Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Tecnam P2010 EASA certified

Bringing up this thread.

Tecnam has now announced the P2010 with the CD170 Engine
LINK

So this will be the first Aircraft powered with this “new” Diesel Engine – Piper announced a Seminole with this Engine some time ago, but no news since then.
So finaly a modern Aircrafts gets a modern Engine! :)

Last Edited by Matt_FK at 27 May 20:06
Austria

Unfortunately, as many other new aircraft these days (DA40 Diesel), it is severly challenged on useful load. 365 kgs as per the glossy video. In practice, it will definitely be less, because it always is. Say 340 kgs. This means that this shiny plane cannot AT ALL be flown with 4 (even very average) adults on board.That makes it unattractive for private owners or clubs (sightseeing flights!..). Such aircraft are sometimes referred to as 2+2 seaters, but of course not in their marketing.

In other words: it weighs over 800 kgs. A basic four-seater with 168hp. Compare with other 160-180hp-aircraft from the past, old Cherokee 180s or Cessna 172s weighs about 670 kgs. Sure, they don’t have such nice interiors, etc., but on the performance side, 800+ kgs is simply too much for so little horsepower. Say goodbye to the typical short or grass runways of Europe.

But it should work fine for flight schools in Asia, where

  • they need the aircraft to run on jet fuel
  • they ususally fly only with 2 POB, and rarely with e a 3rd POB as an observer/checker
  • they only fly from 3km runways

That is definitely the market they are trying to aim it. But this market is already laregly conquered by the DA40, so it won’t be easy. Well, maybe for schools in Dubai etc. it will be nice to have a high wing instead of a low wing, to stop getting grilled on every flight.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 28 May 06:59
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

I am suprised they went with the continental for this application – its 18kg/50lbs heavier than the 135/155 HP version – another couple of kg and they could have installed the Lycoming del-120 which has 205hp for takeoff and can run at 180hp all day – much better match for this and would have solved the so so performance.
The critical altitude for the cd-170 engine is only 6000 feet compared to 9000 for the 155hp version, to get more horsepower out of the same engine they went for a much lower compression ratio and higher fuel flow – interestingly no bsfc numbers published for the cd-170 motor.
http://www.continental.aero/uploadedFiles/Content/Engines/Diesel_Engines/CD100-SpecSheet.pdf local copy

https://www.lycoming.com/engines/del-120 spec sheet

Last Edited by aidanf123 at 28 May 08:07

Off topic but in a similar vein, whatever happened to the Symphony 160? That was EASA certified back in 2005, even before it was FAA certified although I think it was built in Canada.

France

The critical altitude

What’s the definition for this alt?

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

critical altitude – altitude at which the engine can no longer generate full power

aidanf123 wrote:

critical altitude – altitude at which the engine can no longer generate full power

Relevant for turbocharged engines (such as diesels).

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

aidanf123 wrote:

The critical altitude for the cd-170 engine is only 6000 feet compared to 9000 for the 155hp version

With that critical altitude, it is interesting that the brochure claims a practical ceiling of 19,500’ … seems a bit optimistic.

boscomantico wrote:

Say goodbye to the typical short or grass runways of Europe.

I gather then that you don’t believe the performance numbers in the brochure (hard level runway, no wind, std atm, MTOW):
T/O run 380m
T/O distance (assume that means over 50’ obst) 580m
Landing run 260m
Landing distance 540m
I do agree that those takeoff numbers are marginal for the common 600m grass strips, not to mention 500m.

LSZK, Switzerland

gallois wrote:

Off topic but in a similar vein, whatever happened to the Symphony 160? That was EASA certified back in 2005, even before it was FAA certified although I think it was built in Canada.

There’s a pretty good Wiki link covering the history of the aircraft and company. It was a certified version of the Glastar with fuselage construction similar to a Tecnam or Mooney, a steel tube frame back to the tail cone. Very limited fuel capacity, something like 29 gallons. You see them for sale in the $50K USD range.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 28 May 14:56
20 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top