Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JDB

CTLS vs Tecnam P2008

Recommended Posts

Ok, I know this is like throwing dynamite in a fire.  After being without my own plane since last summer it's time to get serious (even my wife says do it!).

The finalists in light sport are down to CTLS and P2008.  All of the online research says:

CTLS

Higher useful load (80 pounds+?), wider cockpit, all carbon fiber, great support, easier to get LOA approvals?,  higher wing loading, 110 pound baggage, used are less expensive but.... less robust landing gear?, no turbo option, baggage doors don't fit standard carryon bags?, Dynon avionics, hose replacement means pulling the engine?, fuel tank leaks, carbon fiber repair?.  What did I miss?

P2008

Wide cockpit, easy baggage access, easy engine compartment preflight, good US support, wings/tail are aluminum, turbo, G3X but...  44 pound baggage limit, "Italian" support, more expensive.  What did I miss?

I've flown the P2008 and hope to fly a CTLS in the next couple of weeks to compare flying characteristics.  I'm instrument rated and most likely would go E-LSA to allow me to fly in actual IMC with the proper equipment.

Don't shoot the prospective owner- just doing final due diligence...

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too looked at both not too long ago.  The 1320#  limit Essentially knocked the Tecnam out of the running for me.  It’s a heavy plane given the rules.  Everyone I spoke with said the same thing “don’t worry about the weight limit no one gets checked anyway”.
Re the CT, the gear issues were a years ago problem on the SW and from memory a bad production run on some of the LS’s... Even when I land “hard” it’s barely noticeable like a 172 - honest.  I haven’t read about an SW gear issue in a long time.  We have many experts on this point on this forum.

if I were you (iFR rated) I would call CT USA and determine if the new Garmin CT-F2 is rated for IFR now or soon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way you go, converting to E-LSA makes a lot of sense.  It's an easy process.  If you do a pre-buy at time of purchase, bump that up to a full annual as an inspection being performed within 30 days prior to the conversion process is required, otherwise you'll be waiting a year or paying for a full annual if you want to convert sooner.  This was the primary reason I went into LSA category, I'm young and healthy so no medical issues - but having the ability to work on airplane and complete annual inspection really appealed to me.  This also removes the requirement for MRA / LOA approvals, you're free to go your own way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback.  I've looked into the F2 and think it would be a 3rd contestant given the better access on the baggage compartment (and looks).  It is brand new so the "issues" will be unknown for awhile and it sounds like it will be late summer/fall before it arrives.  Pluses and minuses always.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was looking today and in your price point, this would be high on the list:

https://www.barnstormers.com/classified-1052400-Flight-Design-CTLS.html?catid=20365

Airtime can facilitate the E-LSA change as part of the sale, and good transition instructors on field.

Then when you have it back home, if you're not a fan of the Dynon do the swap to dual Garmin or what suits your fancy to get to IFR level mentioned.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the F2 might be best for you.  The 912 engine isn't a certified engine and the pitot is not heated on CTLS which the information I have says these are needed for IFR flying.  F2 should have these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JDB said:

given the better access on the baggage compartment

I like that feature a lot.  Thus far, after flying an LS for a year and a half, there hasn't been an occasion that I "needed" the behind the seats storage.  When I was shopping for a plane, having the ability to throw a foldable bike in the back was one of my "must have's".  I abandoned that must have when I bought the LS.  Then I saw on this forum after I bought the plane that some people remove the passenger seat and then a bike can be carried.  Great.

I will admit however that having the hat shelf on the LS is very important to me.  Makes life much easier in terms of in-flight storage; maps, lunch, glasses, pens, headsets, ipad, blah... With that said, the SW has a massive weight advantage that in my opinion turns the SW into the only 2 seat "C-182".  The C-182 is the only legit 4 place, full tanks GA airplane flying.  In the LS, I can carry a passenger for sure - no problem.  I just can't exceed 20 gallons when I have a passenger on board, which with the Fuel injected Rotax, I still have 3-4 hours of flying... which I learned is TONS of gas for my normal use.

The P2008, sorry... is a fabulous looking and luxurious one place plane on a long trip, and, sadly, for a short trip.  The plane is great, the LSA rules are too inflexible which is a damned shame for many of the new 2 place planes out there.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I talked with Airtime about a week ago and planning to get down there the 1st week of June.  And I did find a reference to a heated pitot from FD for the CTLS which brought it back into contention (https://forum.flydynon.com/threads/heated-pitot-boom-style.12380/)   ...

The IMC question has to get fully answered.  I'm not interested in 200 and a half flying- just getting up or down through a 1,500-2000 AGL layer that would block a 300nm trip.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may not be correct on needing a heated pitot or the 912ULS needing to be "certified".  My comments about the pitot were based on a friend outfitting his Piper Colt for certified IFR flight and he stopped when the FAA examiner told him he had to have heated pitot.  My CTSW and the CTLS POH says flight for VFR only and this section also prohibits flight into IMC.  A message sent to me from another forum member says new Operating Limitations provided when he has converted aircraft from SLSA ot ESLA don't state VFR only.  I guess whether or not one can fly IFR in ELSA depends on what the FAA FSDO writes into the new ELSA Operating Limitations section.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JDB said:

Yeah, I talked with Airtime about a week ago and planning to get down there the 1st week of June.  And I did find a reference to a heated pitot from FD for the CTLS which brought it back into contention (https://forum.flydynon.com/threads/heated-pitot-boom-style.12380/)   ...

The IMC question has to get fully answered.  I'm not interested in 200 and a half flying- just getting up or down through a 1,500-2000 AGL layer that would block a 300nm trip.

Thanks!

This is exactly why I went E-LSA. In my Special Airworthiness Certificate and Limitations, there are 3 limitations that allow (1) VFR Day, (2) VFR Night if 91.205(c) requirements are met, (3) IFR operations, if 91.205(d) requirement are met and all applicable maintenance and inspections are complied with. This would include transponder and pitot/static checks. Nowhere in 91.205 not in any of the maintenance/inspections lists anything about pitot heat. Would it be smart to have? Abso-flippin-lutely.  But strictly speaking, it’s not required. Careful planning is required, but not having it is by no means a show stopper.

 

Those are my operating limits, and your DAR/FSDO may do something different. If you go through Airtime, request to use Bart Dalton in Tulsa. He did mine, and it was the easiest dealings with the FAA/DAR I have ever had. Gave him the info he needed, signed a notarized permission to perform the operations, a few days later, got word it was done. I don’t remember what he charged, but I think it was somewhere in the $300-$400 range.

 

PS Feel free to PM me if you want to see a copy of what he gave me. I don’t want to publicly share it, but I’ll be happy to show you the relevant parts of the limitations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I owned a P2008 turbo for over 3 years.  Loved the plane.  Great climb with the turbo, speed, flew and landed wonderfully.  If it fits your mission, I can't imagine you'd be unhappy with the P2008.

(I'm moving up for more speed/pax, so that's why I sold it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Early on after purchasing my CTLSi, I considered going to the Tecnam P2008.  I was having surprising difficulty moving from the SR22 to landing the CT consistently, which some good dual resolved.  I heard that the P2008 was easier to land, thus my interest at the time.

In my look at the P2008, I heard and saw wonderful things about it.  The owners love it.  I do think it's probably an easier transition to that plane from one with higher wing-loading like the Cirrus, although I have no issues with landing the CT now.

To me, what absolutely disqualified the P2008, was that it's a one-person plane if you have the BRS, and fly it legally.  I understand that many light-sport planes are weight restricted by the maximum weight limitation, and not actual performance.  Among other reasons that I don't want to break the regs, is that if you take off with a fuel and passenger combination that in no way could be viewed as legal, should you have a mishap it would be a nightmare in many respects, including insurance coverage.

I've really enjoyed the CTLSi.  As a person with about 2,400 instrument hours, I'd advise being extremely cautious in a light-sport plane for ice avoidance.  I wouldn't worry about the instrumentation...in many respects my Dynons are better than the Avidyne in my Cirrus.  A rule to never fly in clouds below the freezing level would go a long way.  The thankfully few times I've wished I was on the ground mostly came from icing encounters, and that was with lots of power, TKS, and heated pitot-static systems.  I'd expect my CT would be in a world of hurt with just a little ice.

Good luck on your decision.

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for your input.  I am curious if I’m being unrealistic about having at least a 500# useful load with a CTLS?  That’s sort of my bare minimum to be able to take the FO, 20 gal of fuel ,  and 60 lbs of stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JDB said:

Thanks everyone for your input.  I am curious if I’m being unrealistic about having at least a 500# useful load with a CTLS?  That’s sort of my bare minimum to be able to take the FO, 20 gal of fuel ,  and 60 lbs of stuff...

I am 804 empty, in a 2010 CTLS, so 516 useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m 836 with a CTLSi... so, 484 useful.

me: 180 + wife (she’s going to kill me) 130 + 60 baggage = 17 gals @ say 4 gals hour... plenty of gas for a great day trip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning the pitot discussion, there are a number of aircraft certified for IFR with no pitot heat. My Beech Bonanza I had years ago did not have it , you just have to be smart about not flying in any ice. My larger concern is when flying IFR in moderate precipitation the is no self draining pitot tube in the CT. The slope of the pitot lines are all downhill and it will get water in the system. Some have said they have never had an issue. Well how would you know? If the bourdon tube in the airspeed has water you would not, at least until corrosion sets in or the water freezes. This is always considered in type certified aircraft. I installed dual Garmin air data computers in my CT and had to put in a pitot drain system to comply with Garmin's requirements. The air data computers are not cheap and can not get any water in them. I suppose if you are a really good pilot you could fly between the raindrops 😁.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not going to find a P2008 with 500# useful load.  So if that's a critical issue, you're best to cross it off your list.

Now if you think the FAA will increase the weight limits for LSA in the near future, the P2008 has already been certified to 1430 lbs under EASA.  A simple document issued by Tecnam would make that weight limit apply to any P2008 if/when the FAA ups the limits.

Of course that could be next year, or maybe three more years away....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cluemeister said:

You're not going to find a P2008 with 500# useful load.  So if that's a critical issue, you're best to cross it off your list.

Now if you think the FAA will increase the weight limits for LSA in the near future, the P2008 has already been certified to 1430 lbs under EASA.  A simple document issued by Tecnam would make that weight limit apply to any P2008 if/when the FAA ups the limits.

Of course that could be next year, or maybe three more years away....

That is assuming the FAA allows previously certified aircraft to increase their gross weight. With the original rule they didn't allow aircraft that had previously had their gross weight increased above the limit to be lowered back down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2020 at 8:51 AM, AGLyme said:

I like that feature a lot.  Thus far, after flying an LS for a year and a half, there hasn't been an occasion that I "needed" the behind the seats storage.  When I was shopping for a plane, having the ability to throw a foldable bike in the back was one of my "must have's".  I abandoned that must have when I bought the LS.  Then I saw on this forum after I bought the plane that some people remove the passenger seat and then a bike can be carried.  Great.

I will admit however that having the hat shelf on the LS is very important to me.  Makes life much easier in terms of in-flight storage; maps, lunch, glasses, pens, headsets, ipad, blah... With that said, the SW has a massive weight advantage that in my opinion turns the SW into the only 2 seat "C-182".  The C-182 is the only legit 4 place, full tanks GA airplane flying.  In the LS, I can carry a passenger for sure - no problem.  I just can't exceed 20 gallons when I have a passenger on board, which with the Fuel injected Rotax, I still have 3-4 hours of flying... which I learned is TONS of gas for my normal use.

The P2008, sorry... is a fabulous looking and luxurious one place plane on a long trip, and, sadly, for a short trip.  The plane is great, the LSA rules are too inflexible which is a damned shame for many of the new 2 place planes out there.  

My PA28-235 would outhaul a 182.   Js  😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot about that plane Trip... I earned my license in a Cherokee 140, Easiest plane to land ever...  Did you buy another plane yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for your input...  AGLyme, never ever disclose the FO weight- LOL!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never advertised I was smart...; )

Enjoy the search, you are choosing a great time to buy a plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AGLyme said:

I forgot about that plane Trip... I earned my license in a Cherokee 140, Easiest plane to land ever...  Did you buy another plane yet?

No I haven’t.    I’m still watching the ads.   I loved my 235!    Hope all is good with you.   Call me when you have a minute to catch up.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...