Socata TBs - future support etc

OK, but the last of those was made… when?

Socata engineering, and probably corrosion protection, improved as the years went on.

Krister L

4-5 students a year! What is your NAA requirements to become an ATO? In the Uk the cost of compliance has effectively made such establishment non break even able yet alone profitable.

On a less bitter and twisted note.

I’ve seen a few TB9/10 on the market recently that would be suitable for flying school use and for cheap as chip prices as well. My memory fades a little these days but there was certainly one school out in Florida that used Tampico pretty well exclusively during the early 90’s. I also know off a flying school that has a TB9 on the books.

My only worry is that when I have talked to the engineers that are local to me is that they are not familiar with them and they hate them like the plaque yet give them a Cessna or pa 28 (they hate the pa38) they know exactly what to do and at minimum cost.

My only worry is that when I have talked to the engineers that are local to me is that they are not familiar with them and they hate them like the plaque yet give them a Cessna or pa 28 (they hate the pa38) they know exactly what to do and at minimum cost.

That I really don’t understand – unless these people are astonishingly ignorant, incompetent and without any imagination and certainly without any ability to read. OK.. the last one is hardly uncommon in the UK!

I am not a maintenance engineer but have been doing the 50hr checks for 8 years, and assisted on Annuals for most of that time. Last 2 annuals I did together with an A&P/IA. So I know what is in that plane. I am also hangared at a maintenance company (everything from piston stuff through TBMs to King Airs) so I see all the more common hardware, and I see how it goes together.

And I just cannot see why somebody who can (a) pick up a spanner and a grease gun and (b) can decipher the Roman alphabet should have any problems working on a TB. It is a really simple plane.

Yet many owners have reported the sentiment which you mention.

I suspect the phrase “they know exactly what to do and at minimum cost” has a more subtle meaning to them: do almost nothing, tick all the boxes, invoice the client how much he is prepared to pay, and be fairly sure the thing won’t fall apart or seize up before the next time they see it

The guy who works with me had almost no experience of TBs before he started working with me and now he prefers working on them to working on anything else. Especially Diamonds, apparently. He says everything is really simple, and I concur.

There are certainly various procedures which need to be done IAW the MM e.g. setting up the control linkages, flap and aileron angles, etc. The MM contains detailed instructions for doing these. If one doesn’t read the MM, it may not be obvious how to put it all back together. But there is usually no need to take things apart. The flaps and ailerons come off at every Annual for greasing (not many firms like doing that – they prefer to squirt some aerosol in there) but that doesn’t upset the linkages and everything just goes back together as it was.

I think he was an idiot, but I respect your pragmatic decision

Special tools? This man has never read the MM and probably can’t – he is from the large population of “engineers” who never read anything and just jump on the plane and do the standard Cessna/Piper service, then get the secretary to type up the release to service “IAW with the MM”. Some of them probably actually can’t read which is one reason ADs get skipped… you do have to read the list of applicable ADs.

Even I could do the full Annual on a TB20, and I have only just recently bought a grease gun

Tongue in cheek aside, the one thing which is really hard on a TB20 is doing heavy avionics work on the early models which don’t have the two access covers under the front window. I don’t know what S/N those came in. The GT started S/N 2000 (also in year 2000, coincidentally) but the covers came in years before that. A lot of avionics shops never noticed that the later models have these covers and they accordingly hate TBs and jack the bill up in the hope that you will go away.

Can those access panels be retrofitted to earlier models?

Never heard of it, though “anything is possible”. Would be a lot of work.

On the earlier models, there are panels in the firewall which unscrew, bit it’s a really messy solution. What avionics shops do, on bigger jobs, is they take the hinges out on the instrument panel clusters and move them out of the way. That is also quite easy, but you need a rig to hold them in place. Another way is to take the panels right out and then you can work on the bench much more easily.

The centre stack is more tricky but it comes out in about 45 mins if you know what you are doing, and then you can work on a bench in comfort, because it has connectors. The GT has normal circular connectors there which makes it really neat. The gotcha is if some past installer wired straight to it, running wires through the holes Those wires will then need to be cut off and routed through connectors, etc.

However a lot of work doesn’t need the centre stack removed. Even if working inside it, you can often get enough access by removing some of the boxes and getting your hand through. The KMD550 leaves a big hole, for example. Mine has never been out, and this is where I currently am. It would probably have to come out for e.g. a GTN750 installation. For that sort of work you need a heated hangar with a workshop, which is something I would need to arrange if doing that upgrade. But that would be five figures so I won’t do it unless PRNAV becomes mandatory. My enquiries of last couple of days via NATS is that there is no likely process in UK airspace that would affect light GA.

Just make sure you buy a TB which has those access panels, if you plan on a big avionics refit.

is it safe to assume that SMA and Continental have managed to find a way around that issue? Cessna after all are marketing the Skylane solely with a diesel, the T182T has been dropped.

No idea. All I know is that Socata got Britten-Norman (on the IOW) to do at least some of the R&D work, on a TB10 or a 20, plus there was (still is, AFAIK) a diesel TB20 flying in France. Rumour was that it was abandoned due to vibration. But that was a long time ago. Diesels do vibrate a lot more than petrol engines, due to the aggressive compression cycle. If you fly in a DA42 and watch the engine(s) shake on their mountings, you can see why the is so much “give” in the mountings for those engines.

and this is where I currently am.

Peter,
your cockpit looks like a little airliner. I am sure you’ ve also got a coffee machine in your galley

Do you have the KA-33 Cooling Blower installed? If yes, do you have a picture of it, i.e. where it sits?
I heard that all planes made for US export were equipped that way. Mine hasn’t got one, so I plan to add it.