Looking for a first airplane - TB9?

Hi our club had a TB9 and I flew many enjoyable hours in it.
IMO it feels a bit underpowered when compared to similar enginwd Robin’s. And you really notice a difference when moving to the higher powered TB10.
I found it very comfortable and stable to fly.
The club sold it as maintenance became too expensive for the hourly rate it could be charged out at.

There really is nothing economical about the specs of a TB9. 32 litres of Avgas an hour = 100 Euros per hour for fuel alone these days, to go 95 knots. Well, what is economical about them is the purchase price, exactly because they are not hugely popular.

If you wanted to go more economical though, you would have to go 2-seater, and if you don‘t want to do that (family) than the certified light 4-seaters are all more or less the same in cost. I would still consider maybe an AA5A instead. A little bit faster, mogas-capable, sometimes lower landing fees, more pleasant to fly. But some people just like the TB design, so if you like that, go for it.

I do like the TB design..IMO they have a very nice feel about them and keeping a little power on until the round out, either a bit of practice you can get a kiss landing every time. It was much appreciated by my wife and mother in law.🙂 My wife particularly being a nervous passenger.
Bosco is correct about 32litres an hour but I think someone said there is now an STC for use of mogas along with several others to allow a bit of modernisation. The same engine in the Robin 300 series gets 120kt for roughly the same fuel flow and can take off and land shorter as well as carry more load. ( Sorry I keep mentioning Robin’s but it’s a comparison I have experience of as we had both in the club at the same time.) It’s the, I’ll call them add ons that seem to cost the maintenance money. Silly things like the door openers and supports, (brain fade as to.what they are called).IIRC exhaust parts are also a little pricier than the norm.

I would still consider maybe an AA5A instead. A little bit faster, mogas-capable, sometimes lower landing fees, more pleasant to fly.

For those unfamiliar the AA5A is the 150 HP Cheetah version of the four seat Grumman, which means the small engined version, like the earlier AA5 Traveler but with cleaned up aerodynamics. The Cheetah would burn about 15% less fuel per hour than anything with an 180 HP engine while cruising at 120 kts versus 100 kts for the TB9. A nice plane but with limited high altitude performance, rectified by the AA5B with its 180 HP climb capability and 135 kts cruise speed.

It seems to me that the main benefit of the TB9 compared the either AA5A or B would be low purchase cost, which is no bad thing but be sure that speed is not a priority. 100 kts on 160 HP would otherwise be tiresome on a trip.

Folklore and a lot of people’s opinion is that given typical en route winds and typical GA legs, 120 kts is about the slowest that works well for going places, although given patience you can go anywhere in anything.

Silvaire wrote:

It seems to me that the main benefit of the TB9 compared the either AA5A or B would be low purchase cost, which is no bad thing but be sure that speed is not a priority. 100 kts on 160 HP would otherwise be tiresome on a trip.

Maybe in the US. Here in Europe, TBs tend to be more expensive than AA-5A/B of comparable configuration. Grummans also tend to have lower maintenance costs.

Spain is a big country with fewer fields than other countries, so speed may be important to get somewhere in a reasonable time. You may love time spent in the air, your pax less so.
You must think of hot climate performance vs runway length at your typical destination.

The problem of the AA5 is that it’s an owner airplane. I would love to sit in one to see how I fit in but have never seen one with my own eyes. Ok, maybe on the grass at flying legends but that doesn’t count

Good luck.

I went through this exercise in 2000-2001.

I would much rather go for the TB10 than the TB9. Much more useful due to better runway performance, extra range, extra ceiling which is important in the European IFR system, and a bit more speed, and it has the same very nice cockpit as the whole TB range. Passengers love it, and the two doors are great for both easy access and safety.

The TB9 is the cheapest in the TB range and thus tends to suffer from the same “entry level” issues as any other “entry level” model e.g. the Arrow (PA28R) is the cheapest retractable so a lot of people buy it who can barely afford to look after it, hence so many of them are shagged. This issue will be amplified in Spain where for various reasons (e.g. the economic collapse, and the hot wx) planes for sale tend to be in a poor condition.