Tecnam Aircraft's Rotax-Powered Twin

[DiamondPilotDan]

"branching out from the LSA market by making the world's ugliest, weakest twin."

[3593893]

500 K ??  Damn.

[b101aa2]

other then the price, this aircraft is beautiful. knock off 75k, and it hits the sweet spot. my first thought is, FLOATS! because of the speed, twin, the way the gear is mounted, and the large cabin; this thing would do great on the water.

[crudeoilsystems]

nice to be able to have the chance to fly these things

[pilot29902]

Go to 'Airline Training Solutions Flight School' and you will log about 95% of your training time in a Tecnam P2006T!!!!

[FormerFF]

Single engine climb of 200 fpm clean? In other words, if you lose an engine on departure, land straight ahead. The chances of an average pilot getting it cleaned up and climbing away are poor.

[Earssss]

@FormerFF ,,, you should land straight ahead no matter how many engines the plane has,,, more ppl die trying to return to the runway than if you land straight ahead

[mocatx]

I fly a plane with a Rotax so no prob there. But is it not a bit slow for the money?

[youngfart40]

@mocatx Well I guess that all depends on how fast you want to go ;)

[ignoton]

Maybe the only thing, after pizza and pasta, that Napoli did right.

[C172Pilotdude]

I just read last night in the latest AOPA magazine that the aircraft will come with a G1000 with an integrated GFC700 autopilot instead of the S-Tec 55. It also gave a price of 550K loaded. Not just under 500K. 500k might be a bit pricey for this aircraft but it is still a lot cheaper than a seminole which would be the next twin in line for the flight training field. Especially if you compare the operating costs between the two aircraft.

[jyokid]

This is exactly the sort of airplane I've been wanting. Definitely going t keep my eye on it and Tecnam as a manufacturer. I'm happy with the speed and performance of the DA40 and 182's that I fly, but it'd be nice to have a second engine, just in case.

[ups463]

I love Tecnam's airplanes...

[flynmid]

What they should do is syick two )-200's in it and burn car gas. Then operating cost would decrease further, and it would have the reliability of proven engines.

[cw8jw]

The problem with that is two-fold:

1. Weight and balance issues; can you even find 200's that match the size & weight profile, as well as the engine mounts being compatible with the airframe?

2. Structural stress loads; the existing airframe is designed to handle the expected stress loads of the Rotax engines they are using. Would the airframe be capable of handling the stresses from using 200's, even if they were operating within the same capabilities of the Rotax's?

[flynmid]

I agree that the weight an balance would be thrown way off, but I don't think it would take too much to strengthen the airframe enough to handle the 0-200. If they could manage to get a similar payload with the heavier engines, it would be a great airplane. (Not saying that it's not aready)

[jwills8606]

These ARE proven engines. I built a Kitfox with a 912 and I can say it is the best engine I have ever flown behind. 2000 hour TBO, starts easily, runs smoothly, absolutely reliable. Dual CDI ignition, dual carbs, water and aircooled, and will run at reduced power to get you home if it loses coolant. I can't say enough about this little engine. And, I might add, I believe they are quite a bit lighter than the Lycomings.

[flynmid]

haha yes, I dint know about the Lycomings, but I do know it's over 100lbs less than the Continental O-200

[stevenpam]

Love your videos, guys. Sounds like you might need new batteries in your wireless mic! (you DO monitor the sound while you're recording, right?).

You know, the digital recorders are so good, small, and cheap these days it's often better to just use one of those in the pocket, connected to a lapel mic, so you don't have to worry about range. Then you just drop the audio file in when you're editing - syncing up the sound is not a big deal.

[clannon]

I don't trust Rotax engines. Bad experience in the rotax-powered Katana (with few hours on the engine). POS.

[XaircraftX]

Very sweet airplane, looks fun to fly!

[maddoginthesky]

$500,000 that's a lot cheaper than a Twin Star or Seminole and it burns a lot less gas. If it holds up it'll make a great trainer and it is undoubtedly a good entry level twin.

[CaptainFaisal]

agreed.

[vwphile]

as he says, insurance will be the variable. Acquisition and operating costs will likely be comporable to a (new) skylane or SR20.

(and yeah, its a very neat plane!)

[N21X]

Looks like a neat plane. The wonder what it will cost to rent at a school?