One aircraft in particular, the P55 Tornado, caught the attention of enthusiasts by winning the prestigious Giro di Sicilia air race. From that success, the family gained enough notoriety and confidence to start the first company—Partenavia.

From humble, pre-World War II beginnings to multiple state-of-the-art facilities today, Tecnam strives to be a dominant player in the piston market. The plan to find niches that can be exploited and dominated by aircraft designed to be class leaders has served the company well and is gaining traction. Tecnam produces a range of aircraft from light sport aircraft, to piston twins used in short haul commercial applications, to the recent 2024 FLYING Innovation Award winner two-seat trainer P-Mentor, capable of taking students from zero time through instrument and commercial. 

The upscale variant of the P2010, the Gran Lusso, is another example of the company’s ability to fill a void with a well-designed product.

The P2010 (or “twenty-ten”) Gran Lusso, like all current Tecnam aircraft, begins its model designation with the letter “P” that pays homage to the proud Pascale family lineage—no harm there. The number that follows the P indicates the year when the design was born and the aircraft began to take shape. The challenge here is two-fold. First, aircraft development takes years to advance from paper airplane to fully certified aircraft. Thus by the time a model appears on the market, the model name gives it the illusion of being a couple years old. For example, the 2024 Gran Lusso I tested is dubbed the P2010. Second, the naming convention doesn’t provide much indication as to where various products fit in the model line-up. For example, the P2002 is a single, the P2006 is a twin, the P2008 is a single, the P2010 is a single, and the P2012 is also a twin. 

• READ MORE: We Fly: Piper M700 Fury

But what’s in a name? In the case of the 2024 P2010 Gran Lusso, the thing to focus on is why the aircraft is deemed Gran Lusso, Italian for “grand luxury.” The aircraft is elegant looking, tastefully appointed, and its refinements (thanks largely to its FADEC turbo-diesel powerplant) include simplicity of operation from one-button start to the elimination of both mixture and prop controls. 

Airframe

The aircraft has attractive, sleek contours, common among composite fuselages, accentuated by complementary finish of a beautiful paint scheme. Italian fashion models have long been heralded for their curvaceous lines and chiseled features, and the Gran Lusso has similar sex appeal on its own runway. 

Interestingly, the P2010 variants have three different tail configurations based on what is slung firewall forward. Empennage configuration changes slightly with different powerplants—Continental CD-170 (170 hp), Lycoming IO-360 (180 hp), and Lycoming IO-390 (215 hp)—to achieve the desired handling characteristics. Also curious is the blend of airframe construction methodology, including a metal wing mated to a composite fuselage. 

The beauty of composite construction lies in the speed of production (with far fewer parts and labor required), its favorable weight-to-strength ratio versus aircraft aluminum, and the ability to craft complex shapes seamlessly (with lower parasitic drag) from large-scale molds. However, carbon fiber materials are generally more expensive than aircraft-grade aluminum. Consequently, even with the added production time of riveting overlapping skins to stamped metal ribs and bulkheads, aluminum construction can be more cost-effective. Some may argue that making metal field repairs may also be easier in the case of hangar rash or bird strike. 

• READ MORE: Ultimate Issue: We Fly the Cessna T182T Skylane

Regardless of the manufacturing strategy, the airframe is a thing of beauty with attention to detail in such mundane items as a door handle portends that no detail is too small to be thoughtfully designed. And speaking of doors, the aircraft also boasts another thoughtful feature rare in a four-place piston single—a rear passenger door (more on that later). 

Cabin

Approaching luxury automotive fit and finish best describes the interior in a single sentence. Legacy aircraft designs have long perpetuated an odd juxtaposition between the bougieness of what one drives to the airport and what one flies away.

Aircraft designed in the 21st century have all benefited from and exploited a path that brings the aircraft experience closer to the auto interior experience (noise level aside). And given what new pistons single retail for these days compared to luxury cars, making the aircraft feel like a luxury auto experience helps make the price tag seem like a better value for those who need the justification. 

In the Gran Lusso, everything the pilot and passengers see, touch, and interface with has a premium feel, most of which is wrapped in Italian leather and hand-stitched—the French way. The interior is also available in six color schemes with carbon-fiber inlays.

Vents, cleverly ducted from the front of the engine cowl to the panel provide an immediate airflow for cooling upon engine start. Even if the fuselage has been turned into a terrarium by the summer heat, the airflow facilitates evaporative cooling until the temperature lapse rate of higher altitudes substitutes for air conditioning.

The front seats are electronically adjustable up and down, and manually fore and aft. At 6-foot-1, I had ample leg room without the seat at the rear stop leaving extra leg room for back-seat occupants. The rear passenger door makes ingress and egress more elegant than adjusting seats and seat backs and clambering from front to back. Even with the front seats fully aft, the rear door provides an unobstructed entry portal. Once comfortably seated, passengers will find ample options for charging devices, lighting, and cooling.

The baggage area is also flexible and accommodating. The rear seats are relatively easy to remove as are the baggage-area panels, making it easy to load larger, longer items like downhill skis through the rear passenger door, serving as a much larger cargo door.

Avionics

Garmin provides the interface for the last two-thirds of the aviate–navigate–communicate equation. The G1000NXi suite coupled to a GF700 autopilot is an increasingly familiar and incredibly robust panel. Both the G1000NXi and GFC700 have feature enhancements not found in earlier iterations.

The G1000 suite receives plenty of attention, largely because it has become so popular in new aircraft like the ones we cover in FLYING. In reality, fewer than 20,000 aircraft in the fleet boast G1000 avionics, so it’s still worth discussing what’s new. 

• READ MORE: Embraer’s Phenom 300E Full of Bossa Nova Style

The NXi version has an updated multifunction display (MFD) featuring a split-screen feature. This allows the pilot to have more pages visible, thereby reducing the need to switch between them to display desired information. The MFD screen can be split horizontally, vertically, or a combination of both for maximum customization. 

U.S. operators will benefit from enhanced terrain awareness through the addition of color-coded contouring when the aircraft is 2,000 feet (green shading), 1,000 feet (yellow), and 100 feet (red) agl. Map options include VFR sectional or IFR enroute.

Wireless connectivity now enables the pilot to stream information such as traffic and weather between compatible devices and apps so animated radar imagery can be overlaid on the MFD and the HSI inset on the PFD. Users can also transfer flight plans created on a remote device directly to the G1000NXi. 

The GFC 700 also includes visual approach capability for vectors or straight-in approaches with a coupled vertical flight path down to pilot-selectable minimums. 

The Gran Lusso’s G1000 is also equipped with features including synthetic vision (optional) and basic envelope protection in what Garmin calls ESP—electronic stability and protection. The system helps avoid loss-of-control scenarios by providing increasingly stronger forced feedback through the yoke if pitch or roll exceeds programmed limits. If the system is activated for an extended period, the autopilot will bring the aircraft back to straight and level flight. This feature can help avoid inadvertent stalls or other loss of control scenarios possibly induced by spatial disorientation.

The good news is, first, the forced feedback can be relatively easily overcome with firm control inputs, and second, the system can also be manually disabled for training purposes.

Engine

The Gran Lusso is powered by an overhead cam, liquid-cooled, fuel-injected, FADEC-controlled, turbocharged, intercooled, high compression, jet-A burning 170 hp powerplant. If that litany of engine tech sounds like something you’d find in an auto brochure, you’d be correct. This Continental CD-170 is a heavily modified Mercedes-Benz engine capable of a cruise speed of 140 knots on less than 9 gallons an hour.

Another welcome surprise is the much lower-than-expected ambient cabin noise than one generally experiences in a legacy piston single. While it isn’t the 65 decibel noise level of your family truckster at highway speed, in-flight conversations without a headset are possible with power pulled back to cruise.

Walkaround

My demo pilot for the day was Nate Weisman of CieloBlu, one of Tecnam’s U.S. dealers. Weisman is an instructor, demo and ferry pilot, salesman, marketer, and just all-around good guy. He is just what every aircraft dealer needs—someone who knows the aircraft, is easy to fly with, and can give you pointers while demonstrating.

During the walkaround for the aircraft  preflight inspection, Weisman pointed out the usual and customary items and also some that, again, speak to the attention to detail on the P2010. 

For example, there’s a small, almost unnoticeable drip sill attached above the front doors to divert rainwater away from the opening. Additionally, rather than hanging down into airflow, the wing fuel sumps are sculpted into the end of a small fairing. The baggage door doesn’t require a key and adds a level of security through a hidden release located inside the cabin.

Performance

Start-Up

The turbo diesel adds a number of practical benefits to this beautiful aircraft. But if you didn’t get a whiff of jet fuel while walking around the aircraft, the start-up procedure gives the first indication of what’s bolted to the firewall.

The aircraft has a single push-button start while still requiring a prestart checklist. The procedure is basically, flip the master on, engine master on, push and hold the engine start button until the engine fires, then release. 

Unlike gas-powered internal combustion engines, diesel engines do not have spark plugs but rather glow plugs to assist in the combustion process. Since glow plugs take a few seconds to heat up, there is a very brief pause required before cranking an engine to start. Once the GLOWSYS ACTV cas message appears, simply push and hold the start button until the engine fires.

Taxi

The fully castering nosewheel requires differential braking to taxi, but it also enables a very tight turning radius. Since the nosewheel isn’t connected in any way to the rudder, dancing with the rudder pedals isn’t going to provide any steering inputs while taxiing because the weak aerodynamic forces on the rudder at such low speeds typically will make the rudder ineffective.

Gently using the toe brakes for differential braking will keep you aligned on the centerline. For those who haven’t taxied a castering nosewheel, this may take a bit of driving around the airport to get a good feel for it.

When we taxied out to the runway for the demo flight, I couldn’t quite get a coordinated feel for where to place my feet to best manipulate the toe brakes. I wanted to rest my heels on the floor but couldn’t quite get the feel I wanted on the toe brakes. After landing, I realized that I could rest the balls of my feet on the top of the rudder pedals and work the toe brakes by rocking my toes forward.

Run-Up 

The benefits of the dual-channel FADEC engine were obvious and reduced workload. With no mags to test, and no prop to cycle, the run-up is a fairly simple process with the fully automated and redundant FADEC system testing itself—first FADEC channel A, then toggling to test the FADEC B channel.

The only other action was selecting takeoff flaps. There are only two flap settings, takeoff (15 degrees) and landing (40 degrees). That said, it probably took longer to write this paragraph than it did to complete the run-up.

Takeoff

Automated engine controls manage prop setting and fuel metering, leaving only a throttle lever in the center console for managing power.

With everything in the green and the modified Mercedes diesel up to temperature, we brought the power up and launched out of Appleton, Wisconsin, on a hot summer midday before EAA AirVenture with clouds building around us. 

After rotation, we targeted the century mark for the climb up to 6,500 to have some fun and see how the ESP would react. I was reasonably impressed by the climb ability—as a rule, diesel engines generally have more torque than gas. This makes the P2010 with the CD-170 a powerful combination that likes to climb yet doesn’t require an unusual amount of right rudder trim. 

Once stabilized at a safe altitude and clearing turns combined with familiarization with the controls and sight picture, we executed a power-on stall.

Pulling back on the yoke made the airspeed tape scroll below Vx and filled the windscreen with nothing but blue sky—one would be hard-pressed not to recognize the warning signs of an approaching power-on stall. As expected, the ESP system kept trying to convince me to lower the nose as I kept trying to put the yoke in my lap. The power-on stall was unremarkable and the aircraft recovered as expected.

The power-off stall characteristics felt a bit more squeamish with what I deemed to be a tendency to drop a wing more abruptly than I expected. Not disconcerting, just surprising, which brought up another point I was not aware of. Unlike some high-wing aircraft with gravity feed systems, the P2010 pilot must monitor fuel and switch fuel tanks periodically to maintain balance. Keeping an eye on fuel is a part of the routine scan, setting a timer is always wise, and programming a recurring MSG in the G1000 is also a great backup to help avoid a fuel imbalance that might aggravate a stall.

After a couple stalls, we leveled off and executed some steep turns that also woke up the ESP. As the bank angle increased beyond 30 degrees, an increasing amount of control input force was required to overcome ESP’s desire for the aircraft to rollout back to wings level. It would be difficult to overcontrol the aircraft with ESP on, but I can also envision times when I’d prefer to keep ESP off.

I also wanted to see if the Gran Lusso, which lived up to its name, also lived up to its marketing hype—I wanted to see 140 knots. With the GFC700 doing the flying, we pushed the throttle forward and yes, at 90 percent power on 8.9 gph, the airspeed tape scrolled to 140 ktas as advertised.

Conclusion

The Gran Lusso is a compelling product. At its core, it checks all three boxes for my trifecta of what a 21st century general aviation, cross-country aircraft design should be with regard to airframe, avionics, and powerplant.

Modern airframe—check.

While not fully composite, it includes a sleek, spacious fuselage that reduces weight and drag. The ramp presence is strong, the fit and finish is impeccable, and the interior appointments are stunning in this class of aircraft.

GA aircraft are expensive, no question. In the past however, the premium price didn’t seem to align with the technology, fit, finish, features, and comfort one might expect when reaching so deep into your retirement fund.

In this case, everything about the Gran Lusso seemed to indicate that no corners were cut in the process of delivering grand luxury. OK, maybe a heated seat would have been a nice addition—and a key fob to remotely illuminate underwing and interior LED lighting (I’ll be looking for that next).

Modern avionics—check.

The Garmin G100NXi suite needs no more explanation. The feature-rich package, digital autopilot, and safety attributes have altered the way many of us fly. There’s considerably more features in the NXi upgrade that aren’t covered here, but it will suffice to say that the G1000 is synonymous with modern avionics.

Modern powerplant—check.

The vast majority of GA aircraft are powered by very basic, generally low-tech, air-cooled engines designed in the previous century. While engine OEMs have made vast improvements over time in reliability, fuel delivery, electronic controls, and more, simply put, aviation engine technology has not kept pace with the modernization and performance found in today’s cars and motorcycles.

If a 4-cylinder liquid-cooled, double-overhead cam, motorcycle engine can produce more than 200 hp from only 1,000 cc displacement, why are we still slogging around with 360 ci air-cooled, pushrod engines pumping out 200 hp?

Granted it’s not easy. I get it, but you see the point. The Gran Lusso has a modern engine with arguably more reliability than its 1,800-hour TBR (time before replacement) would imply. 

Unlike other powerplants, the CD-170 is replaced, not overhauled, at the currently certified end of its service life. This could be because the OEM wants to eliminate the liability of having very hi-tech engines rebuilt in the field without proper tools, training, or parts. At the prescribed time, the engine is returned to the OEM for a core credit toward the purchase of a factory new, not remanufactured, engine.

But fear not, flying 100 hours per year still provides 18 years of enjoyment before TBR. And as for relative wear and tear comparison, 1,800 hours of operation may only equate to roughly five years of use in an auto application. Given the reliability of diesel engines, and the more than 10 millions hours of testing claimed by Continental on the engine, I suspect the CD-170 could fly considerably longer than the 1,800 TBR without flinching. So kudos for engine modernization. 

Perhaps what I find most compelling about the Gran Lusso is its mission capability and practicality. With an average useful load near 850 pounds and fuel efficiency of about 6.6 gph in cruise, it can be a four-place aircraft that can fill all four seats (depending on how carefully you choose your friends) and still have enough useful load remaining to carry the fuel needed to fly farther than the closest fuel stop.

The Tecnam Gran Lusso is a wonderful confluence of technology, features, luxury, and performance. With its production rate and growing popularity, the Gran Lusso may be as elusive as a dinner and drinks with an Italian model (but that certainly shouldn’t deter you from entertaining the possibility).

Cockpit at a Glance: 2024 Tecnam Gran Lusso

A. The Garmin G1000NXi suite coupled to the GFC700 digital autopilot boasts new features and supports options like synthetic vision and Flight Stream 510 to wirelessly stream data.

B. The Garmin flight management keypad provides push button data entry as an alternative to knob twisting.

C. The center console puts important controls like flaps, fuel valve, trim wheel, parking brake, and the single power control in one convenient location.

D. Approaching luxury automotive fit and finish, the interior is also available in six modern color schemes with carbon-fiber inlays.

Spec Sheet: 2024 Tecnam Gran Lusso

Price as Tested: $690,220 (including optional Synthetic Vision)

Certifications: FAA Part 23, Transport Canada Civil Aviation, European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Australia)

Engine: Continental Aerospace Technologies CD-170 turbodiesel

Propeller: Three-blade MT MTV-6-R/190-69

Horsepower: 170 hp

Length: 25.95 ft.

Height: 9.32 ft.

Wingspan: 33.79 ft.

Wing Area:  149.6 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: at max gross weight = 17.98 lbs./sq. ft.

Power Loading: 16.01 lbs./hp

Cabin Width: 3.74 ft.

Cabin Length: 7.55 ft.

Max Takeoff Weight: 2,690 lbs.

Max Zero Fuel Weight: 1,687 lbs.

Standard Empty Weight: 1,841 lbs.

Max Baggage: 88 lbs. in baggage compartment

Useful Load: approx. 849 lbs., depending on options

Max Usable Fuel: 411.75 lbs. (61 gallons usable)

Service Ceiling: 18,000 ft.

Max Rate of Climb, MTOW, ISA, SL:  MTOW, ISA, SL:  579 fpm

Max Cruise Speed: 140 ktas

Max Range: 1,300 nm

Fuel Consumption at Max Cruise: 8.7 gph

Stall Speed, Flaps Up: flaps up 63 kias

Stall Speed, Full Flaps: flaps LND 49 kias

Takeoff Over 50 Ft. Obs: 2,306 ft. (ISA, sea level @ MTOW)

Landing Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,808 ft. (ISA, sea level @ MTOW)

This feature first appeared in the September Issue 950 of the FLYING print edition.

The post We Fly: Tecnam Gran Lusso appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Because it is always about speed. 

For Piper singles, it started with the Malibu since Piper had long wanted to build a pressurized piston single that would outrun Cessna’s pressurized 210. Delivered at the end of 1983, the PA-46-310P Malibu, with its cabin-class appointments did just that. Naturally, Cessna’s nose was out of joint, so it developed the R model of the P210, which was introduced in 1985 and was one whole knot faster than the Malibu. Forty were sold before production ceased for good.

Of course, Piper couldn’t let an out-of-production Cessna be faster than its top-of-the-line single. By 1989 it was delivering the PA-46-350P Malibu Mirage, which whistled along at a maximum cruise speed of 213 knots. 

However, about that time there was a new sort of single-engine entrant into the speed competition—turboprop power. By 1990, the TBM 700 was reaching customers. Then, Piper watched as Malibu and Mirage owners paid big money for the JetProp turboprop conversion for their birds, producing speeds in the 260-knot range. 

• READ MORE: FAA Clears Piper M700 for Unpaved Field Operations

It was not to be tolerated. 

It wasn’t.

Piper made significant tweaks to the PA-46 wings and tail to handle a big power upgrade as it dropped a 500 hp turboprop up front. The new PA-46-500TP Meridian began deliveries just before the close of the century in November 2000. With a max cruise of 260 knots at a lower fuel burn than the JetProp, the Meridian was an immediate success. 

Not willing to leave well enough alone and recognizing the payload limitations of the Meridian, Piper developed a new wing that could carry more fuel for the tried-and-true PA-46 fuselage, upped the horsepower to 600 and introduced the M600 while announcing that the PA-46 line would henceforth be referred to as the M-Class. The Malibu Mirage became the M350 (for its 350 hp engine), and the Meridian the M500. With deliveries starting in 2016, the M600 had 50 percent more range than the M500 and could carry 100 more pounds in the cabin. Yet, it was about speed—it was 14 knots faster at 274 ktas. It immediately outsold the M500 handily. 

Not surprisingly, customers  figuratively pounded the table crying, “We want more!” Not being the slightest bit foolish, Piper responded “your wish is our command” and dropped even more puff—700 hp—into the airframe and certified the M700 (PA-46-701TP) earlier this year. This time Piper gave it a name that reflected its goal of speed and performance—Fury. Gone are the laid-back Malibu, Mirage, and Meridian names: It’s time for something fire-breathing. 

The name Fury harkens back to a Royal Air Force biplane fighter of the 1930s. However, with an ability to cruise at 301 ktas, Piper’s Fury is more than 100 knots faster than the RAF’s 640 hp combat machine from Hawker. As the M700 breaks the 300-knot barrier for personal single-engine aircraft, the name Fury seems most appropriate. Good grief, at $4.2 million nicely equipped, it’s within 5 knots of being as fast as the Cirrus Vision jet.

The Basics

The fuselage is almost pure Malibu/M350—the aircraft are assembled on the same production line with some changes for the needs of the M700’s speed. Max differential pressurization is 5.5 psi, giving an 8,244-foot cabin at FL 280. The Pratt & Whitney PT6A-52 powerplant is flat-rated at 700 hp—which it can maintain up through FL 240. It’s also used on the King Air 260, where it puts out 850 hp so it’s not breathing hard on the M700. Max operating altitude is 30,000 feet. At FL 250 max cruise is 301 ktas on a standard day, where it burns 365 pph (55 gph). Usable fuel is 260 gallons (1,742 pounds). 

Piper advertises range at max cruise with 45-minute reserve as 1,149 nm. Slowing just 9 knots pushes the range up more than 200 nm to 1,424. Pulling the power back to what one considers max cruise for many piston singles, 206 ktas, bumps the range to a bladder-aching 1,852 nm. Yes, I know, people are buying the M700 for speed because it’s always about speed. I suspect that M700s are going to spend a significant portion of their flying lives at or near 301 knots.

Max rate of climb at sea level—2,048 fpm—is 30 percent greater than the M600. The Fury can claw its way to FL 250 in 13.9 minutes. Welcome to power and a five-bladed prop that can convert it to thrust. It’s no surprise that with the introduction of the M700, Piper is phasing out the M600. 

The M700 I flew had an empty weight of 3,855 pounds—and it appeared to have every available option. That’s 125 pounds more than Piper advertises and 79 pounds more than the average for the first aircraft off the assembly line. With a maximum ramp weight of 6,050 pounds, the aircraft I flew had a useful load of 2,195 pounds. Max takeoff weight is 6,000 pounds—thereby making it a BasicMed aircraft so long as the PIC stays below the flight levels. With full fuel, 453 pounds can be carried in the cabin. 

• READ MORE: Piper Lifts the Veil on the M700 Fury, Its Fastest Single Yet

Max landing weight is 5,800 pounds, so 200 pounds of fuel must be burned off after a gross weight launch. Max zero fuel weight is 5,050 pounds (any weight above 5,050 pounds must be in fuel). That allows for a maximum of 1,195 pounds to be carried in the cabin of the aircraft I flew. Filling the seats means watching individual weights, although it can come close to carrying six 200-pounders and no baggage. The aircraft is designed to be owner-flown, and it just isn’t that common for owner/pilots to fill the seats in their aircraft. For families with three or four kids, the aircraft might be perfect if care is taken in how much stuff everyone carries. 

With a max cabin load, 1,000 pounds (149 gallons) of fuel can be loaded. That’s nearly three hours of flying at low cruise settings. Not bad at all. 

When I ran some sample weight and balance problems, I observed that with full fuel and a partial passenger load, the center of gravity tended to stay near the middle of the envelope. However, with a full boat of passengers (I used 190 pounds each) and partial fuel, the aircraft was loaded 1.37 inches aft of the aft limit—and that’s with no baggage. The takeaway: If you’re going to fill the cabin, load the heavier folks forward.

Fortunately, with the G3000 avionics suite, running the departure and landing weight and balance is easy. Unless a pilot has the blind staggers and total disregard for self-preservation, it should be easy to keep the aircraft inside its loading envelope. 

I’ll note here that I like the warranty offered through Piper’s Ultimate Care Program. It covers all scheduled maintenance either to 1,500 hours or the aircraft’s fifth annual inspection as well as labor and parts for any mandatory service bulletins.

Avionics

Beyond the speed of the Fury, the major selling point is the stunning avionics suite that comes standard. It includes a Garmin 3000 system that I observed to be seamlessly integrated into the aircraft, a GFC 700 Digital autopilot, autothrottle, GWX 75 weather radar, GDL60 datalink, integrated digital cabin pressurization, and HALO safety system, which was the stuff of science fiction only a few years ago.

It also includes Garmin’s emergency Autoland, a fully autonomous landing system that can be activated manually by anyone in the aircraft or automatically if the system senses pilot incapacitation. Reduced to its essentials, once triggered, Autoland selects an appropriate airport for landing, notifies ATC of the emergency, keeps the occupants advised as to what’s going on, and lands the aircraft—activating deicing equipment as needed, extending the flaps and gear when the time comes. It slows the aircraft to a stop on the runway, shuts down the engine, and instructs the occupants on safe exit from the aircraft. 

• READ MORE: Piper Announces FAA Type Certification for M700 Fury

Garmin won the prestigious Collier Trophy for Autoland in 2020. The Collier isn’t given away for simply showing up at a fly-in and not wrecking the aircraft on landing. It is awarded “for the greatest achievement in aeronautics or astronautics in America, with respect to improving the performance, efficiency, and safety of air or space vehicles, the value of which has been thoroughly demonstrated by actual use during the preceding year.” Other Collier winners have included the NASA/JPL’s Ingenuity Mars Helicopter Team and NASA/Northrop Grumman’s James Webb Telescope Industry Team. 

As this is going to press, Autoland has not been used in anger, however, as with lifesaving whole aircraft parachutes, I think that it’s only a matter of time. In talking with Piper sales personnel, I was assured that the Garmin Autoland system has sold a number of M700s. 

Above 14,100 feet with the autopilot engaged, HALO monitors pilot interaction for signs of hypoxia. If it detects hypoxia, it will fly the M700 to a lower altitude while it continues to monitor pilot activity. If activity is not detected, it will automatically activate Autoland. 

Automatic Level Mode—a push-button— returns the aircraft to a wings-level attitude with zero vertical speed. In addition, Electronic Stability & Protection (ESP) is monitoring when the aircraft is being hand flown. Should selected pitch, bank, and speed (high or low) parameters be exceeded, the system gently applies control forces to return the aircraft to flight within the parameters. Given that in-flight loss of control is up there on the fatal accident causation list, I think this system may be a lifesaver, especially when things start going south in weather while a pilot is hand flying and having difficulty programming the automation. 

The autothrottle is an integral part of the above systems, helping prevent overspeed or stall. I found that it was also handy on takeoff. Bring the power lever up to 800 pounds of torque, and the autothrottle takes over and sets max torque (1,840 foot-pounds) so the pilot doesn’t have to fiddle with setting power while the Fury is scorching down the runway toward its 75-knot rotation speed—it gets there quickly.  

Walking Around It

Approaching the M700 Fury from head on, its clean lines and five-bladed prop serve notice that this flying machine was built to cook. The radome is on the leading edge of the wing, not in a draggy pod hanging from it. Even the exhaust stacks give the impression of speed as they’re subtly more swept and tapered than I’m used to seeing. I was advised that they help make the aircraft quieter than the M600 and the engine slightly more efficient. 

The large cuff on the inboard leading edge of the wing helps the Fury meet the 61-knot maximum stall speed for single-engine aircraft and it, along with some fairings, are easily removable for maintenance. The cuff also allows for fuel lines from the wings to the engine to be routed outside of the fuselage pressure vessel, a big plus for crashworthiness. The two big nonicing NACA ducts under the nose deliver air to the engine without a need for ice vanes, inertial separator, or inlet deicing. The large flaps have three positions—up, takeoff/approach, and down.

Walking around the Fury with Joel Glunt, Piper’s head of flight test, I was impressed by the overall fit and finish. The paint job was first rate, and I was interested to see the colors change subtly when viewed from different angles. 

Other than the shape of the exhaust stacks, the only noticeable exterior difference between the M600 and M700 is a Gurney flap—a low-drag, high-lift device from the auto racing world—on the left side of the rudder trim tab. As Glunt pointed out, adding more power to an aircraft can be destabilizing. To achieve the desired roll and yaw stability on the M700, the Gurney flap was added, and rudder travel was increased.

The Cabin

The clamshell airstair door is located just aft of the left wing, giving access to the middle of the cabin. The cabin is fairly tight at 49.5 inches wide and 47 inches tall—one of the reasons the bird is fast. Length from the aft pressure bulkhead to the instrument panel is 148 inches. Taller passengers will be intertwining legs when facing each other in the club seats.

 As much as 100 pounds of baggage can be stowed behind the rear seats. They fold forward, but getting heavy suitcases in and out takes some effort. There is a provision for storing as many as three sets of golf clubs. 

The quality of the interior appointments is first rate, in keeping with the demands of those who occupy the cabins of top-of-the-line turboprops. The seats are comfortable, the leather is beautiful, the colors available are impressive, and such amenities as cup holders and USB ports are in easy reach. 

Getting into the pilot seats for anyone over 6-foot tall is a challenge. The M-series machines were not designed for tall people—they were designed to go fast, so it’s a compromise. Once in the left seat (I’m 6-foot-4), my head was against the headliner even before putting on a headset. Legroom is only just adequate. 

From a crashworthiness standpoint, the flight deck is, in my opinion, not satisfactory. There is little flail space in the event of a quick stop, and there is an upper switch panel in front of each pilot that is likely to cause head injury during the most common type of general aviation aircraft accident—runway loss of control and impact below stall speed. The upper switch panel also restricts visibility upward in turns and steep descents. 

I was amazed at the flight deck restraint system—it’s a set of three-point belts that look like they came from an old Cherokee. They are not only jarringly out of place in the overall ambiance of the interior, they are, in my opinion, inadequate for an aircraft with the Fury’s potential energy. For the tight space available for the pilots, I think that the very best in occupant protection for those in the pointy end of the arrow should be installed—airbag seat belts. 

Flying It

Firing up the Fury is pure PT6—turn the engine, wait a moment, introduce fuel, and monitor temperature and pressure as it lights off and comes up to speed. The G3000 boots up quickly. It will display whatever you need in the moment—checklist, synoptic pages showing systems status, taxiway routing, even synthetic vision on the ground while taxiing. 

Once moving, the nosewheel steering is positive and predictable. There is enough thrust at idle due to prop pitch and the faired exhausts that it’s usually necessary to taxi in Beta with occasional forays into reverse. There is a nose gear squat switch that locks out Beta and reverse in flight.

Acceleration on takeoff is just plain exhilarating. Directional control was positive throughout the takeoff roll and climbout with much less right rudder required than I expected. Published takeoff performance on a standard day at sea level is a ground roll of 1,261 feet and over an obstacle in 1,994 feet. While Glunt and I weren’t in a position to measure our takeoff distance, loaded about 300 pounds below gross weight, it looked like we didn’t roll much more than 1,000 feet. 

Rotation required only light back pressure, but once the M700 broke ground, significant nose-down trim was required immediately, increasing workload as the gear and flaps were retracted. I suspect that moving the gear aft with the new wing (for the M600 and M700) meant that setting takeoff trim was a tradeoff between control force required on rotation at 75 knots (as opposed to 85 knots for the M600) and the trim required for climb at V_Y—122 knots. 

In the initial climb, I saw a rate of 2,300 fpm, which was consistent with our weight and a published rate of 2,048 fpm at gross weight on a standard day at sea level. Handling was positive and lighter in pitch than I anticipated for an aircraft of this size with a downspring in the pitch control system. Max yoke deflection in roll is only 45 degrees, something that I suspected would make it easy to overcontrol as little control displacement is needed to deflect the ailerons. That was initially the case, but within a few minutes I adjusted to the pressure required to get the response desired. The aircraft can be tossed around nicely. 

Leveling at 17,500 feet and holding max torque, I observed a true airspeed of 291 knots burning 385 pph. The book called for 284 ktas while burning 390 pph. 

Descending below 10,000 feet to do air work revealed that the M700 is rock solid in slow flight and just plain fun to fly in steep turns—the long nose helps with pitch control. The stall is a nonevent, with lots of warning and a straight-ahead, gentle pitch down.

Programming the Garmin automation for a descent and intercept for an ILS approach was as it usually is—easy. The autothrottle nailed programmed speeds and descent rates. 

Disconnecting the autopilot and hand flying the ILS revealed that the Fury stayed on its trimmed speeds nicely. The hydraulically actuated gear can come down at 170 kias, with approach flaps at 147 kias and full flaps at a surprisingly low speed, 112 kias. There is a noticeable pitch change with flap extension and retraction. Gear extension causes what I considered to be a surprising amount of yaw as the nose gear comes down. 

Holding 85 kias on final, bringing the power lever to idle, and making a good pull on the yoke gets the nose up smoothly for a 70-knot touchdown. Putting the nosewheel on the runway allows using reverse, and that big prop stops the aircraft rapidly without directional excursions. 

In Conclusion

I liked what I experienced in the M700 Fury—more performance in an aircraft that is fun to fly matched with the most sophisticated avionics suite and safety automation available is quite a combination. Yes, it’s about speed, and it looks like Piper has come up with another fast-moving winner.

If you’re ready to pull the trigger on a new Piper turboprop, this one’s a bullet. 

Cockpit at a Glance:  Piper M700 Fury

A. The overhead panel contains switches for the electrical system, lighting and anti-icing systems but restricts the pilot’s view upward.

B. The primary flight display is the leftmost of the three-screen Garmin G3000 glass panel, and as the name indicates, provides all primary flight information in a single display. It can be customized by the pilot.

C. The multifunction display is on the center screen of the G3000 panel and can be configured as desired. Here it is set to display engine status, navigation information, and traffic.

D. Dual touchscreen Controllers operate much of the G3000 avionics and are arranged for easy access from either front seat.

Spec Sheet: Piper M700 Fury

Price as Tested: $4,519,272 (N701FY, the fully equipped M700 demonstrator)

Engine: Pratt & Whitney PT6A-52

Propeller: Hartzell 5-blade composite 5D3-N338A1/78D01B

Horsepower: 700

Length: 29.7 ft.

Height: 11.5 ft.

Wingspan: 43.13 ft.

Wing Area:  209 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: at 6,000 lbs. = 28.71 lbs./sq. ft.

Power loading: @ MCP 8.57 lbs./hp

Cabin Width: 49.5 in.

Cabin Height: 47 in.

Max Takeoff Weight: 6,000 pounds

Max Zero Fuel Weight: 5,050

Standard Empty Weight: approx. 3,776.15 lbs.

Max Baggage: 100 lbs. in baggage compartment

Useful Load: approx. 2,273.85 lbs., depending on options

Max Usable Fuel: 1,742.6 lbs. usable/260 gal. usable

Service Ceiling: FL 300

Max Rate of Climb, MTOW, ISA, SL: 2,048 fpm

Max Cruise Speed: 301 ktas

Max Range: 1,526 nm with NBAA reserves, 1,852 nm maximum endurance at economy cruise

Fuel Consumption at Max Cruise: 365 lbs./hr.

Stall Speed, Flaps Up: 6,000 lbs. gear up, flaps up 73 kias

Stall Speed, Full Flaps: 6,000 lbs. gear down, flaps LND 62 kias

Takeoff Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,994 ft.  (ISA, sea level)

Landing Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,950 ft. (ISA, sea level)

This feature first appeared in the July/August Issue 949 of the FLYING print edition.

The post We Fly: Piper M700 Fury appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

For the 1956 model year, the company applied the nosewheel concept to its tailwheel 180 and smaller sibling 170, creating the 182 and 172. Thus began a sales tour de force that continues to this day. Where the 172 became the most popular general aviation airplane in history, the more powerful and capable 182 became the big-engine, reliable, go-almost-anywhere, powerful climbing, carry-almost-anything, good-handling, comfortable old boot that could be found nearly anywhere on the planet where there was space into which to shoehorn an airplane.

In the first decade of manufacture, Cessna fine-tuned the 182 with a wider and deeper fuselage that made the cabin truly comfortable for four, added a panoramic rear window, as well as beginning steady gross weight increases so that what was soon named the Skylane became the utility infielder of the GA world.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Embraer Phenom 300E

The original design was eventually stretched to become the models 205, 206, 207, and, with retractable landing gear, the 210 and retractable 182.

In 1962, Cessna became the first to successfully bring a form of turbocharging to general aviation with its model 320 twin. A turbocharger is an air compressor that pumps more air into an engine, allowing it to develop greater power at higher altitudes than a normally aspirated engine as intake pressure drops with altitude. A turbocharger uses exhaust gas to turn a turbine, to compress and boost intake pressure. When there’s more air entering the engine, more fuel can be added to the fuel/air mixture resulting in greater power.

Turbochargers have been around since World War I, but their complexities and fiery operating environment prevented their widespread use in GA until the Cessna 320 debuted with a system that was reliable and didn’t require a degree in engineering for pilots to operate safely. The 320 sold like mad, so Cessna expanded its turbo offerings.

For the 1981 model year, Cessna turbocharged the Skylane, but with a relatively primitive, fixed-wastegate system that involved significant pilot workload. Nevertheless, it proved popular, outselling the normally aspirated 182 until Cessna’s hiatus on piston-engine production in 1986.

When that production began once more in 1996, the 182 was reintroduced in its normally aspirated form. In 2001, to start out the new century, a new turbocharged 182—the T182—was offered with important updates, including aggressive corrosion-proofing and aerodynamic tweaks to the airframe. Motive force now came from a Lycoming engine with slightly more power, the 235 hp TIO-540-AK1A with 2,000-hour TBO. Most significantly, the turbocharging system was a sophisticated set-and-forget type.

A sloped controller in the system sensed manifold pressure and modulated the wastegate to keep the correct amount of exhaust gas going through the turbine section of the turbocharger to maintain the desired manifold pressure. The wastegate is a valve that adjusts to direct exhaust gas through the turbine section of the turbo until the system decides the amount is appropriate, and then it directs any excess into the overboard exhaust pipe.

There was one more pause in Turbo Skylane production—in 2013—when Cessna explored replacing it with a diesel version. I’ve heard various reasons that the diesel didn’t work out but don’t know if any are true. Cessna, wisely, in my opinion, reintroduced the T182T with deliveries starting in 2023. The newest version included the latest Garmin G1000 NXi avionics suite, a heated prop, and upgraded interior amenities. Max operating altitude is 20,000 feet. Base price is currently $760,000.

As an aside, the first “T” in T182T refers to the Cessna’s way of saying that the flying machine is turbocharged. The second letter designates the specific model (as type certificated) of 182. The first model 182 had no alphabetical suffix—it is called the “no letter.” Each subsequent model change received a new letter, although some letters were skipped. The current normally aspirated 182 is the 182T.

The Basics

The T182T I flew was the first off of the assembly line in the 2023 production restart. It was flown as a demonstrator for 240 hours before being purchased by Phil Preston of Poplar Grove, Illinois. The airplane came with most available options including electric air conditioning, oxygen, and a striking interior.

The T182T’s Lycoming engine is a “max continuous power” engine—it develops its full-rated 235 hp continuously at 32 inches of manifold pressure, 24 gallons per hour (gph) fuel flow, and a quiet 2400 rpm all the way to 20,000 feet. There is no time limit on full-power operation.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Cirrus SR G7

Empty weight of the airplane I flew is 2,191.5 pounds. With a maximum ramp weight of 3,112 pounds (max takeoff weight is 3,100 pounds), it has a useful load of 920.5 pounds. (Cessna’s advertising claims a 998-pound useful load.) Max landing weight is 2,950 pounds, so 192 pounds of fuel (27 gallons) must be burned off following a max-weight departure. Fuel capacity is 92 gallons in the integral wing tanks, of which 87 is usable.

With full fuel—522 pounds—398.5 pounds can be loaded into the cabin. At first blush that doesn’t seem like much for a legendary load hauler like the 182, but the huge fuel tanks make the airplane a camel. At 15 gph, full tanks give well over five hours endurance.

Still, with all the options, this airplane is heavy. Putting four 200-pounders in the cabin means the airplane is over its maximum landing weight without any fuel aboard, so juggling fuel and passengers is required. Assuming having 10 gallons of fuel on board when landing at maximum landing weight after burning off 27 gallons following a gross weight takeoff, the maximum possible cabin load for the airplane we flew is 698.5 pounds, or three large adults and baggage. Maximum baggage is 200 pounds—split between three baggage areas.

Cessna singles have a reputation for some of the longest center-of-gravity (CG) ranges in the industry. The T182T lives up to its reputation. I ran several weight-and-balance scenarios and found that in none of the occupant and baggage combinations I tried was the airplane out of the forward or aft CG limit. That’s impressive.

The fuel system is simple. Two tanks and a fuel selector that offers left, right, and both and off positions. Leaving it on the “both” position means getting all the available fuel and minimizes the risk of selecting a tank that doesn’t have fuel in it. To avoid inadvertently shutting off the fuel, the selector valve must be pushed down before it can be rotated to the “off” position. I was impressed by the accuracy of the fuel gauging system, something important when launching with partial fuel may be routine.

The electrical system is straightforward—dual bus, 28-volt DC, powered by a 95-amp alternator with primary and standby batteries. The standby battery will power the equipment on the essential bus for about 45 minutes.

Walking around this new T182T revealed excellent fit and finish, a beautifully applied paint job and some of the aerodynamic touches made over recent years to maximize speed, such as smaller steps, low-drag wheel fairings, and a low-profile beacon.

The Cabin

Opening one of the large cabin doors, you notice little touches, such as their solid feel and the easy step into the cabin itself. Preston has owned several airplanes, high-wing, low-wing, and biplane. He told us that he chose the 182 because of the ease of entry: “I don’t like climbing up onto a wing to get in and out of the airplane.” He also likes the high wing because he’s loaded and unloaded airplanes in the rain many times and prefers to be able to stay dry.

The seats are delightfully comfortable and adjust far more easily than older 182s to fit a wide variety of pilot sizes and shapes. Cessna has been a leader in GA crashworthiness going back to 1946 when it began offering shoulder harnesses as optional equipment for all seats in its singles, continuing through the 1960s when it did full-scale crash testing and later when it donated some 172s to NASA for its crash research. Where it shows in this new T182T is with the best occupant restraint systems available in general aviation—AmSafe airbag seat belts for all four seats.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Diamond DA62

The clean panel is dominated by the Garmin NXi two-screen display with all controls, switches, and knobs easily accessible to the left-seat pilot.

Flying It

Start-up is not simple. The process, including system checks, takes nearly a minute before the starter switch is engaged. On my flight the engine started easily on the first try, even though it was hot. Preston told me that he has not had any problem with hot starts.

Once the avionics were on, Preston showed how easy it was to load a route into the Garmin NXi system. He said that he appreciated its wireless database and flight plan loading capability.

Taxiing out, I was impressed at how easily the airplane rolled and the lightness of the nosewheel steering—there’s no sense of a heavy engine pressing down on it as there is in older Skylanes. On the hot morning of our flight, I came to quickly appreciate the electric air conditioning. It cooled the cabin rapidly.

I used Cessna’s recommended 10 degrees of flap for takeoff. Lined up, and throttle forward, I monitored the manifold pressure to make sure that it stopped at the 32-inch redline. While the turbocharger control is automatic, if the engine oil is cold, the control can be sluggish, and it’s possible to overboost the engine slightly. If 32 inches is reached before the throttle is fully open, just stop pushing it forward until the control system catches up. Acceleration is rapid, and right rudder is most definitely required, especially once the nosewheel leaves the ground.

The aggressive takeoff performance of the turbo Skylane reminded me that the T182T meets the U.S. Department of Defense’s definition of STOL aircraft right out of the factory—no mods required. At sea level, it will take off or land over a 50-foot obstacle in less than 1,500 feet. Few production airplanes are that capable. For a short field takeoff, 20 degrees of flaps are used.

Cleaned up and holding V_Y, 84 kias, loaded about 200 pounds below gross on a warmer than standard day, the rate of climb approached 1,000 feet per minute (fpm)—book is 1,015 fpm on a standard day. When I pulled the power back to what Cessna calls for in a “normal” climb—25 inches of manifold pressure and 16 gph fuel flow, while maintaining the full 2,400 rpm—the rate of climb sagged off by nearly half. At the suggested 95-knot airspeed, it was only 550 fpm.

Frankly, in my opinion, making a power reduction for climb in an airplane with a max continuous power engine makes no sense. It greatly increases the time to altitude and burns slightly more fuel—according to the POH—than a climb at full power. In addition, in case of an engine failure after takeoff, the higher it happens, the better the radius of action for a forced landing. Using full power and climbing at V_Y, the time to 20,000 feet per the POH is only 23 minutes from sea level and burns 9.2 gallons.

For a “normal” climb, it takes 24 minutes just to get to 12,000 feet and burns 6.3 gallons. Comparatively, at full power and V_Y, it takes 13 minutes and 5.1 gallons of fuel to get to 12,000 feet.

As with all but the oldest Skylanes, control forces on the Turbo Skylane are not light.

However, if sufficient pressure is applied to deflect them, the airplane is quite responsive with a most satisfying roll rate. Pitch forces are heavy, mostly due to the downspring in the elevator system that allows the long CG range. The first rule of thumb when flying a Skylane is to use the trim when any change is made in power or speed. With trim, the Skylane is a pure pussycat to fly—one of the reasons it has been so popular for so long. With trim, steep turns are a piece of cake. The solid stability of a Skylane in slow flight could set the standard for GA aircraft—the T182T proved no exception.

The Garmin Electronic Stability and Protection system kicked in while I was maneuvering (it can be disabled). It is a safeguard to protect the pilot while hand flying. Once the aircraft is rolled beyond a selected angle of bank or gets faster or slower than set speeds, it applies control forces to roll the airplane toward wings level or pitch up or down to control speed. Given that in-flight loss of control is well up there when it comes to risk of fatal accidents, I like this system a lot.

Stalls—hey, what do you want? It’s a Cessna. Power on, power off, full flaps, or clean, it’s a nuthin’ muffin. With the ball centered, it breaks straight ahead. A little pitch reduction, and it’s flying. Adding power (right rudder, remember!) turns any descent into a climb forthwith.

Preston and I then looked at cruise power versus airspeed. As much as I despise the overused phrase “power packed,” that describes this Lycoming engine. For pilots used to maximum cruise at 75 percent power, this engine gets one’s attention because it can be run, and leaned, at as much as 87 percent power—204 hp on a 235 hp engine. At 10,000 feet, the POH quotes a cruise speed on a standard day of 155 knots and 17.8 gph at 87 percent—that’s moving in a 182. At 20,000 feet on a standard day, 82 percent generates 165 knots while burning 16.3 gph.

Some time ago, I was told that Cessna does its cruise speed testing by launching above gross weight so that the airplane is at gross at altitude—and therefore the book speeds will be conservative. For over 40 years I’ve cross-checked book versus actual speeds on new Cessnas, and that’s always been the case.

Descending to 10,000 feet and setting up 75 percent power, at 15 degrees above standard temperature, the book called for 144 ktas. Preston and I saw 145, however, our fuel burn was 13.8 gph versus the book’s 13.6. Want to save some fuel but still move along nicely at 10,000 feet? Pull the power back to 60 percent and get a quiet decent 131 knots at 11 gph. Want to go far? According to Cessna, max range is 971 nm at best economy power.

Leaning leads to an issue that is troubling for an airplane of this sophistication and a useful load that is, let’s face it, not exactly great. Lycoming’s recommended lean mixture setting is 50 degrees rich of peak turbine inlet temperature (TIT). (Lycoming certificated the engine, so Cessna must follow Lycoming protocols.) With what we know now from published data from sophisticated general aviation engine test facilities, 50 degrees rich of peak is not at all good for an engine.

It is the power setting for the highest combination of heat, internal cylinder pressure, and minimum detonation protection—and may necessitate cylinder replacement prior to engine overhaul. For best power, Lycoming calls for 125 degrees rich of peak TIT—which is better for detonation protection. Per the POH, best economy is at peak TIT. That setting is not wonderful because it is still in the range of maximum heat and internal cylinder pressure as well as lower detonation protection.

Lean of peak (LOP) operation is not “approved.” As far as I can tell, it’s not a limitation, so it is a recommendation. Still, it makes no sense to me. Lycoming engines have a reputation for excellent mixture distribution between cylinders and have been run LOP for decades. LOP reduces fuel burn 2 to 3 gallons per hour and dramatically reduces CHTs as well as internal cylinder pressures.

In an airplane that is heavy to start with, having to burn 2 or 3 gph more than necessary isn’t a stellar idea. It means having to carry extra fuel instead of payload. For a trip of several hundred miles, that can mean an extra hour of endurance wasted. To make a good airplane even more capable by reducing fuel consumption, extending engine life and increasing payload, one wonders why Cessna hasn’t leaned on Lycoming to come into this century with engine operating guidelines.

As we flew, I purely enjoyed working with the Garmin automation in the Turbo Skylane. Preston demonstrated that not only did the autopilot engage smoothly, programming it to do what we wanted was easy.

Millions of words have been written about Garmin automation, so I won’t add more here, other than to say it was intuitive, easy, worked well, and seamlessly integrated into the T182T.

Approaching our towered airport, I was asked to keep the speed up until short final. Those are magic words to a Skylane pilot. The T182T smoked down a long final at 150 kias until 3 miles out—then I took advantage of the high flap speeds. The first 10 degrees of flaps can come out at a blistering 140 kias, 20 degrees at 120 kias, and all of them at 100 kias. The airplane slowed so quickly that it was a piece of cake to be stabilized at 60 kias while still several hundred feet up.

I’ve heard pilots complain that 182s are nose heavy. They aren’t. The reality is that with just two aboard, the airplane is near the forward CG limit, so a lot of nose-up elevator is necessary to flare. Plus, if the airplane isn’t trimmed, it’s going to take a lot of effort to heave the yoke aft because of the downspring in the system and the airframe’s attempt to nose down to maintain its trim speed.

The POH says that the demonstrated crosswind level is 15 knots. With the effective flight controls of the T182T, I suspect that number is conservative.

Conclusion

The Cessna 182 became the four-place airplane everyone wanted because it does almost everything well—it’s the SUV of the general aviation world. With turbocharging the T182T takes that utility and performance to new heights and new capabilities, giving a pilot more options and more ability to deal with weather and winds.

Spec Sheet: Cessna T182T Skylane

2024 Base Price: $760,000

Engine: Lycoming TIO-540-AK1A

Propeller: (Manufacturer, metal or composite, number of blades) McCauley, metal, three blade

Horsepower: 235

Length: 29 feet

Height: 9 feet, 4 inches

Wingspan: 36 feet

Wing Area: 174 square feet

Wing Loading: 17.8 pounds per square feet @mtow

Power Loading: 13.19 pounds/hp

Cabin Width: 42 inches

Cabin Height: 49 inches

Max Takeoff Weight: 3,100 pounds

Max Zero Fuel Weight: N/A

Standard Empty Weight: 2,114 pounds

Max Baggage: 200 pounds

Useful load: 998 pounds, depending on options

Max usable fuel: 87 gallons

Service Ceiling: 20,000 feet

Max Rate of Climb, MTOW, ISA, SL: 1,040 fpm

Max Cruise Speed at 82% Power at 20,000 Feet: 165 ktas

Max Range: 971 nm [45-minute reserve]

Fuel Consumption at 82% Power: 16.3 gph

Takeoff Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,385 feet [ISA, sea level]

Landing Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,335 feet [ISA, sea level]

This feature first appeared in the Summer 2024 Ultimate Issue print edition.

The post Ultimate Issue: We Fly the Cessna T182T Skylane appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

As Butch asked Sundance in the 1969 movie, “Who are those guys?” To which I add: Why the Phenom 300E? And, what makes that jet so popular?

I’ll answer the second question first. It’s a combination of being the fastest single-pilot jet in the sky, the fastest light jet with the highest payload and the ability to use runways less than 4,000-feet long and climb directly to FL 450. It offers stunningly attractive and comfortable interiors as well as solid human factors engineering (HFE) that keeps the workload for a single pilot manageable in challenging conditions.

For the first question, those men and women are Embraer, a Brazilian manufacturer that for more than 50 years has been designing and building turboprops and jets for the airlines, general aviation, and military. We’ve heard it said that Embraer is channeling the disruptive aeronautical design philosophies of countryman Alberto Santos-Dumont, whose aviation firsts from 1901 through 1909 made him a household name throughout much of the world.

After visiting Embraer’s Melbourne, Florida, campus—built as the U.S. space program there was slowing down to take advantage of a highly trained workforce—with its 192,000-square-foot production facility, engineering and technology center, two paint facilities, delivery center with design studio, and flying the Phenom 300E—I came away with the feeling that the manufacturer is on the cutting edge of bizjet design, performance, and customer service (75 centers worldwide).

• READ MORE: We Fly: Cirrus SR G7

I’ll be the first to admit that the definition of light jet is a bit amorphous, although, in general, it can carry six to eight passengers on flights of two to three hours and access relatively small airports.

The Phenom 300E can be configured for as many as 10 passengers on board. A 25-degree wing sweep helps generate a maximum speed of Mach 0.8 and a high-speed cruise of 464 knots, yet its sophisticated flaps mean it can operate from 4,000-foot-long runways at sea level, needing 3,209 feet for takeoff at its 18,551-pound maximum gross weight. Fully fueled, its NBAA range is 2,010 nm, which includes the ability to divert to an alternate airport 100 nm away. With eight occupants, its NBAA range is 1,178 nm. Max operating altitude is FL 450 (45,000 feet), and the 300E can climb directly there in 22 minutes.

The Basics

The Phenom 300 debuted in 2009. In 2013 it received an avionics upgrade to the Garmin G3000 Prodigy Touch Flight Deck. A major interior redesign came in 2017. A power bump in 2020 gave it its current impressive cruise speed. That’s when it became known as the 300E—the “E” standing for Enhanced. Power is supplied by a pair of FADEC-controlled Pratt & Whitney PW525E1 engines putting out 3,478 pounds of thrust each. TBO is 5,000 hours.

Recent Developments

Enhancements keep coming for the 300E.

• Autothrottles: They tie in with the autopilot for normal operations as well as overspeed and underspeed protection. Servos move the power levers, giving the pilot a tactile indication of the power setting in addition to the display on the gauges.

• Emergency Descent Mode (EDM): With the autopilot engaged, should the cabin pressure climb above 25,000 feet, the system turns the jet 90 degrees left and commands a descent to 15,000 feet while setting the transponder to 7700. For those aircraft equipped with autothrottles, power is reduced for the descent and increased then the aircraft reaches 15,000 feet.

• Runway Overrun Awareness and Alerting System (ROAAS): It engages at 1,000 feet agl and monitors altitude and speed for the runway in use and the runway conditions. Between 500 and 100 feet agl, if approach parameters are exceeded—generally too high and/or too fast—the system cautions that unless the pilot gets the jet back into appropriate approach parameters, it won’t be able to stop on the runway—“Caution, overrun.” If things are not corrected by 100 feet agl, an aural warning, “Overrun, go around,” sounds. If the airplane floats on landing, the system will give another caution, “Long flare.” ROAAS keeps working through rollout. If the jet isn’t decelerating appropriately, it issues another warning, “Overrun, brakes.”

• GWX75 radar: It has been upgraded with automatic vertical scanning and predictive hail capabilities, which predicts hail and presents it visually on the weather display.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Diamond DA62

The airplane flown had a basic empty weight (BEW) of 11,739 pounds. With full fuel—5,353 pounds—the payload was 1,459 pounds, or six 200-pound passengers and a lot of baggage. What is usually more important is how flexible the aircraft is when it comes to fuel versus cabin load. The zero-fuel weight for the 300E is 14,263 pounds, so when loading the airplane, anything over that weight has to be fuel. That means in the airplane we flew up to 2,524 pounds could go into the cabin—a whopping load. Bringing the airplane up to gross weight with 4,288 pounds of fuel still means the jet can fly well over 1,300 nm with reserves and go fast doing it.

With Embraer demo pilots Marisha Mohler and James Crawford, some sample weight-and-balance problems using the Prodigy Touch were run. Bottom line: It was nearly impossible to load the 300E out of CG, something of major importance because it minimizes the risk that a loading error will create an uncontrollable flying machine.

The Walk-Around 

Walking around the jet, I was impressed by the size of the left-side-accessed, heated-aft baggage compartment—84 cubic feet—with room for skis and golf clubs.

I was advised that the Phenom 300 was originally designed for high usage in the fractional and charter world—with a life of 35,000 hours or 28,000 cycles—so Embraer borrowed from its experience in the constant operation airline world for longevity and robustness. I noticed such features as all exterior panels, including the windshield, use a single screw head design. If necessary, the windshield can be replaced in four hours. The lavatory is serviced externally. Single-point fueling is available, and the large airstair door is beefed up to withstand long-term use but is designed for one-handed operation.

For speed, the skins are flush-riveted, the area rule of the rear fuselage is particularly notable inboard of the engines, and there are gap seals between all control surfaces. The auxiliary power unit (APU) plug is angled, so it will pull out, rather than rip out, should a pilot taxi away with it connected. The right engine can be run in a ground power mode, functioning as an APU.

Systems are conventional, but almost all are set and forget, with automation taking care of routine tasks and abnormalities and using the large screen presentation of the Prodigy Touch to display irregularities so that the crew can determine what actions, if any, are necessary. I saw numerous examples of HFE designed to reduce pilot workload and maximize situational awareness. One example is the spoilers. When deployed in-flight, they stow automatically when certain conditions are met. They deploy automatically on landing.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Cessna TTx

Braking is via a brake-by-wire system with an electronic, rather than mechanical, anti-skid system in the same box that turns pilot brake input into electrical impulses to the brake hydraulics. The brakes are carbon, maximizing effectiveness as they heat up. Wing, tail, and engine inlet deicing is via bleed air. The windshields are electrically heated.

The electrical system is a 28-volt, eight-bus system powered by two 390-amp generators.

The Cabin

When talking about a purchase price on the order of $13 million, the reality is that an owner-flown, fractional, or charter jet exists to carry people of means who want to get to a destination fast and in comfort. I think that is true especially for the owner-flown jet family. After all, there’s a hoary aviation axiom: If the nonflying spouse ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy, and the jet better have a comfortable potty.

After spending time in the cabin, I think Embraer nailed it. First, the cabin never gets too high—the 9.4 max pressure differential means that at the FL 450 maximum operating altitude, the cabin is at 6,600 feet. The cabin shape is a modified vertical oval, allowing the seats to be mounted low to maximize headroom. Standing 6-foot-4, I’ve been uncomfortably crowded in a lot of aircraft cabins—that was not the case here. The comfy seats recline, swivel, and track horizontally away from the bulkheads.

Everything on the ceiling is flush, including the air vents. Finally, there’s a design that gets rid of the ball-shaped head-knockers we’re used to. What is called a tech panel is on the ceiling, containing motion sensors. Moving a hand near the veneer lights up buttons to control the various entertainment systems, video displays, and cabin lighting.

The lavatory is the real thing—complete with a sink—and with solid, sliding doors for privacy. It has a window that is the same size as those in the rest of the cabin, so there’s no feeling of retreating into a black hole, especially as the lav seat can be belted and used as a passenger seat.

My takeaway from our time in the cabin and Embrarer’s Melbourne design center is that there is serious commitment to not only comfort but an elevated level of style and panache. But, then again, that’s what we expect from the country that gave us the elegance of the samba.

The Front Office

Moving forward to where the magic happens, the first thing that I observe is the sheer size of the Garmin G3000 Prodigy Touch displays and the well laid-out nature of the panel. Once seated, I found the seats to be among the easiest to adjust and the most comfortable I’ve experienced on any bizjet.

While I may have to turn in our jaded journalist accreditation, I kept running into things that were at the high end of our experience. I’ve used rudder pedals that adjust fore and aft, but never as easily as these. At my height, I’m used to being uncomfortable on a flight deck—it wasn’t the case in the 300E. To my amazement, when Captain Mohler—who is well over a foot shorter than I—got into the right seat, the seat and rudder pedals adjusted to fit her physique easily. I’m not used to that range of adjustment in flight deck seating.

I then looked at an issue I feel critical to design—crashworthiness for those at the point of the arrow. The most common bizjet accident is a runway overrun or loss-of-control event that involves impact at under stall speed, where good crashworthy design means keeping the crew alive. I generally liked what I saw. The restraint system is five-point, and there is flail space in front of the crew and no head-gouging overhead switches.

The more I learned about the flight deck and systems, the more I realized the significant thought that went into setting up the 300E for single-pilot operation and felt that it is a most reasonable step up for pilots flying single-pilot turboprops and smaller jets.

The Garmin G3000 Prodigy Touch Flight Deck avionics blend well with the aircraft, presenting what the pilot needs to know, when needed, and the shallow menu allows accessing information required with a minimum of screen inputs. Garmin’s intuitive design is well known, so I won’t go into detail here. Its incorporation in the 300E came across as nearly seamless.

While Prodigy Touch requires intense, focused training, I think that its design is pilot-friendly and intuitive. Once it is understood, a pilot can program the automation easily—thus freeing them to do the important stuff, such as think and maintain situational awareness. That’s especially important when dealing with weather or high-density airport arrivals in a single-pilot jet that goes as high and fast as this one.

Flying It

Starting a Phenom 300E is so easy that I can’t help but wonder whether it’s illegal in some states. You turn the appropriate rotary switch at the base of the power quadrant from “stop,” past “run” to “start.” Wait two, count ’em, two, seconds and then turn the switch back to run. FADEC takes care of monitoring engine rpm, applying fuel and ignition at the appropriate time and monitoring temps as the engine spools up—stopping the start automatically should something be amiss.

Yes, you monitor and are prepared to move the switch to stop, but there’s little to do. Taxiing is via the rudder pedals and carbon brakes. Once running, the jet will roll away from the chocks at idle power, meaning that braking is needed.

Takeoff preparation is easy—the checklist is short and consists generally of setting flaps, confirming that the departure procedure and initial altitude are loaded in the Garmin. I liked that there is nothing extra to do—or forget—after takeoff clearance is received. There’s a takeoff configuration button to push that checks the critical stuff and confirms that the jet is configured for takeoff. Switchology at that point is that every switch should be in the 12 o’clock position and all lights off. “12:00 and dark,” is the call. It’s simple, straightforward, and crew-friendly.

Loaded about 2,000 pounds below gross for this launch, V₁ was 105 knots, with V_R at 106. Acceleration was as to be expected for a bizjet, exhilarating and addictive.

Rotation immediately generated a positive rate of climb, once the gear was up and flaps retracted, we watched the rate of climb slide into the 3,000 fpm range as we accelerated.

We alternated hand-flying and having the automation handle things as we were slowly cleared to a 16,000-18,000-foot block altitude east of Melbourne. There, we hand-flew the 300E through steep turns and found that the jet is just plain fun to fly. The controls are heavy but responsive and the aircraft stays where you put it. Stick-force-per-G is linear and gets heavy quickly, so it’s unlikely someone will inadvertently load up the airframe when maneuvering.

With the autopilot back on, we pushed the power levers from max cruise to the climb mark and reached FL 450 so quickly that we were still negotiating with ATC for a route where we could have 10 minutes of level flight for a speed check. Once at altitude, we left the power in the climb setting and accelerated to Mach 0.8 , where at ISA minus-7 degrees Celsius we were burning at a total of 910 pph.

Pulling the power back to max cruise, the speed slowly backed off from Mach 0.8 to about 0.78 before it was time to start a descent. Heading down, we explored an emergency descent with power at idle (no effect on pressurization) and spoilers deployed and saw 10,000 fpm on the gauges.

I was impressed by the ease of programming the Prodigy Touch system as Captain Mohler did so while we were being vectored through busy Florida airspace and set up for the RNAV approach into Runway 9R at Melbourne. What would otherwise have been a workload-intensive event was something, in my opinion, easily handled by a single pilot comfortable with the automation and maintaining situational awareness.

Once established on glideslope, Captain Mohler suggested trying the coupled go-around feature. Pushing one of the TOGA (takeoff-go-around) buttons on the power levers caused the flight director to command an appropriate pitch up with the autopilot following the command. With autothrottles installed, the power would have come up simultaneously.

We then disabled the autopilot and rejoined the glideslope to set up a demonstration of ROAAS.

I’ve seen far too many bizjet runway overshoot accidents—and they almost invariably arise from being high and/or fast on final with a pilot determined to complete the landing and certain they can pull things together, only to discover the laws of physics can’t be broken. I think ROAAS will go a long way in reducing one of the remaining bugaboos of bizjet operations.

After sampling the automatic go-around and ROAAS features, landing the jet in gusty conditions proved to be a nonevent. I found it easy to maintain VREF. Captain Mohler called for pulling the power levers to idle at 50 feet and making a minimal flare. We managed to develop a sink rate at the last moment and touched down embarrassingly firmly. However, in performing its design duties, the trailing beam landing gear soaked things up and made us look good.

In the gusting crosswind we appreciated the automatic spoiler deployment. I could pay full attention to keeping the airplane tracking where we wanted with the main gear firmly on the ground. Applying gentle pressure initially to the brake pedals provided feedback that all was well, so I applied significant pressure as we wanted to make a nearby taxiway. I never felt the anti-skid cycle, but the jet slowed as if someone had tossed out an anchor.

In Conclusion

I came away from our time with the Phenom 300E impressed in many ways.

I like the robustness of the airframe. I appreciated the thought that went into a design focused on the needs of pilots so that either as a crew or single pilot, they can concentrate their time and energy on what is important, situational awareness, and handle whatever weather, ATC, or equipment failures throw at them without descending into the high-stress, tunnel-vision world where mistakes are made.

Spec Sheet: Embraer Phenom 300E

Price (as tested, estimated): $13 million

High Cruise Speed: 464 ktas

Max Mach Number: 0.80 MMO

NBAA IFR range (5 passengers): 2,010 nm

Takeoff Distance, 1,000 nm/NBAA IFR: 3,209 ft. at max gross weight

Landing Distance, Unfactored/NBAA IFR: 2,212 ft.

Max Operating Altitude: 45,000 ft.

Length: 51 ft., 4 in.

Wingspan: 52 ft., 2 in.

Height: 16 ft., 9 in.

Cabin Length: 17 ft., 2 in.

Cabin Width: 5 ft., 1 in.

Cabin Height: 4 ft., 11 in.

Maximum Payload: 2,524 lbs.

Payload, Full Fuel: 1,459 lbs.

Pressurized Stowage: 10 cubic ft. in the cabin

Aft Cargo Stowage: 84 cubic ft.

Cockpit at a Glance: Embraer Phenom 300E

A. The Embraer Phenom E00E’s pair of displays can be laid out in many ways. The primary flight display features a familiar Garmin interface, with airspeed and altitude tapes plus attitude information.

B. The multifunction display hosts the power and propulsion system schematic in this view.

C. A Garmin GTC-style touchscreen controller also follows the similar control unit found in many new piston and turboprop airplanes.

D. The power levers on the right side of the pilot’s seat are set as required for the necessary engine power output.

E. The flight control yoke is used to control pitch and roll.

This feature first appeared in the May 2024/Issue 948 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post We Fly: Embraer Phenom 300E appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The complexity of the instrument panel has served either to intrigue or intimidate potential pilots. Having been the former kind, I’ve had trouble putting myself in the latter’s point of view.

But with ever-advancing avionics and capabilities, I admit it can be tough even for the seasoned ones among us to keep up. That’s why the fresh approach Cirrus took to its next model in the SR series makes a lot of sense.

And for new pilots—and this pilot who flies Cirrus aircraft sporadically—as opposed to a seasoned owner or dedicated Cirrus instructor, the barrier to entry and re-entry has fallen significantly.

Though it’s not as overtly revolutionary as the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) or Safe Return enabled by Garmin Autoland on Cirrus’ SF50 Vision Jet, the reimagined flight deck in the new SR G7 and other improvements make a more immediate impact—because pilots benefit from them on every flight, from the moment you press the start button.

Wait—what??? There’s a start button?

What’s new here takes us way beyond the panel.

A Beginner’s Mind

When you must approach something from a fresh perspective, it helps to go into a beginner’s mindset.

But how to do so when you’ve known the airplane since its early development years, as I have? In a similar fashion, the engineering and product dev teams at Cirrus had to work to place themselves in that beginner’s mindset.

My first look at the G7 started with a long cross-country. And the fact that I hadn’t flown an SR for a year assisted me in taking in the new generation with as close to a newbie’s view as possible. I met up with Cirrus SR product director Ivy McIver in stealth mode at the Hagerstown Regional Airport (KHGR) in Maryland.

She warned me ahead of time that the airplane wouldn’t appear different from the outside but to expect something truly different inside. So I fired up the GoPro and prepared for her to open the door.

First Approach

From the walk-up you might notice a new paint scheme, new colors—but it’s true you won’t really register a change until you open the pilot’s door.

In fact, McIver had been flying the G7 around in broad daylight, with only a series of foiled sunshades to hide the nature of what awaited inside. This obviously kept the ruse going, and according to McIver, I was officially the first person outside of Cirrus to demo the new model, a real privilege.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Diamond DA62

After giving me a quick preview on the ground, we needed to see the G7 in action to begin to appreciate all that had been accomplished with the redesign. We flew in pursuit of good weather and photo backdrops not browned by the seasons, and headed south—nearly straight south—from Maryland to Florida by way of Hilton Head, South Carolina.

It honestly took the five-plus hours en route (and a fuel stop) to get a sense of it all.

Engine Start

Push the button. Hold it in, monitor a gauge, release. After setting things up, that’s typically all you have to do in a jet. The mag switch has been relocated, made larger to the palm, and incorporates a button to start. It’s an elegant way to make the process similar to the SF50, while still preserving the ability to isolate mags, whether in a before-takeoff check or in-flight issue. There’s no key to insert—just like with today’s automobiles. The logic is, if you can enter the airplane with the key fob, you can start the engine.

Fuel selection has also benefited from “Vision Jet-ification, ” with an automatic fuel switching protocol that alternates tanks by physically moving the fuel selector knob with every 5 gallons burned. You can override the system to manual by lifting a sliding door, but it was honestly completely forgotten within the first half hour of our flight demo. It’s very similar to that found in many single-engine turboprops as well.

Taxiing out reveals more fascinating tools. While we have experienced SafeTaxi and SurfaceWatch from Garmin before, the G7 takes it a step further with automated slewing to the proper PFD perspective during ground operations versus in flight. The functionality is smart, in that it zooms in and out, adding and subtracting info from the display based on your speed and location relative to a runway—whether you are holding in the ramp area or taxiing onto the active for takeoff, for examples.

Cross-Country Lines

The faster an airplane cuts through the air, the more of the country you can string together at one go.

But the engineering behind the G7 didn’t wring a few more knots from the carbon fiber airframe by tweaking fairings or FIKI panels. The team accomplished the most recent speed mods in the last G6 version we flew (“We Fly: Cirrus SR22T 8000,” March 2021).

Instead, the G7 begins saving the pilot time on the ground—during pre-startup, taxi, and before takeoff checks—streamlining what had at times been belt-and-suspenders checklists into the key items retained in a logical flow. A new scroll wheel fell nicely to hand as I ran through the commensurate checks during each stage of preflight, in-flight, and postflight procedures. The checklists come linked to the CAS as well, so that the appropriate ones come to the fore when an alert pops up.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Cessna TTx

Some elements are just left on. Like the nav lights. With long-life LEDs, when would you choose to leave them off? Therefore, not only do the nav lights come on when BATT 1 is turned on—the same goes for the avionics—but the nav light switch has been removed from the electrical system subpanel in front of the PFD as well.

Streamlining has targeted what’s in the PFD too. Menus have popped out of their nesting, leaving layers behind that previous pilots had to wade through. The G1000 gained complexity over the years—expanding in parallel into the G2000, G3000, and Perspective. When you can strip away those unnecessary complications, you save time in normal operations but also during abnormal and emergency procedures.

Where the pilot retains control—such as in setting the power and mixture—Cirrus incorporated aids to make standard adjustments easier. Since the engine monitoring system knows the aircraft altitude, outside air temperature, and internal temps in the Continental IO-550-N (in the case of the normally aspirated SR22 we flew for the report), it updates the green arcs on the power setting and fuel flow gauges on the display. The pilot puts the power setting at the percent power desired then sets the mixture to the top of the green arc for best power. Further leaning for LOP settings—or rich of peak settings—can utilize lean assist.

While these tools have been available in various forms in Garmin-integrated flight deck installations, the protocols underwent refining with the latest edition of the Perspective Touch+ in the SR G7.

In-Flight Maneuvering

So if the shell of the SR22 has remained the same, along with its planform, control surfaces, and powerplant, why would I take the time to fly through a full series of maneuvers—after spending five-plus hours speeding down to Florida and two more as a safety pilot in our photo mission for what you see on the cover and in these pages?

Because one more thing has changed in the G7—and it may not mean much to most pilots who fly the new model, but it impressed me enough to need to take it through its paces. That’s the updated flight control stick. The SR series’ flight control mechanism had iterated only slightly from its origins as a somewhat utilitarian-feeling half-yoke managed by trim on a hat button in the first production SR20 in the late 1990s. The upgrade in ergonomics with the G7 makes a real difference to this size-5-glove wearer.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Garmin Autoland for the Beechcraft King Air 200

Another new jet-like inclusion? A stick shaker. This I definitely had to see in anger, so as part of the standard test profile I conducted, we looked at both power-on (departure) and power-off (approach) stalls. Holding down the autopilot disconnect button allows you to maneuver past the ESP (electronic stability protection), and in this case, pitch up to a deck angle needed to induce preliminary stall buffeting. However, before any break, the stick shaker activated—as if the “danger Will Robinson” graphics on the PFD could be ignored—compelling the release of whatever back pressure I was holding in to induce the stall condition.

Flap overspeed protection makes for one more improvement, preventing the pilot from deploying the flaps above the programmed indicated airspeed relevant to the flap setting selected. It also prevents you from retracting the flaps when airspeed is too low.

Behind the Systems

Cirrus also calls out an intelligent new battery to support the electrical system. How can a battery demonstrate intelligence? Maybe that’s a bit of affectation—but we’re seeing certain levels of system monitoring and responsiveness in electric and hybrid aircraft, and this may be an instance where there is carryover from these innovations in battery management systems that make them seem, well, intelligent, as they optimize cells purportedly for improved performance.

Systems pages on the MFD present the details from the pilot’s operating handbook in a color-coded manner, easing quick interpretation and assessment of status for electrical, ice protection, fuel, and environmental control systems. When used in combination with the checklists, the need to pull out the pilot’s operating handbook in flight goes down—saving more time in tense situations.

The built-in oxygen system comes as an option—I suppose you can save the money and 18 pounds of added weight if you don’t plan to fly high. But at $13,900 to me it’s cheap insurance to have O2 locked and loaded so that you can access it quickly and with less fuss than a portable system. And you don’t need to be flying the turbo model up in the teens to gain from its use—most of us perform better in the airplane if you turn on the juice as low as 7,000 or 10,000 feet, especially at night.

Stacking Up the Options

The specific serial number we flew was an SR22 GTS version of the G7, equipped with air conditioning, Cirrus Global Connect, built-in oxygen, and the Hartzell lightweight three-blade composite propeller upgrade. The blend prices out at $1,136,500 and takes the weight from the standard GTS basic empty weight of 2,359 pounds to 2,419 pounds—the Hartzell prop takes off 12 pounds, while the AC adds 55 and Global Connect 6.

The standard interior has taken a turn to anything but a commonplace look and feel. Not only have the seat designs seen a visual update, but the ergonomics have improved as well. Better placement of the USB-C ports and more robust cup holders—seriously, this is an issue when they are flimsy in a million-dollar-plus aerial conveyance—round out the updates. As with the G6, the baggage door is unlocked with proximity to the key fob, and it opens with the touch of a button to assist when your hands are full. And you can see if it’s left open by CAS message and on the appropriate systems page.

Connectivity includes Garmin’s Flight Stream 510 that the avionics OEM rolled out in 2016, automating the data exchange between the aircraft, pilot, and manufacturer. Jeppesen ChartView, SiriusXM weather and audio, and Garmin Pilot come along for the ride too. The GTS package adds Cirrus Executive (yaw damper, enhanced vision system), Cirrus Awareness (active traffic, eTAWS), Cirrus Advantage (14-inch screens, taxiway routing, Surface Watch), certified flight into known ice (FIKI) protection, the Premium appearance options and GTS badging to identify the series.

For a low-end reference on the evolved series, pricing begins at $634,900 for a base model G7 SR20. All versions come standard with a three-year, 1,000-hour spinner-to-tail warranty that rivals other new piston singles. For $21,900 to $25,900, you can add two years and 1,000 more flight hours to create five-year coverage for the SR G7, depending on the model.

And we can’t help but mention the new colors, in and out, that add to the wide-ranging palette of head-turning options. While you can choose a more restrained look, Cirrus offers more to appeal to those who don’t mind drawing attention on the ramp. New exterior colors include the striking blue on N433CA, while several customer favorites remain, such as the gray on N616SP, which I flew for this piece. And the interior continues the conversation piece, with leather, bolstered seats, and satin silver vents and lights. Pilots can choose from five leather colors and two cabin interiors. The seats can be appointed with black Alcantara inserts or an all-leather design.

The Grand Total

Wrapping it up in a complete package and taking a step back, what has Cirrus Aircraft achieved here? In my estimation, the company had to have felt challenged to build on its success—with the 500th Vision Jet overall delivering in the third week of December and 389 2023 SR models flying out the door by the end of the third quarter of 2023.

Simplifying things is hard, particularly when selling at an ever-increasing price. It’s easy to chase the marketing pundits chorusing “more, more,” adding to the feature set to justify the value.

But to the Cirrus customer, who has typically been sold on the lifestyle offered and enabled by the airplane, the most elusive commodity is time. Other OEMs have thought through time-saving elements—think of the Gulfstream G700, that, when certificated, will allow the pilots to go from opening the door to engine start in less than five minutes. So this is what Cirrus really achieves with the streamlining of the flight experience made possible by the G7.

The G7 hits the mark, giving a pilot for whom technology resonates—but doesn’t wish to piddle around the airplane, tinkering on weekends, and getting things just so—the ability to walk up to the airplane, start up, and go with a streamlined approach, knowing the technology in the background has your back.

Spec Sheet: 2024 Cirrus SR G7

Price, as tested: $1,136,500

Engine: Continental IO-550-N, 310 hp

Propeller: Hartzell lightweight, composite, three-blade

Seats: 5

Length: 26 ft.

Height: 8 ft., 11 in.

Wingspan: 38 ft., 4 in.

Wing Area: 145.16 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: 24.8 lbs./sq. ft.

Power Loading: 11.61 lbs./hp

Cabin Width: 4 ft., 1 in

Cabin Height: 4 ft., 2 in.

Max Takeoff Weight: 3,600 lbs.

Max Zero Fuel Weight: 3,400 lbs.

Standard Empty Weight: 2,272 lbs., base 2024 SR22

Max Baggage: 130 lbs.

Useful Load: 1,328 lbs., base 2024 SR22

Max Usable Fuel: 92 gal.

Service Ceiling: 17,500 ft.

Max Rate of Climb: MTOW, ISA, SL: 1,310 fpm at 50% flaps (takeoff); 1,268 at 0% flaps (en route)

Max Cruise Speed: 186 ktas

Cruise Speed at 75% Power, 8,000 ft. pressure altitude, 3,400 lbs., ISA: 180 ktas

Max Range at 55% Power, 14,000 ft., ISA: 1,169 nm; 11.3 gph

Stall Speed, Flaps Up: 73 kcas

Stall Speed, Full Flaps: 61 kcas (most forward CG)

Takeoff Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,868 ft. (ISA, sea level)

Landing Over 50 Ft. Obs: 2,535 ft. (ISA, sea level, flaps 100%)

Cockpit at a Glance: 2024 Cirrus SR G7

A. Mimicking the Vision Jet, the SR G7 features a push-button start—though mags and mixture must be properly set for ignition to take place.

B. The new Cirrus Perspective Touch+ by Garmin includes twin 12-inch displays that come standard, with 14-inch PFD and MFD an option. All feature split-screen capability.

C. The two Garmin GTC touchscreen controllers carry over from the jet as well and offer redundancy of functions.

D. The digital, dual-channel automated flight control system (AFCS) incorporates “smart servo”

technology and includes an optional yaw damper that automatically disconnects at 200 feet agl.

E. Updated synoptic pages and streamlined checklists aid in the monitoring of both systems and procedures throughout all phases of flight.

F. The Cirrus IQ app gives the pilot remote viewing and control. Optional Cirrus Global Connect delivers worldwide texting, telephone service, and weather.

This column first appeared in the January-February 2024/Issue 945 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post We Fly: Cirrus SR G7 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Since the first of its kind—the Wright Flyer, if you go back all the way—airplane designers have addressed the tension between power and control in a variety of ways. Some with centerline thrust, such as the Cessna 336 and 337 Skymaster, and others with pilot support, such as the Beechcraft King Air’s latest autothrottles—both under supplemental type certificate and standard in new models—taking flight in the one-engine regime into “easy day” territory.

But Diamond quietly achieved the latter in elegant ways with the DA62, starting with its first flight in April 2012. Now, more than 11 years later, the twin has become a darling of private owners as well as a handful in flight training.

Futuristic Lines

I first contemplated the DA62 in detail as I flew off its wing in Diamond’s newest sister ship, the DA50 RG, for a pilot report last spring (see “We Fly: Diamond DA50 RG” in Issue 938). We followed a course from Friedrichshafen, Germany (EDNY), after the AERO 2023 conference, to Diamond’s home in Wiener Neustadt, Austria, south of Vienna. While at first take the DA62 appears to be a stouter version of the DA42 that preceded it (and which sees most of its time on training flight lines in Europe and North America), upon inspection it appears even more robust—less a Captain Proton design than a Porsche Cayenne with wings and a T-tail.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Cessna TTx

I did my initial multi in 1995 in a pair of Cessna 310s—first a J-model belonging to master Twin Cessna instructor Chuck Clemen, and the second a striking P-model with a jaunty red stripe at Longmont Air Services at what is now KLMO in Colorado. I started an airline transport pilot certificate course in a Piper Seminole at one point—and that’s another story—but was less than impressed with it after enjoying the stately, still-modern ramp presence and performance of the 310. But the lack of single-engine climb rate on takeoff in Colorado even in the 310 sobers you up quickly.

That’s where the DA62 demonstrates its difference. With a single-engine service ceiling of 13,000 feet, you might actually be able to climb to the pattern for a landing following an engine failure after takeoff at mile-high elevations—as opposed to closing both throttles and aiming for the softest spot like you were in a single.

While the DA42 came in a couple of versions, one with Lycoming and one with Austro Engine powerplants, the DA62 entered both EASA and FAA certification with the AE-330s, a bespoke jet-A burner based on a Mercedes-Benz automotive diesel engine. Originally having a 1,000-hour TBO, the bar was raised in 2019 to1,800 hours, with estimated overhaul costs still in flux as of press time. But regardless, it’s great news—saving money for engines making it to the later TBO.

FADEC Baseline

The DA62’s genius lies in the way the designers architected the FADEC-enabled engines to leverage that control into a safety net for the pilot to use in the event of a power loss. But the simplification of operation begins on engine start and carries on throughout the flight.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Garmin Autoland for the Beechcraft King Air 200

The before-takeoff checks illuminate how this works. The dance of checking prop, mixture, and mags—involving six levers in most standard light twins—is replaced with the 20-second-long ECU test that runs its automated magic when you press and hold the button on each engine in sequence. The fuel system also follows the simplicity rule, with two tanks centered between the fore and aft spars and within the stout carbon fiber structure to attain the level of crashworthiness for which Diamond airplanes are known. To crossfeed in the event of single-engine operations, or to balance fuel between the wings, you place the fuel on/off lever into that position for the tank, with the red off position guarded with a sliding, red metal gate.

Flight Test

I took the opportunity to fly with Micke Lang, pilot and delivery manager in flight operations for Diamond Aircraft, out of the European factory location at Wiener Neustadt (LOAN). After watching the previous days’ ballet of aerial photography of the DA62, with its steep turns and quick breaks, I couldn’t wait to get my hands on the stick—yes, a twin with a control stick—and feel those maneuvers for myself.

Lang briefed me on the flight ahead prior to getting on board the airplane. Then he walked me through the engine start, flipping the master switch on and pushing the silver button on the left and then right as we cleared both sides visually. Soon we were calling our position on the 1,067-meter (3,501 feet) runway for a normal takeoff, which in our very light configuration—with half tanks and just the two of us on board—took less than half its length.

We cruise-climbed up at 110 knots indicated (V_Y is 89 kias) to a moderate altitude of 4,500 feet msl from which to begin the high work series, starting off with a power-off stall with flaps and a mild relaxation of pressure around 70 knots on the tape. No bad habits as long as both engines are turning in equal measure. In fact, the aerodynamics compared favorably to the single-engine retract DA50 RG I’d just tested, definitely showing the family resemblance.

Single-Engine Operations

We put the DA62 through a full palette of ops on one engine—with Lang shutting down the left engine with a flip of the switch, upon which time it automatically went into feather, prop stopped. I took the controls, and put in 5 degrees of bank into the good engine, but tooling around on one above the Austrian fields felt only nominally different from two-engine maneuvers, handling wise. The left side is the critical engine, but the low power adjustment needed to maintain level flight at that altitude made it feel decidedly not so critical. It makes sense that V_YSE at 87 kias is so close to V_Y in this twin.

After conducting the demonstration of the loss of power, bringing that side back to life was as simple as maintaining the recommended airspeed, 80 knots (76 knots for a stopped prop), allowing the prop to regain forward thrust as I turned the ECU switch back on.

All along the flight, I felt instantly comfortable with the familiar Garmin G1000 NXi up front with two primary flight displays and a central multifunction display. Within its avionics brain, you find the industry standard ESP (enhanced stability protection), an emergency level mode, weather radar via the GWX8000, and Surface Watch ground alerting system. The most recent Phase III software update introduced split-screen functionality, Bluetooth recording of pilot audio, and coupled go-arounds using the GFC 700 autopilot.

Getting Current?

As we returned to base, Micke demonstrated one unique flight regime for the DA62, the accelerated descent. Putting the airspeed tape at the bottom of the yellow arc—at 162 kias and 1,100 fpm down—we smoothly bled off altitude to transition to the charted visual approach back into LOAN. I gave Lang a moment’s pause when I answered his question: How many landings shall we do? Three, I said half in jest, so I can be current.

Yes, in an EASA-registered airplane not logging instruction, that was not really to be the case, but with the ease of operation—and the straightforward approach and touchdown sight pictures for the DA62—it would have been readily accomplished.

Can It Carry Seven?

The target market for the airplane (see “The Owner Experience” below) lies in the coveted six-seater realm, and the DA62 goes one better over standbys such as the Beechcraft Bonanza G36 by allowing for up to seven passengers. To be fair, the rear seats combined are really only workable for a couple of children perhaps, but with seven belts instead of six, that option remains. And with a useful load of up to 1,548 pounds, that choice is real. Front baggage compartments hold up to 66 pounds on each side—and the third row can have an optional fold-down capability to fit in more stuff by volume.

The owner can choose a range of materials and designs based on whether those kids—hypothetical or not—tend to leave a trail of Goldfish crackers and sippy cups behind, or if they’re grown and ready to go looking at college campuses with the pilot on a whirlwind tour.

And while you can make your own paint scheme a reality, the selection of premium colors runs from ruby red to anthracite black. With the leather interior choices on Diamond’s famous crashworthy seats, owners can opt for a variety of options, from highlight stitching to custom panels and carpets.

Market Penetration

Since the DA62 was first delivered in 2015, with two units, Diamond has kept a steady cadence of between 26 to 33 units each year up through 2021.

However, a jump to 53 out the door in 2022 and 30 in the first half of this year signal an uptick in orders. At press time, Diamond had reported a total of 273, according to figures compiled by the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, in the hands of mostly ecstatic private owner-pilots.

The significant fleet speaks to the sweet spot that the DA62 has found in the market—for a true family luxury SUV of the air.

The Owner Experience

With nearly 275 in the field, the Diamond DA62 is making pilots happy with their choice.

In the 40 years since he became a pilot, and 20 in the aviation business, John Armstrong of LifeStyle Aviation has flown his share of light twins. But the Diamond DA62 is the airplane of choice to fly every week.

“It’s my go-to airplane, and I love it,” Armstrong says, because it requires relatively little effort from the pilot compared to others in the piston-twin segment.

That sentiment echoed through the voices of the four DA62 owners FLYING interviewed for this article. From high time pilots, such as Armstrong and Scott Thompson, to brand-new ones, like Brett Swanson and John Chaffetz, everyone agreed that the DA62 ranked among the lowest in pilot workload and commensurately high in capability and capacity for their respective missions.

Bill Craven purchased serial number 177 in January 2022—and he transitioned from the Cessna T182T and T206 that he had used to fly his family from the Seattle area to a vacation home in central Washington. Craven was attracted by the DA62’s flight into known icing (FIKI) approval to make the oft-wintry trek over the Cascades. With a similar useful load to the 206 but with an extra engine, the DA62 has proven to be a reliable mount.

“It’s easy to fly, but also a pilot’s airplane,” Craven says, referring to the airplane’s control stick and direct feedback.

Chaffetz started flying in a DA40 in the Los Angeles Basin, so the transition to the DA62 felt natural to him. It also appealed to his passengers.

“The stability is the thing,” he says. “It’s a little bit heavier than the DA40 but still fun to fly. It’s just so much more comfortable on longer trips.”

With the ability to seat up to seven people, depending on their size, owners have options. Thompson has a few tips regarding the configuration.

“It’s really a four-adult, two-kid, or five-adult, two-kid, or five-adults-and-a lot-of-bags airplane,” he says.

And it sips jet-A, which several owners reported was an advantage because of its widespread availability. Several we spoke with reported economy cruise burns of around 15 to 20 gph total.

But for all of that capability, the mechanics of flying the twin remain straightforward. For Swanson, more than any other thing, the simplicity of operating the DA62 lends him a degree of confidence that he truly appreciates.

“The pilot workload is just lower,” he says, which allows him to use the airplane to visit store franchise locations around the Southeastern U.S., with either his wife or several colleagues on board.

Plus, it passes the all-important test for passenger and pilot—satisfaction.

“When it sets down on the runway, it sticks—that’s part of the confidence,” Swanson says, noting that although his insurance was pretty expensive during the first year, it was worth it.

Cockpit at a Glance

A. The engine-start sequence is enabled by the control inherent in the Austro AE-330 powerplants, using the ECU switches for each engine.

B. The Garmin G1000 NXi offers ESP, emergency level mode—and in the latest update, split-screen functionality and coupled go-arounds with the GFC 700 autopilot.

C. The single lever for each engine helps to reduce workload, and one-engine-out operations are streamlined so that bringing back the power on the failed engine feathers the prop.

D. The fuel system is also simplified, and it follows Diamond’s standards for safety and crashworthiness, plus the ability to crossfeed with the slide of a switch.

E. The control sticks are unique among twins, giving the airplane an immediate responsiveness.

Spec Sheet: 2024 Diamond DA62

Price, standard equipped: $1,471,950

Engine: 2 x Austro Engine AE-330, diesel

Propeller: 2 x MT-Propeller MTV-6-R-C-F/CF, composite, three blade

Horsepower: 180 hp per side (177 hp max power, 169 hp max continuous power)

Seats: Up to seven

Length: 30 ft., 1 in.

Height: 9 ft., 3 in.

Wingspan: 47 ft., 10 in.

Wing Area: 184.1 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: 27.54 lbs./sq. ft.

Power Loading: 14.32 lbs./hp

Cabin Width: 4 ft., 2.8 in

Cabin Height: 4 ft., 2.4 in.

Max Zero Fuel Weight: 4,850 lbs.

Max Takeoff Weight: 5,071 lbs.

Empty Weight: 3,523 lbs., depending on options

Max Nose Baggage: 132 lbs.

Max Rear Baggage: 265 lbs.

Useful Load: 1,548 lbs., depending on options

Max Usable Fuel: 86.4 gal. (main + aux.)

Max Operating Altitude: 20,000 ft.

Single-Engine Service Ceiling (ISA, MTOW): 11,000 ft.

Max Rate of Climb (MTOW, ISA, SL): 1,028 fpm

Cruise Speed at 85% Power: 185 ktas, ISA, 12,000 ft.

Max Cruise Speed: 192 ktas, ISA, 14,000 feet msl, at 4,407 lbs.; 190 ktas at MTOW

Max Range: 1,288 nm with no reserve

Fuel Consumption at 60% power: 11.8 gph, 12,000 ft.

Stall Speed, Flaps Up: 72 kcas MTOW

Stall Speed, Full Flaps: 68 kcas MTOW

V_MC: 76 kias, flaps up

V_YSE: 89 kias (MTOW)

Takeoff Over 50 Ft. Obs: (ISA, sea level, MTOW) 2,732 ft.

Landing Over 50 Ft. Obs: (ISA, sea level, MLW) 2,559 ft.

This column first appeared in the December 2023/Issue 944 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post We Fly: Diamond DA62 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In a boardroom cross-country—literally—from where I sat, former Cessna president and CEO Jack Pelton had closed the deal, yes, buying “certain assets of the Columbia Aircraft Company.” His excitement about the purchase rang through the few lines of text—for the airplanes Textron had just bought as well as the potential for growing Cessna’s foothold in an evolving piston marketplace. And from that moment, my own relationship unfolded with the airplane. What started as the Columbia 400 could have taken the high-performance, piston-single segment by storm, born of the Lancair heritage. It would become the Cessna 400—known briefly by its marketing name, Corvalis TT—and finally, in its most recent edition, the Cessna TTx.

The type designation—Cessna T240—would place it atop the hierarchy of Cessna singles, but it began life as an offshoot of a popular kitplane, the Lancair ES. Lancair formed a new business entity, Columbia, to oversee the development and manufacture of the 300, followed by the 350, then the 400, under Part 23. The company was new to the process of type certification, but not to high-performance aircraft development, and this resulted in a string of airplanes determined to knock a pilot’s socks off with their ability to go fast, maneuver fearlessly, and look nothing short of awesome doing it.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Garmin Autoland for the Beechcraft King Air 200

Columbia upgraded the original 300 (FAA type certificated in 1998) to the 350 with the addition of an optional glass panel—Avidyne’s Entegra primary flight display—in 2003, along with the more powerful, turbocharged 400, right up until the company dissolved in 2007. Columbia achieved the airplane’s stall speed requirement with a multiphase wing, moving the aerodynamic stall inboard and limiting up elevator travel and left rudder pedal range. These changes resulted in an airplane that could be certified under the FAA’s definition of spin resistant—unable to enter a spin even with pro-spin inputs. Recovery would come from normal anti-spin procedures, as opposed to the ballistic recovery parachute system required by its primary competitor, the Cirrus SR20 and SR22.

Westbound

The only visible moisture we touched in 933 nm between Hagerstown, Maryland, and Wichita, Kansas, came during the takeoff roll at KHGR—wisps of mist that had suppressed the visibility below a quarter mile for the hour prior to our departure still wavered across the wide runway. As soon as we lifted off, we left it behind and continued our climb over the first folds of the Appalachian hills, as I revisited the TTx in September.

As we cut a path through the sky westbound above the scattered threads of valley fog, I thought of the last cross-country I made in an SR22T. Yes, the newer avionics of the Cirrus have had the benefit of continuous evolution—the TTx suffers from a paralysis in updating the G2000, such that its capabilities seem encased in amber.

• READ MORE: We Fly: WACO YMF-5

The touchscreen control pad—called by the model designation GTC—went under development with Garmin immediately after the acquisition, as one of the primary components of the G2000—a two-big-screen integrated flight deck driven by softkeys on the display bezels as well as remotely through the GTC. This formed the foundation that Garmin would leverage into the G3000 we now find on single-engine turboprops and on up the food chain. Thus the lack of a Perspective doesn’t hit as keenly—you still feel like you’re in a modern cockpit though the architecture is now 10-plus years old.

Cessna worked in concert with Garmin on the development of the touchscreen and exactly how the pilot actions would activate the controls on the display. Though it appears to be actuated by the heat of a finger—as our smartphones do—early versions introduced crisscrossing beams across the screen that would be interrupted by the presence of the pilot’s finger. But just breaking the beam wouldn’t be enough to activate the “button” on the screen below—a deliberate pause and stroke was required. This action has been refined in subsequent models of the GTCs—but it was intriguing to give my input to the product management team during the testing phase in Cessna’s R&D lab in Wichita in the early 2010s.

The Way-Back Machine

Continuing the flashbacks: Now we’ll move forward a bit to 2014. I’d joined Jeppesen as a senior manager in aviation courseware development—but was ready to strike out on my own. I decided to take back two familiar roles—working on a book and flight instructing. I paired up with a retired race car driver and engineer who had just bought a 2012 TTx on the preowned market through the local Cessna piston sales dealer in the Denver metro area. He needed a bit of transition training as he pursued his instrument rating. But he felt clearly comfortable with the TTx’s speed and nimble coupling, given his background. The TTx fit him and his personality like a glove.

• READ MORE: Today’s Top AircraftForSale.com Pick: Cessna TTx, the ‘Other Cirrus’?

We headed to Independence, Kansas, for the factory-led portion of his TTx training—and my refresher course in the model since I’d left Cessna. In fact, KIDP was the scene where just a couple of years ago I’d seen the TTx fuselages join together from their composite halves on the production line as the company sorted through the best way to replicate the former Columbia Aircraft factory in Bend, Oregon. I’d visited that facility as well—in February 2008, Cessna held a sales meeting in Bend, and members of the team toured the compact production line, with clearly skilled craftsmen attending to each unit. The initial promise to keep production within the hands of this dedicated team boded well—as well as retaining a beautiful location for customer delivery and training—but internal and external economic forces in late 2008 and 2009 conspired against that original business plan.

For the likes of Six Sigma-led Cessna to pick up that work and translate it to a line more like that of its legacy singles, such as the 172, 182, and 206, it would be a feat—but made more so by the nature of the Columbia airplanes’ composite construction. At the time, most composite work for Cessna was completed at the TAM facility in Mexico, but these were nonstructural components like fairings and nose bowls. The entire fuselage required a complex layup process beyond that kind of work. Still, Textron forced the movement of production from Bend to Chihuahua. As it turned out, the need wasn’t properly identified to upgrade all the environmental systems at the Mexico plant to properly address the layup and curing via autoclave of the carbon fiber and Kevlar composites used in the Columbia design—and early serial numbers on the Cessna 400 suffered. Delamination in a handful of wings—discovered in an FAA flight test when an integrated fuel tank in the wing leaked—torpedoed the 400’s reputation in the market.

The move of more production and assembly to Independence, and the rebranding and upgrades to the model to create the TTx, sought to assuage those issues. However, the loss of confidence—however temporary and well addressed—combined with Cirrus Aircraft’s powerful presence and success in the market gave the TTx too far to go to make up lost ground. Though 110 units sold in 2008—the last of the Bend-built Columbias— sales never reached beyond the double digits per quarter, even after the upgrade to the TTx. In the end, Cessna ceased production on the TTx in 2018, with a total of 704 400s and TTxs built.

Pelton offers the perspective of reflection after 15 years have passed since Cessna made the transition from Bend production to Kansas and Mexico: “The economic downturn of 2008 really forced things, making it necessary to move the line away from Oregon where the knowledge base for composite layup was, as well as a great place to have customer deliveries.” That stumble cost dearly, along with a couple of other key delays, one in bringing FIKI certification into play, and the other in failing to market well on the strength of the airplane aerodynamically over its competitors.

Yeah, Baby!

Yes, shunning the TTx as weak in any way would be a serious mistake. In fact, the 400 from which it derived carries a utility category certification, meaning it actually has as a limit load factor of 4.4 positive Gs—and minor aerobatic chops as a result. Legendary airshow pilot

Sean D. Tucker nabbed the Columbia 400 for use in his Tutima Academy of Flight Safety in 2006—and if you search his name and the model on YouTube, you’ll find an inspiring video of the master taking the 400 through a graceful routine. The FAA granted a reclassification of the stock 400 into an experimental airworthiness certificate so that it could be flown in aerobatic and upset prevention and recovery training. And that’s what Tucker used the mount for, as it closely resembles the airplanes many pilots fly for themselves—as opposed to an Extra 330—yet it provided a slightly wider envelope for maneuvers. Though Tucker no longer offers the 400 as part of the academy’s portfolio, the legacy remains meaningful.

So don’t get any ideas about taking a TTx out for a loop and a roll—just know that the model carries this strength forward, along with impressive maneuverability and a real appeal to hand-flying pilots. The Columbia 400s came with carved mahogany flight control sticks mounted on the side panels—left for the pilot, right for the copilot—and they are true sticks, with a natural range of motion and articulation. When I had the chance to put the now leather-wrapped stick in my hand during our flight to Wichita, it was like greeting an old friend who falls into step next to you.

Cruise Control

For our two-leg mission to Wichita, we planned a stop at Spirit of St. Louis Airport (KSUS) on the north side of the metro area on the western banks of the Mississippi River near where the Missouri River joins it. At 8,000 feet, we kept 150 kias and 175 ktas most of the way, with a little more or less in spots. The weather gods not only blessed us with clear skies but also a mere breath of a headwind, which translated into a crosswind somewhere over Illinois.

A quick fuel-up and turn at Signature Flight Support at KSUS—and chicken tenders and waffle fries for the road—had us off again for a two-hour jaunt across Missouri and into Kansas for the slide into the bumps below the LCL and Eisenhower National Airport (KICT). We arrived in comfort and style, as we weaved through the obstacle course of construction to the ramp at Yingling Aviation.

For our troubles, we averaged about 15.8 gph on both legs, taking a total of roughly 100 gallons of 100LL to make the journey halfway across the country in about six hours. Try getting from door to door, Maryland to Wichita, in less than that on the airlines. I dare you.

Any Gotchas?

The twin turbochargers on the Continental TSIO-550 respond well to careful management—and replacing them is not cheap. Nor is making up for any damage they might do if pressed to failure, so they’re worth treating nicely.

When you do, however, you’re rewarded with great performance figures across the board. The TTx can get off the ground in a relatively short distance: a 1,300-foot ground roll, with 1,900 feet to over a hypothetical 50-foot obstacle in sea-level standard conditions, as shown in the book values and as I witnessed many times in practice. It will land just as short, as far as ground roll is concerned—1,250 feet—but you need to budget a bit more space for the whole trees-at-the-end approach at around 2,700 feet.

Just as with the SR series, speed control on final rewards the pilot and helps to avoid the dreaded runway overrun that plagues high-performance singles. One area in this regard where the SRs have an edge? The approach flap speed has been raised to 150 kias on SR22s—while the TTx’s remains at a painfully slow 127 kias. Fortunately, the TTx has speed brakes to help you slow down and get down at the same time. You will use them all the time—there’s no speed restriction on them (apart from VN_E)—just have them tucked in before you touch down.

The Columbia 400 originally came with an optional E-Vade anti-ice system on the wings, which used heat-conducting panels to shed the ice. However, it didn’t come certificated for flight into known ice (FIKI). Whether to add the option was debated within Cessna ranks until finally the TKS “weeping wing” de-icing system was introduced in March 2012, with full FIKI certification coming in June 2014. The TKS Ice Protection system offers up to 2.5 hours of icing protection—but that translates into 10.15 gallons at a hefty 9 pounds per gallon weight for a total of 91.4 pounds fluid weight—137 pounds for the system.

On the Market

You’ll want to search for the Columbia 400, Cessna 400, Corvalis, and TTx in order to capture all of the possible models existing on the market. At press time, I found roughly 20 TTxs available, mostly in the U.S. but a few overseas. The original 400 gained FAA type certification in April 2004 under Lancair’s direction, and European Union Aviation Safety Agency approval followed in 2009.

Pricing runs the gamut—from the mid-$300,000s to just north of $700,000—depending on equipment, total time, and location. But most appear to have between 900 and 2,000 hours, reflecting flight time of 100 to 200 hours per year since new. With the TBO at 2,000 hours, the cost of a new big-bore Continental or its overhaul may need to be factored into your purchase price.

Still, with the SR22Ts of the same vintage asking an average from $699,000 and up in Aircraft For Sale, the TTx looks mighty attractive on the spreadsheet. But the numbers tell only a small part of the story. As with all airplanes for which we harbor grand affections, the real joy comes in the flying.

Accelerated Bliss: Flying the Cessna 400 Series Was a True Pleasure

By Pia Bergqvist

In my 24-plus years of flying, I have been fortunate to take the controls of many different types of airplanes. Like adopted children, the two airplanes I have owned—Peppermint Patty, the Cessna 170, and Manny, the Mooney—occupy the softest part of my pilot heart. But the airplane that brought me the most enjoyable personal flying experience was one that, like some favorite children, bears many names. It started out as the Columbia 400, became the Cessna 400 when I first flew it, and was later renamed Corvalis TT and TTx.

I was one of four Cessna 350/400 product specialists (the 350 being the non-turbocharged version) spread around the country when the company took over and started marketing the aircraft type in 2008. Emily Waters covered the West Coast, Doug Walker the Northeast, and Kel Jones the Southeast—all three were previous Columbia pilots. I was new to the airplane, and my territory spanned from New Mexico to Tennessee and South Dakota to Texas. It might appear to be a large area for a single-engine piston four-seater. But covering the region in this sports car with wings was no trouble at all.

I will never forget traveling to Bend, Oregon, where the factory was located at the time, to pick up my first demo airplane. The terrific team of employees there gave me first-class treatment, as if I was a customer. There was a sign bearing my name standing in front of a factory-new Cessna 400—a black, silver, and white beauty—N86DE. The production quality was stellar, with flawless composite production, paint finishing, and interior and avionics installation. It was easy to proudly represent the airplane for the Wichita, Kansas-based company.

In no other airplane have I been able to sit as comfortably, with my left hand on the sidestick and the right hand on the keypad that manipulated most functions on the G1000 MFD—the flight deck installed in the 400 before the TTx moved up to the G2000. I had many long days in that seat, without even a hint of discomfort. While the Cessna 350/400 was equipped with the terrific GFC 700 autopilot, I hand-flew the airplane on most legs. It was simply a really fun airplane to fly, with enough maneuverability to satisfy one of the best aerobatic airshow performers of all time—Sean D. Tucker (yes, there are YouTube videos to prove it). In fact, the airplane earned well its certification in the utility category.

And the Cessna 400 got me where I needed to go quickly. I could count on around 200 ktas at 10,000 feet, but if I wanted to go faster, I simply hooked on to the built-in oxygen system and climbed higher. On one flight from Independence, Kansas, to Memphis, Tennessee, I reached 306 knots ground speed. Walker was kind enough to send me a patch, inaugurating me into the 300-knot club of Columbia pilots.

In the nearly 600 hours I was fortunate enough to fly the Cessna 400 and 350, I flew from coast to coast to dealers and airshows, and I took countless friends and strangers for rides. Many fond memories were forged in that airplane, and I hope, one day, I will return to that blissful seat.

Controls/Instruments at a Glance

A. The TTx featured the first—and perhaps only— Garmin G2000 integrated flight deck in a piston single. It works quite well, but the upgrade path is uncertain at this point.

B. The first of the GTC touchscreen controllers—a single one—came with the introduction of the Corvalis model.

C. The Continental TSIO-550 up front requires management of the twin turbos, but a robust engine information system display aids with keeping everything in the green.

D. The beautiful, wood sidestick flight control in the Columbia 400 transitioned to a leather-wrapped model, but it still falls comfortably to hand and maneuvers with ease throughout the significant flight envelope.

E. The GFC 700 takes FMS input for smooth climbs and descents tracking a flight plan.

2013 Cessna TTx Specs

Price New, Avg. Equipment: $810,000

Price, 2023: $450,000 to $700,000

Engine: Continental TSIO-550-C (310 hp) TBO: 2,000 hours

Propeller: McCauley, three-blade, constant speed

Seats: 4

Wingspan: 36 ft.

Wing Area: 141.2 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: 25.5 lbs./sq. ft.

Length: 25 ft., 2 in.

Height: 9 ft.

Baggage Weight: 120 lbs.

Standard Empty Weight: 2,520 lbs.

Max Takeoff Weight: 3,600 lbs.

Max Landing Weight: 3,420 lbs.

Max Useful Load: 1,070 lbs.

Fuel: 106 gal./102 gal. usable

Max Rate of Climb: 1,400 fpm

Service Ceiling: 25,000 ft.

Stall Speed (landing config.): 60 kias

Max Cruise Speed: 235 ktas

Max Range: 1,250 nm

Normal Range: 502 nm with 3 passengers (Conklin & deDecker/JSSI)

Takeoff Distance, Sea Level (over a 50 ft. obs.): 1,900 ft.

Landing Distance, Sea Level (over a 50 ft. obs.): 2,700 ft.

This column first appeared in the November 2023/Issue 943 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post We Fly: Cessna TTx appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The technology has been around since before World War II in military airplanes (see “How Can It Land Itself?” below) and from the mid-1960s in transport category jets. But if necessity is the mother of invention, then market demand is its directional guidance. When Garmin Aviation unveiled its Autoland emergency landing system in 2019, we saw the intersection of relatively inexpensive and precise GPS navigation, digital autopilots, and the FADEC-enabled turbine and turboprop powerplants capable of responding elegantly to an autothrottle.

Garmin debuted Autoland in the Piper M600/SLS—with an emergency-only autothrottle at first. Daher was first to certify a standalone Garmin autothrottle, in the TBM 940, followed by Cirrus in the SF50 Vision Jet, then the two OEMs added Autoland functionality in sequence in 2020. For the safety breakthrough, Garmin secured the Robert J. Collier Trophy—and FLYING’s 2021 Innovation Award.

In the case of Garmin’s Autoland, the fact that someone has yet to push the big red button spells a certain success. Or does it? Have you read of an accident in which the aircraft’s ability to land itself might have saved the day? And would you use the system if the situation warranted?

The Next Versions of Autoland

No one seems to mind that we haven’t seen Autoland used in anger yet. The applications just keep coming. Adding to new certs in the TBM 960 and Daher retrofits, the recently announced HondaJet Elite II program on its model HA-420, and the inclusion of the system on the upcoming Beechcraft Denali single-engine turboprop, Garmin has been working on its own supplemental type certificate for the Beechcraft King Air 200, to be followed by the 300 series—on an up-to-50-year-old design with many configurations.

For the King Air 200 series STC, you need a 200/B200 model—and several key components, including the Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42, -52, or -61 engines paired with four-blade props. Your King Air also requires hydraulic landing gear for Autoland. You’ll need the latest configuration Garmin G1000 NXi flight deck for either autothrottle alone or paired with Autoland. You can start with an analog panel or the basic G1000—you just have to get the updated NXi first.

• READ MORE: Elliott Aviation Delivers First Garmin Autoland Upgrade in King Air B200

Four years ago, I had a sneak peek of the very first installation at Olathe, Kansas, at New Century AirCenter (KIXD). On August 19, I climbed on board with Eric Sargent, engineer and flight-test pilot, into N60HL, which Piper had delegated to the project just a day before the company had to take it out of market survey for the final push to certification. I didn’t know what to expect—and we flew a slightly modified version of the protocol since the whole project remained under a cloak of secrecy at the time.

Still, I had to draw upon all my years of sitting there in the right seat watching students work out how to land without my touching the yoke, in order to keep my hands from grabbing for the horns as the M600 made a competent—if a bit solid—touchdown.

Going Flying—Hands Off

During that initial dance with Autoland, Jessica Koss, then aviation media relations specialist and now demo pilot for Garmin, led my introduction to the project. So it was only fitting that she would take the left seat in the King Air for the next demo I’d have—this time out of the Appleton Regional Airport (KATW) in Wisconsin during the week of EAA AirVenture in late July. Garmin announced the STC in progress the week prior, so our moves weren’t top secret this time, but it still felt like we would tap into talents on board the twin turboprop that the bigger iron we taxied past—a Falcon 900, a Citation Latitude—could only dream of having in the panel. With two rated pilots up front, midsize to long-range business jets don’t need “George the autopilot” to do any more than it already does, perhaps. But the King Air—so often flown single pilot—does.

This King Air B200—N288KM, Garmin’s workhorse test bed for new toys—had two critical building blocks installed to make the Autoland system work. First, it needed the upgrade to the G1000 NXi, the integrated flight deck now available by STC or as original OEM equipment in a multitude of light singles and twins. That STC for the King Air 200 series debuted in 2011—and across the King Air C90, 200/B200 and 300/350 series, Garmin estimates roughly 841 aircraft have had the STC installed, with 562 already equipped with the upgraded G1000 NXi.

Second, the King Air needed an autothrottle. While another autothrottle option exists for the model—the Innovative Solutions & Support installation, which debuted in 2019 and won FLYING’s Editors Choice Award that year—the Autoland suite requires the Garmin solution. That didn’t exist until recently, and it’s part of the package Garmin introduced at AirVenture. We would get to test both the autothrottle in its stand-alone modes and Autoland with the AT pulling the power levers, literally.

Before we launched, we’d had a briefing on the suite and the procedures. Around the table at the Appleton Flight Center—a hive aswarm with pilots to-ing and fro-ing during the show—Koss, Will Johnson (flight-test engineer), Aaron Newman (flight-test pilot), and Scott Frye (program manager) walked us through the architecture of the system and what to expect.

• WATCH: We Fly Garmin Autoland King Air 200

About That Autothrottle

We followed the plan to go through a takeoff using the autothrottle and climb above the bumps around 5,500 feet msl. The autothrottle itself brings significant safety benefits through its series of modes paired with the phase of flight. One key “pilot surprise” it prevents is throttle rollback when engaged—which has been blamed for several accidents over the course of the twin’s history. It also provides torque adjustment in the case of an over-temperature or overtorque condition.

Takeoff, climb, and descent/approach modes have standard settings or can be user-configurable.

But the phase of flight where the AT shines is if you lose power on one side. Then, it kicks into OEI (one-engine inoperative) mode and supports the pilot, working in parallel with the King Air’s native rudder boost. Autothrottle OEI is separate from rudder boost-triggered OEI ESP, and it is functionally equivalent to normal AT, except it parks the failed side throttle lever in its present position once the failure is detected.

About 20 nm out from KATW, Koss called Appleton Tower and by their prearranged agreement announced the request to initiate the Autoland sequence. As expected, the tower was able to accommodate the demo and told us to expect Runway 21. With the way clear, Koss had me engage the guarded, red-rimmed “Emergency Autoland” button—found in the King Air application on the lower console between the pilot and copilot seats. That keeps it within reach of both cockpit denizens but also the folks in the back.

From there on, Autoland took the reins, and frankly, it got pretty boring—if not still a bit surreal to watch the airplane fly itself. Keep in mind the King Air weighs almost twice as much as any other certificated application thus far—so much needed to be accounted for in the landing portion in terms of ensuring the stabilization of that mass prior to touchdown.

The screens turned to “calm-the-passengers” mode, and a series of gentle maneuvers linked us to the final approach course and a solid touchdown. I joked with Koss that she could surely land better than that—and it’s true. Autoland is not set up to caress the runway with the grace of a skilled—or lucky—pilot. It’s set to land firmly but safely, as if the runway were always slicked with a quarter-inch of rain.

A. The G1000 NXi installation comes first, bringing the latest software into the flight deck if not already installed.     

B. The autothrottle utilizes mechanical linkages as well as electrical components to set power for the phase of flight—or balance power between the engines.

C. Sensors and autopilot servos work behind the scenes to monitor flap and gear positions, and move flight control surfaces in response to Autoland requirements.

D. Garmin’s electronic stability and protection enters a new protocol during engine-out operations.

E. Autoland changes the displays to a passenger-centric presentation that walks the people on board through the steps of the approach and onto the landing.

How it Works

For those who didn’t read FLYING’s complete report in the January/February 2020 issue, or you want a review of what’s going on behind the scenes, here you go. The pieces of Autoland in the King Air B200 emulate those of the original installation—with a few more moving parts (and algorithms inside) to attend to the fact this is a turboprop twin we’re working with and not a single-engine turboprop or jet. In fact, the STC will mark the first certification of a two-engined aircraft, with the initial approval in the twin-engined HondaJet still in the works at press time.

First, there’s Garmin’s electronic stability and protection (ESP). The advanced aircraft recovery functionality has been built into Garmin flight decks since 2010. ESP works in the background when the pilot hand-flies the airplane. It’s independent of the autopilot but is activated using the AP’s servos. If the pilot exceeds a 45-degree bank, and ESP is active, then it will engage and nudge the flight controls to a more level attitude—and encourage the pilot to reduce the bank angle a bit. It works in a similar way with nose-up and nose-down pitch attitudes. If ESP activates for a prolonged period, the autopilot will engage in level mode.

The ESP takes on a new level in OEI management—what old school called “engine-out ops” or “single-engine ops.” Normally, the loss of power on one side triggers a bank excursion unless the pilot captures the change with appropriate rudder and aileron input—remember “dead foot, dead engine” and banking 5 degrees into the good powerplant? Well, upon the power loss, the ESP’s normal limits of 45 degrees change to 10 degrees into the failed engine and 40 degrees into the good engine, and pitch limits tighten from 20 degrees to 10 degrees pitch up and from 17 degrees to just 5 degrees nose down. Low airspeed protection kicks in at V_MCA plus 15 kias.

Second, there’s emergency descent management (EDM). EDM monitors pressurization and, in the event of a pressurization loss, maneuvers the airplane down to 15,000 feet msl or lower, unless the pilot responds.

Third, the autothrottle kicks in. The AT controls power typically by maintaining an airspeed, or a climb or descent rate, as selected by the pilot through the autopilot. In the case of Autoland, the AT continues to manage power during the descent, approach, and landing, based on target speeds, altitudes, and climb or descent rates, as called for by the system. For the King Air application, the autothrottle also balances power between the left and right engines, and monitors both to respond in the event of a power loss.

Fourth, sensors and “smart” autopilot servos work in the background. A barrage of specialized sensors monitor flap and gear positions, as well as braking sensors once the airplane is on the runway. The autopilot also features advanced servos with the functionality to be driven in very fine increments. This allows them to manage the precise vertical/descent rate and touchdown protocol required for a reasonably smooth landing.

Finally, there is a radar altimeter, already installed on the King Air. This advanced altimetry system uses the timing of radio waves to determine the airplane’s height above the ground with pinpoint accuracy. Initial testing of Autoland on previous singles attempted to manage altitude just by reference to the GPS—but the nuances of the roundout managing final feet above the runway required the precision of a radar altimeter to execute the landing properly. Perhaps future iterations of Autoland could use increasingly precise GPS for this component, but we’re not there yet.

So, back to the question posed as we sit here four years into a real, fielded automatic landing system for GA. We probably still need more time flying with the system ready in the background before we’ve contemplated all the ways it might save the day. And future versions are likely to assist us in abnormal situations rather than emergency ones—like using it to fly the airplane (without the ATC warnings) while we care for a sick passenger or upon entering weather we’re not prepared to exit properly.

One thing is for certain: Like a parachute, it’s a tool which, well deployed, can expand our reach as pilots—safely.

What’s it Going to Cost You?

Autothrottle: Starting at $44,995 (plus installation)

Autoland (assuming the G1000 NXi and autothrottle installed): Starting at $32,995 (plus installation)

Upgrading G1000 NXi to Phase II (to support AL/AT): $74,995 when purchased with the AT package

Upgrading the G1000 to the G1000 NXi: $52,995 (plus installation)

Adding G1000 NXi from scratch: $410,000 to $450,000 (depending on facility and options)

Labor estimates:
Autothrottle: 80 to 100 hours

Autoland: 200 to 240 hours

How Can it Land Itself?

With all the tech on the flight deck today, it’s no wonder that a modern airplane can perform a middling-to-decent landing on its own. But if asked when the first automated landing took place, you might be surprised to hear it: August 23, 1937.

That’s when Army Captain Carl Cranetested out his invention—an automatic landing system constructed of airborne receivers installed in a Fokker C-14B paired with a network of five radio beacons surrounding Patterson Field (now KFFO) near Dayton, Ohio.

Crane, director of the Instrument and Navigation Laboratory, and his fellow engineers put their minds to the proposal in 1935. First, in determining the system’s architecture, the group tested the electrical and mechanical components on aircraft in flight—much like a modern autopilot in cruise at first then through approach and landing. From a report filed following the successful attempt and reproduced on Fokker’s website, the process followed a similar structure to modern automatic landings:

First, a Sperry gyro pilot maintained the airplane’s directional control—which had been proven in long-distance flights from Ohio to Texas, New York, and Virginia. Regardless of the airplane’s actual heading when the pilot let go of the controls, the system captured a radio beacon signal from those transmitters that functioned much like marker beacons on an modern ILS.

Using the sensitive altimeter to fix the proper altitude, the airplane tracked inbound to the first of the string of stations, growing ever closer to the field.

For the first complete landing, Crane and engineers George Holloman and Raymond Stout took off from Wright Field (which was KDWF, near Riverside, Ohio, and now closed). As they leveled off and turned on the equipment, the Fokker traversed the roughly 5 sm over to the Patterson landing site.

The Fokker maintained altitude through a throttle “engine”—a rudimentary autothrottle interconnected with the altitude control to adjust the power setting if the minimum altitude was reached prior to Radio Station 1—the closest one to the field. After station passage, the throttle actuated again to set up a power-on glide and descent at a moderate rate until the touchdown was made at Patterson Field. At that point, switches on the landing gear actuated the throttle again, reducing power to idle. The landings were made in winds up to 11 mph and about half in “rough air.”

The C14B had certain advantages in making these trials a success. With a wingspan of 59 feet and a 525 hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690-5 Hornet radial engine, the C14B was relatively powerful when loaded to only half its normal payload—normal max gross weight was 7,341 pounds. Yet it was slow, stable, and ponderous enough in its handling to presume it would land predictably as well, mitigating tendencies to ground loop—which the report excerpt makes no note of, by the way.

Postwar Commercial Autoland

Development on an automatic landing system resumed following World War II, as the Royal Air Force formed its Blind Landing Experimental Unit (BLEU) at two military airfields in Suffolk, England—RAF Martlesham Heath and RAF Woodbridge. Using an increasingly more sophisticated autopilot to track the newly launched ILS for course and vertical guidance, rather than the beacons alone, introduced far more precision into the process. However, though the ILS’ lateral guidance could be used throughout the landing because of the way the transmitter is set up and emits, glideslope guidance ends once the airplane is over the runway threshold, leaving that last 10 feet up in the air, so to speak. Therefore, any autoland system had to begin ignoring the glideslope information once it became unreliable and transition to the radio altimeter.

From this basic truth comes the basis for the Category I instrument approach having a standard minimum altitude of 200 feet agl. Further reductions in those minimums, down to a full “zero-zero” landing, is classified as Category IIIc and requires not only the special onboard equipment and aircraft certification but also pilot training and qualification, and runway certification.

These early systems were tested on the military Vickers Varsity and Avro Vulcan, followed by the first installations on civilian aircraft, the Hawker Siddeley (originally de Havilland) HS.121 Trident, in cooperation with British European Airways. BEA had partnered with the RAF throughout the post-WWII development and made the first automatic landing in commercial revenue service on June 10, 1965, on G-ARPR, from Paris-Le Bourget (LFPB) to London Heathrow (EGLL). From there, the system was installed in the Sud Aviation Caravelle and throughout the turbojet fleets of other airlines.

The U.K. remained pioneers of sorts in utilizing automatic landing systems—driven by the poor weather and persistent low visibility experienced in the British Isles. North American airlines were relatively slow to pick up the new technology. In fact, when BEA went to scrap its Tridents and replace them with the Boeing 757, it was horrified to discover the 757 had no provision for the automatic landing system. While a dozen runways in the U.K. were certified to Cat. IIIc approaches then, only two were in the U.S., and the automatic landing system was deemed unnecessary for operations.

This feature first appeared in the October 2023/Issue 942 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post We Fly: Garmin Autoland for the Beechcraft King Air 200 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Back in the mid 1930s, my grandmother took her first joyride in a biplane. For $5 that she split with her best friend, Marion, Isabel Barker defied her father’s explicit instructions not to go up in one of those “newfangled contraptions” and snuck in the secret flight at the county fair in Maquoketa, Iowa. She confessed to him later, being the honest soul she was. But she never forgot that view from the front seat—perhaps a Standard.

But maybe it was a WACO model D.

She’s gone from us 7 years now, and the details remain lost to history. Alex Skiba, former sales and marketing manager for WACO Aircraft, figures many of those pilots who purchase a new WACO YMF-5 in 2023 still do so in order to use it for sightseeing operations. Similar in feel and spirit to those flights from a county fairground, the romantic taste of the sky that an open-cockpit airplane affords hasn’t lost its appeal.

And neither has the WACO.

An Introduction

The WACO takes you back into a beginner’s mind, not only because it evokes the beginnings of aviation’s golden age but also being the first airplane for many cadets facing entry into the U.S. Army Air Corps in World War II. Then, as now, WACO is an acronym, standing for Weaver Aircraft Company in honor of its original co-founder, George “Buck” Weaver, who in 1920 with Elwood “Sam” Junkin, Clayton “Clayt” Bruckner, and Charlie Meyers launched the nascent aircraft builder in Lorain, Ohio (see “The Dream Machines”). You also understand instinctively when approaching it that this flight experience will be completely different from any-thing you’ve had before.

Like preparing for a special first date, I walked through in my mind my previous piloting time in biplanes. A few hours in the stately Stearman, and a quick aerobatic flight in a Christen Eagle—that would be the sum total. My experience is not uncommon among those who choose to purchase new WACOs—like the stunning ed and blue YMF-5 featured in these pages that belongs to Ed Stadelman. As a retired airline pilot—with a 40-year career spanning from Allegheny Airlines to USAir to American, from which he last flew the Boeing 777 out of New York—Stadelman recognized his flight time flying a previously owned Cessna 206 and 310, and a few hours years ago in the Stearman, would not serve as a sufficient precursor to taking on the WACO. It’s not that it’s hard to fly compared to other tailwheel airplanes—it’s just that the sight picture is quite different with the looming cowl blocking most of the forward view from the rear seat, where the airplane is flown from.

Stadelman negotiated a 20-hour training package with the purchase of the YMF-5, and he took a tailwheel refresher course prior to beginning that tutelage—a path he recommends to anyone without significant time in a big-engined biplane.

A. The rear cockpit is laid out with most of the WACO’s instrumentation, according to the owner’s desires. But certain legacy touches, like the teak-handled control stick and flooring, echo back to the original design.

B. The “six pack” on this YMF-5 features two Garmin GI 275 electronic instruments that can be configured for IFR flight.

C. The JPI EDM 930 engine monitoring system gives detailed data from the powerplant and fuel system.

D. The Garmin GTN 750 offers a modern navigation option, even though the owner isn’t likely to file IFR in the open-cockpit biplane.

E. An S-TEC System 55 autopilot is an option, along with a second com radio to round out the IFR package.

You Need a Ladder

Yes, you need a stepladder for most any thorough pre-flight. But this walkaround absolutely requires one. And not just any ladder, but one that will allow you to check the fuel caps on the upper wing—there are at least two, and four if the owner has opted for long-range tanks. The preflight encompasses standard items for any airplane—checking the flight controls, landing gear, fuel and oil levels—but with many nuances special to a biplane with fabric covering and bracing wires.

The aircraft flight manual is 28 pages long. This is notable, as it’s about 20 times shorter than the AFM for a new FAA Part 23 certificated airplane with standard factory-installed avionics. Since everything in the panel—save for the legacy instruments such as airspeed, altimeter, and engine gauges—is an option, those supplements stand alone and are not woven into the manual. There aren’t pages of performance tables for altitudes into the stratosphere, nor are there expanded systems descriptions and pages of warnings for the pilot to wade through and heed gingerly. Maybe that’s because this particular airframe and engine have no airworthiness directives applied to them since the original type certificate was blessed by the CAA in 1934.

The preflight checklist is thorough. It goes from the front and rear cockpits to the left lower wing trailing edge, where in addition to normal checking of the wing and aileron surface and freedom of movement, the slave wire between the upper and lower aileron is addressed. Proper tension of the landing and flying wires, and the security of the interplane strut must be verified as well.

At the nose of the airplane sits the now-standard 300hp Jacobs R755 A2 7-cylinder radial powerplant, with its MT Propeller two-bladed, fixed-pitch prop attached to the hub. There’s an option for an MT-Propeller controllable-pitch version too. The manual advises against flying with less than 3 gallons of oil on board.

As a potential WACO owner, you’ll be pleased to note that those Jakes are still on the market, when it comes time for the 1,400-hour TBO. The R755 A2 can be ex-changed for an overhauled model for $36,950—or you could buy one outright for $43,950—at Radial Engines Ltd., in Guthrie, Oklahoma, for one, at press time.

A Modern Version

Instead of squinting our eyes for flocking aerial competitors around that farmer’s pasture, today’s pilots plying the trade of air tours have ADS-B to call out traffic on a series of optional avionics offered as add-ons to basic VFR and IFR packages.

Stadelman opted for a Garmin GTN 750 WAAS-enabled GPS/nav system and a second com radio, as he flies around the busy New England states from his home base at Falmouth Airpark (5B6) in Massachusetts. He prefers the modern, IFR-capable panel, though he has no plans to fly his prize in the soup. “Even on marginal VFR days, it’s nice to have,” he said. Stadelman also chose the long-range tanks—taking the normal 46-gallon capacity up to 70 gallons—so that he doesn’t need to refuel if going into a grass strip with intermittent or nonexistent services.

Other nice touches in the rear cockpit include backup electronic instruments, additional com radios, and a JPI EDM 930 engine monitoring system. For my flight test, I was paired with N577S, a 10-year-old YMF that WACO keeps for training and demonstration purposes—and virtually identical to Stadelman’s 2022 model in all the ways that mattered, including the modern displays in the rear panel.

Ready to Taxi?

Flying from the back seat actually gives you a little better forward perspective than from the front, where the cowl with its signature bumps looms closer and blocks the view almost completely. I’m up front to start to familiarize myself with the airplane while WACO instructor Bob Danielson learns more about me.

I sit up straight to no avail, then begin wide S-turns to supplement my forward view. I work our way out to the runway at Battle Creek Executive/Kellogg Field (KBTL)for a short flight over to Brooks Field (KRMY), where a vintage hangar and open grass alongside the runway will make our morning photos more historically appropriate. The tailwheel is fully steerable, which improves handling on the ground but preserves the need to lock it prior to landing—lest the airplane trend off quickly from the centerline if the wheel isn’t aligned.

Hands and Feet On Takeoff

You need to be a steady partner with any tailwheel airplane, and the WACO rewards stick-and-rudder competence. The YMF-5 will lift off before you want it to in a three-point attitude unless you firmly place the stick forward as soon as the relative wind over the elevator allows for it. My first takeoff from the front had me working as I figured out the controls, but we managed to come off after about a 1,000-foot ground roll. Liftoff speed hovers just below 60 knots, with V_X at 63 kias and V_Y at 66 kias. We cruised at about 1,000 feet agl for the14 nm hop over to Brooks for my first landing. Danielson coached me through the pattern and landing speed (about 75 kias), and I stayed on it to keep the runway in sight as we came down final. I lost the numbers under that stately cowl several beats before “normal”—and then transitioned to a side view for the touchdown, with Danielson ready on the pedals in case my sense of the rudder pressure required was inaccurate.

• READ MORE: Waco Doubles Production and Plans to Expand Product Line

In the Glorious Open Air

After a trip back to Battle Creek Exec and a lunch break at the WACO Kitchen—I recommend the Wagyu tacos, but then again, I always recommend the tacos—we set off on a true demo flight, with me taking the backseat. The WACO is soloed from the rear cockpit, and as Danielson termed it, “it’s pretty lonely up front” with nothing but airspeed and altimeter, throttle and stick to work with. The front cockpit is built for up to two passengers—and often has the front stick removed lest they get any crazy ideas. So it was truly an act of courage for him to grant me that hallowed rear pit.

I found the YMF was easier to taxi from the rear, and we made it out for an intersection takeoff without too much heartache. But I failed to push forward quite enough on the stick during the takeoff roll, and we lifted off a few knots lower in airspeed than desired. Fortunately, we made up for it in ground effect and carried on up into the blue-and-green patchwork June afternoon.

Under a scattering of fair weather cumulus, I lazed into gentle turns above Gull Lake to the northwest of Battle Creek. Though it felt like breaking the serenity of my brief moments with this considerable companion, I know that many WACO pilots enjoy the highly maneuverable biplane for its grace in basic aerobatics. We hadn’t prepped the cockpits for anything upside down—nor were we sitting on chutes—but I tried out steep turns to 55 degrees of bank and pulled the YMF into a lazy 8 or two, followed by Dutch rolls, to test out its coupling. Perhaps one of those edged into a wingover… Amazingly, for an airplane built when serious adverse aileron drag seemed like it came standard one very model, the YMF didn’t present such vagaries but rewarded even rudder pressure with smooth control.

Landing Home

We circled the lake a few times to allow for anyone on the water to enjoy the sight of a navy blue-and-old-gold biplane against the cloud backdrop. Then I called up Battle Creek Tower, and we headed back in for my first landing attempt from the rear seat. Harkening back to my days flying a Globe Swift, a tail-low wheel landing feels most comfortable to me in taildraggers—and it works well for WACO pilots too, for the most part.

Keeping a few hundred rpm of power in, I targeted 75 knots on the tape and rode down to the long runway at KBTL. I had 10,000 feet to work with, so my aim point was about halfway down the pavement—about where I’d started my takeoff roll. With a gentle lean to compensate for a breath of crosswind, I leveled off and began to feel for the ground, easing out power and taking in a measured inhalation ’til the mains touched.

Was I ready for it? The gods of wind and summer thermals were on my side, and the WACO answered my control pressures honestly. What more could you want from any return to terra firm a than that moment of joy?

Courtesy of the WACO, it can be yours to pursue.

WACO YMF-5

Price, as shown: $658,400; VFR packages start at $590,000

Engine: Jacobs R755 A2, 300 hp

TBO (with current SBs): 1,400 hours

Propeller: MT Propeller MT233R150-6AJ, fixed pitch

Seats: 1+1/2

Wingspan: 30 ft.

Wing Area: 234 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: 12.6 lbs./sq. ft.

Power Loading: 9.83 lbs./hp

Length: 23 ft., 4 in.

Height: 8 ft., 6 in.

Baggage Weight: 75 lbs. aft, 25 lbs. forward

Basic Empty Weight: 2,145 lbs.

Max Gross Weight: 2,950 lbs.

Average Useful Load: 628 lbs. (805 lbs. max)

Fuel: 46 gal. std; 70 gal. with long-range tanks

Max Rate of Climb: 865 fpm

Stall Speed: 51 kias

Maneuvering Speed:120 kias

Load Limits (at 2,950 lbs.): +5.2/-2.1

Cruise Speed: 100 ktas, at sea level

Max Endurance/Range, Max Range Power, Long Range Tanks: 450 nm at 2,500 ft. msl

Takeoff Distance, Sea Level (over a 50 ft. obs.): 1,556 ft.

Landing Distance, Sea Level (over a 50 ft. obs.): 1,650 ft.

This article first appeared in the August 2023/Issue 940 print edition of FLYING. 

The post We Fly: WACO YMF-5 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Much like it was during the early days of Popular Aviation—FLYING’s precursor—one of the first aviation magazines in Italy, L’Aquilone, featured plans for building model aircraft used by enthusiasts enamored by the idea of flight. These kit-built machines catalyzed the dreams of Luigi and Giovanni Pascale as they reached their majority in Campania north of Naples.

In league from the beginning, the brothers would nurture and support each other’s imaginations until they could launch their aircraft design and manufacturing efforts in 1948, 75 years ago. The Pascales built their unique airplanes at first incorporated under the marque of Partenavia in 1957—and within the company we know today as Tecnam.

Training Legacy

The latest of Tecnam’s single-engine airplanes to come to fruition, the P-Mentor, joins a legacy of aircraft destined to help aspiring pilots learn to fly. The first true Pascale design to reach production, the original P48 Astore, looks a lot like the Piper Pacer taildragger from which the brothers drew inspiration. The P-Mentor breaks from one tradition, in that it is one of the few of the Pascale designs not named after the year in which it began development—for example, the P48 sprang from the drawing board in 1948, and the P2012 Traveller started in 2012, though it didn’t see European Union Aviation Safety Agency certification until 2019, with FAA certification to follow later that year.

• READ MORE: Tecnam Unveils P-Mentor Training Aircraft

While Tecnam has enjoyed recent success in the U.S. with its modern version of the Astore LSA, and the latest edition of the P92 Echo, the P-Mentor makes a compelling case for a primary trainer that goes beyond the light sport category. The P-Mentor achieved EASA certification under CS 23—equivalent to the FAA Part 23 type certification basis for light aircraft—in 2021. Though the P-Mentor is powered by a version of the same engine found on many LSAs—the Rotax 912iSC3—the airplane’s heft and sophisticated cockpit take it up a notch from the entry-level category to create a platform that will serve to educate new pilots intent on progressing into a career—or just larger, more capable airplanes.

A. The FADEC-equipped Rotax 912iSC3 engine has an easy preflight check sequence.

B. The simulated landing gear switch is also tied to a gear warning horn to help facilitate training in preparation for more complex aircraft.

C. The Garmin G3X Touch displays can be configured in multiple ways, including a base map, engine information system, and the primary flight display. A Garmin GTN650Xi in the RNAV-capable edition enables a complete IFR training program.

D. The control sticks have a shape to them that falls nicely in the hand, and the seats are adjustable, rather than the rudder pedals, for a comfortable fit.

E. An optional Garmin GFC 500 autopilot outfits the P-Mentor for extended cross-country missions and advanced aircraft training.

A Walkaround

My introduction to the P-Mentor began on the ramp at the company’s headquarters in Capua, Italy, following a detailed production-line tour that took in several of the models in various stages of readiness for first flight and eventual delivery. Witnessing how the machines come together always gives insight to how they will perform, so I felt particularly well versed in the P-Mentor’s genesis after hearing Giovanni Pascale—managing director of Tecnam and the latest in the family line to lead the company—walk through each step in that process.

Its low-wing, side-by-side seating evokes similar LSAs I’ve flown recently—such as the BRM Aero Bristell SLSA—yet with an aspect to the way the canopy slopes into the fuselage that recalls its design heritage, as we saw earlier in the tour, from the mid-’50s designs of the firm, but still modern and inspiring confidence as you approach it on the ramp. Tecnam chose to certify the P-Mentor with a maximum gross weight of 1,587pounds, a good 267 pounds higher than the top of the LSA class. Having done so allows for a useful load of up to 628 pounds and the flexibility to have two healthy adults plus full fuel on board.

Walkaround takes in the normal checkpoints with few unique aspects to the process. Tecnam flight test pilot Massimo de Stefano oriented me to a few items, mostly to do with getting in and out of the airplane. Early Pascale designs—and all of its twins—feature a high wing, in part to aid ingress for pilots and passengers. But the low wing has an easy step-up and good handholds for settling yourself into the seats.

De Stefano guided me to the right seat, which was perfect for this review, as it allowed me to assess the P-Mentor as an instructor and see how it would perform and feel flying from that familiar CFI’s perch.

The flight deck features a twin Garmin G3X Touch installation in the complete IFR package—called the “Sport” version—that we flew with in I-PDVF, the company’s demonstrator. Those displays are accompanied by a Garmin GTN 650 Xi nav/com/GPS, a Garmin GAD 29c ARINC data module, and a remote-mounted Garmin GTX 345R transponder with ADS-B In and Out capability. All of that—in addition to the engine management system—is powered by a 14-volt electrical system that utilizes two electrically isolated alternators (A and B) and a main ship’s battery.

Startup and Taxi Out

Starting the Rotax involves a simple process, with a couple of nuances—you first flip a toggle switch to energize the starter in addition to having the master switch on. Then, it’s both FADEC Lane A and B switches on, fuel pump on, and push the red starter button to swing the prop—which caught quickly on the warm engine (from previous flights). There are separate avionics and autopilot masters as well.

Run-up was guided by the engine information display on the right-hand G3X Touch screen, checking both FADEC lanes using the 4-cylinder exhaust gas temperature readouts, along with coolant and manifold temperatures, oil pressure, and volts.

De Stefano took on the task of taxiing out in order to familiarize me with the special procedures at the Capua Airport (LIAU), both of the day—rain showers earlier left the grass runway in varying states of rough—and in general. LIAU has a flight information service staffed by the local fire brigade—and therefore non-English speakers. Unusual, but not wholly unanticipated.

We left our abbreviated flight plan with the FIS and de Stefano guided me through the first takeoff, taking a line that was relatively smooth on the left-hand half of the runway, which measures 1,097 meters, or 3,599 feet.

We took just over one-third of the runway on that takeoff roll, not bad considering the condition of the turf, which appears to be a running source of amusement amongst the Tecnam pilots and their dealers. Test flying is often frustrated by the weather at Capua, with winter rains rendering it unusable for stretches of time.

One clear benefit to the location? I saw the airplane’s performance on a truly soft field. All Tecnam aircraft must pass this test or never reach the skies at all. The local council plans to finally pave the runway sometime in the next year—and we hope that’s on schedule, though the current field has its, well, charm.

In-flight Feel

For our mission, we took off to the northeast from Runway 26 to stay clear of the military field—Grazzanise—on whose control zone perimeter Capua sits, at 64 feet msl. I had the controls through the climbout to 3,000 feet for our high work, and we saw 450 to 700 fpm at the V_X of 70 knots and power set at 28.9 inches and 5,550 rpm.

During steep turns the controls felt solid, and even between aileron and pitch (in the baseline I use, aileron control feel is usually a degree lighter than pitch). However, I found the P-Mentor easy to keep coordinated both in 30- and 45-to-50-degree-bank turns and the proper pitch attitude facile to find in each direction.

Stalls broke mildly—more of a mush in an approach to landing (power off) stall, with a level break in the departure (power on) mode. Recover came swift and sure. I performed a few additional coordination maneuvers, seeking the marriage between aileron and rudder, and with a brisk roll left and right and back to center, again, straightforward to keep the nose on the horizon in its place.

• WATCH: We Fly the Tecnam P-Mentor

I made a power-off glide at 70 knots to test that handling, and the P-Mentor preserved the good gliding characteristics of the P92 Eaglet—precursor to the Echo—that I first flew back in 2006, with a reasonable 9.7:1 glide ratio. No surprises—just honest flying.

In Cruise

Where the P-Mentor trades off its weight for performance shows up in two places—the not-quite-as-short takeoff roll, and in the modest cruise speed of 117 knots. That’s at a power setting of 27 inches MP and 5,480 rpm.

Reducing the power to 24 inches and 5,030 rpm brings us to 100 knots indicated at 2,000 feet msl and13 degrees C—nearly ISA conditions. The panel is setup for cross-country missions in the sport package we tested—and you can do so at the modest fuel burn afforded by the Rotax, which sips 3.7 gph at that economy cruise setting. The company prides itself on the efficiency of its models, which certainly holds true here.

Training to Land

One unique feature of the P-Mentor that places it squarely into the training class is the simulated landing gear lever on the pilot’s subpanel. Though the airplane’s gear remains fixed firmly in place, if you don’t actuate the gear lever to the down position when bringing the throttle to idle, a warning horn sounds—just as it would in a true retract, and it’s tested during the run-up. The idea is to ingrain each of the steps into the thinking process of a new pilot. However, one could argue that because the airplane doesn’t reflect the aerodynamic change of the gear moving and the swinging of the gear doors, it’s a tenuous transfer of learning.

However, Sporty’s sells the same portable type of device in its catalog towards the same purpose, and I suppose it holds merit for building that habit of always checking to see if the gear is down on final.

Short and Soft Techniques

The long-span flaps can be set at the takeoff position (roughly 15 degrees) as high as 106 kias, with full deflection of about 30 degrees—the landing position—at 96 knots, aiding greatly in the ability to slow the airplane.

De Stefano wanted to demonstrate a landing first (and the right line to take on the rutted field), and I was keen to try out the go-around profile of the airplane. A nice, easy approach speed of 70 knots kept us on a smooth path to the touchdown point—and I braced myself for the bounces I figured would be inevitable—but the P-Mentor’s tires handled the uneven turf with aplomb. He pushed the power up for a touch-and-go, and handed the controls back over.

We did a low approach first, and I kept myself purposefully high, and slipped on final to see if the P-Men-tor’s good coupling held true, and it did. During the pass, I flew just off of the deck by about 15 feet, so I could continue to get a sense of things. I pulled up into a nice fly-by for the folks on the Tecnam ramp and entered the pattern again, level at about 750 feet agl—about 800 feet msl.

Remembering to put the “gear” down as I throttled back, it didn’t take long to find the approach speed that seemed to give the best mix of low speed and positive control authority on final. I aimed for the good line in the grass, and I was rewarded with a pleasant touch-down—stick in my lap and a little bit of power in to keep us going as the tufts of turf snatched at the tires.

We readily made the turn off just past midfield to taxi back into the factory—and de Stefano was all smiles as I did—a mark of approval that goes beyond translation. That grin matched my own, as the P-Mentor had been a true pleasure to fly—and would likely be just as much fun to use, yes, mentoring new pilots into the skies.

Tecnam P-Mentor

Price (fully equipped, as tested): $350,750

Engine: Rotax 915iSC3, 100 hp

TBO (or equivalent): 1,200 hours

Propeller: MT V.P. hydraulic with governor, two-blade

Seats: 2

Wingspan: 29.5 ft.

Wing Area: 128.1 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: 12.39 lb./sq. ft.

Power Loading: 15.87 lb./hp

Length: 22.1 ft.

Height: 8.2 ft.

Baggage Weight: 66 lb.

Standard Empty Weight: 959 lb.

Max Takeoff Weight (EASA CS 23): 1,587 lb.

Standard Useful Load (EASA CS 23): 628 lb.

Fuel: 140 liters/37 gal.

Max Rate of Climb: 750 fpm

Max Operating Altitude: 13,000 ft.

Stall Speed (flaps extended): 44 kias

Max Cruise Speed: 117 ktas, at sea level, max continuous power

Max Range @ Max Range Power: 950 nm

Takeoff Distance, Sea Level (over a 50 ft. obs.): 1,706 ft.

Landing Distance, Sea Level (over a 50 ft. obs.): 1,280 ft.

This article first appeared in the July 2023/Issue 933 print edition of FLYING.

The post We Fly: Tecnam P-Mentor appeared first on FLYING Magazine.