Socata Reviews ?
Originally Posted by The Cardinal
It’s like getting advice on marriage from someone who’s never been married!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Some would say that they're the ones who've understood best”
Or, to reinforce my point: Those who never understood at all…..
Now back to the point, or should I say Cardinal point, of flight reviews:
T.C.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: london uk
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The TB10 is a good plane, but the VP Prop will put your maintenance up, and the 180hp engine will put your fuel bills up. Good for long legs, i've flown one over to Spa from Earls Coln. They have a nice one for rent G-TZEE £125/hr wet. I agree that taking one for a spin would be a good idea, and whilst there see if you can get a few questions in with the owner. Personally, i think the best all rounder is a decent 172. Lots of leg room for the pax in the back, fast enough for the money and pretty good for short field. I took one into Lundy 4up! And thats published at 400meters! But if you get out and push it right back into the rocks you can get another 50
and we cleared the 4' wall no problems! Why the desire for something European? Parts for Cessna and Piper are easily aquired and most Engineering shops know them inside out, so what are your percieved advantages of buying European? Whatever you choose, make sure you read and get to know the POH intimately treat every flight like its your first one in it. Do a thourough Pre-Flight even if its only a day since you last flew it! "Familliarity breads contempt".
and we cleared the 4' wall no problems! Why the desire for something European? Parts for Cessna and Piper are easily aquired and most Engineering shops know them inside out, so what are your percieved advantages of buying European? Whatever you choose, make sure you read and get to know the POH intimately treat every flight like its your first one in it. Do a thourough Pre-Flight even if its only a day since you last flew it! "Familliarity breads contempt".
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: a galaxy far, far,away...
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Piper is very mechanical, the Socata very electric & the Cessna somewhere in between. If your end goal is the Bonanza, I would discount the Cessna for the high wing. I've flown the TB9 with 4 adults in & out of Goodwood in the summer with no problems, although granted it's not long on power.
I would suggest you first look at the limitations of the airfield you will be based at & the likely characteristics of your flying, ie how often will you want to be at MTOW. That may rule an a/c out in itself. Then try to arrange to test-fly each of the types, preferably on the same day & in the manner of the "typical" flight profile. If you'll be 4-up most of the time, test it with 4-up.
I still think the TB9 is most comfy. If I remember it's something like 40" across at shoulder height as opposed to 34" for the PA28. The two doors really is a bonus, believe it or not. Plus, since they open upwards, you can open them in the rain & not end up sitting on a sponge. It's also by far the most modern (& i think best looking) of the trio. Only problem I ever had was losing all the electrics once which meant a non-radio flapless landing. It was at Bounemouth though, so I could have made 3 off the one approach!
TB9 on the downside is probably the most fragile.
Edited to add
What about the Robin 3000? Good perf (130kts) & all you specify. Very nice to fly & like most Robins superb vis. A bit different from the norm with T-tail & teensy winglets!
I would suggest you first look at the limitations of the airfield you will be based at & the likely characteristics of your flying, ie how often will you want to be at MTOW. That may rule an a/c out in itself. Then try to arrange to test-fly each of the types, preferably on the same day & in the manner of the "typical" flight profile. If you'll be 4-up most of the time, test it with 4-up.
I still think the TB9 is most comfy. If I remember it's something like 40" across at shoulder height as opposed to 34" for the PA28. The two doors really is a bonus, believe it or not. Plus, since they open upwards, you can open them in the rain & not end up sitting on a sponge. It's also by far the most modern (& i think best looking) of the trio. Only problem I ever had was losing all the electrics once which meant a non-radio flapless landing. It was at Bounemouth though, so I could have made 3 off the one approach!
TB9 on the downside is probably the most fragile.
Edited to add
What about the Robin 3000? Good perf (130kts) & all you specify. Very nice to fly & like most Robins superb vis. A bit different from the norm with T-tail & teensy winglets!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you all for your (mostly) constructive and helpful comments !
Special thanks to aluminium. I too like the Robin - although I have never flown one - but at the risk of getting bashed by some, I really would prefer having a proper yoke rather than a stick.
L
Ooooopsss ! Just realised the 3000 actually HAS a yoke... Disregard.
Special thanks to aluminium. I too like the Robin - although I have never flown one - but at the risk of getting bashed by some, I really would prefer having a proper yoke rather than a stick.
L
Ooooopsss ! Just realised the 3000 actually HAS a yoke... Disregard.
Last edited by loewy; 18th Aug 2006 at 15:11.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've flown PA28's, C172s, TB10's and TB20's.
My views are that the TB20 is without doubt the most capable tourer. It is fast, carries well, a joy to fly, VFR or IFR in reasonably bad weather. But it is the most thirsty with its big 250HP engine, requires most maintenance due to wobbly prop and gear, and requires a reasonable runway. I'd love one if I could afford it.
The TB10 is similar in some respects to the TB20, but the main differences are: slower, less thirsty, less performance due to the 180HP engine. Less maintenance costs due to the fixed gear, but it still has a wobbly prop, which doesn't add that much over a fixed prop 180HP aeroplane. Glides like a brick, excellent cross wind performance, I landed one easily with 25 kts across the runway.
PA28's well....depends on what you want. I used to fly the Dakota with a 236HP engine and wobbly prop. That was fun, and it really hoiked you into the air and was pretty quick. The 180HP versions are ok, not stuning performance or stunning short field performance, but reasonably comfortable, will get you there and look nice. Easy and safe to fly, and relatively cheap to run with fixed gear and prop. The 160HP and less are still fun to fly, but less performance obviously and you'll soon reach max weight.
C172's....Ok, pretty much like the PA28's, though I personally don't really like them. They are better for sight seeing and that is about it.
Now, do you really want to fly hard IFR and tour hunderds of miles all the time? If not I would suggest a Socata Rallye as your first aeroplane. I bought a share in one and it is brilliant.
Mine has a 160HP engine, but has better performance than a 160HP PA28. They have automatic leading edge slats so it CAN get you in and out of the really short strips if you want. I've had 4 adults and full fuel in mine and was off the deck in about 200m, gives a duration of 5 or so hours with a reasonable burn (£40 or so per hour covers our fuel and some left in the pot). I cruise comfortably at 90 kts, 95 - 100 if I push it, so not record breaking speed or anything. Very safe, you can stall it and "falling leaf" to the ground at under 1000 fpm. Reasonably comfortable, I'm 185cm tall. Sliding canopy so entry and exit is better than a PA28 and excellent visibility. Fixed gear and prop so cheap to maintain. Aero's approved (or ours is) for basic aero's: spins, stall turns, loops, rolls etc.....Stick as opposed to yoke, which is neither hear nor there, but I prefer it. Good positive response from the controls as well. Ours is FM immune so can be used to fly IFR if wanted.
And the best bit....They are dirt cheap! You have to look carefully at them as many had corrosion problems, but if you got one like I did which is in outstanding condition, you get an awful lot for your money.
One more advantage I have thought of is that it weighs in at 1918lbs. This is good at places like Bournemouth which charge the landing fee based on aircraft weight, with normally a threshold at 2000lbs. I used to get charged £30something in a TB10 at Bournemouth, last time I was there in the Rallye, it cost £15 or so.
My views are that the TB20 is without doubt the most capable tourer. It is fast, carries well, a joy to fly, VFR or IFR in reasonably bad weather. But it is the most thirsty with its big 250HP engine, requires most maintenance due to wobbly prop and gear, and requires a reasonable runway. I'd love one if I could afford it.
The TB10 is similar in some respects to the TB20, but the main differences are: slower, less thirsty, less performance due to the 180HP engine. Less maintenance costs due to the fixed gear, but it still has a wobbly prop, which doesn't add that much over a fixed prop 180HP aeroplane. Glides like a brick, excellent cross wind performance, I landed one easily with 25 kts across the runway.
PA28's well....depends on what you want. I used to fly the Dakota with a 236HP engine and wobbly prop. That was fun, and it really hoiked you into the air and was pretty quick. The 180HP versions are ok, not stuning performance or stunning short field performance, but reasonably comfortable, will get you there and look nice. Easy and safe to fly, and relatively cheap to run with fixed gear and prop. The 160HP and less are still fun to fly, but less performance obviously and you'll soon reach max weight.
C172's....Ok, pretty much like the PA28's, though I personally don't really like them. They are better for sight seeing and that is about it.
Now, do you really want to fly hard IFR and tour hunderds of miles all the time? If not I would suggest a Socata Rallye as your first aeroplane. I bought a share in one and it is brilliant.
Mine has a 160HP engine, but has better performance than a 160HP PA28. They have automatic leading edge slats so it CAN get you in and out of the really short strips if you want. I've had 4 adults and full fuel in mine and was off the deck in about 200m, gives a duration of 5 or so hours with a reasonable burn (£40 or so per hour covers our fuel and some left in the pot). I cruise comfortably at 90 kts, 95 - 100 if I push it, so not record breaking speed or anything. Very safe, you can stall it and "falling leaf" to the ground at under 1000 fpm. Reasonably comfortable, I'm 185cm tall. Sliding canopy so entry and exit is better than a PA28 and excellent visibility. Fixed gear and prop so cheap to maintain. Aero's approved (or ours is) for basic aero's: spins, stall turns, loops, rolls etc.....Stick as opposed to yoke, which is neither hear nor there, but I prefer it. Good positive response from the controls as well. Ours is FM immune so can be used to fly IFR if wanted.
And the best bit....They are dirt cheap! You have to look carefully at them as many had corrosion problems, but if you got one like I did which is in outstanding condition, you get an awful lot for your money.
One more advantage I have thought of is that it weighs in at 1918lbs. This is good at places like Bournemouth which charge the landing fee based on aircraft weight, with normally a threshold at 2000lbs. I used to get charged £30something in a TB10 at Bournemouth, last time I was there in the Rallye, it cost £15 or so.
Last edited by englishal; 18th Aug 2006 at 15:22.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes there was a spar AD on the TB. One of the things one would check if buying one, but then every plane ever made has a list of ADs as long as your arm anyway... Some even longer 
Englishal - are you sure the TB10 does more MPG than the TB20? I am not so sure. It drinks more but it goes a lot faster. I get the same MPG now as I used to get in a PA28 Archer, but I am moving a helluva lot faster. Fixed gear comes with a heavy price tag in fuel flow. The TB20 does the same MPG as a Cirrus SR22.
Englishal - are you sure the TB10 does more MPG than the TB20? I am not so sure. It drinks more but it goes a lot faster. I get the same MPG now as I used to get in a PA28 Archer, but I am moving a helluva lot faster. Fixed gear comes with a heavy price tag in fuel flow. The TB20 does the same MPG as a Cirrus SR22.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Englishal - are you sure the TB10 does more MPG than the TB20?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: london uk
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting calculation in regards of cost is the pasenger mile per litre. If you take the cruise speed, multiply by number of passengers and divide by fuel burn in litres you get the amount of fuel to move each pax a mile! So consider a Cherokee Six. 60ltrs/hr six up and doing 135Kn @6000' 135 x 6= 810 passenger miles. Divide by litres and you get 13.5 passenger miles per litre. This plane is the cheapest i have found for touring, but it does need to be atleast 4up to make it pay. BTW i rent one from Turweston as most of my flying is one or two up so it works out cheaper to keep my 172 and rent when enough pax are available to make it cost effective. Try doing the calc for a few types and i think you will be surprised at which planes are more cost effective for certian flight profiles. Sorry for going off topic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deepest Warwickshire
Age: 47
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maule might be better if you are flying around Eire, land of the airstrip, VFR (I see your location says Dublin). Make sure you get some quality instruction from someone who knows the type. There is a bonus too in that they are still made (same factor applies to Piper and Cessna) so parts are relatively easy to come by, though the family-run factory can mean they are a bit relaxed on the customer service side. Not a great stable IFR platform by the way.
Any metal Robin/TB is going to cost more ££££s in parts.
Any metal Robin/TB is going to cost more ££££s in parts.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pistongone
An interesting calculation in regards of cost is the pasenger mile per litre. If you take the cruise speed, multiply by number of passengers and divide by fuel burn in litres you get the amount of fuel to move each pax a mile! So consider a Cherokee Six. 60ltrs/hr six up and doing 135Kn @6000' 135 x 6= 810 passenger miles. Divide by litres and you get 13.5 passenger miles per litre. This plane is the cheapest i have found for touring, but it does need to be atleast 4up to make it pay.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To run the costs are in line with other retractable, variable pitch prop aircraft. It's a Lycoming IO-360 engine, so pretty standard from that point of view.
To buy they're remarkably cheap, as they seem to be deeply unpopular in the UK - possibly because they have a bad reputation for operation on grass. As a guide, take the US book price and SUBTRACT the ferry costs.
I have one; it's a lovely aircraft, fantastic for touring, but there's no way anyone else is flying it.
To buy they're remarkably cheap, as they seem to be deeply unpopular in the UK - possibly because they have a bad reputation for operation on grass. As a guide, take the US book price and SUBTRACT the ferry costs.
I have one; it's a lovely aircraft, fantastic for touring, but there's no way anyone else is flying it
.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deepest Warwickshire
Age: 47
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: a galaxy far, far,away...
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No worries Loewy!
If it helps, I have had
Me
Mrs P
Master P age 5 + car seat
Miss P age 2 1/2 + car seat
Big 3-wheeler buggy
Changes of clothes & cleaning equipment for the kids
Lots of fuel (tho can't remember if it was full tanks)
& flew it to a small airshow. With the canopy rather than a door it was a doddle to load & unload. Have to say, the looks we got from Joe Public when I was bringing out more... & more.... & more were hilarious!
This particular a/c was delivered from Austria & would apparently just about have made the trip non-stop. The yoke is set kind of high for my liking & with the long wings it handles a little like a glider & can float forever but it is a great a/c to fly & economical too.
ap
edited cos I forgot to say I'm talking about the Robin here! oops!
If it helps, I have had
Me
Mrs P
Master P age 5 + car seat
Miss P age 2 1/2 + car seat
Big 3-wheeler buggy
Changes of clothes & cleaning equipment for the kids
Lots of fuel (tho can't remember if it was full tanks)
& flew it to a small airshow. With the canopy rather than a door it was a doddle to load & unload. Have to say, the looks we got from Joe Public when I was bringing out more... & more.... & more were hilarious!
This particular a/c was delivered from Austria & would apparently just about have made the trip non-stop. The yoke is set kind of high for my liking & with the long wings it handles a little like a glider & can float forever but it is a great a/c to fly & economical too.
ap
edited cos I forgot to say I'm talking about the Robin here! oops!
Last edited by aluminium persuader; 19th Aug 2006 at 09:27.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wrong Stuff
. . . deeply unpopular in the UK - possibly because they have a bad reputation for operation on grass.
Originally Posted by Wrong Stuff
. . . but there's no way anyone else is flying it .
.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pistongone - very good point about 6 seats. But with 6 seats loaded with "present day sized" people you have just enough range to get to Le Touquet and back May be good for Vietnamese refugees though
Realistically, a 6-seater will very rarely be full, unless one is running some dodgy operation.
Fundamentally, an engine operated at peak EGT, or lean of peak, is going to deliver X HP per gallon/hour. Something like 10-15HP per GPH I think. It doesn't matter what size it is; the bigger the better and one with fewer cylinders and bigger cylinders will be better. That's why an IO-540 in a TB20 delivers at least as many MPG than an IO-320 (?) in a TB9/10. Similar airframe, TB20 has no legs hanging out
There is no free lunch with planes. Everything is a tradeoff against something else.
May be good for Vietnamese refugees though Realistically, a 6-seater will very rarely be full, unless one is running some dodgy operation.
Fundamentally, an engine operated at peak EGT, or lean of peak, is going to deliver X HP per gallon/hour. Something like 10-15HP per GPH I think. It doesn't matter what size it is; the bigger the better and one with fewer cylinders and bigger cylinders will be better. That's why an IO-540 in a TB20 delivers at least as many MPG than an IO-320 (?) in a TB9/10. Similar airframe, TB20 has no legs hanging out
There is no free lunch with planes. Everything is a tradeoff against something else.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pianorak
Originally Posted by Wrong Stuff
. . . deeply unpopular in the UK - possibly because they have a bad reputation for operation on grass.
In reality with the J, the gear doors are very close to the ground and could easily get damaged. You can remove them for grass runway operation, but it's a fag. Personally, I pick destinations with hard runways as although you miss out on some great places, it's not worth the risk of a prop strike. But I know others who are a lot less cautious and are happy operating off grass.
Originally Posted by Pianorak
Originally Posted by Wrong Stuff
. . . but there's no way anyone else is flying it .
Originally Posted by IO540
There is no free lunch with planes. Everything is a tradeoff against something else.
I've always loved the efficiency of the Mooney. I never think twice about flying somewhere because it's so frugal in terms of fuel burn. And although I've got GAMIs fitted I never bother with LOP operations because the saving in fuel isn't worth losing the 10-20 knots. Against that, the cabin has a bit of a "sports car" feel - although it's well suited to tall people, it's quite narrow and you really feel it in winter if everyone's wearing bulky jackets. For European touring, though, it's difficult to beat.
Last edited by Wrong Stuff; 18th Aug 2006 at 23:32.