Garmin 696.That's about as much as you need, and more, in a VFR machine.

 

With the tanks empty it weighs 790lbs, not 890 so has a useful load of 530lbs.

 

Now, if we are going to commit cross country aviation, we will general do so carrying the things we need to take along, plus optional extras such as our wives. We adjust fuel load accordingly and very rarely fly with full tanks. There are very few light aircraft in which you can fill all the tanks and all the seats and baggage and still go flying, I can only think, off-hand, of two such aircraft, the PA32 and the PA28-235, it is always a compromise one way or the other.

 

Thus, the equation is either, "I have to carry this load, so how far can I fly" or "I have to fly this far, so how much can I carry"

 

Taking me as an example, a typical load might be; me, at 200lbs, my wife at 150 lbs, plus 50 lbs of baggage and bits. Therefore I can carry 130lbs of fuel. At 6lbs per US Gallon, thats 21.7 gallons, or 16.5 gallons usable, with an hour and a bit left in the tank on landing, for Mum and the kids. That is enough gas at 75% power to fly for 3 hours 15 minutes.

 

No matter where I fly, I always seem to manage to have a head wind, so let's assume a groundspeed of 105 knots, which, near as darn it, is 350 nautical miles on the available fuel. That makes the P2008, and the CTLS, which has similar load capacity, very practical aircraft for cross country work, even over the vast distances you can travel in the USA.

 

You see, the problem with internal tankage is that most of us older pilots don't actually have enough of it to match what the aircraft can deliver. Three and one quarter hours and 350 miles is probably long enough to go between stops to pump the bilges.

 

So when you are looking at useful load, remember that the load actually needs to be just that, "useful".

 

There is no point in filling the aircraft up to fly 7 hours if your internal tank can only handle 3 hours, so you might as well use that weight to take other things you need, like a leggy blonde or a short brunette. That's what I call "Useful Load"

 

Fly safely!

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...

Hello everyone! What is the maximum height for the pilot to fly comfortably in the Tecnam P2008?

Does anyone know if there are anthropometric specifications to fly the P2008? Is there any documentation (says nothing in the Aircraft Flight Manual)

Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2010 at 8:19 PM, markmn said:

John,

 

Wondering if most of the CTLS`s are coming in right at published weight when fully loaded?

 

Mark

No way.  Most will be 20-50lb heavier, with the newer ones being heavier than the older ones.  The published weights are usually best case scenarios based on a stripped down airframe or a calculated engineering weight from the materials list that will never be reality.  

The same thing happened with the CTSW; the brochures touted "600+ pound useful load" but as time went on very few airplanes got to 600lb useful and most that did were  2005 or early 2006 models.  My 2007 CTSW sat at 585lb useful as delivered (and it's bare-bones), and after some upgrades like Matco wheels it's now 575lb useful.  Still quite good, but not what the glossy copy suggested.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FlyingMonkey said:

No way.  Most will be 20-50lb heavier, with the newer ones being heavier than the older ones.  The published weights are usually best case scenarios based on a stripped down airframe or a calculated engineering weight from the materials list that will never be reality.  

The same thing happened with the CTSW; the brochures touted "600+ pound useful load" but as time went on very few airplanes got to 600lb useful and most that did were  2005 or early 2006 models.  My 2007 CTSW sat at 585lb useful as delivered (and it's bare-bones), and after some upgrades like Matco wheels it's now 575lb useful.  Still quite good, but not what the glossy copy suggested.   

Concur with Andy. Same here with my 2006.

If prop is pitched right, performance is still quite good . . . for an LSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...