Back to airplanes……and the original subject of this thread……[:)]
Having not owned a Cirrus I cannot comment on the aircraft but I did own a (1990) TB21 for 10 years and approximately 1,500 flying hours, so I feel qualified to briefly comment on the good and the bad….
Good:
Simple, rugged airframe.
Excellent visibility.
Extremely ergonomic cockpit.
Reliable Lycoming TIO-540_AB1AD, which is limited to 250 HP in this aircraft, so it was never working hard-my engine went to 2,500 hours TT and was only replaced because the new owner wanted an engine overhaul.
I routinely saw 165 KTS on around 15 GPH, it’s not the most slippery airplane out there but it give you reasonable performance.
High wing loading and lots of rudder=good ride in turbulence and max demonstrated X-wind component of 25 KTS, which I did myself on one or two occasions.
Not-so-Good:
VLe of 129 Kts, with max speed of 139 knots once gear are extended, is ridiculously low in today’s slam-dunk ATC environment, especially if (as is common in California) you have to remain high to clear terrain than have to descend in a hurry.
Baggage door shape is….odd. Not unusual to have to load baggage compartment by lifting larger bags over rear seat backs.
I read the previous comments about the “simple, reliable” landing gear with amusement as this system gave me more grief than anything else on the aircraft. I would go thru about 1 pressure switch a year, and the switches would inevitably fail (meaning gear are stuck down) when I was about 1,000 miles from home base, meaning an excruciatingly slow flight back home. Once the planes went out of production getting pressure switches was a chore, they were being “made to order” and I was AOG for three yes three months once waiting for Socata to have a bunch made. Ridiculous.
More on parts….it wasn’t only getting a pressure switch, I needed a pitch trim tab and had to wait 3-4 months for that. Why? Well, you couldn’t exactly go and grab one off of the production floor, since the planes were no longer being produced, so all you could do was wait. I suspect that common parts are more readily available but be prepared to be patient if you need something germane to the aircraft.
Aircraft was maintained by a Socata Service Center, so doubt that you can blame much of above on inept maintenance.
You have pretty much summed it up . I only owned my TB 20 for five years. I had numerous problems with my landing gear,like yourself. I read the previous comments about the “simple, reliable” landing gear with amusement as this system gave me lots of grief and cost.
One of the big things we’re seeing in Australia, is Spar corrosion, there has been many airframes wrecked because of this. When I went to sell mine there was a lot of negative talk about this, hence the price I sold the plane for was well below half of what I paid for it.
A TB20 does 140kt IAS (low level) and more in TAS as you go higher on 11.5 USG/hr. That is at peak EGT. I guess that to get 165 KTS TAS (at some altitude) on around 15 USG/HR you were running about 120F ROP which many owners do because they don’t believe the whole “leaning business”, but they pay the price in fuel. Comparing both at peak EGT, a TB20 does the same MPG as an SR22 but the SR22 goes a bit faster because the engine is bigger.
Why did you need the pitch trim tab? Unless eaten by corrosion, or damaged, it has no life limit. There is a procedure for the trim tab hinges and the trim tab linkage (in essence, looking after the bushes and ensuring that excessive play is not allowed to develop) which most companies don’t know and they just throw away the whole thing and replace it.
The pressure switches are made by Eaton and are an off the shelf item; they are used on a number of GA aircraft types. That’s before you get to alternatives of which there are several. The pressure switch design was changed at some stage because later aircraft don’t get that problem. Doesn’t stop Socata sending out old or suspect stock, of course… I had three Astro-Tech duff clocks, one after the other, and a load of other bad avionics, all on a new aircraft. After that was replaced, zero problems.
One thing I Know that the TB 20 does not have is CAPS . Which would have made the outcome at the recent CAPS Event in Australia, a very different story in a TB 20. Our resident Australian so-called socata expert, once told me there wasn’t a place in Australia that you could not put down safely a TB 20 and walk away. Well this area over the Blue Mountains, which is not the most friendliest ground underneath, has very busy airspace over the top, ATC will hold you at 6000feet, and the ground is approximately 3000, whether you are on an IFR plan or VFR plan. As the jets are coming in over the top, due to land at Sydney. The next step 5 miles away is 4500 feet A great outcome, the media coverage has been large in Australia, highlighting the parachute on the Cirrus. The media is announcing that all light aircraft should be fitted with the parachute. I believe the accidental video shot by the man cutting some wood. Was one of the best marketing tools seen to date… I think the other prices of used planes without a parachute will tank even further…
The amount of phone calls I received on the Saturday night after the event, from friends saying your plane really does have a parachute. I don’t think I want fly in any other plane except the Cirrus… Were comforting to know that I purchased the right aircraft…
I did not run the TB21 LOP because a) at the time I owned the aircraft (I sold it in 2007) I was not at all versed in LOP operations b)even if I had been, I have no idea if the injectors would have been balanced enough to allow it and c) Lycoming, in their infinite wisdom, still does not support it. I know that a lot of people who have Lycoming engines do so, but I was not one of them. I do fly my Columbia LOP and have since new with (so far as I can tell) no problems due to such operation.
The pitch trim tab needed replacement because at some time in the past (perhaps when the plane was painted-it was S/N 1000, with the funky paint job to celebrate that fact) a bolt was left out which allowed the pitch trim tab to vibrate. this was missed by everybody over the years-Socata, me, various service centers. Over time, this resulted in elongation of the fitting where the pitch trim actuator rod bolted into the trim tab. The first I knew of this was when I started noticing insufficient nose-down trim authority. The only way to repair this was by replacing the trim tab, and I had to wait 3+ months for a replacement part (actually, the second replacement part, as the first one Socata sent over was the wrong half).
The pressure switches may be “off the shelf” but I never found that to be true, I always had at least a few week delay (and, that last time,a three month delay) to receive one and if Andrew Knott had not interceded the last time the delay could have been much longer. Maybe I required one of the “older” pressure switches; all I know is that from September thru December one year I could not fly while I was waiting for a part. Oh, I suppose I could have flown gear down but that rather defeats the purpose of paying for a retract, don’t you think?
I also had to deal with the brackets which held the tailbone on cracking-that problem went on and on and on……finally had a shop fabricate a set out of heavier-gauge aluminum and they went away.
I have had worse luck with aircraft-the TB21 pales in comparison to my Mirage-but I did find that dealing with Socata, particularly once the aircraft went out of production, was difficult at best.
I would not suggest LOP. It doesn’t give you any more MPG. I don’t buy into the LOP debate myself either (except LOP is required for some specific installations where the lower EGTs are required). Peak EGT is sufficient. You won’t have any problems if you manage the CHT. My engine got opened up at 800hrs (for the SB569 crank swap) and nearly everything was still within new limits: http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/engine-rebuild/index.html Are people operating Cirruses ROP?
Re the pressure switch I meant buying the same part but not from Socata. I recall Piper and Beech use it so you can order it via one of their dealers. This is the case with most non-airframe aviation parts, which are nearly always standard US made parts, but it can require some work to trace the P/N. Also there is no requirement to buy it from an “aviation” outlet. You merely need a traceability document to come with it, and it doesn’t need to be an 8130-3. I know certain people in the Socata scene disagree with this and say you have to buy everything from Socata but that is patently untrue (especially on US registry, Part 91) and really any A&P should know that. Same issue with Cirrus of course…
Dealing with Socata is very difficult nowadays but isn’t normally required and I find buying parts from one of their dealers (Troyes) is easy. Thus far, no problems. My vertical stabiliser got damaged in the hangar a while ago. They had one in stock, at about $10k which was probably similar to any other aircraft make.
Reading your last post suggested that you operate or have operated your engine at peak EGT and that was “sufficient”? Did I get that right?
Sounds like you have had a lot if experience with this. Would love to learn more from you. Can you explain why you think operating at peak EGT is the way to go? Thanks
There is a well known US guy called John Deakin who has written a lot on this topic, and I am sure this is mentioned inside your forum (to which I don’t have access).
Yes I fly at peak EGT all the time, except during climb when I use the constant-EGT method (see the above URL), or when flying near the operating ceiling (basically FL170-FL200) when one needs “best power” which is about 125F ROP (but then MPG obviously suffers, by about 10%, relative to peak EGT).
It is interesting, to say the least, that Peter Holy who runs the “euroGA” internet forum like a mini dictator (ask me how i know) does not give sxxx about our policies on COPA and will post under the wrong name of “Holt”.
I hate to say it but your above statement is factually not correct. Flying at “peak EGT all the time” is about the worst thing you can do for the longevity of your engine. That is where everything runs the hottest at the high power settings we commonly use. “Best power” is a power recommendation not based on the higher power output from the engine. Rather it is the point where ROP provides the highest power in the “safe zone” which is detonation is less likly and peak cylinder pressures are not too high.
Now, at high altitude in a non-turbo engine, all of the above changes. Since tour max percept power at 17,000 feet is 50% or less, operating at peak EGT IS the best place to be to get as much out of the engine as you can. So, the way you described what you do is backward from the right way to to do it. Operating at 125 degrees ROP at high altitude is way too rich and not giving you the most power.
I know that you and Peter have your differences but is reviving a two year old thread the right way to deal with them?
Although, looking back through the thread, with references to his own website it looks as though Peter was perfectly well recognised, it must surely be against the spirit of fair dealing to deliberately ‘out’ him in this way.
Of course, in general you are right, Tim. But Peter is a big boy and he was aware of the rules on COPA. And there is no anonymous posting here.
Also, i did not “out” him, because that was done already two years ago by other COPA members.
I am just completely sick of his double standards and arrogance - and it was fun to write a post he cannot simply delete when he doesn’t like it personally
(At the same time all this is very unimportant and the rest of this story does not interest anybody around here, so let’s leave it at that)
I have sent this message to the Contact Us link on this forum:
Dear Sirs,
Again, Prince Alexis is writing material which breaches your forum policy i.e. outing people, in revenge for something which he perceives upset him.
The truth is that he was banned from EuroGA.org which is a serious and moderated European pilot forum, on which he was dropping 1000-2000 posts per month, mostly off topic, and I (an unpaid admin/mod) constantly had to deal with this torrent of posts which contributed nothing. Very occassionally he would write something sensible but often even that was off topic so I would start a fresh thread with it - a process which takes significant time especially with a smartphone.
He chucked his toys out of his pram a couple of times over the past 2 years, over what he called freedom of speech.
In the end, The Prince wrote some personal garbage about me on a German forum (PUF) and that was enough for me, and I banned him, suggesting that the German forum (which is essentially unmoderated, short of legal libel issues) is a better place for him.
Peter
It is IMHO unfortunate that COPA allows unmoderated posting of this type, and in that I include the garbage written about me here previously by some former member of the Socata owners’ group.
It’s a shame that you bring your stuff up here, Peter. You can really never leave a person alone on your worldwide cruisade. Is that the same Peter who was implicitely badmouthing COPA as a club of the rich who can’t fly so many times?
Just stick to the COPA rules, and all will be good No reason to get so excited.
PS: “Socata forum” is a good keyword. Is that the one that expelled you for constantly harrassing other members? See Gramsy’s post.
As an officer in COPA I got your contact us email. I discussed it with several other officers. I/we considered it spam and intend to do nothing about it. Then this post brings it public. We saw no transgressions on his part but some on yours. If you are indeed running an alias on our site that is contrary to our policy and I would ask that you correct that immediately. I do expect a corrective action on that issue if you are to remain on COPA.
I, however, will take issue with your recent approach here on COPA. Making disparaging or snide personal attacks (for example “Prince Alexis”) will not be tolerated on this forum. If you have an issue with Alexis, take that up directly with Alexis - ELSEWHERE. You are a guest on this website. Alexis is a paid member and has long been a member in good standing. We do not understand where you are coming from, nor do we care to hear your allegations. Those are between you two.
Alexis has demonstrated a reasonable commitment and demeanor on this site and is a member in good standing.
You, on the other hand, are a guest on this forum. While we welcome guests, we do expect they have the decency to be a good guest. The kind of guest we are pleased to see stick around. While I cannot, and will not, decide which of the two of you is “right”, it is wrong to bring your fight over here.
We expect a professional and collegiate demeanor. Do that and you are a welcome guest.
