TB or not TB? That is the question....
 

Sorry for the awful pun but I am thinking of upgrading my Archer to a sophisticated single such as an Arrow or similar.

I spotted a current advert for a TB20 which suits my requirements but as I know very little about the type I wondered what the pitfalls are.

Can anyone give a rough guide to the pros and cons of owning and running one? Including the availability of spares etc? Any help appreciated.

Whatever I choose I need BRNAV approved IFR capability.

Thanks.

BB.

I had an Archer 2 and now share a TB 20. The TB 20 is between Arrow and Saratoga in terms of performance and comfort. It is well put together and performs very well. Spares have been no problem, RGV at Gloucester can get most things overnight.

The Rnav and IFR capability are dependent on the avionics fit but most TB20s are capable and have three axis autopilot.

Google Peter2000 for a very detailed owner website there's also a great Socata TB forum in the USA.

If you really want sensible advice about buying a TB-20, I suggest you get a hold of Peter H who, I believe, runs the EuroGA website. He really makes his TB-20 work for him.

I would recommend flying one before you make any purchasing decisions. I wanted to like the TB20, I really did... I had found an absolute bargain. I love the cabin (which seems to be a marmite issue for a lot of people) but unfortunately I absolutely hated the control harmony.

I would describe the elevator as "normal" but the ailerons feel like they are set in concrete, which I put down to the relatively small size of the ailerons and the fact that the control wheel only turns a maximum of 45 degrees. I found it very strange and it really put me off the aircraft. Whilst I enjoy touring, I also like to pole the thing around the sky on a nice day - I didn't feel the TB20 was really suited to that.

Thanks for all the replies. The blog by Peter2000 is about all anyone could wish for and is a great reference for potential buyers.

I know an Archer is hardly comparable to a Chipmunk in handling, but like Hyph, I do appreciate being able to enjoy my 'poling' so that was a useful tip.

BB

I find the "poling " comment a bit bizarre, what does it mean? It's perfectly possible to fly a TB 20 in small circles with significant angles of bank should you so desire, but it's primarily an IFR go places machine which is what OP said he wanted. It's streets ahead of the Archer 2, which I used to own, in all except short field performance. It's also better than an Arrow, but not as good as a Bonanza or Saratoga.

Or a low tail Lance.

I had the opportunity to fly a TB 200 Tobago XL for a while and yes, it was nice, comfortable and quite fast, although a bit heavy on the controls, but I really disliked the non-existing glide. Get the throttle on idle and it dropped like a stone, so no way to fly rectangular patterns in training, just immediate turn and down.

BoeingBoy


Please let me know a bit about your Archer, by PM if that would be more correct.

As suggested above Peter H is a very knowledgable TB20 advocate his blog and forum have huge amounts of info.

I had an early TB20 (1984) for two years. I flew just over 200 hours in the TB and absolutely loved it! It had the most comfortable seating position it felt like being in a sports car bucket seat.

It cruised at the book speed of 145kts at 14GPh (low level). The W&B was good for taking four people some bags and a decent amount of fuel. It was capable of operating out of 500m Tarmac. The trailing link undercarriage was fantastic and made some more doubtful landings seem perfect! It was an all round well built aeroplane if you can forgive the slightly strange push switches. Nice to fly VFR and IFR. I only changed as I needed more seats.

Parts were never a problem for me, but I understand that they can be more expensive than say Piper.

Not sure if you know RateOne at Gloucester. They have one on the fleet might be worth trying to fly it as part of an IR renewal or training so you can get a feel for it without more commitment.

What's it like on grass ?

Grass performance was ok. I had a three blade prop which gives slightly more ground clearance. I used to visit my In-laws at Elmsett which is a perfect 900m grass runway like a croquet lawn. You would have to run the numbers but I don't think short grass runways with long wet grass are the TB's forte.

Thanks everyone. As I'm strictly a 'concrete and no stones' kind of guy, grass fields are not really my thing.

I owned my TB20 for a number of years, and flew it from the UK to Florida, the Bahamas and back. The comment above, that it is primarily a go-places IFR aircraft is absolutely right. Its only real vices are that it is not a short-field machine, and that the original avionics and engine instruments are pretty dreadful, and you'd want to get one that had been invested in. Pre 1990 aircraft have something of a reputation for corrosion too...

You can't slide a cigarette paper between the TB20 and Rockwell 114 in terms of performance, my guess is the R114 would be slightly less expensive to maintain but you need to fly both aircraft before you decide to buy.

A friend has a very nice 114 but his worry is that some spares are becoming harder to find as opposed to simply cost.

TB is nice enough if you are a midget. If you are six foot like me you end up hunched over all the time to stop hitting the canopy. It has a dreadful glide and dreadful short field or grass field capability.

I enjoyed the time I was in the group but never again.

Perhaps you need the OP's Archer :-)

I have a perfectly good Hawk XP.... ;)

I've flown a TB20 for over 15 years now and would just add that when I was looking for a plane in its class I kept coming back to the TB20. The Rockwell Commander series are beautiful looking planes and I wanted them to come out as the one to get just for the looks but the TB20 came out on top in my spreadsheet (which has since gone due to hard disk failure).

I have flown mine several times to Firs Farm (lovely 600 metres grass farm strip near Newbury) and I think every time I go there it has a cross wind. One of my fellow owners was over 6' tall but had no major issues flying it. The plane will glide at over 9:1 clean which is better than the DA40 configuration in this https://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=102145 incident. I fly mine to Switzerland regularly and normally use half tanks for that journey. It is a solid plane and for me the next step up would be to get access to FIKI and perhaps pressurisation.