Jump to content

Newest Tecnam P2008 Photos


markmn

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Now that we both are happy flying CTSW...

We are already discussing about our next flying machine...then, I saw P2008 and I hope one day I have chance to check it out  :)

 

My angle on this subject is a bit different from all others on this forum, since I was not interested in aviation machines until mid last year.

Also, our main goal is to utilize LSA as "transportation with great view".  Not too interested in looks nor speed except safety and comfort in mind.

 

I do like CTSW, P2008, Remox GX, Pipistrel, Sport Cruiser etc etc...but all seems to not to have the complete package...and way too expensive.  The main reason why no one particular LSA can have all...bad government restrictions, bad instructors & over all dying general aviation industry in the U.S.

 

Anyhow, I do understand that many restrictions have safety in mind but when limitations restricting manufactures from making safer aircraft is just flat out stupid.  If additional 100 pounds will make the plane acturally safer...then why not?..why weaker landing gear is better for anyone?...why without BRS is safer?...bottom line is that keeping weight down does not matter if the aircraft is not selling in huge numbers...safer, comfortable and fun to fly should not be restricted.  Only way to make affordable anything is to create enough excitement and then to mass produce...period.

 

Ever since our journey started last year, we had nothing but the trouble finding the "right" instructor.  It was a nightmare and not even close to be a "fun" experience.  Bad oversight / regulations are just icing on the top, it is just taking away "fun" of owning your own aircraft.

 

Overall, I believe everyone in the industry must look into what will bring this industry back on track like how it was used to be and you know that the only way is to bring the "excitement" back on the table instead of "more regulations and fear".  Which means to create the "it" factor through LSA aircraft and not only for experienced but for new commers, otherwise you are just feeding the dying tree and will eventually dissapear.

 

I am the living testimony of average joe think about what is wrong in the general aviation...

 

All I am asking for is:  Economical, nicely designed, dependable, user friendly LSA aircraft.  Basically combining ICON A5, CTLSi, P2008, Sport Cruiser all in one without the bad regulations stopping it from happening.  Then make luxury version for the wealthy......am I asking too much from the top aeronautical engineers in this world in April 2014?  I hope not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

liltaka, I think that the future of general aviation belongs to experimental aircraft.  The regulations are crushing the life out of everything else.  More people are gravitating to the E-AB (and E-LSA) world, where they can do their own maintenance in a safe and reasonable way without undue regulatory burden or paying somebody $75/hr to turn a screw or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawyers and fearmongering are what is crushing aviation. The FAA regs come out of a regulatory environment which is all about CYA: cover your ass! The FAA can be sued just like everyone else.

 

Fueling that CYA is the massive amount of fearmongering going on. When there is an accident and the aircraft involved is a homebuilt, you should read the comment section. Every soccer mom/dad who knows nothing of aviation has an opinion, and it's always MORE REGULATIONS.

 

I'm not saying the FAA is totally unaccountable, but a lot of the regulations are written in blood. If you read the history of NPRMs (notice of proposed rulemaking, which are what starts the regulation writing process), there are preambles, which often describe what events led up to the NPRM.

 

There IS reason why many of the regs exist. It's because someone did something somewhere that ended up getting someone killed. I agree that many of the regs are akin to swatting a fly with a sledgehammer, but there's a reason why they require you to pay a guy $75 an hour to turn a few screws. There are a few people who know how to maintain and torque an aircraft properly, but there are a LOT of people who don't, and are completely unaware of how to do it properly. There's a lot of scary stuff that we see in the shop; even the nuances of changing oil properly seems to escape a lot of people (admittedly I had a couple goofs before I had formal training that a mechanic friend pointed out and corrected).

 

That said, I'm very much in favor of extending the LSRM-A style of mechanic privileges so they can inspect and maintain their own aircraft. Some formal training goes a long way to making sure people do it right. It's not perfect and won't prevent all mistakes, but helping people understand what the terms in the maintenance manual, or the tools required for the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot of scary stuff that we see in the shop...

To be fair, I've seen a LOT of scary stuff come out of certified shops. Maintenance-induced-failures are hardly peculiar to "backyard" mechanics.

 

I may not have all the skills of a professional mechanic, but I believe that having more time to give attention to detail, plus having "skin in the game" (almost literally) at least makes up for that.

 

Or at least I hope so!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, there's some scary certificated mechanic work too. Still, having training decreases the chance of these things happening. Experience is great for things you have done in the past, but knowlege is a good thing to lay the foundation. Combine the two and you end up with some pretty good maintenance.

 

As for the "skin in the game," that only works if the pilot (or mechanic) doesn't think that (for example) bolt torque or safetywire is bullcrap. One of my A&P instructors in school had a person bring in a plane for inspection, and the pilot replaced their own alternator belt at one point thinking they can do that as preventative maintenance. Problem is the prop had to come off. What was discovered was that some of the safety wire was put on backwards, and it was overtorqued, which crushed the flange and stretched the bolts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top two engine mounts of an aztec engine were held on by a few threads at the end of the bolts. It just came out of annual. The FAA revoked the powerplant rating of the guy, which invalidated his IA too.

In another case, a guy was going to inject medical rubber into his tailwheel because he couldn't wait for the factory to do a production run, and he didn't want to pay to change the tailwheel assembly to something more modern. That and he wanted to remove two structural bars with a hacksaw in his airplane cockpit because it made it slightly harder to get into the aircraft. Oh and he JB welded his engine block thinking that would be enough to stop a small crack that had formed from growing.

I've heard and seen crap from all sides of the coin.

Anyways, there's not a lot you can do about poor habits resulting from human factors or carelessness. You CAN do something about the knowledge of the tools and materials though. That's why I support formal training before you can work on aircraft. If you take specific training for your aircraft, I am in favor of dramatically reducing the amount of training required. The A&P certificate is a general catch all certificate where a huge amount of the time taught is about general theory and a little bit about practical application with the understanding you will learn more in the field, but if you are maintaining your own aircraft, I am happy with teaching more practical application specific to your aircraft than theory in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...