Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.

#50 2022 Tecnam P2010 MkII (215 HP) Review - A true Cessna competitor?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 6 сер 2024
  • This week we wanted to show you a review of the 2022 Tecnam P2010 MkII. Last week we had Amir fly the airplane but I needed to get a bit more familiar with it before sharing my thoughts on this airplane in detail. Overall it's a very impressive airplane and in my opinion has a really good chance to take some market share away from Cessna. The airplane feels modern and new compared to most other single-engines out there, is very comfortable and quiet, and got some really good 182 like performance. I do like the Cessna products very much and have spent lots of time in them, but this Tecnam is really impressive and definitely does not have to hide!
    If you have any additional questions in regards to the Tecnam P2010 or are interested in this airplane, please contact me our our team at OCR AVIATION.
    Special thanks to Chris Rose and AOPA for the beautiful air to air shot of the P2012 at 5:12. (#flywithaopa #cloudsandcamera #aopa )
    #Tecnam #TecnamP210 #GeneralAviaiton #AirplaneReview
    0:00 Intro
    0:31 Engine Start
    0:49 Taxi Differences
    2:30 Take Off
    4:08 Tecnam History
    5:19 Model P2010
    6:30 Cruise Performance
    9:22 What I don't like
    10:22 Things to consider
    12:00 Descending into Long Beach
    15:36 Landing
    16:54 Final Thoughts
    Our Tecnam Listing:
    www.controller.com/listing/fo...
    Tecnam Website:
    www.tecnam.com/aircraft/p2010...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DISCLAIMER: All videos are for entertainment purposes only. Do not refer to them as instructional videos due to heavy editing and clips being edited out of context.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Website: ocraviation.com/
    Instagram: flying_with...
    Contact:
    Rich Manor
    (562) 413-3251
    Rich@ocraviation.com

КОМЕНТАРІ • 274

  • @gatestpilotpaulmsouthwick7012
    @gatestpilotpaulmsouthwick7012 2 роки тому +38

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +2

      Thanks. Great feedback - I am curious about the TDI so nice to hear your thoughts! Thank you.

    • @bellofello1
      @bellofello1 2 роки тому

      What does the TDI burn at cruise settings? Say 60% and 80%?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +3

      @@bellofello1 website says around 5.2 gph which is quite impressive. Not sure what power settings.

    • @bellofello1
      @bellofello1 2 роки тому

      @@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

    • @TheWallablack
      @TheWallablack 2 роки тому +1

      Agree, had the chance to fly the TDI version in Capua and it is a very cool machine. Easy to handle, easy engine management and low fuel burn! :)

  • @robertd4468
    @robertd4468 2 роки тому +69

    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.

    • @KarlBeeThree
      @KarlBeeThree 2 роки тому +2

      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.

  • @pauljalbert
    @pauljalbert 2 роки тому +17

    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. ;)

  • @MTBAviator
    @MTBAviator 2 роки тому +18

    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
      @scotabot7826 Рік тому +2

      NO single engine is worth 750/800k, as all that money is lawyer money anyway!!

    • @TecnamTwin
      @TecnamTwin Рік тому +1

      Yeah... Textron doesn't care. And Cirrus's are absurdly overpriced.

  • @joshuawilson4027
    @joshuawilson4027 Рік тому

    I think, it's one of the best review Tecnam! Thks a lot!

  • @amagg26
    @amagg26 2 роки тому +10

    I flew a Tecnam Sierra for awhile. Really fun little airplane. Just the pure joy of simple flying.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +3

      Thanks. I have been impressed with Tecnam too.

    • @andrewmorris3479
      @andrewmorris3479 2 роки тому

      @@FlyingwithRich The P2008 handles like an absolute dream.

  • @scottwebster7114
    @scottwebster7114 2 роки тому +13

    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
      @friskytwox Рік тому

      so safe to it's a good choice if i wanna buy one then.

    • @user-vc2up9ys6v
      @user-vc2up9ys6v 4 місяці тому

      you're lucky mine has the 172 with the G1000. way nicer than the R models but I wish I had tecnam planes

    • @zent555
      @zent555 18 днів тому

      Nice. What school did you train?

  • @0lorenzo0
    @0lorenzo0 Рік тому +1

    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.

  • @ASWISSPILOT
    @ASWISSPILOT 2 роки тому

    Great review! Thanks for sharing! 👍🏼😉

  • @paultaylor9939
    @paultaylor9939 2 роки тому +1

    Thanks for sharing great plane and the price I am sure they will do well in the market cheers

  • @matsuhotprops
    @matsuhotprops 2 роки тому

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      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!

  • @galas455
    @galas455 2 роки тому

    Hey Rich, thanks for the Tacnam review, I like it!

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      It's a very nice airplane. Thanks for watching!

  • @mouser485
    @mouser485 2 роки тому +6

    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.

  • @donaldholman9070
    @donaldholman9070 2 роки тому +1

    Great plane! Thank you!

  • @jasonmiller5956
    @jasonmiller5956 2 роки тому +2

    That’s a gorgeous plane. Great lines and a great paint scheme

  • @bruschi8148
    @bruschi8148 2 роки тому +2

    Partenavia was indeed the name before!! The Partenavia P68 twin is a great flying aircraft

  • @tmc3882
    @tmc3882 2 роки тому +6

    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.

  • @iichthus5760
    @iichthus5760 2 роки тому +4

    Great aircraft. Need the “both” fuel selection. Nearly as comfortable as my 177RG.

  • @easttexan2933
    @easttexan2933 2 роки тому

    Really nice looking airplane. Very clean lines.

  • @74tgf
    @74tgf 2 роки тому

    beautiful airplane!!!!! i love it!!

  • @captnjim44smith74
    @captnjim44smith74 11 місяців тому

    I’m like the look and your comments 😊

  • @maurickable
    @maurickable 2 роки тому

    Hi rich tecnam and pilatus are my favorite aircrafts best regards from italy

  • @LostInSpace175
    @LostInSpace175 Рік тому +1

    Such a smooth plane!

  • @timmartin6410
    @timmartin6410 2 роки тому +4

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      Thanks for the message. Tecnam could be a player in the market, but tough to unseat the 172/182. Thanks for watching!

    • @VesperTV_
      @VesperTV_ Рік тому

      woot? :(

  • @Cherfield-D-Blessedman
    @Cherfield-D-Blessedman Рік тому

    Beautiful airplane, I love it.

  • @Dennco2000
    @Dennco2000 20 днів тому +1

    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.

  • @ccproperty1519
    @ccproperty1519 2 роки тому +1

    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.

  • @DonAv8s
    @DonAv8s 2 роки тому +4

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +3

      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!

    • @DonAv8s
      @DonAv8s 2 роки тому +4

      @@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.

  • @envitech02
    @envitech02 Рік тому +1

    Love the windshield raked angle. Looks like a Ferrari. Helps a lot in aerodynamics.

  • @mytubehkjt
    @mytubehkjt 2 роки тому +43

    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. ;-)

    • @FlyingNDriving
      @FlyingNDriving 2 роки тому +8

      The maintenance and ADs tho. Shame what the commanche could have morphed into without the flood. All we get now is the arrow 🤢

    • @sengwesetogile6054
      @sengwesetogile6054 2 роки тому +18

      The wings wont fall off on the tecnam

    • @FlyingNDriving
      @FlyingNDriving 2 роки тому +4

      @@sengwesetogile6054 wrong piper bro

    • @justsmy5677
      @justsmy5677 2 роки тому +5

      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?

    • @mytubehkjt
      @mytubehkjt 2 роки тому +1

      @@sengwesetogile6054 Have you seen the main spar on a Comanche? Obviously not. Wouldn't be out of place on a DC3.

  • @tedk2814
    @tedk2814 2 роки тому

    great looking aircraft !! I do like the 1991 Ford F 150 style a/c vents

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      I just delivered a 2017 Caravan and someone made same comment about it!

  • @joemclaughlin995
    @joemclaughlin995 2 роки тому +1

    Class looking machine!Enjoy

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      Another T206 coming for this weekend’s video!

  • @foodhead4677
    @foodhead4677 Рік тому

    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.

  • @gtr1952
    @gtr1952 2 роки тому +1

    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

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      Yes this is the G1000nxi which also has a higher resolution than the previous gen G1000. Thanks for watching!

  • @pnorva
    @pnorva 2 роки тому

    Beautiful airplane!

  • @bernardanderson3758
    @bernardanderson3758 2 роки тому +1

    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

  • @bashardahabra
    @bashardahabra Рік тому

    Can you please advise what mounts are you using for the GoPro on the windshields front and side?

  • @jammusique
    @jammusique 2 роки тому +2

    Great as always! Why can't you get a new Skylane at present?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      Sold out until late ‘22. Thanks for watching.

  • @renoguy25
    @renoguy25 2 роки тому +1

    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

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      Glad it was helpful and you enjoyed it! Thank you! Happy Holidays!

  • @bernardanderson3758
    @bernardanderson3758 2 роки тому

    The castering nose gear steering is like on the Honda Jet and the Grumman Aircraft Tiger and cheetah 🐆

  • @valblome4913
    @valblome4913 2 роки тому +1

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      The door handles are actually from a BMW 3 series!

    • @valblome4913
      @valblome4913 2 роки тому

      @@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.

  • @rickdl5022
    @rickdl5022 2 роки тому +2

    Cessna shouldn’t have stopped C152 production, the best trainer ever

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +5

      Agree and updated 152 would be a real seller!

  • @lostinasia25
    @lostinasia25 2 роки тому +6

    The electric adjustable seats are what they need in the Cessna line. No more seats sliding back on takeoff.

  • @cfinoman
    @cfinoman Рік тому

    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

  • @spiro5327
    @spiro5327 2 роки тому +1

    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

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +2

      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!

  • @elpowderman
    @elpowderman 2 роки тому +7

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +13

      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!

  • @ulyssesja9465
    @ulyssesja9465 2 роки тому

    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

  • @Matt-zc1qs
    @Matt-zc1qs Рік тому +1

    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.

  • @lcprivatepilot1969
    @lcprivatepilot1969 Рік тому

    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)

  • @Joaocanguru
    @Joaocanguru 9 місяців тому

    What kind of camera did you use to record the "final thoughts" of the video. thks.

  • @Padie600
    @Padie600 Рік тому +1

    Its the most well built plane I've seen on this streets

  • @eksemos
    @eksemos Рік тому

    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?

  • @Clovescp
    @Clovescp 2 роки тому +1

    🛩️ 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" ! 🛩️ 🇧🇷

  • @chcr8150
    @chcr8150 2 роки тому +2

    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!

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      That true - but honestly didn’t notice the noise level at 2700 RPM as being high or even noticeable. Thanks for watching.

  • @ismailcift
    @ismailcift 2 роки тому +1

    It's like a highwing cherokee :)

  • @ATH_Berkshire
    @ATH_Berkshire 8 місяців тому

    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
      @FlyingwithRich  8 місяців тому

      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.

  • @gclaytony
    @gclaytony 2 роки тому

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      It's a pretty roomy airplane - worth checking out. They did a nice job on the interior - electric seats! Thanks for watching!

  • @backcountyrpilot
    @backcountyrpilot 5 місяців тому

    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.

  • @umami0247
    @umami0247 2 роки тому

    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.

  • @michaelbarker742
    @michaelbarker742 2 роки тому +1

    Hand crank roll down/up Windows would be my ask.

  • @envitech02
    @envitech02 Рік тому

    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.

  • @916medic
    @916medic Рік тому

    Would they make a taildragger version.

  • @zevnafte5168
    @zevnafte5168 2 роки тому +2

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      I agree - looking forward to flying one!

  • @donjohnston3776
    @donjohnston3776 2 роки тому +3

    I think the TDI/fadec version will be desired by more of your customers

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      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.

    • @WattsUpDev
      @WattsUpDev 2 роки тому

      @@FlyingwithRich Can you confirm the TDI’s useful load with full tank?

  • @TheGbelcher
    @TheGbelcher 2 роки тому +2

    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?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      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.

  • @allamericandude15
    @allamericandude15 Рік тому

    Sounded like some folks were struggling in the pattern while you landed lol

  • @davidboyle3032
    @davidboyle3032 2 роки тому +2

    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

    • @quattro4468
      @quattro4468 2 роки тому +1

      What if youre not a fat american tho?

    • @adfa5288
      @adfa5288 9 місяців тому

      @ 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

  • @yacahumax1431
    @yacahumax1431 Рік тому

    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

  • @Parker53151
    @Parker53151 2 роки тому +3

    Which manufacturer supplies the TDI engine, and how does the TDI performance compare with the avgas engines?

    • @milonangele6611
      @milonangele6611 2 роки тому

      It’s the CD170 from Continental

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      Continental. Here is all the info: www.tecnam.com/aircraft/p2010-170hp-diesel/

    • @Parker53151
      @Parker53151 2 роки тому

      @@FlyingwithRich Thanks.

  • @sqvision
    @sqvision 2 роки тому

    I believe Cessna’s late models have synthetic vision? The Tecnam does not. Or it’s an option at both?

  • @GT47179
    @GT47179 2 роки тому +1

    Easy start ups 😎

  • @josephlevin3546
    @josephlevin3546 2 роки тому

    What happened with the flaps?

  • @gorgly123
    @gorgly123 2 роки тому

    What is the comparison on Useful load between 182 and Tecnam?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      850 lbs use file load on this particular 2010. I think most Skylanes come out with about 1000 lbs useful load.

  • @carloscortes5570
    @carloscortes5570 2 роки тому

    Sounded like a cessna sky lane commercial to me!😂😂😂🤔

  • @tonyrowland9216
    @tonyrowland9216 2 роки тому

    I am looking to replace a 172. Just found it’s replacement. How hard is the transition from steam gage to glass?

  • @brianb5594
    @brianb5594 2 роки тому +1

    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...

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      The 182 has a little more useful load of around 1100 lbs depending on options.

    • @brianb5594
      @brianb5594 2 роки тому +1

      @@FlyingwithRich figured that with the added HP. Thanks Rich!

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      @@brianb5594 no problem!

  • @seandonaldson8810
    @seandonaldson8810 2 роки тому

    Hi Rich
    Great review of the aircraft…..thanks.
    Can I ask how you run the audio in your review?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      There are plenty of audio adapters you can find in pilot shops for various cameras.

    • @seandonaldson8810
      @seandonaldson8810 2 роки тому

      @@FlyingwithRich Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
      I just came across your channel recently and really enjoy your content.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      @@seandonaldson8810 thanks a lot! I appreciate it!

  • @chrismcleod1796
    @chrismcleod1796 2 роки тому

    i would like to know how it would handle on floats ..

  • @Taser1-1
    @Taser1-1 2 роки тому +1

    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.

  • @PilotDaveAviation
    @PilotDaveAviation 2 роки тому

    What's the useful load for this aircraft.... thanks for sharing

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +2

      800 lbs. Thank you for watching!

    • @PilotDaveAviation
      @PilotDaveAviation 2 роки тому

      @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

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      @@PilotDaveAviation Well let us know if you're serious! We still have it in our inventory!

  • @paulchristensen7963
    @paulchristensen7963 2 роки тому +2

    Isn't top of the white band on the ASI the flap placard?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      Full flaps range.

    • @taildraggerpilotch
      @taildraggerpilotch 2 роки тому

      @@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).

  • @FlightSimDude
    @FlightSimDude 2 роки тому

    👍👍👍👍👍

  • @thomasgreen1688
    @thomasgreen1688 2 роки тому

    Interesting airplane. Seems a bit more sexy than a 182. Interior way better.

  • @guillermo_hoyos.
    @guillermo_hoyos. 2 роки тому

    Sera la competencia del Cirrus SR20.y más economico

  • @mytubehkjt
    @mytubehkjt 2 роки тому

    Hi Rich. Vfe white arc. ~91kts by the look... ;-)

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      Yeah I know but Vfe is max flap extension. We were looking for approach flaps which are usually outside the white arc.

  • @USNVA11
    @USNVA11 2 роки тому +11

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      Good call!

    • @paulsinthunava755
      @paulsinthunava755 2 роки тому +1

      And of course with only 180HP!

    • @USNVA11
      @USNVA11 2 роки тому +1

      @@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.

    • @renard8137
      @renard8137 2 роки тому +1

      600.000$ for 130kts🤐

    • @WattsUpDev
      @WattsUpDev 2 роки тому

      That cost is way off

  • @paulo7200
    @paulo7200 2 роки тому

    Any forthcoming retractable version?

  • @matthewbrinker6615
    @matthewbrinker6615 2 роки тому +1

    I’m stuck with renting until I die. Great.

  • @keyboardflyer7384
    @keyboardflyer7384 2 роки тому

    anyone knows what model of Oakley sunglasses the pilot is using?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      I'm the pilot - honestly don't know the model!

    • @keyboardflyer7384
      @keyboardflyer7384 2 роки тому

      @@FlyingwithRich haha thanks anyway. will look it up the interweb

  • @noyfub
    @noyfub 2 роки тому

    You have the white ribbon on the airspeed for flaps?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      White arc could mean full flap range in a lot of aircraft. Tecnam’s manual is not clear. Thanks for watching!

    • @draudio2u
      @draudio2u Рік тому

      Curious why the flaps were oscillating when you mentioned "film that". Is that a safety feature for flap speed?

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  Рік тому

      That was a malfunction of the flaps. I think a position switch was bad.

  • @AFO3310
    @AFO3310 2 роки тому +3

    It's like a 172, DA40 and SR20 came together and each gave 33% to make a baby and this is the outcome

  • @stephenst-pierre9533
    @stephenst-pierre9533 Рік тому

    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.

  • @MSJDesign
    @MSJDesign 2 роки тому

    Is it a caster nose wheel?

  • @cwehbe
    @cwehbe 2 роки тому

    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.

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      They do have a Diesel Fadec version, but I understand what you mean.

  • @brandonb417
    @brandonb417 2 роки тому +1

    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.

  • @jonclassical2024
    @jonclassical2024 2 роки тому +1

    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?!?!

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому

      Nope. That’s what you saw. It’s a maintenance issue.

    • @randominternet5586
      @randominternet5586 2 роки тому

      @@FlyingwithRich It could be a safety feature as well if there was a flap extension command above flap speeds.

  • @claytondavy3468
    @claytondavy3468 2 роки тому

    Im curious, are you a dealer for these aircraft ?

  • @duckhorn
    @duckhorn 2 роки тому

    does it include apple carplay?

  • @michellonergan8517
    @michellonergan8517 2 роки тому

    Is it full IFR, with deicing kit

    • @FlyingwithRich
      @FlyingwithRich  2 роки тому +1

      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.

    • @michellonergan8517
      @michellonergan8517 2 роки тому +1

      @@FlyingwithRich Thank you sir.

  • @sikhumbuzobulose6748
    @sikhumbuzobulose6748 2 роки тому

    Nice plane, how much does it cost?