Check out the BN2P Islander. I have over 5000hrs in the islander alone and all island and bush type flying. Single pilot, 9pax 1 crew. Awesome aircraft.
This is the Lycoming IE2 engine which is a fuel injected, turbo and all electronic ignition and full FADEC controlled. It has been EASA certified. Tecnam is very smart to use this engine as it is dual fuel (100LL and UL 100) and generates plenty or HP. The prop control is not a combined fuel/prop control. The FADEC computers adjust fuel flow based on density altitude and other engine parameters. The prop control controls prop pitch and thus will affect engine RPM based on throttle position.
I really like this plane. They’ve done a great job - single pilot, a clean design, and keeping it spacious inside (the big windows help). But the max speed just keeps me eying low end turbines, esp. at that price. But i still find it gorgeous.
@@lardal1502 I think it depends on the application. As a mission I tend to think about taking non-paying passengers/friends somewhere within low hundreds to a few thousand miles max, maybe 4-12 people plus baggage. So “decent speed/range given that weight.” My mission doesn’t really require it to be hyper competitive commercially but if I was doing cargo for hire that might be a different story.
I agree. I read a test article on this plane. Apparently maximum cruise is 84% power and burns over 60 gph total. 50 gph total nets you about 170kts or so. Very much in the same range as a turbine Kodiak for example. That said, I am sure Cape Air knows their operations to the most excruciating detail and stayed with pistons and avgas for good reason.
@@randallkelley3600 Higher maintenance costs given the short hop, high frequency service that Cape Air would subject these to. A number of them are going to be doing the 30 mile HYA-ACK run 10-14 times a day each way. That's a lot of cycles to put on a turboprop engine.
Awesome Aircraft, love the content you create I'm Columbus Ga, pursuing my private pilot license. You inspire me Big Dogg. Definitely appreciate everything you do..
Mojo...I'm really impressed with your reviews...it has helped me rekindle and returned to flying and decide whether LSA or private pilot certification...probably LSA..lots to choose from.
Just watched your video on the P92, and saw this airframe on their website, had to look at it, glad I could count on your articulate nature again on THIS aircraft. Easy Flying and keep the blue side up, Friend
Hey man! Thank you very much this is the first time I see you in your vlog. I always watch your videos almost everyday but I never knew that it is you. Keep making more videos man. Thank you again
It won't be. It's a solution without a problem. There is no situation where this is superior to more closely classed turbines and turboprops, most specifically the Vision, the Hondajet, and and the Phenom 100, just off the top of my head. They are a bit more expensive, but have better hourly costs.
One important spec with these short hop planes is take-off and landing distance. These planes come into their own when they are used on shorter back country strips.
This has the same, or even longer, takeoff and landing distance as other comparable aircraft in its weight class. It's really not an impressive plane when you look at the competition.
I 1st heard of the Technam from brotha Russ Can Fly's channel this past yr. Very interestin. Keep the plane reviews coming. Nice hat #salute my gud brotha!!!!!
I just looked up this plane up on flight radar 24 and it's currently in the air in Alaska! Anchorage to Keni 25 min flights. Looks like they make these round trips all day.
Thanks for another great review and demystifying modern day flight. What is your belief on the origins of flight? Should I join group for these answers?
Kenai Aviation in Kenai Alaska bought this specific aircraft. I have flown in it as a passenger it does not like my 6 foot three frame and will be training in it as a pilot the front is a little bigger. Thank you for a good review. I’ll let you know what I think. Thus far it has been a great aircraft.
with this price and performance range, it will be difficult to compete with the Cessna 208 Caravan, which has been consolidated in the market for over 40 years, carries more passengers and more cargo capacity with just one engine (which reduces maintenance costs) and also you can find used units in excellent condition for half the price.
this is very similar to the norman-britten islander from England. 9 passengers in a stol design and piston engines. the islander originally had,( and still uses), the lycoming 540 but now has many versions with turbines
As a career long salesman of business jets, turboprops and pistons, I have always respected Tecnam albeit as a bit of a 2nd tier manufacturer of private aircraft. And I always liked the P2012 also. But I always assumed that the aircraft had a price point of about $1.5-2M. When I heard you say that it is $3M, my jaw dropped. Who would buy this aircraft when a new Cessna Grand Caravan EX costs about $500k less while carrying up to 12 pax with more payload, more range and way better product support in a global service center network with a proliferation of Caravans around the world. Are you SURE about this? If its true, it would be really good to hear from people who have paid $3m for theirs and why they didn't choose a Grand Caravan EX. Thanks & keep up your mojo !
Markus, I thought much of the same at first glance. I then researched the origins of the aircraft and its intended mission. Cape Air a small part 121 Airline based in the US is the largest customer of the 2012 and the catalyst for many of the design features. They are trying to replace their fleet of (around 80) Cessna 402C. Cape air flies mainly short flights out of smaller airports feeding larger ones, Island hopping and Point to point flight between tourist destinations. They approached Cessna about a new aircraft, but they weren't really interested. From talking to a Cape Air pilot, they wanted to keep 2 engines (Redundancy) and the low fuel burn (especially at lower altitudes) provided by the 402s Piston engines The 2012 is equipped with the latest FADEC controlled Lycoming engine. They also simplified many systems in order to keep maintenance and cost to minimum: Fixed gear, Simple flight controls, TKS Icing vs Boots, etc. Im sure Cape Air did not pay 3 million per aircraft, and to other small commercial operators the twin engine, low fuel burn, and simple systems might outweigh the price, range and payload factors. I have some time flying a caravan and it would be hard for me to buy a 2012 over that, but depending on ones mission I could see an argument. Cheers
@@wncav8er thanks a lot for this input. Yes - I have followed Cape Air for a while and aware. If they mandated a twin - that's all that's needed. Its a big price to pay but so long as they paid a lot less than the $3m unit price, it would make sense if support is sufficient. I'll go check out the DOCs between the 3 models...especially fuel flow. I just remembered that the US limits the Grand Caravan to 9 pax so my argument about more pax is moot. I live overseas and the limit is 12 pax here for a grand caravan... cheers to you !
I could certainly be wrong but I think the Prop levers have nothing to do with fuel management. I thought the fadec would set the best fuel flow given the throttle position.
FINALLY! An aircraft designer who creates separate doors for the copilot AND the pilot AND the other passengers!! I never understood the seeming stupidity behind the small Piper's single door design even though I like Pipers!
Way cooler than the P2006. It also costs a lot more though. LOL I would rather sacrifice a little speed to have more interior room. I like this plane. It's a SUV instead of a sports car.
Yes thank you nice piece of equipment, an there should be a good market for it. An should lend itself, in the future, to a fairly easy conversion to electric powered. Good luck to them.
Hi , this is an absolute different concept. The cabin is not compresed , so there is no reason to add a much more expensive turboprop engine . As well oxygen, it is oriented for FL100 limit. I can not flight it because of PPL license, but as commercial line (for example as aero taxi or between islands whatever, it is good proposal, A better solution could be with diesel piston engine
@@dimitriskaligeris5506 Think of my vision like a double Cirrus SR22T with one pilot. RR M250s are pricey ($260-300K) but they do exist. I could not find a 375HP diesel aviation engine. I do agree alternatives to 100-LL, etc. are needed.
Hi Mike , a request : I understand more in kiloneters and miles and noting in nautical miles and please mention the data in kilometers or miles alongwith nautical miles
This plane was basically designed in collaboration with Cape Air to replace their fleet of Cessna 402s in their business of short hop commuter flights and EAS contracts.
And ... we have a TON of problems with them! I work for Cape Air, and aside from the avionics and the ease of loading, and more leg room, it stops there. Very disappointed.
@@twisterzmanwould you be wiling to go more indept on the down sides of this aircraft seeing you have first hand experience with it? Currently looking into purchasing 2 but would love feedback
@TheSherrbert we have 30 in our fleet. Massive oil issues in the beginning, using excessive amounts. (A quart every 30 minutes) but that is a lycoming problem, which they've more or less solved. The heater blowers are not good. The electrical is problematic, AOA sensors, and fuel pump/ filter issues. We fly these 4 times a day tho, and I will admit, they are getting better as time goes on. The avionics are amazing, it does fly nice but slow. As a weekend warrior plane, should be great. If you are looking to hot lap fly these, idk. We were seeing big cht temps on climbout, nearing 500°, but we've adjusted settings. It's not true fadec, you still have prop feathering . Max take off is 8113lbs, and with 8 passengers and luggage, you're limiting fuel range then. We burn about 55 gallons on 180 nautical, should be better. TKS works very well, providing icing is minimal. Struts will over extend, tire wear is high on the mains. Pros and cons for sure. Horizontal stabs buffet like crazy as well, and it's loud.
The smaller twin P2006 has retractable gears.....Strange that Tecnam went for the fixed gears design on this new heavier twin.... With retractable gears the P2012 would probably cruise well above 180 kt at 80% power and the gears up configuration would also help to maintain a better single engine positive rate. As for the power plants , for example , a pair of light weight Rolls- Royce M-250 / 420 shp would boost the performance numbers and operators could stay away from the problematic AVGAS supply at remote airports.... These light weight turbines have a reasonable fuel consumption and comes with a better safety track record vs engine failure than their pistons cousins.... Yes the amount of fuel required on board for the same range is greater but turbines are way lighter for the same horsepower output than the piston engines. At last a beautiful design from Italy that could benefit from a a gear up jet fuel smell upgrade...
I don't believe it can compete with, planes such as Pilatus, Kodiak, Caravan. For bigginers I believe its under powered. The Italians, try to imitate the Rockwell commander 500. Except its fixed gear. Just my humble opinion.
Good point. It seems like its a lot of money for a plane that can't go that fast. But then it might being aimed at the short hop tourist markets in places like Africa, Asia and the Pacific, where a less technical plane might be a damn sight easier to operate, maintain, get pilots for, etc.
It was designed and engineered according to Cape Air's requirements and specifications for the US market. I heard that a turboprop version is under study for the rest of the world where avgas is difficult or impossible to find. The Pilatus, Kodiak and Caravan are designed with a different target in mind and are single engines, the P2012 is meant to replace the Cessna 402 at Cape Air.
Did I read correctly that the Tecnam's fuel burn is over .3kg/km while the Piaggio P180 Avanti Evo burns .22kg/km (flying at 318kn...). And comparing Pilatus PC-12 it consumes 250 l/h compared to Tecnam's 117 l/h. But since the Pilatus is cruising at 265 kn (and Piaggio's number includes takeoff, climbs etc. for the flight) compared to Tecnam's 170 kn, their consumption is actually not that horribly far off? The Tecnam doesn't really save in other than capital costs, and I guess despite needing overhauls more often, it's probably still somewhat cheaper in maintenance than a pressurised business turboprop like the Piaggio and Pilatus? Or do the longer TBOs of the Piaggio and Pilatus even it out? No doubt the Tecnam is far, far simpler. Of course on shorter routes the Tecnam won't use as much fuel climbing up to high altitude, but is there that much of a difference, since the Piaggio climbs to FL250 in 10 min? So is it true that with the Tecnam costs won't be wildly cheaper for many types of operations compared to far better performing and more comfortable turboprops, the main advantage is easier raising the much lower capital / lower lease payments?
Pardon me this is a little out of sync but what is a good plane I could put a focke and wulf assuming it is feasible mechanically. Money of course is a factor but would it be tasteful. I'm not putting a. AudRS engine into a chevy cobalt even if it would make sense to attempt
I think they wanna bring a couple of these planes in to Hawaii for inter island travels but they look small on the inside....would be hard for the elderly to get in and out....I wish they would bring back the twin OTTER...
Tbh with pressurization it'll be pretty niche, and for the fuel you're burning and amount your carrying it's just too slow. Better options were built in the 60s-70s-80s.
I saw Tecnam is developing an electric engine version together with Rolls Royce for norwegian regional airline Widerøe. I really wonder if they can make it work.
Smaller airport to airport [Airfield] runs - yes. But nowadays with the risk of small arms fire, RPGs etc: you need a good ceiling. You would also need good weather mostly to operate it. With 9 pax, it would have to be a "premium" service commercially: Kaduna to Abuja return, Kano to Abuja return etc. Abuja to Makurdi or Otukpo... Lagos to Ibadan, or Lagos Ilorin etc... With the range of the aircraft: it can do much longer flights even Lagos to Abuja - but it would NOT be a comfortable prospect. Long [2+ hours], turbulent etc...
@@josephc.9520 Parts of Nigeria are under some "bandit"/ Terrorist pressure: these are gangs of terrorists, some of who are linked to Boko Haram, and other extremist groups - as well as gangs of cattle rustlers and many gangs who have gone into kidnapping. They are quite heavily armed: a lot of small arms and RPG from looted warehouses in Libya have trickled down to Nigeria now...
In my opinion Tecnam, though beautifully designed, is ridiculously over-priced and underpowered. You get the consumption of a Cessna 182 with the performance of a 172 and at a price more than both those. Ten out of ten for beauty of design though.
Hefty tag. Might be almost proportional to cirrus sr22 but that bird is quite overpriced as well. It might be a limited market and a semi complex bird but damn. It's not even pressurized. It's pretty much a 1950 plane.
This is way larger than a SR22, they aren't even close to the same class. This would be closer to the Vision or Hondajet, and it does nothing better than those. 3m$ for this just doesn't make sense. I'd much, much rather put down the extra money on a Visionjet or Hondajet, and have a far better performing aircraft. Its the "poor mans private jet", except that poor men don't have private jets. The SR22 is a small private plane next to this lumbering oaf of an aircraft.
He explained that it's designed for commercial-type operations in lower population areas. Look at island hopping around the Caribbean or from Florida to the Bahamas. It costs less than a Kodiak, Caravan, or Twin Otter etc...Light cargo or small passenger plane. It may find use in Alaska or Canada.
@@stonehorn4641 I'm aware it's bigger :) I was talking about similar price/size ratio to the Sr22. I'm also aware that this is a crude plane that they want 3 mill for.
should be $1.7M no more with pistons. Sure hope you have prepared the engineering for small turbines already...of course you have and larger wheels too - you know what is coming. ...Also needs the option to have much larger tires. Too small/might not make it for some strips I have been on as a bush pilot in BC Canada.
Got that Aero Commander vibe
Yh no
Its an islander mixed with a 402
Check out the BN2P Islander. I have over 5000hrs in the islander alone and all island and bush type flying. Single pilot, 9pax 1 crew. Awesome aircraft.
i also have over 5000 in the BN2P with alot of it bush time and what i can say itz just modernized Bn
This is the Lycoming IE2 engine which is a fuel injected, turbo and all electronic ignition and full FADEC controlled. It has been EASA certified. Tecnam is very smart to use this engine as it is dual fuel (100LL and UL 100) and generates plenty or HP. The prop control is not a combined fuel/prop control. The FADEC computers adjust fuel flow based on density altitude and other engine parameters. The prop control controls prop pitch and thus will affect engine RPM based on throttle position.
I’m so happy I got to see your plane at Sun and fun Yesterday. Sadly I could find you but I had a great time.
The way those main landing gear are made tells me that it has been built to be made retractable as an option in the future
I wonder if there is a low drag option for the fixed (as in wheel spats)??
No retracts are planned
I really like this plane. They’ve done a great job - single pilot, a clean design, and keeping it spacious inside (the big windows help). But the max speed just keeps me eying low end turbines, esp. at that price. But i still find it gorgeous.
Exactly
turbine would use more fuel and require bigger tanks. More fuel means less passengers and lower income for commercial operators.
@@lardal1502 I think it depends on the application. As a mission I tend to think about taking non-paying passengers/friends somewhere within low hundreds to a few thousand miles max, maybe 4-12 people plus baggage. So “decent speed/range given that weight.” My mission doesn’t really require it to be hyper competitive commercially but if I was doing cargo for hire that might be a different story.
I agree. I read a test article on this plane. Apparently maximum cruise is 84% power and burns over 60 gph total. 50 gph total nets you about 170kts or so. Very much in the same range as a turbine Kodiak for example. That said, I am sure Cape Air knows their operations to the most excruciating detail and stayed with pistons and avgas for good reason.
@@randallkelley3600 Higher maintenance costs given the short hop, high frequency service that Cape Air would subject these to. A number of them are going to be doing the 30 mile HYA-ACK run 10-14 times a day each way. That's a lot of cycles to put on a turboprop engine.
Wow by looking at the lower engine duck, the intercooler efficiency should be off the charts with that nice low pressure zone on the bottom.
Awesome Aircraft, love the content you create I'm Columbus Ga, pursuing my private pilot license. You inspire me Big Dogg. Definitely appreciate everything you do..
Mojo...I'm really impressed with your reviews...it has helped me rekindle and returned to flying and decide whether LSA or private pilot certification...probably LSA..lots to choose from.
Thanks for the review of this beauty! Been following them, and you!
Just watched your video on the P92, and saw this airframe on their website, had to look at it, glad I could count on your articulate nature again on THIS aircraft.
Easy Flying and keep the blue side up, Friend
Hey man! Thank you very much this is the first time I see you in your vlog. I always watch your videos almost everyday but I never knew that it is you. Keep making more videos man. Thank you again
This is very comprehensive explanation of a very game changing aircraft.
Damn! That thing looks sleek!
$3M is nuts. Great video!
These are gorgeous! Been following them, but thanks for the video!
This thing looks awesome! Hope its a success!
It won't be. It's a solution without a problem. There is no situation where this is superior to more closely classed turbines and turboprops, most specifically the Vision, the Hondajet, and and the Phenom 100, just off the top of my head. They are a bit more expensive, but have better hourly costs.
One important spec with these short hop planes is take-off and landing distance. These planes come into their own when they are used on shorter back country strips.
This airplane reminds me of a twin otter
This has the same, or even longer, takeoff and landing distance as other comparable aircraft in its weight class. It's really not an impressive plane when you look at the competition.
@@julianbrelsford Like a mini Otter that costs a lot less.
I 1st heard of the Technam from brotha Russ Can Fly's channel this past yr. Very interestin. Keep the plane reviews coming. Nice hat #salute my gud brotha!!!!!
Love is airplane!!!!!! I will get this for my family if I could.
I just looked up this plane up on flight radar 24 and it's currently in the air in Alaska! Anchorage to Keni 25 min flights. Looks like they make these round trips all day.
This will work just right for me and family and work .
Nice to see your videos again! Saludos desde MMGL
Thanks for another great review and demystifying modern day flight.
What is your belief on the origins of flight? Should I join group for these answers?
Always look forward to your reports from Sun N Fun. They are outstanding.
Kenai Aviation in Kenai Alaska bought this specific aircraft. I have flown in it as a passenger it does not like my 6 foot three frame and will be training in it as a pilot the front is a little bigger. Thank you for a good review. I’ll let you know what I think. Thus far it has been a great aircraft.
with this price and performance range, it will be difficult to compete with the Cessna 208 Caravan, which has been consolidated in the market for over 40 years, carries more passengers and more cargo capacity with just one engine (which reduces maintenance costs) and also you can find used units in excellent condition for half the price.
Cape Air would disagree. The plane was designed really for them.
That is a great looking aircraft . Doesn't look like a lot for 3 million though in my opinion.
this is very similar to the norman-britten islander from England. 9 passengers in a stol design and piston engines. the islander originally had,( and still uses), the lycoming 540 but now has many versions with turbines
The strangest version is the Trilslander , what a trippy looking thing, Its like its trying to be an MD11.
As a career long salesman of business jets, turboprops and pistons, I have always respected Tecnam albeit as a bit of a 2nd tier manufacturer of private aircraft. And I always liked the P2012 also. But I always assumed that the aircraft had a price point of about $1.5-2M. When I heard you say that it is $3M, my jaw dropped. Who would buy this aircraft when a new Cessna Grand Caravan EX costs about $500k less while carrying up to 12 pax with more payload, more range and way better product support in a global service center network with a proliferation of Caravans around the world. Are you SURE about this? If its true, it would be really good to hear from people who have paid $3m for theirs and why they didn't choose a Grand Caravan EX. Thanks & keep up your mojo !
Markus, I thought much of the same at first glance. I then researched the origins of the aircraft and its intended mission. Cape Air a small part 121 Airline based in the US is the largest customer of the 2012 and the catalyst for many of the design features. They are trying to replace their fleet of (around 80) Cessna 402C. Cape air flies mainly short flights out of smaller airports feeding larger ones, Island hopping and Point to point flight between tourist destinations. They approached Cessna about a new aircraft, but they weren't really interested. From talking to a Cape Air pilot, they wanted to keep 2 engines (Redundancy) and the low fuel burn (especially at lower altitudes) provided by the 402s Piston engines The 2012 is equipped with the latest FADEC controlled Lycoming engine. They also simplified many systems in order to keep maintenance and cost to minimum: Fixed gear, Simple flight controls, TKS Icing vs Boots, etc. Im sure Cape Air did not pay 3 million per aircraft, and to other small commercial operators the twin engine, low fuel burn, and simple systems might outweigh the price, range and payload factors. I have some time flying a caravan and it would be hard for me to buy a 2012 over that, but depending on ones mission I could see an argument. Cheers
@@wncav8er thanks a lot for this input. Yes - I have followed Cape Air for a while and aware. If they mandated a twin - that's all that's needed. Its a big price to pay but so long as they paid a lot less than the $3m unit price, it would make sense if support is sufficient. I'll go check out the DOCs between the 3 models...especially fuel flow. I just remembered that the US limits the Grand Caravan to 9 pax so my argument about more pax is moot. I live overseas and the limit is 12 pax here for a grand caravan... cheers to you !
I could certainly be wrong but I think the Prop levers have nothing to do with fuel management. I thought the fadec would set the best fuel flow given the throttle position.
Piston engine airplanes are common where I live. I have flown on scheduled flights in Navahos and Cherokee 6s.
So, are we calling this a mini Dash 8, or modernized Commander?
In appearance it definitely has some things in common with the Twin Otter and its larger derivatives, the Dash 7 and later the Dash 8.
Such a versatile bird!
FINALLY! An aircraft designer who creates separate doors for the copilot AND the pilot AND the other passengers!! I never understood the seeming stupidity behind the small Piper's single door design even though I like Pipers!
The single door on a Piper as told told to me in the 70s (I was young) was for the strength of the airframe.
Mike, looks like a versatal plane. Would be a great plane for a large family. Can a bathroom be installed in the back?
Love your videos. Mark in SC
Now that's a great plane
Beautiful aircraft would love to fly it
Nice work
Nice job Mike!
I've never looked at a High Wing and thought, "oh, that's nice, I want one of those".
That still holds true today.
On the sidebar here, there is Paul Lucas flying on a Traveller!
Very nice!
Great review 👍🏾👍🏾
Good job Mike
I always like your vids, like the hat too
Will the lycoming use just avgas or will it be able to use other fuel types such as jetA1 or petrol?
I think you mean Part 135, Also there were plenty of piston twins in the past that held just as many people. Cessna 402, Chieftain ect...
I think it will be popular between small islands... Sure Tecnam will add some floats soon...
Way cooler than the P2006. It also costs a lot more though. LOL I would rather sacrifice a little speed to have more interior room. I like this plane. It's a SUV instead of a sports car.
propellers that close to the door seem a lil scary if u had to bail out
There are quite a few twin piston engine air raft capable of carrying 10 passengers plus the pilot.
How many cost 3 million brand new?
Love it,can you do a video of Eflyer 800 too?
Very Nice Bro! Get Good People/Pilots!
Yes thank you nice piece of equipment, an there should be a good market for it. An should lend itself, in the future, to a fairly easy conversion to electric powered. Good luck to them.
I like the usmc boonie cover.
Perfect candidate for the new smaller GA turboprop enines
For 3mill it better be turbo prop!!
used Cessna 208 Caravan for the half price
@@renatoigmed would pick the 208. Although, this aircraft does look sweet
1/2 a mil for the panel! :(
NICE!!! Add wheel fairings, oxygen and 2 Rolls Royce M250s and go faster above FL19 while carrying another 400 lbs of people, freight or fuel
Hi , this is an absolute different concept.
The cabin is not compresed , so there is no reason to add a much more expensive turboprop engine . As well oxygen, it is oriented for FL100 limit.
I can not flight it because of PPL license, but as commercial line (for example as aero taxi or between islands whatever, it is good proposal,
A better solution could be with diesel piston engine
@@dimitriskaligeris5506 Think of my vision like a double Cirrus SR22T with one pilot. RR M250s are pricey ($260-300K) but they do exist. I could not find a 375HP diesel aviation engine. I do agree alternatives to 100-LL, etc. are needed.
@@TonyK3130 Continental has a 300HP, may be snecma have one
So build a completely different aircraft
my Man.I didn't see the complete video about these plane.is it not felt the landing gears?
Hi Mike , a request : I understand more in kiloneters and miles and noting in nautical miles and please mention the data in kilometers or miles alongwith nautical miles
Would make Great Sense for a little place here in the UK By the name of Alderney EGJA and the surrounding Islands
That engine needs to go in the Piper m350 or even the SR22
That is what I thought also.
This plane was basically designed in collaboration with Cape Air to replace their fleet of Cessna 402s in their business of short hop commuter flights and EAS contracts.
but for 3 million? the best option would be to buy a used Cessna Caravan right away for half the price.
And ... we have a TON of problems with them! I work for Cape Air, and aside from the avionics and the ease of loading, and more leg room, it stops there. Very disappointed.
@@twisterzman They're Italian, what do you expect. All style, little substance.
@@twisterzmanwould you be wiling to go more indept on the down sides of this aircraft seeing you have first hand experience with it?
Currently looking into purchasing 2 but would love feedback
@TheSherrbert we have 30 in our fleet. Massive oil issues in the beginning, using excessive amounts. (A quart every 30 minutes) but that is a lycoming problem, which they've more or less solved. The heater blowers are not good. The electrical is problematic, AOA sensors, and fuel pump/ filter issues.
We fly these 4 times a day tho, and I will admit, they are getting better as time goes on. The avionics are amazing, it does fly nice but slow. As a weekend warrior plane, should be great. If you are looking to hot lap fly these, idk. We were seeing big cht temps on climbout, nearing 500°, but we've adjusted settings. It's not true fadec, you still have prop feathering . Max take off is 8113lbs, and with 8 passengers and luggage, you're limiting fuel range then. We burn about 55 gallons on 180 nautical, should be better. TKS works very well, providing icing is minimal. Struts will over extend, tire wear is high on the mains. Pros and cons for sure. Horizontal stabs buffet like crazy as well, and it's loud.
Oval windows and a service ceiling of 19,000 feet is it slightly pressurize?
The smaller twin P2006 has retractable gears.....Strange that Tecnam went for the fixed gears design on this new heavier twin....
With retractable gears the P2012 would probably cruise well above 180 kt at 80% power and the gears up configuration would also help to maintain a better single engine positive rate.
As for the power plants , for example , a pair of light weight Rolls- Royce M-250 / 420 shp would boost the performance numbers and operators could stay away from the problematic AVGAS supply at remote airports....
These light weight turbines have a reasonable fuel consumption and comes with a better safety track record vs engine failure than their pistons cousins....
Yes the amount of fuel required on board for the same range is greater but turbines are way lighter for the same horsepower output than the piston engines.
At last a beautiful design from Italy that could benefit from a a gear up jet fuel smell upgrade...
Probably wanted to appeal to the missionaries who need simplicity and lower operating costs.
A larger market to sell more planes to.
Cape Air asked for fixed gear on this machine.
I don't believe it can compete with, planes such as Pilatus, Kodiak, Caravan. For bigginers I believe its under powered. The Italians, try to imitate the Rockwell commander 500. Except its fixed gear. Just my humble opinion.
Good point.
It seems like its a lot of money for a plane that can't go that fast. But then it might being aimed at the short hop tourist markets in places like Africa, Asia and the Pacific, where a less technical plane might be a damn sight easier to operate, maintain, get pilots for, etc.
It was designed and engineered according to Cape Air's requirements and specifications for the US market. I heard that a turboprop version is under study for the rest of the world where avgas is difficult or impossible to find. The Pilatus, Kodiak and Caravan are designed with a different target in mind and are single engines, the P2012 is meant to replace the Cessna 402 at Cape Air.
So do you happen to know if they have a cockpit poster to practice the flows? If so, how can I acquire one?
Amazing
For 3 million I'd expect the carpet not to have wrinkles in it.
Great replacement for an Britten-Norman BN-2B Islander.
Did I read correctly that the Tecnam's fuel burn is over .3kg/km while the Piaggio P180 Avanti Evo burns .22kg/km (flying at 318kn...).
And comparing Pilatus PC-12 it consumes 250 l/h compared to Tecnam's 117 l/h. But since the Pilatus is cruising at 265 kn (and Piaggio's number includes takeoff, climbs etc. for the flight) compared to Tecnam's 170 kn, their consumption is actually not that horribly far off?
The Tecnam doesn't really save in other than capital costs, and I guess despite needing overhauls more often, it's probably still somewhat cheaper in maintenance than a pressurised business turboprop like the Piaggio and Pilatus? Or do the longer TBOs of the Piaggio and Pilatus even it out? No doubt the Tecnam is far, far simpler.
Of course on shorter routes the Tecnam won't use as much fuel climbing up to high altitude, but is there that much of a difference, since the Piaggio climbs to FL250 in 10 min? So is it true that with the Tecnam costs won't be wildly cheaper for many types of operations compared to far better performing and more comfortable turboprops, the main advantage is easier raising the much lower capital / lower lease payments?
Pardon me this is a little out of sync but what is a good plane I could put a focke and wulf assuming it is feasible mechanically. Money of course is a factor but would it be tasteful. I'm not putting a. AudRS engine into a chevy cobalt even if it would make sense to attempt
Cool airframe but why bother with a piston twin? Turbine is cheaper in long run and fuel more available worldwide.
I think they wanna bring a couple of these planes in to Hawaii for inter island travels but they look small on the inside....would be hard for the elderly to get in and out....I wish they would bring back the twin OTTER...
Tbh with pressurization it'll be pretty niche, and for the fuel you're burning and amount your carrying it's just too slow. Better options were built in the 60s-70s-80s.
I saw Tecnam is developing an electric engine version together with Rolls Royce for norwegian regional airline Widerøe. I really wonder if they can make it work.
sir I want to watch electric commercial aircraft vedio , is it possible??? l am lover of your channel, best of luck go ahead
Reminds me of Rockwell commander.
I still think a version with retractable gear might appear for even higher cruise speeds.
คุณต้องคิดถึงความเป็นจริงมีร้านค้าอยู่เป็น 10 ล้านคุณเข้าไปซื้อกันอยู่ร้านเดียวกิน 9 ร้านเขาขายของไม่ได้เลยมันไม่ผิดกฎกติกาแต่เป็นการรักษาน้ำใจสังคมส่วนรวมคนกลุ่มใหญ่แล้วก็มีปัญหาอีกมากมายขอพักไว้ก่อน 5-6 เดือนขอยืนยันไม่ได้ห้าม
Hay Mike great video. Do you think this aircraft will do well in Nigeria? Peace out.
Smaller airport to airport [Airfield] runs - yes.
But nowadays with the risk of small arms fire, RPGs etc: you need a good ceiling.
You would also need good weather mostly to operate it.
With 9 pax, it would have to be a "premium" service commercially: Kaduna to Abuja return, Kano to Abuja return etc. Abuja to Makurdi or Otukpo...
Lagos to Ibadan, or Lagos Ilorin etc...
With the range of the aircraft: it can do much longer flights even Lagos to Abuja - but it would NOT be a comfortable prospect. Long [2+ hours], turbulent etc...
@@Yman83464z I thought you were joking about the RPGs took a hot second to realize your seriousness
@@josephc.9520 Parts of Nigeria are under some "bandit"/ Terrorist pressure: these are gangs of terrorists, some of who are linked to Boko Haram, and other extremist groups - as well as gangs of cattle rustlers and many gangs who have gone into kidnapping.
They are quite heavily armed: a lot of small arms and RPG from looted warehouses in Libya have trickled down to Nigeria now...
Should have went with a diesel like Diamond and the non retractable gear is a deal killer. For the price someone can get a caravan.
In my opinion Tecnam, though beautifully designed, is ridiculously over-priced and underpowered. You get the consumption of a Cessna 182 with the performance of a 172 and at a price more than both those. Ten out of ten for beauty of design though.
Hefty tag. Might be almost proportional to cirrus sr22 but that bird is quite overpriced as well. It might be a limited market and a semi complex bird but damn. It's not even pressurized. It's pretty much a 1950 plane.
This is way larger than a SR22, they aren't even close to the same class. This would be closer to the Vision or Hondajet, and it does nothing better than those. 3m$ for this just doesn't make sense. I'd much, much rather put down the extra money on a Visionjet or Hondajet, and have a far better performing aircraft. Its the "poor mans private jet", except that poor men don't have private jets.
The SR22 is a small private plane next to this lumbering oaf of an aircraft.
He explained that it's designed for commercial-type operations in lower population areas. Look at island hopping around the Caribbean or from Florida to the Bahamas. It costs less than a Kodiak, Caravan, or Twin Otter etc...Light cargo or small passenger plane. It may find use in Alaska or Canada.
@@stonehorn4641 I'm aware it's bigger :) I was talking about similar price/size ratio to the Sr22. I'm also aware that this is a crude plane that they want 3 mill for.
CapeAir says the fuel consumption so far is worse than promised
It is. And slower than our 402s. And can't carry as much. It does have nice avionics..🙄
How much it cost
Regards from Serbia Mojo, nice video.
What is the per hr cost?
I think Cape Air is getting these soon-ish
I would like to know the real operating cost per seat mile.
What makes it a "game changer"?
That they spend more time in our shops than in the air? Because ours do
It's pretty. How much, turn key?
3milly
@@stormworks4882 Yikes! I'll stick with a Twin Otter.
should be $1.7M no more with pistons. Sure hope you have prepared the engineering for small turbines already...of course you have and larger wheels too - you know what is coming. ...Also needs the option to have much larger tires. Too small/might not make it for some strips I have been on as a bush pilot in BC Canada.
damm good airplane
It some how reminds me of a great white shark
Awesome price. That's about the price of Vision Jet!!!
Except it's a million more than the Vision Jet. Completely different missions.
@@tomboard1 The G2 variant of Vision Jet was $2.85 million in the second quarter of 2021.
Is that 375HP each or both together
each
Looking very similar to Do-228
That's a pretty islander