socata tb9 any good ?

[jxk]

IO540

Most scheduled maintenance bits on any normal GA plane are common as muck parts which you can pick up at any aviation parts shop. Gaskets, filters, plugs, etc. This is true for Cessnas, Pipers, Socatas, etc. Only a mug is going to buy an IO-320 oil filter from Socata....

From experience Socata seem adverse to using standard AGS so very often you will find that instead of being able to buy 'of the shelf items' you have to buy manufacturer's parts. Fuel & Oil hoses?

[A and C]

A lot of talk about TB-9 Vs Cessnas & Pipers but what of the other French Factory?

Performance wise the Robin DR400 will better the TB9 in all areas except standing out in the rain.

TB9
Engine: O-320-D2A 160HP
Average empty weight : 1,440 lbs
Max. take off weight (MTOW) : 2,337 lbs
Max. useful load : 897 lbs
Take off over 50 ft obstacle : 1,866 ft
Landing over 50 ft obstacle : 1,378 ft

DR400-160

Engine: O-320 160HP
Average empty weight : 1,318 lbs
Max. take off weight (MTOW) : 2,315 lbs
Max. useful load : 996 lbs
Take off over 50 ft obstacle : 1,936 ft
Landing over 50 ft obstacle : 1,788 ft

Some of the performance numbers for the Robin dont look so good at first untill you take into account the Robin is doing this all with 99Lb of extra payload.

[jxc]

Ok so now i know warrior is better than a tb9 i will have to keep an eye open for one of them in east sussex area. The robin DR400 is what i would really like but seems to be working out at over double the cost of the tb9 share


Cheers

[A and C]

More Cost?

At the moment I run a DR400-180 & a PA28-180 and can't slide a cigarette paper between the two of them on operating cost, so I can't think why the TB9 should cost any more than a DR400.

The TB9 may well cost less to buy but I would take a very good look at the group finances before getting involved as the low cost may well hide some big bills just over the horizon.

[Fright Level]

The TB9 was produced as a trainer, not a touring a/c. Your kids will grow during the time you own the share in the plane and so you won't be able to go far with four up with some bags. In a group, this leaves the problem of how much fuel is in the tanks when you turn up at the airport en famille.

I had a share in a TB10 which was very capable but 90% of my trips were 2 or 3 up. You really need to fly a TB to see what the benefits are ("modern" interior design, great visibility, rear pax sit higher and get good vis out front etc).

A summary of the TB series:

TB9 Tampico O-320 160bhp - fixed gear & prop
TB10 Tobago O-360 180bhp - fixed gear, variable prop
TB20 Trinidad IO-540 250bhp - retractable gear, variable prop
TB21 - TIO-540 250bhp - retractable gear, variable prop & turbo normaliser (sea level to FL200)

I'd view the TB9 as a 150 but with seats in the back and look out for a TB10 share if you like the type. There are quite a few around.

[S-Works]

Performance wise the Robin DR400 will better the TB9 in all areas except standing out in the rain.

How can this be so A an C? according to IO540 it is a case of simple physics that aircraft with the same horsepower are all going to perform the same.

IO540 Wrote:
The TB9 is no worse on runway requirements than any other 4-seater with same engine HP, weight, and stall speed. How could it be? Physics is physics

.

So how do we reconcile the physics?

[IO540]

From experience Socata seem adverse to using standard AGS so very often you will find that instead of being able to buy 'of the shelf items' you have to buy manufacturer's parts. Fuel & Oil hoses?

It depends on which ones.

The hose between the fuel pump and the carb/fuel servo, and the hose between the latter and the injector spider, are standard Lyco parts which any hose shop can make up for about £40. If you get Teflon ones (£40) they are good for life (on a TB).

Same for the oil cooler hoses, IIRC.

Airframe-specific flexible hoses, 2 or 3 of those, are a "Socata special" which use ISO thread fittings, L43-215 type, and these fittings are expensive. Such a hose costs about £400 from Socata, or about £200 if you get them made by a hose shop (I have done this, email me for the details) which can get the fittings. Again, on a TB aircraft, Teflon hoses have no life limit.

AFAIK, the only time any of these hoses are a mandatory replacement is on the engine ones which are replaced at engine overhaul i.e. 2000hrs+. Not a significant problem considering the cost of an OH, and only 1 or 2 hoses.

To be fair, this is a real issue but only because maintenance shops tend to be slightly lazy and the UK ones tend to blindly buy parts from Air Touring. Anybody with initiative can easily find the parts from non-Socata sources. Socata have tried to make it hard by giving every last nut and washer a special P/N and most are not cross-referenced to the real ones. The idea, of course, is that the Socata dealer buys all parts from Socata.

But the whole GA business works on this kind of scam - they rely on lack of initiative and ignorance. Superficially it's easier on an N-reg because an 8130-3 is good but an 8130-3 (or any other traceability document whatsoever) is equally good for a non-PT G-reg; ref CAA AN-14 (which most people don't want you to know).

A large part of reducing the operating cost of a plane, especially an old one, is known as a "brain", and not simply buying everything from the dealer. True for a Socata, a Cessna, a Piper, everybody.

But there is no doubt that if you get stuck at Kathmandu you are better off with a Cessna. But.... since the cost of unscheduled maintenance depends heavily on the general condition of the plane, and in the later years being made up largely of airframe parts, so much depends on the plane's history.

Jxk - I will send you an email or a PM with some info.

[wsmempson]

Just to add my half-penny-worth re the Warrior, the book figures (weights and performance) quoted earlier only apply to new aircraft. The performance figures relate to performance at MAUW (2,325lb or 2440lb depending on the model) and the basic weights are seemingly those before you start adding modern kit.

My experience of renting 30-40 year old machinary is that it rarely performs as it did when it was brand new.

Looking at the club fleet of 6 Warriors that I learnt to fly on - which is as immaculate a fleet of pipers as you will find anywhere - I don't think any of those had a useful load of much more than 825lbs, due to the basic weight always being higher than the original book figure. Knock off 200lbs for fuel to tabs and you're down at 600lbs for pax and baggage.

Whether this is due to the gradual acquisition of lots avionics, paint, upholstery etc. over the years, or piper doing what Colin Chapman did when he homologated road cars for racing and declared an impossibly low basic weight, I couldn't say.

By all accounts, the same will almost certainly hold true of a TB9. I reckon for your mission capability, you need a step up from these two a/c. PA28 180/1 or Arrow, Cessna 182, TB10, a bigger engined Robin, etc.

[IO540]

Indeed, and the engines get progressively knackered too. Look at the AAIB report on that fatal PA28 departure from Sandown. The cams were so trashed the valve lift was reduced by about 40%. Almost nobody in GA does oil analysis and evidently not everybody even cuts open the oil filter.

[BigEndBob]

Years ago had TB9 at the flying school, couldn't wait to get rid of it.
Good for going places in a straight line, but thats about it.
Didn't seem to have a climb attitude therefore a bit rubbish for teaching on.

[A and C]

Bose-x

It is very simple it is all down to aerodynamics, the Robin has a very clever wing that reduces the induced drag in the cruise yet at slow speeds gives the full wing area over to lifting the aircraft.

A lot of atention has been given to reducing the parasite drag, if you look at the robin from the front you will see much smaller engine cooling inlets than on most american aircraft, this is just part of the drag reduction on the Robin.

[IO540]

Didn't seem to have a climb attitude therefore a bit rubbish for teaching on.

That's interesting. How would one reach the certified ceiling of 11,000ft without a "climb attitude"?



The 25kt max demo crosswind is also exceptional. On many days when it's 15-20kt across the runway, the place I am based at is quiet as a graveyard. The Cessnas and Pipers cannot fly. I have not yet (in 6.5 years) cancelled a flight due to excessive crosswind.

[S-Works]

The 25kt max demo crosswind is also exceptional. On many days when it's 15-20kt across the runway, the place I am based at is quiet as a graveyard. The Cessnas and Pipers cannot fly. I have not yet (in 6.5 years) cancelled a flight due to excessive crosswind.

Rubbish, want to see my trophy from the Guernsey Air Rally for landing in a 38kt direct crosswind.

We all know that the it is down to pilot ability and currency. Any Cessna or Piper is just as capable of flying as the TB in those conditions.

We all know you think the TB is the best thing since sliced bread, but lets keep it in the bounds of reality.

I am still looking forward to your lecture on simple physics.

[jxk]

IO540

Airframe-specific flexible hoses, 2 or 3 of those, are a "Socata special" which use ISO thread fittings, L43-215 type, and these fittings are expensive. Such a hose costs about £400 from Socata, or about £200 if you get them made by a hose shop (I have done this, email me for the details) which can get the fittings. Again, on a TB aircraft, Teflon hoses have no life limit.

Yeap, I know all this, that's why I posted the hoses as an example of the different cost associated with the two types of aircraft being discussed. From a maintenance point of view there are other items such as the brake motors and access to what looks like a modular instrument panel which are both real pain to work on too.

Have to agree with previous posting about the efficiency of DR400 series and I especially liked the EcoFlyer with the Thielert engine. But, we all know the problems that Apex is having with the availability of this engine! DR's are also wood, fabric and fibre glass which does mean they should be hangared; more expense.

Sorry, Cessna & Piper spamcans are far more practical for most people.

[IO540]

brake motors and access to what looks like a modular instrument panel

What is a "brake motor"?

The instrument cluster (which is not "modular" in any way) is in 3 parts, LH, RH and middle. The LH and RH are dead easy to get to. The middle one is hard to get to; the whole thing has to come out, but in the context of any work done on those avionics it doesn't matter. If you are having a GNS530 put in, the extra 2-3 hours will be trivial.

I especially liked the EcoFlyer with the Thielert engine

Well, there's a really great recommendation for a well supported engine with low cost assured-availability spares.

Confusion warning: two very similar pseudonyms in this thread: jxc and jxk.

[steveking]

Interesting about the take off performance of the types. How do the types compare in the cruise performance. I don't fly 4 seaters very often but a friend of mine has a Mooney and it seems to be a bit better in the cruise compared with an Arrow with the same engine. How does the TB 9 or TB10 compare.

[Fuji Abound]

Rubbish, want to see my trophy from the Guernsey Air Rally for landing in a 38kt direct crosswind.

I hope you are not claiming that as a record?

[jxk]

IO540

The instrument cluster (which is not "modular" in any way) is in 3 parts, LH, RH and middle.

If it's not modular why is it in 3 parts?

[IO540]

The instrument cluster (which is not "modular" in any way) is in 3 parts, LH, RH and middle. If it's not modular why is it in 3 parts?

What is an instrument "cluster"?

The instrument panel (the usual aviation name) of a TB has three parts to it. The 2 end ones tilt forward and also there is rear access to each via exernal inspection panels. The middle part, which could be called a "cluster", is the fairly usual avionics construction which is used for pluggable avionics, comprising of an aluminium sheet fabricated box which has almost no access to the back of it and which has to come out whole to re-wire the instruments in it. Normally, one has radios, GPS and other pluggable items in the middle part, and these come out with a 3/32 allen key (but you knew that, hey?). The only time one needs to access the middle part of the TB instrument panel is when doing really major avionics work. The individual instruments just pull out.

I am merely trying to dispel the saaaaaaame ooooold rumours which go around GA about the TB range, repeated mostly by people who have never actually done the work on these types.

The reality is that a TB is constructed pretty conventionally throughout and any maintenance person with a brain and who can read (the MM) can work on it. For really major work, say installing a TCAS system, there are loads of gotchas as to how to remove e.g. the interior trim without making a mess, but how often does the average punter spend 5 digits on an avionics upgrade? And one would hope that if doing such an upgrade he will take the plane to a firm which does serious work on upmarket types, not some monkey.

The individual avionics e.g. altimeters etc are in the end sections which have excellent access. You can pop in a new altimeter in the time it takes to sort out the static hose on the back of it.

[jxc]

I only meant the robin dr400 being more expensive due to the fact the one i have seen and like in east sussex is 10k share and the TB9 not far from it is 4k i know both will probablt take offers the robin is the one i would really like but finances are a pain in the rear till early Feb

Jxc