I am a maintenance technician at a flight school, I work a lot with Tecnam (p2008, 2006T and p2010) alongside good `ld cessna. The Tecnam has a good design and avionics but is a pain in the ass to operate and maintain, especially in a flight school environment where they fly constantly. This rapid acumulation of flight hours take its toll at the aircraft airframe and especially to the rotax 912 engine ending in a lot of troubleshooting. Plus, Tecnam`s Manuals and support are the worst I ever seen. Students and instructors have mixed fellings about this aircraft. I personally think Tecnam are good aircraft for private owners that operate max 100h per year.
Totally agree with u. I can add some other things too, like how operates in the air. Is totally diferent (worse) as the typical (and the best for the greatest part of experienced people) Cessna 172, but of course, more expensive). Flight instructor in LECU, aprox 2000 flight hours.
Thanks for your feedback mate. What you think about the P2010 TDI? It’s one of the shortlisted options in my list for personal use, around 80-100 per year. How’s the parts cost and availability in general ?
Porque este avión P20006T la hélice no es triple.aspas.y el motor no lo hacen turbo.tiene cobertura de poca distancias náutica.y mejorar las vibraciones.Hay prospecto de mejoras para años siguientes 2023?...
Actually Tecnam planes are absolutely HORRIBLE in quality. Mine has been sitting in Tecnam’s North American HQ in Sebring for the last two consecutive years. It has endless electrical problems that they, for two years, don’t know how to fix. Some of the most incompetent leadership I’ve ever seen. They only care about selling new planes, not fixing the ones already sold.
Sorry to hear about your problems, buy enough machines and we eventually get a bad one. The most obvious thing is that perhaps unfortunately you purchased a lemon; not necessarily reflective of the brand's quality in general.
@@geralddavis8160 It's not an isolated incident. I've talked with service centers who used to repair Tecnams. They got so fed up with them constantly having endless electrical problems that some service centers have dropped repairing Tecnams entirely.
Students at European flight schools grow to hate Tecnams and their constant maintainance issues. They're good for private use but they're flimsy and break constantly when subjected to the demands of flying for 8+ hours a day at a flight school. The nosegear on the P2002 is delicate, the nosegear on the P2006 is dangerously weak. They're simply unsuitible aircraft and yet Tecnam specifically aims them at flight schools, even releasing a glass cockpit version of the P2002 recently despite its flight characteristics being particularly unsuited to IFR flying.
Great description of the brand’s offerings, thank you. Only, I wish there was a comparison/summary slide included with a table of all the models with the engine, avionics, range, speed, climb rate, max payload etc…
I bought a new 2022 P2010 MkII with IO390 engine this last February and have over 120 hours on it in less than 6 months. I love it and have no issues or complaints. N144SE
I have a few hundred hours in various Tecnam types, and I loved them all. Sometimes getting parts shipped across the pond would get aggravating, but no more than for anything else.
just to add a horror story. going out with an instructor to do stalls. He shows me the spot where a school aircraft had crashed after loosing a wing..... When you enter an insipient spin, they try to flip on their back... and they are unable to handle any negative G!
I have flown all of the single engine planes listed here. They fly great, but are not quite as robust as a normal certified aircraft, but they are working against the LSA weight restriction. Also, 172 is now well over a quarter million dollars, so…..
I have about 10hrs in a P2002. It was a flimsy plane but flew fairly well. I’ve heard that the P2012 is a maintenance nightmare though. Seems to have trouble with its gear system.
Lovely aircrafts. Good luck if you need to refuel the high wing ones. You'll need a ladder to dip the tanks or refuel because you can't climb up using the strut. Unless you are about 10ft tall.
Dwayne, certainly always bringing great options to all of people line me looking options for having a plane and family trips. One question, I live in Colombia, and there is a group called colombian air patrol which basically takes humanitarian missions to apart places in the country where you can only get by plane. Do you think the tecnam P2006 will be an option?
Italian rubbish with a rotax engine, my old flight school has a lot of them I was lucky to barely fly them, they were low quality built, it has a lot of indications issues, fuel press used to drop bellow minimum as soon as you turned off the fuel pump. The only good thing is they have good avionics but as most modern airplanes, so don't be cheap, buy a real airplane instead of an ultralight aircraft.
Watched a similar Italian designed twin called a Partnavia come apart at airshow in Texas. Any design that is similar in structure strength is suspect. Sure the pilot was probably at fault, with the exception of a well built aerobatic airplane like a Pitts or an EXTRA, you can pull the wings off of just about any airplane. But to watch what I thought was a relatively low G maneuver have the wings separate from the fuselage just outside the engine nacelle's is totally UNSAT. I wouldn't get in one of those designs.
I flew the P 68 Partenavia during my Fish Sporting days , Excellent aircraft. The Navy of Chile has four of them , along P3 Orions and Casa / Nurtanio turboprop ASW twins.
@@giancarlogarlaschi4388 I will never forget seeing both wings separating killing the pilot. One of the things I hope a aircraft engineer will answer for me is, ' can a previously over stressed metal wing exhibit deformation..? I've seen several airplanes with wrinkles in the upper skin, most notably from the trailing edge wing root extending to the forward wing tip. I've turned down a number of ferry jobs after looking at the skin closely. As a GA contract pilot for many years before I flew freight in C-130's (some of them were bent to some extent, (ripples in the fuselage, just forward of the ramp) and before the airlines, it's unfortunate, many light airplanes trade structural integrity for weight reduction.
The 2006 is a terrible airplane lol. Easy to fly and great for training. However, other than the Rotax engines, the airframe is junk. Cracked ribs, broken aileron cables, flap hinge cracks and many other issues. You will never see me own anything Tecnam.
You have a lot of information in this video son, but how does the P2012's fuel injection "help preserve gasoline" ? Does it somehow keep the gasoline from growing old? I don't think you mean it preserves the liquid but it CONSERVES it. Now with that behind us, if you can just learn how to say the word "Fuselage" correctly you might sound more like a real airplane kind of guy. Hint: It's not Fyoosalidge. You had ONE job in this video, that's to talk- and you screwed it up!
What a video full of BS, tecnam is the worst training aircraft i've flown/given instruction with. I've flown DA20/40/42 PA28/SENECA III/IV/V C152/72/82 and by far, the tecnams are the worst. The multi engine cannot even maintain level flight with one engine if there's a bit of bad conditions ie: altitude/heat. Not to mention that they brake if you treat them a bit rough ( which is the usual at schools ). SAY NO NO TO TECNAM.
..theres an airshow video where a tecnam twin's wings pop right off during a high g pullup. U can here the crowd yelling "oh no" bc they know the pilot is effed.
I am a maintenance technician at a flight school, I work a lot with Tecnam (p2008, 2006T and p2010) alongside good `ld cessna. The Tecnam has a good design and avionics but is a pain in the ass to operate and maintain, especially in a flight school environment where they fly constantly. This rapid acumulation of flight hours take its toll at the aircraft airframe and especially to the rotax 912 engine ending in a lot of troubleshooting. Plus, Tecnam`s Manuals and support are the worst I ever seen. Students and instructors have mixed fellings about this aircraft.
I personally think Tecnam are good aircraft for private owners that operate max 100h per year.
Totally agree with u. I can add some other things too, like how operates in the air. Is totally diferent (worse) as the typical (and the best for the greatest part of experienced people) Cessna 172, but of course, more expensive). Flight instructor in LECU, aprox 2000 flight hours.
This guy knows what he's telling
Thanks for your feedback mate. What you think about the P2010 TDI? It’s one of the shortlisted options in my list for personal use, around 80-100 per year.
How’s the parts cost and availability in general ?
Porque este avión P20006T la hélice no es triple.aspas.y el motor no lo hacen turbo.tiene cobertura de poca distancias náutica.y mejorar las vibraciones.Hay prospecto de mejoras para años siguientes 2023?...
A&P here. Sounds like you could use Rotax Factory Training.
Actually Tecnam planes are absolutely HORRIBLE in quality. Mine has been sitting in Tecnam’s North American HQ in Sebring for the last two consecutive years. It has endless electrical problems that they, for two years, don’t know how to fix. Some of the most incompetent leadership I’ve ever seen. They only care about selling new planes, not fixing the ones already sold.
Sorry to hear about your problems, buy enough machines and we eventually get a bad one. The most obvious thing is that perhaps unfortunately you purchased a lemon; not necessarily reflective of the brand's quality in general.
Thanks, really good to know.
@@geralddavis8160 It's not an isolated incident. I've talked with service centers who used to repair Tecnams. They got so fed up with them constantly having endless electrical problems that some service centers have dropped repairing Tecnams entirely.
@@LoganInfinity fair enough.
lol thanks for the sincerity
Students at European flight schools grow to hate Tecnams and their constant maintainance issues. They're good for private use but they're flimsy and break constantly when subjected to the demands of flying for 8+ hours a day at a flight school. The nosegear on the P2002 is delicate, the nosegear on the P2006 is dangerously weak. They're simply unsuitible aircraft and yet Tecnam specifically aims them at flight schools, even releasing a glass cockpit version of the P2002 recently despite its flight characteristics being particularly unsuited to IFR flying.
in the event of 1 engine failure on p2006t you get like 10 fpm climb on sea level, it really provides "the sense of security" as mentioned...
Great description of the brand’s offerings, thank you.
Only, I wish there was a comparison/summary slide included with a table of all the models with the engine, avionics, range, speed, climb rate, max payload etc…
I bought a new 2022 P2010 MkII with IO390 engine this last February and have over 120 hours on it in less than 6 months. I love it and have no issues or complaints. N144SE
Comments are gold and seem to describe a different aircraft line.
I have a few hundred hours in various Tecnam types, and I loved them all. Sometimes getting parts shipped across the pond would get aggravating, but no more than for anything else.
just to add a horror story. going out with an instructor to do stalls. He shows me the spot where a school aircraft had crashed after loosing a wing..... When you enter an insipient spin, they try to flip on their back... and they are unable to handle any negative G!
The Tecnam P92 was my first plane I ever flew. I loved the stick
I have flown all of the single engine planes listed here. They fly great, but are not quite as robust as a normal certified aircraft, but they are working against the LSA weight restriction. Also, 172 is now well over a quarter million dollars, so…..
When speaking of Italian style we shouldn't forget Piaggio Avanti and Aviamilano (Sequoia) F.8L Falco.
It's depend on Marketing team, if they had good skill, they can even selling junk product for gold
I have about 10hrs in a P2002. It was a flimsy plane but flew fairly well. I’ve heard that the P2012 is a maintenance nightmare though. Seems to have trouble with its gear system.
Since it is Italian, you don't say it's a flimsy plane, you say it's a Fragile (Fra Gee' Lay) plane! 😂😉🤠
Lovely aircrafts. Good luck if you need to refuel the high wing ones. You'll need a ladder to dip the tanks or refuel because you can't climb up using the strut. Unless you are about 10ft tall.
That's the same for almost any high wing
You missed the Tecnam P2002 JR;
Two seater single, 912 Rotax, variable pitch prop and retractable gear !!
I didn't know Tecnam was so good.
Great video.
they aren't
Everything mechanical built in Italy is questionable.
...except higher-end shotguns, and a few other puzzling outliers.
12:47 "a great option for turboprop aircraft" and 5 seconds later at 12:52 "Lycoming piston engines". They ain't the same thing.
The Piaggio Avanti is still the best Italian aircraft. Just saying!
Just saw one yesterday at Martin State airport in Maryland.
I have 1,000 in the P2012 and they are NOT underrated. I would stay far away from these if I were in the market.
Eric, what are the issues that you experienced? Was this with Cape?
The quality is really poor but you get what you pay for
The twin looks good.
Dwayne, certainly always bringing great options to all of people line me looking options for having a plane and family trips. One question, I live in Colombia, and there is a group called colombian air patrol which basically takes humanitarian missions to apart places in the country where you can only get by plane. Do you think the tecnam P2006 will be an option?
The P2006T is a great plane, not adequately powered but it'll got the job done... A critical aspect to consider is its service network in your country
Don't get a Tecnam, it is lightweight...
So is its structure.
You might land a Cessna in a field with no consequences.
Not a Tecnam.
¡Gracias!
Decent airplanes but they are all underpowered. Every single model the make, needs twice the hp power they have, at minimum.
BRAVO! :)
Ferried the P2010 - it was ok, lots of plastic and a bit flimsy feeling in the Wx
Is this a sponsored video by tecnam? Just to know if this is an unbias assessment of the planes
Not a sponsored video
The only problem with tecnam is shipping them overseas (parts as well) otherwise they rock!!!!
Really amazing airplanes and gorgeous ☺️ grazie!!!
Por que hacer dificil volar , no es mas facil colocar menos instrumentos para q en caso de perdida de piloto cualquiera pueda resolver problemas
Italian rubbish with a rotax engine, my old flight school has a lot of them I was lucky to barely fly them, they were low quality built, it has a lot of indications issues, fuel press used to drop bellow minimum as soon as you turned off the fuel pump.
The only good thing is they have good avionics but as most modern airplanes, so don't be cheap, buy a real airplane instead of an ultralight aircraft.
Watched a similar Italian designed twin called a Partnavia come apart at airshow in Texas.
Any design that is similar in structure strength is suspect.
Sure the pilot was probably at fault, with the exception of a well built aerobatic airplane like a Pitts or an EXTRA, you can pull the wings off of just about any airplane.
But to watch what I thought was a relatively low G maneuver have the wings separate from the fuselage just outside the engine nacelle's is totally UNSAT.
I wouldn't get in one of those designs.
I flew the P 68 Partenavia during my Fish Sporting days , Excellent aircraft.
The Navy of Chile has four of them , along P3 Orions and Casa / Nurtanio turboprop ASW twins.
@@giancarlogarlaschi4388
I will never forget seeing both wings separating killing the pilot.
One of the things I hope a aircraft engineer will answer for me is, ' can a previously over stressed metal wing exhibit deformation..?
I've seen several airplanes with wrinkles in the upper skin, most notably from the trailing edge wing root extending to the forward wing tip.
I've turned down a number of ferry jobs after looking at the skin closely. As a GA contract pilot for many years before I flew freight in C-130's (some of them were bent to some extent, (ripples in the fuselage, just forward of the ramp) and before the airlines,
it's unfortunate, many light airplanes trade structural integrity for weight reduction.
Question. How long does it last till it starts breaking?
Less than 100 hours for the 2006 lol
Total Crap!Poor corrosion prep on inner metal.Pop rivets holding fairings on,But the big killer is the Weak main wing spar metal thickness.
The 2006 is a terrible airplane lol. Easy to fly and great for training. However, other than the Rotax engines, the airframe is junk. Cracked ribs, broken aileron cables, flap hinge cracks and many other issues. You will never see me own anything Tecnam.
Lovely planes…wished they didn’t use Rotax.
It’s not that they are a bad plane…just way overpriced. Give me an RV8 any day
Not Underrated , I’ll better say Underpowered 😖🤣
I generally enjoy your videos but I really wish you would learn how to pronounce the word "fuselage"
And "composite".
👍👍👍
You have a lot of information in this video son, but how does the P2012's fuel injection "help preserve gasoline" ? Does it somehow keep the gasoline from growing old? I don't think you mean it preserves the liquid but it CONSERVES it. Now with that behind us, if you can just learn how to say the word "Fuselage" correctly you might sound more like a real airplane kind of guy. Hint: It's not Fyoosalidge. You had ONE job in this video, that's to talk- and you screwed it up!
I am reluctant to be negative... but I am rated on the echo and Bravo.... worst aircraft I have flown... sorry
What a video full of BS, tecnam is the worst training aircraft i've flown/given instruction with. I've flown DA20/40/42 PA28/SENECA III/IV/V C152/72/82 and by far, the tecnams are the worst. The multi engine cannot even maintain level flight with one engine if there's a bit of bad conditions ie: altitude/heat. Not to mention that they brake if you treat them a bit rough ( which is the usual at schools ).
SAY NO NO TO TECNAM.
Over priced underwhelming
Tecnam is a great aiircraft, but its not a utilitarian aircraft. Good for owners that fly less than 100hrs annual.
Horrible underpowered airplanes with alot of issues.
..theres an airshow video where a tecnam twin's wings pop right off during a high g pullup.
U can here the crowd yelling "oh no"
bc they know the pilot is effed.
Are you sure that wasn't a Panavia and not a Tecnam .. remember it is slander if you get it wrong so take care on your claims
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤...