A very good aircraft that becomes sensational in TDI form (jet fuel burning CD-170, turbocharged, liquid-cooled, FADEDC engine). BTW our P2010 has a little popout window vent - easy to install and perfect for hot days, especially on the ground as the prop wash cools you down.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Great feedback - I am curious about the TDI so nice to hear your thoughts! Thank you.
@bellofello13 жыл бұрын
What does the TDI burn at cruise settings? Say 60% and 80%?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
@@bellofello1 website says around 5.2 gph which is quite impressive. Not sure what power settings.
@bellofello13 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich yea I saw that, it would be a great aircraft 👌👌 I have 10 hours in a Tecnam 2004 bravo LSA and it flew great
@d3adp0ol40 Жыл бұрын
Between Tecnam and Diamond, Cessna's market share in the EU for flight schools (and anywhere else avgas is prohibited/costly) will drop to 0. Throw in lower fuel costs, FADEC simplicity, and better interiors and the U.S. won't be far behind. Many schools near me already switched to Diamond. Cessna's own research shows most pilots favor the brand they learn on, so expect this to ripple out across GA more broadly. IMO Cessna is making a huge mistake by ignoring/killing development on alternative engines and fuels.
@robertd44683 жыл бұрын
I agree that Cessna needs to modernize their interiors. One of the things that made Cirrus sell so well isn’t just the parachute, it’s the fact that the interior looks like a modern architecture. It’s just pleasing to the eyes. This plane actually reminds me more of the Cessna 177 Cardinal. It has that raked windshield that looks just like the Cardinal.
@KarlBeeThree3 жыл бұрын
I was thinking the same thing. In profile it definitely looks like a Cardinal with wing struts. Back in the late 60's I used to fly Flight Safety's Cardinal there at KLGB. It's odd to hear what I knew as runway 25L referred to as 26L while 30 remains as it was back then.
@amagg263 жыл бұрын
I flew a Tecnam Sierra for awhile. Really fun little airplane. Just the pure joy of simple flying.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Thanks. I have been impressed with Tecnam too.
@andrewmorris34793 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich The P2008 handles like an absolute dream.
@pauljalbert3 жыл бұрын
Maximum flap speed (VFE) is the top of the white arc, which in this airplane appears to be 91. Although all V speeds are good to memorize, they're always right there in front of you. ;)
@doctorgarnerАй бұрын
White arc is full flaps, though, right? I think he was looking for the first notch which isn't indicated on the dial.
@MTBAviator2 жыл бұрын
Cessna has an amazing baseline product with its 172/182/206. However, the company made the decision to invest in its Citation line and minimally in its single engine line, essentially handing the market to Cirrus. A new interior, folding rear seats, revising the instrument layout so the standby instruments are usable in an emergency, adding a back-up alternator, an option for a composite prop, and voila! You have an updated and serious contender. Instead Cessna doesn’t change much and lets Garmin do the innovating. And continues to raise prices significantly every year. Come on Cessna. Get your act together. You’re losing serious money because of this.
@scotabot7826 Жыл бұрын
NO single engine is worth 750/800k, as all that money is lawyer money anyway!!
@TecnamTwin Жыл бұрын
Yeah... Textron doesn't care. And Cirrus's are absurdly overpriced.
@0lorenzo0 Жыл бұрын
I did my PPL in an aircraft build by Partenavia, the predecessor of Tecnam. It was the P.66C a well known plane to all italian student pilots but totally unknown outside Italy. It was something between a Cessna 152 and 172, both in terms of size and performance. That was my first plane, it wasn't the best plane ever built but I still love it.
@mouser4853 жыл бұрын
He said it kind of fits in between a Skyhawk and a Skylane. Well, that’s basically Cardinal area right there so it might compare better to a Cardinal. I really don’t like that strut being right behind the front doors, that would make it much harder for me to get in with me having to use a forearm crutch to aid in my walking. The Cardinal with its 4ft wide door is easy to get in and load. I love the 3rd door this plane has and the strut being shifted back would aid in visibility forward and down. Cardinal i fly is burning around 11GPH @75% 125kts with a 950lb Useful. I’m envious of that panel and the “newness” of the whole plane. That’s a very pretty airplane for sure. I just hope they’d consider a cantilever wing and remove the struts all together. Also, I’d be curious to know the specs on the diesel version.
@scottwebster71142 жыл бұрын
As a student pilot I fly one of these in my flight school. Nice plane and you get exposed to the G1000 setup. Plenty of power.
@friskytwox Жыл бұрын
so safe to it's a good choice if i wanna buy one then.
@N800-q1b9 ай бұрын
you're lucky mine has the 172 with the G1000. way nicer than the R models but I wish I had tecnam planes
@zent5555 ай бұрын
Nice. What school did you train?
@jasonmiller59563 жыл бұрын
That’s a gorgeous plane. Great lines and a great paint scheme
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
I agree. Thanks for watching!
@joshuawilson40272 жыл бұрын
I think, it's one of the best review Tecnam! Thks a lot!
@timmartin64102 жыл бұрын
Great look at the Tecnam, if I were still flying this would be worth considering. I like that it's comparable to the 182, I have somewhere around 150 hours in C182's. It's been 42 years since I've flown and although the flying bug never left, but alas resuming now is just cost prohibitive. Definitely sticker shock at what rentals cost...a long way from the $8 and hour wet for a C150 back in the day.
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the message. Tecnam could be a player in the market, but tough to unseat the 172/182. Thanks for watching!
@VesperTV_2 жыл бұрын
woot? :(
@Matt-zc1qs Жыл бұрын
The 182 that I fly occasionally does not have the steps for fueling either. Not that big of a deal, but can be a pain in the ass if the right conditions are met.
@tmc38822 жыл бұрын
Aircraft appears to be a great option to the 182. Modern look, much needed upgrades that Cessna is long overdue for. Would consider purchase but supply chain for parts and overall support not quite there (Dealer network still in infancy stage) Would love feedback from current US owners.
@bruschi81483 жыл бұрын
Partenavia was indeed the name before!! The Partenavia P68 twin is a great flying aircraft
@Dennco20005 ай бұрын
In the 180 hp 2010 with take off flaps set it feels like it uses a lot of runway and the climb out is poor until the flaps are fully retracted at 300 feet.
@iichthus57603 жыл бұрын
Great aircraft. Need the “both” fuel selection. Nearly as comfortable as my 177RG.
@matsuhotprops3 жыл бұрын
Hey Rich, it’s Mark Johnson from Alaska and the Cessna days. Great channel you have. Glad to see you are doing well and flying lots of interesting airplanes.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Hey Mark - thanks for the message. Seems like yesterday - really miss those days in Alaska! Great to hear from you - let’s catch up sometime!
@core_of_winter4 ай бұрын
I flew a P2010 about 9 years ago. I agree that the interior is definitely nice. The only gripe I had was the controls felt kind of heavy for such a light airplane, particularly in roll. I've flown light twins that felt lighter on the yoke in roll than the P2010. But other than that, a fine airplane.
@rickdl50223 жыл бұрын
Cessna shouldn’t have stopped C152 production, the best trainer ever
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Agree and updated 152 would be a real seller!
@DonAv8s3 жыл бұрын
Its a nicely appointed aircraft. Roughly the same cost as a new C172SP but with better interior, updates and performance even though it competes with Skylane.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
It’s great to see some competition and manufacturers seeing demand in this entry level market. Cessna has really retracted from it and building very few airplanes. GA needs companies like Tecnam!
@DonAv8s3 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich You are spot on again and its nice to see you are supporting Tecnam. Association with quality US aviation companies who can support the brand with standardized training, parts inventory, owner assistance and maintenance is what they need. Those issues are what seemed to hamstring Diamond Aircraft in the US.
@envitech022 жыл бұрын
Love the windshield raked angle. Looks like a Ferrari. Helps a lot in aerodynamics.
@ccproperty15193 жыл бұрын
Avionics ON to confirm oil pressure comes up when starting, not battery voltage. Tecnam should have made it cantilever since side view is severely restricted by the wing. In the P2010 I need to duck down to see horizon out the side windows.
@galas4552 жыл бұрын
Hey Rich, thanks for the Tacnam review, I like it!
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
It's a very nice airplane. Thanks for watching!
@lostinasia253 жыл бұрын
The electric adjustable seats are what they need in the Cessna line. No more seats sliding back on takeoff.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
The sliding mechanism is still non-electric. Just the height adjustment is electric.
@leprechaunbutreallyjustamidget2 жыл бұрын
No thanks manual is lighter
@LostInSpace175 Жыл бұрын
Such a smooth plane!
@lcprivatepilot1969 Жыл бұрын
Would be nice if Cessna-Piper and Beech would bring their designs up to date and or “rake up” the aesthetics on current designs (interior/exterior), especially when considering the pricing for them brand new. (Cessna could go back to original plans of replacing the 172 with the 177, which still looks “modern”, imho)
@ATH_Berkshire Жыл бұрын
I would be interesting to hear how you think this aircraft stacks up against the SR-20 particularly the newer ones with a similar engine.
@FlyingwithRich Жыл бұрын
I feel like this class airplane (4 seat, 200HP range) isn’t that popular for personal use. Most buyers want more performance in a 4 place airplane, and have the financial capability to go to an SR22 or something similar. The 2010 is kind of between a 172 and 182, not sure there is much room there for a viable market. Cirrus doens’t sell near as many SR20s as SR22s so that market seems limited too. Both the 2010 and SR20 are nice airplanes, just limited markets in my opinion. If I were going to choose, I would take the 20.
@paultaylor99393 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing great plane and the price I am sure they will do well in the market cheers
@jammusique3 жыл бұрын
Great as always! Why can't you get a new Skylane at present?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Sold out until late ‘22. Thanks for watching.
@captnjim44smith74 Жыл бұрын
I’m like the look and your comments 😊
@foodhead4677 Жыл бұрын
Looks great, im in the north east. I don't understand what people use them for. Where do you go/why? Seems like about half the travel time of driving but no snacks.
@elpowderman3 жыл бұрын
I want to be supportive of this plane - looks awesome and always nice to have competitors. But for how modern it is, I am pretty surprised by the performance numbers. 139 knots is nothing to sneeze at, but at 14 gallons per hour? It almost doesn’t make sense and I’d be tempted to question the calibration of the fuel flow, except that that number (14gph) is right there in the POH. It seems to me that the Tecnam should be so much slicker than your average Cessna that it would either be faster at the same fuel flow or the same at lower fuel flow. Given that fuel flow pretty much equals power output, at 14gph my 6-seat Cessna - draggiier, heavier, bigger, with 1400# UL, and 60 years older - is only a few knots slower, and I know its fuel flow is dead-on. Very odd to me.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
I see what you mean but it can do 135 knots at 12 gph and around 130 kts at 11.5 gph. Also, the cabin of the Tecnam is very wide compared to a Cessna. Cessna did a great job 60 years ago and unfortunately engines haven't changed much. Thanks for the comment!
@bernardanderson37583 жыл бұрын
The 182 Market isn’t slowing down none Because of the higher demands and more less some of them are in need of a engine overhaul and Prop and avionics upgrade so that they can be brought wholesale or retail price if you can find one
@mytubehkjt3 жыл бұрын
My Piper Comanche all the way from 1959 is bigger inside, goes faster on 35 less Hp using 30% less fuel. Probably cost 1/10th of the price too... Oh how far we've come. ;-)
@FlyingNDriving3 жыл бұрын
The maintenance and ADs tho. Shame what the commanche could have morphed into without the flood. All we get now is the arrow 🤢
@sengwesetogile60543 жыл бұрын
The wings wont fall off on the tecnam
@FlyingNDriving3 жыл бұрын
@@sengwesetogile6054 wrong piper bro
@justsmy56773 жыл бұрын
I’m not a fan of one cabin door. Safety concerns and also a hassle. Egressing in an emergency would be sporty...even without a bent door frame. The cabin widths are about the same aren’t they?
@mytubehkjt2 жыл бұрын
@@sengwesetogile6054 Have you seen the main spar on a Comanche? Obviously not. Wouldn't be out of place on a DC3.
@valblome49133 жыл бұрын
Hopefully here in the near future, I will have the opportunity to get on the insurance of a stunning 2019 P2010. I'm really looking forward to it. This said, if I were going to pick an airplane to own, it would be the Skylane. The Tecnam has some handbuilt Italian parts, like a Ferrari, which is awesome... Buuuut, that makes replacing them a pain. I know one which had a wheel pant damaged, and the replacement part didn't even come with holes drilled in it. One simply can't guarantee any standard configuration of holes will line up with the hand tooled originals on the non-damaged part. Gotta make your own to match.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
The door handles are actually from a BMW 3 series!
@valblome49133 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich I didn't know that, interesting! The exterior handles are so thin, I've always treated them very carefully. It'll be interesting to see how well those age.
@Padie600 Жыл бұрын
Its the most well built plane I've seen on this streets
@joemclaughlin9952 жыл бұрын
Class looking machine!Enjoy
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Another T206 coming for this weekend’s video!
@chcr81503 жыл бұрын
Hey Rich, at that cruise power setting of 2700 rpm to get 138 true, does that make it kinda loud in the cabin? Seems like a 182 would give you 140 true at more like 2400. Thanks!
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
That true - but honestly didn’t notice the noise level at 2700 RPM as being high or even noticeable. Thanks for watching.
@eksemos Жыл бұрын
Rich, what is Tecnam's product support and customer service like in the US? Is parts availability good, and do they have adequate maintenance facilities in the US?
@Joaocanguru Жыл бұрын
What kind of camera did you use to record the "final thoughts" of the video. thks.
@backcountyrpilot10 ай бұрын
As to fuel burn, I could back my Maule MT-7-235 with a 235 HP IO-540 down to C172 speeds of 105 KTS and burn C172 fuel numbers of about 8 GPH, or open it up to 145 MPH burning about 13 GPH at low altitudes or about 10 GPH at 14,000 MSL going about 6 MPH faster.
@envitech022 жыл бұрын
The sleek lines puts this on similar design and aerodynamics as the Diamond models. Makes the typical Cessna look like a Model T Ford (no offense to Cessna). Speaking as a low time PPL here.
@donaldholman90703 жыл бұрын
Great plane! Thank you!
@maurickable3 жыл бұрын
Hi rich tecnam and pilatus are my favorite aircrafts best regards from italy
@spiro53273 жыл бұрын
I prefer the throttle quadrant in this compared to the push pull knobs in the cessna. Im guessing this one won't have the nose heavy feel of the 182 and the interior is definitely nicer as well. I noticed you took off with flap,just wondering is that a requirement for a normal takeoff. Thanks Rich
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Flaps can be be either way. Not as nose heavy as a 182. Throttle quadrant is low, but I prefer it over the push pull as well. Thanks for watching!
@TheGbelcher2 жыл бұрын
I just went to the Tecnam site and according to the specs, the 180 HP model is only 3 kts slower and has the same range as the 215 hp. And the 180 has 30 lbs more useful load. Does anyone know why the 215 hp doesn’t have a significantly faster max cruise than the 180? Is it a limitation of the airframe?
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Often airframes in that class don't get linear increase in speed relative to horsepower. The airframes are the same and I believe they both have the same gross weight so makes sense the useful load is a little higher than the 215 HP version due to maybe engine weights, and more luxury on the interior. I think the 215HP version does better in climb and at higher density altitude. Also, Tecnam may have plans to up the gross weight from the first certified weight - it's common for manufacturers to get something certified and then make improvements on those limitations with further testing post initial certification.
@ulyssesja94652 жыл бұрын
Hello Rich . The runaway flaps spectacle is noted but if you spent time on cars from THAT part of the world ,back in the seventies , you'll likely shrug this off . LOL . The Italian cars that I remember from that time were very attractive ! I grew up in working class neighborhoods so I really only saw models that the working man could reach for . The point here is you rarely spotted old versions of any of these cars. In the mid eighties , I too was drawn in ! She was a sweet looking two seat convertible , and at nearly seven years , she was OLD . I was young and clueless - first car . Long story short , several months later , we had to part ways . LOL. Now Rich, the 182 seems to have its issues as well . Why do owners of this type tend to want to land nose wheel first ?? Perhaps some of them are unable to see well over the panel on short final ? I have a son - not yet licensed . It seems that quite some time would pass before he would be going solo - in a 182 ? btw I still look at Italian cars ! LOL
@zevnafte51683 жыл бұрын
Where this aircraft really excells is the TDI vairant. Fuel burn and cruise on the IO-390 (215hp) version is not that impressive with high fuel burn and a decent cruise speed. However this aircraft really stands out with a low single digit fuel gph fuel burn with its jet fuel burning counterpart.... makes for a very competitive and versitile aircraft.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
I agree - looking forward to flying one!
@cfinoman2 жыл бұрын
I have good experience on it while being an instructor i will say its not solid and strong like cessna for the training specifically but may be you can say for personal use its ok
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Good feedback - I agree. Thanks for watching.
@Parker531513 жыл бұрын
Which manufacturer supplies the TDI engine, and how does the TDI performance compare with the avgas engines?
@milonangele66113 жыл бұрын
It’s the CD170 from Continental
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Continental. Here is all the info: www.tecnam.com/aircraft/p2010-170hp-diesel/
@Parker531513 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Thanks.
@michaelbarker7422 жыл бұрын
Hand crank roll down/up Windows would be my ask.
@donjohnston37763 жыл бұрын
I think the TDI/fadec version will be desired by more of your customers
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Eventually I think TDI is going to be the market. Anxious to fly it. I have flown the DA42 - really like the TDI set up in that airplane.
@WattsUpDev2 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Can you confirm the TDI’s useful load with full tank?
@paulchristensen79633 жыл бұрын
Isn't top of the white band on the ASI the flap placard?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Full flaps range.
@taildraggerpilotch3 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Negative sir. Vfe is valid for both T/O and LAND on this aircraft. See AFM Page APV4-7: Airspeeds for Normal Operation. See also Section 4 Normal Operations - 5.11 Before Landing: 4. Flaps: set TIO (below Vfe).
@gclaytony2 жыл бұрын
I"m curious about the ergonomics. I had a '85 172P for five years and sold it at the start of the current hot used airplane market. At 6'3" I could never get completely comfortable in it and my knees let me know about after after a half hour or so. Mooney/Cirrus fit me much better, but I like high wings. Thanks in advance.
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
It's a pretty roomy airplane - worth checking out. They did a nice job on the interior - electric seats! Thanks for watching!
@bashardahabra2 жыл бұрын
Can you please advise what mounts are you using for the GoPro on the windshields front and side?
@renoguy253 жыл бұрын
Loved the calm and very knowledgeable review . I'm an older guy and set in my ways . Like sticking with what I know works , but , I gotta say , that 3rd door sure would be nice . Would sure love to see the same performance review , with the TDI . Rich , You're a Gentlemen and Scholar, love the channel Thanks Kindly
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Glad it was helpful and you enjoyed it! Thank you! Happy Holidays!
@davidboyle30323 жыл бұрын
Useful load of the 2022 Tecnam P2010 in TDI form (jet fuel burning CD-170, turbocharged, liquid-cooled, FADEDC engine with full fuel is 408 pounds Useful load of Cessna 182 with full fuel is 588 pounds Owners and operators of Cessna 172 Skyhawk, 182 Skylane can utilize 91-octane unleaded (91UL), 94UL or 100VLL (very low lead) fuel in their aircraft wherever it is available
@quattro44682 жыл бұрын
What if youre not a fat american tho?
@adfa5288 Жыл бұрын
@ 5.2 GPH. why would you fly full fuel your bladder can't handle the range A better comparaison would be a fuel load that would allow for a 3 hour flight then compare the load that can be carried
@allamericandude15 Жыл бұрын
Sounded like some folks were struggling in the pattern while you landed lol
@ASWISSPILOT3 жыл бұрын
Great review! Thanks for sharing! 👍🏼😉
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for watching!
@tedk28143 жыл бұрын
great looking aircraft !! I do like the 1991 Ford F 150 style a/c vents
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
I just delivered a 2017 Caravan and someone made same comment about it!
@yacahumax14312 жыл бұрын
I think this plane competes with the DA40NG. The only thing is that you can get the DA40ng with AC and I think,(maybe ) around the same price. I like the looks of the 2010. I would love to fly it
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for watching!
@Taser1-13 жыл бұрын
I don’t think there is a shortage of new airplanes models to buy. What there is a shortage of reasonably priced airplanes for sale.
@markadams73286 күн бұрын
You didn't mention the noise level? Can you please compare it to 'any' other aircraft?
@FlyingwithRich6 күн бұрын
Very quiet compared to most piston engine aircraft.
@markadams73285 күн бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Thanks for your quick answer! Maybe it's just me? But flying in a time when headsets where NOT noise cancelling, and planes were barely insulated, I REALLY appreciate the manufacturer using high tech ways to make planes quieter! I think the materials are available, and I don't think it should add too much to the cost and weight.
@FlyingwithRich5 күн бұрын
@@markadams7328 Agree, noise cancelling headsets are the standard now, but I think soundproofing has improved as well so overall a better noise level experience now.
@bernardanderson37583 жыл бұрын
The castering nose gear steering is like on the Honda Jet and the Grumman Aircraft Tiger and cheetah 🐆
@gtr19523 жыл бұрын
The $$ is less than I guessed after that last video, it seems like a good value. The engine monitor is cool, and the old eyes appreciate the big glass. 8) That seems to be getting better (HD?) Thanks Rich! 8) JMHO --gary
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Yes this is the G1000nxi which also has a higher resolution than the previous gen G1000. Thanks for watching!
@easttexan29333 жыл бұрын
Really nice looking airplane. Very clean lines.
@Cherfield-D-Blessedman2 жыл бұрын
Beautiful airplane, I love it.
@74tgf3 жыл бұрын
beautiful airplane!!!!! i love it!!
@ismailcift2 жыл бұрын
It's like a highwing cherokee :)
@thomasgreen16882 жыл бұрын
Interesting airplane. Seems a bit more sexy than a 182. Interior way better.
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
I agree - but 182 is tough competition!
@PilotDaveAviation2 жыл бұрын
What's the useful load for this aircraft.... thanks for sharing
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
800 lbs. Thank you for watching!
@PilotDaveAviation2 жыл бұрын
@Flying with Rich I have watched several of the videos! My wife and I have been looking for a plane and I believe we have found it.... this is amazing
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
@@PilotDaveAviation Well let us know if you're serious! We still have it in our inventory!
@noyfub2 жыл бұрын
You have the white ribbon on the airspeed for flaps?
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
White arc could mean full flap range in a lot of aircraft. Tecnam’s manual is not clear. Thanks for watching!
@draudio2u Жыл бұрын
Curious why the flaps were oscillating when you mentioned "film that". Is that a safety feature for flap speed?
@FlyingwithRich Жыл бұрын
That was a malfunction of the flaps. I think a position switch was bad.
@Clovescp2 жыл бұрын
🛩️ Só falta ter Opção de "Trem de Pouso Retrátil" reforçado p/ pouso em Pistas de Cascalhos e Grama em Sítios e Fazendas. Na Segurança deveria ter Paraquedas Balístico "CAPS" ! 🛩️ 🇧🇷
@umami02473 жыл бұрын
Definitely Italian design and a good looking plane but for that money wow. And the flap issue is a bit concerning for a new plane.
@sqvision3 жыл бұрын
I believe Cessna’s late models have synthetic vision? The Tecnam does not. Or it’s an option at both?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
I think optional on both.
@pnorva2 жыл бұрын
Beautiful airplane!
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Agee. Thanks for watching!
@tonyrowland92163 жыл бұрын
I am looking to replace a 172. Just found it’s replacement. How hard is the transition from steam gage to glass?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Very easy transition!
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
If you're serious - email us at sales@ocraviation.com
@jonclassical20243 жыл бұрын
When you were talking about 103 being approach flap setting speed and filmed (14:38) out to the right wing....were those flaps going up and down without control input, or was that my imagination?!?!
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Nope. That’s what you saw. It’s a maintenance issue.
@randominternet55863 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich It could be a safety feature as well if there was a flap extension command above flap speeds.
@gorgly1233 жыл бұрын
What is the comparison on Useful load between 182 and Tecnam?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
850 lbs use file load on this particular 2010. I think most Skylanes come out with about 1000 lbs useful load.
@matthewbrinker66152 жыл бұрын
I’m stuck with renting until I die. Great.
@916medic Жыл бұрын
Would they make a taildragger version.
@josephlevin35463 жыл бұрын
What happened with the flaps?
@chrismcleod17962 жыл бұрын
i would like to know how it would handle on floats ..
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Very popular airplane for floats.
@claytondavy34682 жыл бұрын
Im curious, are you a dealer for these aircraft ?
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
We are not a dealer for Tecnam.
@claytondavy34682 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich 👍
@USNVA113 жыл бұрын
Really nice aircraft, however, at nearly $600,000, I guess I’m going to stick with my paid for Grumman AA-5 Tiger that’s just as fast.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Good call!
@paulsinthunava7553 жыл бұрын
And of course with only 180HP!
@USNVA113 жыл бұрын
@@paulsinthunava755 - the Tiger does a lot with that Lycoming O-360 no doubt ! I have installed a power flow exhaust system so my Tiger may even be just a tad faster.
@renard81373 жыл бұрын
600.000$ for 130kts🤐
@WattsUpDev2 жыл бұрын
That cost is way off
@stephenst-pierre9533 Жыл бұрын
It is good that the review states a number of times…similar numbers to the Cessna 182…at rpms and profiles…but is it as stable as the Cessna products in basic maneuvers and especially slow flight? It appears to be since some very good reviews…if so it is a good option as long as supply chain is there…and Trump does not start trade war with Italy.
@frankplaayer8221 Жыл бұрын
A Cardinal with two tablets for 400k. New costs money. That’s life.
@brandonb4173 жыл бұрын
Cool plane, but it's impossible to get excited over a plane that is half a million dollars and by the time a used one is affordable I'll be too old for a medical.
@GT471793 жыл бұрын
Easy start ups 😎
@cwehbe3 жыл бұрын
As long as engines aren't changing and we still see old technology, there is no reason for me to move into a plane like this. Tecnam should have used FADEC at least to attract more pilots. The fuel flow and speed also don't seem like a significant improvement from the Cessna.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
They do have a Diesel Fadec version, but I understand what you mean.
@keyboardflyer73842 жыл бұрын
anyone knows what model of Oakley sunglasses the pilot is using?
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
I'm the pilot - honestly don't know the model!
@keyboardflyer73842 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich haha thanks anyway. will look it up the interweb
@mytubehkjt2 жыл бұрын
Hi Rich. Vfe white arc. ~91kts by the look... ;-)
@FlyingwithRich2 жыл бұрын
Yeah I know but Vfe is max flap extension. We were looking for approach flaps which are usually outside the white arc.
@seandonaldson88103 жыл бұрын
Hi Rich Great review of the aircraft…..thanks. Can I ask how you run the audio in your review?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
There are plenty of audio adapters you can find in pilot shops for various cameras.
@seandonaldson88103 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I just came across your channel recently and really enjoy your content.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
@@seandonaldson8810 thanks a lot! I appreciate it!
@Amar-fu7eq22 күн бұрын
Does it have air conditioning?
@FlyingwithRich22 күн бұрын
@@Amar-fu7eq No AC
@AFO33103 жыл бұрын
It's like a 172, DA40 and SR20 came together and each gave 33% to make a baby and this is the outcome
@paulo72003 жыл бұрын
Any forthcoming retractable version?
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Not that we know of.
@dontbanmebrodontbanme54033 жыл бұрын
$538k? I get it, new plane + new avionics = half a mil (or more). For that price, however, I've seen used Piper Meridians! And I get it, that plane is way more expensive to fly. But you're also getting where you want to go literally twice as fast! My goal is to own a used Piper Meridian (or M600) within the next six years. At a minimum, I'd go for a Piper M350 or a Piper Matrix. Much more capable planes.
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
Based on your analogy, no one would ever buy a newer entry level airplane. Just because you are not in that market doesn’t mean no one else is. Sold lots of new 172s to people who could have easily afforded a late model Bonanza or Malibu. People have different needs and not always about speed. Thanks for watching.
@dontbanmebrodontbanme54033 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Sure, I completely understand.
@habibi750 Жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRichWhat a pompous reply. Seems like you delicate sensibilities were offended.
@FlyingwithRich Жыл бұрын
Different perspective is pompous? How pompous of you.
@michellonergan85173 жыл бұрын
Is it full IFR, with deicing kit
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
It's IFR certified but no de-icing. The airplane has a 14,000 ft service ceiling. Not the kind of airplane you want to take into icing conditions.
@michellonergan85173 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich Thank you sir.
@brianb55943 жыл бұрын
That is a sweet ride Rich! I would say high wing Cirrus based on the styling. How does useful load compare to a 182? Definitely much more appealing airplane than the dated Cessna's...
@FlyingwithRich3 жыл бұрын
The 182 has a little more useful load of around 1100 lbs depending on options.
@brianb55943 жыл бұрын
@@FlyingwithRich figured that with the added HP. Thanks Rich!