Surprise package

It is a fascinating development in the light aircraft market, given there are rela-tively few new model piston twins. Further, in the P2006T, Tecnam has carried over its philosophy, with an aircraft that offers fuel sipping Rotax engines with the ability to run on mogas. It is an example of the LSA heritage stepping up into the mainstream market with an aircraft that blends both worlds – a very interesting proposition.

The light twin market has always been a difficult one to cater for. Only a few stal-warts have managed to make their mark in recent decades – the Piper Seminole, Beech Duchess and Partenavia P68. There were smatterings of other types, but fundamen-tally these three dominated the flight-line and most flying schools. For a small increase in performance over the average retractable single, operating costs and fuel burns are effectively doubled. Additionally, the four-seat twin is best considered as a trainer first and a tourer second. Having been checked out on their asymmetric skills, most pilots ultimately look for something larger, faster and with longer IFR legs to take them cross country – aircraft like the Beech Baron or Cessna 310. So the market for the smaller light twin is quite narrow.

Personally, I spent a fair section of my general aviation career involved in multi- IFR training and was looking forward to seeing if the Tecnam could deliver on a very ambitious goal. As it taxied up to the ramp at Canberra Airport, it became immediate-ly apparent that there was something very different about this aeroplane and yet it was still very familiar.

Something Old, Something New

As the P2006T taxied towards me, its lines were distinctly recognisable as those of the Partenavia P. 68. The swept back nose section incorporating a two piece wind-screen, and its two engines mounted upon a high wing platform, whose roots sit just aft of the cockpit, were heavily reminiscent of the six-seat P. 68. It is not surprising then that both aircraft share the same father within their respective design teams – Pro-fessor Luigi Pascale.

However, for all the visual similarities, the P2006T is a distinctly new aeroplane, which becomes immediately evident, if not by appearance, but by sound. By virtue of its powerplant,the liquid/air-cooled Rotax 912 S, and its low propeller RPM, the P2006T is relatively quiet. This choice of engine is a bold move, and lies at the heart of the crossover from LSA. The 100hp (75kW) Rotax 912 S is FAR 33 certified and is currently the only aircraft engine approved in this category to utilise automo-tive fuel, which is a big plus in terms of both operating costs and the dark cloud hanging over avgas availability.

There are also subtle aerodynamic advantages stemming from the choice of the Rotax 912 S. While not generating the same horsepower, it is much lighter than traditional Lycoming engines. In fact, at 64kg the Rotax boasts well under half the weight of the 180hp (135kW) Lycom-ing O-360, plus has half the frontal area, equating to a lower drag profile and less aerodynamic wing loading.

The differences from its predecessor are also apparent as you walk around the P2006T. Unlike the P. 68 this smaller four-seater boasts a retractable undercar-riage, featuring a ‘trailing arm’ main gear for forgiving touchdowns. There is also a pres-sure gauge to check on the port side of the fuselage to ensure that the emergency gear ‘blow down’ facility is fully charged. The almost circular fuselage cross-section of the P. 68 has been ‘squared off ’ and contoured, seemingly to enhance the space within the cabin. The high wings feature substantial blended winglets which translate directly into improved climb performance, lower stall speed and better fuel economy. Fur-thermore, they are fibreglass, unlike the rest of the aluminium airframe.

In taking inspiration from his P. 68 it seems apparent that Professor Pascale didn’t start with a completely blank sheet when he designed the P2006T. However, this is a significantly different aeroplane with an ob-vious emphasis on economy and efficiency – the catch-cry of aviation in the 21st century. It boasts improved aerodynamic efficiencies and weight savings that yield sparkling per-formance for ‘just’ 100hp a side. In fact, in many ways the performance of this Tecnam twin is more comparable to a retractable single, but with the redundancy of a second engine. This may well prove a cost efficient formula for local flightlines.

Taking To The Skies

Entering the P2006T is a simple task for the pilot as there is a large door adjacent to the command seat on the port side. The instructor, or front seat passenger, will need to work their way across, but there is ample room to do so without clambering over seats. The access is nicely balanced by a similar door adjacent to the rear seats on the opposite side of the aeroplane, which also permits easy access to a generous cargo space at the rear.

Inside, the finish is what you would expect to come out of Italy, the home of fine furni-ture and fast cars. Although eye-catching, a colour darker than the demonstrator’s cream wall panels and high backed seats may be fa-vourable in the less fashionable flying school environment. Overhead, a large highly visible escape hatch offers easy emergency egress to all occupants, but as with other air-craft it is fitted to, the Garmin G1000 flight panel tends to steal the show. (Tecnam also offers a traditional analogue panel. ) The throttle quadrant and yoke both have a solid feel despite the relatively light-weight nature of the aeroplane. Notably, by virtue of the Rotax engines, the throttle quadrant possesses throttle and pitch levers with a carburettor heat, but no mixture control. The mixture is self-regulating de-pending upon the altitude being flown.

Starting the Rotax engines is a very sim-ple process. After a short ‘prime’, the start switches are selected on the overhead panel and the engines come to life instantaneously without the cranking of traditional piston engines. With avionics and systems up and running, an airways clearance is obtained and we taxi off to set course for the train-ing area. The aircraft is simple to control on the ground via nosewheel steering and toe brakes, although we decide to pause and give a Qantas 737 some distance as it moves off the apron. While we wait the most strik-ing factor is the noise level, or the absence thereof. This is a very quiet aeroplane.

Even as the throttles are advanced to full power for takeoff, the cockpit is a comfort-able place to be and ideal for the communi-cation needs of flight training. After about 250m and accelerating through 65kt the control column is eased back to lift the air-craft off. The control force is not insignifi-cant and my ‘light aircraft’ mindset caught me a little off guard initially. Once airborne, I retracted the undercarriage and set the attitude to climb away at 90kt, offering a 10kt margin over the single engine climb speed. Initially levelling off at 4000ft, the aircraft was effectively at full throttle height indicating 26” and the RPM was set at 2200. One slight criticism is that while the MAP gauge was a conventional size, the tachometer was a little on the small side for an instrument so frequently referenced. Regardless of the indication, this combina-tion resulted in a true airspeed (TAS) of around 140kt and a total fuel flow of 40lph from its 220 lit capacity.

The demonstrator pilot flying with me was Tecnam’s Mary Patterson and together we headed east from Canberra and climbed to 5500ft. Throughout the flight the P2006T was offering a very stable feel that was incredibly easy to trim. Combined with the quiet cabin, this aeroplane would defi-nitely offer protection from the fatigue of a hard day’s instructing, so if Mary started to look worn out, suspicion would necessarily fall upon me! In the training area, without delay we flew a series of turns at varied angles of bank, culminating in a number of steep turns. The aircraft was very stable and only a touch of rudder was needed at any stage to maintain balanced flight, while rolling from one limit turn to the opposite direc-tion took around nine seconds.

Stalling was similarly uneventful, although the sleek lines and light weight of the Tecnam called for patience when de-celerating to the ‘clean’ stall speed of 54kt. The symptoms were classical in terms of attitude, warnings and buffet before pitch-ing nose down with a slight tendency to ‘drop’ a wing. This was easily countered by what I was beginning to suspect was a very effective rudder. There was a minimum loss of height as power was reintroduced and a climbing attitude restored.

Next came a look at the asymmetric characteristics of the aeroplane and for me, this was critical given the target market of multi-engine training. On the walk around, I had noticed that both engines rotated their propellers in the same direction, hence creating a ‘critical engine’ in the case of a failure (ie the critical engine failing has a greater adverse effect on the aircraft’s han-dling and performance). On the P2006T, this is the left hand engine.

Mary subsequently played the role of evil instructor and failed an engine. It was an absolute non-event. I initially applied too much rudder input and had to back it off, the yaw was very mild. I believe that this mild yaw was a function of a number of factors – an effective rudder, the 100hp engine being physically unable to produce a strong asymmetric thrust-drag differential, and the relatively close proximity of the thrust line to the aircraft’s lateral axis. Con-trollability was not an issue in any sense and the engine was subsequently feathered, permitting comfortable level turns both towards and away from the failed engine. Critical engine or not, this aircraft is very easy to handle.

There are no unfeathering accumulators, so a short press of the starter saw the failed engine come back to life without hesita-tion. One of the challenges with asymmet-ric training is that following a simulated failure, one engine has been working very hard with high engine temperatures to reflect this, while the feathered engine is relatively cold. To care for the engines, these temperatures need to be managed before simulating another failure. However, as the Rotax 912s are liquid cooled neither engine ever showed much of a fluctuation in temperatures, offering potentially more simulated failures in a relatively short time without abusing the engines, a big bonus for twin training.

Airwork done, we set course for Can-berra and Mary insisted that I engage the autopilot and couple it to the Garmin G1000. As expected, the workload dropped significantly with Mr Garmin driving and this would be a wonderful feature in IFR operations, but for today, I couldn’t wait to hand fly the aeroplane a little more.

Approaching the circuit we were se-quenced as the third aircraft to land, so I reduced the power to 21” and the Tecnam sat comfortably at 100kt. At this speed we were well within the top flap speed of 119kt and in easy reach of gear and landing flap at 91 and 93kt respectively. I lowered a single stage of flap and the visibility was even further enhanced before joining base and configuring to land. Conditions were gusty at Canberra with a mean crosswind of 15kt, but the aircraft sat there quite steadily with an approach speed of 85kt. On final approach, I reminded myself of the seemingly responsive rudder, aware that I would need it in the flare. Over the fence the speed was allowed to bleed off towards 75kt, a squeeze of rudder was matched by a touch more of aileron and we arrived very respectably. This is an easy aeroplane to fly.

We continued in the circuit, offering my New Zealand based companion an excellent view of our nation’s capital. Each circuit became more and more familiar and within three laps I felt very comfortable with the P2006T and could easily antici-pate the mild pitch changes associated with changes in configuration.

One thing I noted was that the gear can take a little while to cycle, so I stored that into the memory bank as we prepared for an engine failure after takeoff and single-engine circuit. With Mary throttling back one engine to simulate the failure, I kept straight with rudder and targeted the ‘blue line’ of 80kt. Controllability was never an issue and the little Rotax did a respectable job at gradually separating us from the earth below once the gear was up and zero thrust was set to replicate a feathered engine. The rate of climb was around 300ft/min before a change in circuit traffic called for the engine to be restored. On downwind we ‘went asym-metric’ once again and flew a single engine approach and landing. Always respecting ‘blue line’ speed and remembering that a long runway lay ahead, I took my time in configuring the aircraft fully. On final with the gear down, the aircraft was as docile on approach as it was with both engines pro-ducing thrust. It was time to call it a day.

The Cultural Revolution

Before I even set eyes on the Tecnam P2006T, there were individuals squint-ing at the mention of Rotax engines and 100hp per side. As usual, they were gener-ally people who had not been in the same postcode as the aeroplane let alone the pilot seat. Herein lies the greatest challenge for the P2006T. Just like the growth of LSA aircraft, initially there will be resistance to change and that resistance will often be un-founded. Sure, on bare numbers, the power output of the two Rotax engines doesn’t sound that great, but the MTOW is also 40 per cent less than a Beech Duchess’s. It is a new, clean airframe and by now most of the other old piston twins are far from ‘straight’ machines and would undoubtedly suffer from unmeasured performance penalties. It may not have quite the same straight line speed or quite the range of comparative twins, but let’s look at this more closely.

This aircraft is aimed at the multi-engine training market, so cruise speed and range aren’t overly critical factors. However, my air test went for just over an hour and a half and we crammed a lot of flying in without ever tilting the engine temperatures. The controllability of this light twin would make asymmetric training a breeze and its climb performance on one engine was respectable. The fact is, there aren’t many light piston twins that are that impressive with an engine out after takeoff regardless of their horsepower, and when the engine fails, controllability is often the fatal factor. Financially, the aircraft burns half the fuel of comparative Lycoming powered twins and can even utilise cheaper mogas.

A New Direction

No aeroplane, particularly in general aviation circles, can be all things to all opera-tors. However, the Tecnam P2006T is a bold move towards a newer, more efficient future. Its new purchase price is lower than its competitors and once flying operationally, it is far cheaper to run. Like all new types, longevity can only be proven by time, but the Rotax engine has at least already estab-lished a track record on the LSA side of the fence. Similarly, the fact that this aircraft fails to bite at the corners of the envelope is a benefit for the trainee pilot and the touring private pilot alike.

In a marketplace in need of a new multi-engine trainer, Tecnam has served up an air-craft that will cause people to sit up and take notice. It may need to get some runs on the board to convert the sceptics, but regardless of opinion, this aircraft is a move towards a more sustainable general aviation fleet. It may share some history with the Partenavia, but the future is very much its own. With a mixture of new technology and old common sense, the Tecnam P2006T is set to cross some new boundaries and hopefully change some old mindsets.

TECNAM P2006T
Technical specifications
Powerplant
Two x Rotax 912 S producing
98hp (74kW) for takeoff and 92hp
(69kW) max continuous driving
two blade Hoffman variable pitch
HO‑V352 propellers.
Performance
Max speed at sea level 153kt
Cruise speed (75 per cent, 7000ft)
147kt
Cruise speed (65 per cent, 9000ft)
141kt
Stall speed flap up 54kt
Stall speed flap down 48kt
SL climb rate 360ft/min
Single engine climb rate, SL
380ft/min
Range at 75 per cent, 30min reserve
610nm (1130km)
Range at 65 per cent power, 30min
reserve 710nm (1315km)
Service ceiling 16,007ft
Takeoff roll 225m
Weights
Max takeoff 1180kg
Standard equipped 780kg
Standard useful Load 460kg
Dimensions
Wing span 10.6m
Length 8.66m
Fuselage height 2.85m
Wing area 14.4m2
Website
www.tecnam.com.au
Price
From U284,700 – fixed gear, analog
avionics to U370,000 for retractable
version with full glass avionics inc
synthetic vision