Tecnam as unveiled a STOL version of the P2012. It has a longer wing and replaces the 350 HP Lycoming TEO-540s for a pair of GTSIO-520-S. I can't find the HP rating for the 520 but I assume it is 375 like other GTSIO-520 engines. I am wondering if the only reason for the switch is greater HP. On paper the the TEO-540 looks like a very advanced engine with all of the features that we have been wishing for: knock sensors, variable electronic ignition timing, independent fuel mixture control for each cylinder, etc. Or perhaps the in service reliability of this engine has been disappointing? Maybe there are still some bugs to be worked that only became apparent once Cape Air put the P2012 into service in reasonable numbers.

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/tec ... 2012-stol/

I just don't understand the reason for this airplane. A Caravan will do the job so much better. Makes no sense to me.

The amount of cycles that Cape Air puts on their airplanes would be very expensive on something with a turbine.

There have been various competitors to Cape Air that have popped up over the years that used Caravans, and all of them end up going out of business while Cape Air soldiered on in their 402's.

Geared nosecase will allow some different prop setups. Probably offering better takeoff/climb performance, maybe some noise relief as well.

How so?

A pair of GTSIO-520 hourly costs seem similar if not more than one PT6.

Note that they can get Jet-A fuel a lot cheaper than us normal folk.

GTSIO-520-S certified for 100LL only. So what happens when leaded fuel is banned?

The reliability of a turbine engine should win this fight, me thinks.

Engine TCDS attached.

Engine RPM 3350, prop RPM 2233.

Mike C.

Because turbine engines have inspections and limits based on cycles, piston engines do not.

Cape Air has been in this business for a very long time and they are no dummies. If the caravan made financial sense, they'd be flying them now.

If the internet is correct, the engine in their normal steed, the Cessna 402, is a TSIO-520. Maybe this gives them some parts commonality.

Cape Air has been buying the Lycoming powered version.

Does this indicate difficulty behind the scenes with Lycoming as a company that Tecnam will resort to the pains of certifying a new totally different engine installation.

Is Lycoming giving them delays getting engines and parts, quality control, warranty issues?

Tecnam dropping all of the electronic controls and updates after all of the hype to go to an engine that is not too common anymore with a reputation. (I know they are reliable and I have no problem with geared engines)

Skipping the Lycoming IO-720 also seems odd given the airplanes size and weight plus simplicity of eliminating turbos. What is the usable thrust vs weight for 720 vs the electronic, turbo 540 with all the extra complexity. Bemidji Aviation could give a lot of input for many hours of fleet history with 720s. Noise is an issue but modern Type Certificates seem to ignore that anyway. Cirrus vs a late 70s 182 for example.

The geared engines just make more thrust is probably what it comes down to and if they want to remain piston powered not turbine there are not many other options unless they want to hang some R-985s on it.

Repeated STOL approaches and high cycles with a GTSIO? T404s in this environment how did they hold up thought I think I remember they had a different gearbox ratio that did not work out as well as the 421s.

I’m not familiar with the GTSIO-520-S referenced in the article other than the TCDS says it’s similar to the L. What used them?

Will this mean possibly a better engine parts supply and factory support to keep 421s and T404s flying? Especially for the starter adapters with the harmonic balancer.

Many hours behind geared engines and they simply have no comparison when it comes to STOL capabilities. For that, you need torque and "low gearing".

600ft takeoff in my old 520. Any direct drive Commander would need twice as much, at least.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/0zEhHJkUERE[/youtube]

How so?

A pair of GTSIO-520 hourly costs seem similar if not more than one PT6.

Note that they can get Jet-A fuel a lot cheaper than us normal folk.

Cape Air has been buying the Lycoming powered version.

There is a Lycoming powered 402?

I didn't know that.

I don't think it came from the factory that way.

Mike C.

Hi Mike
Sorry for the confusion from my reply. What I was trying to say was that Cape Air flys the P 2012 with the Lycoming Engine, not the STOL version with the geared continental .

Cool airplane.