Douglas Paterson wrote:
Hello, All!

The Socata Trinidad (TB-20) seems to pretty closely match or slightly exceed
the Comanche's performance numbers. For a comparably equipped Comanche,
they seem to cost (acquisition) about the same. Meanwhile, the Trinidad is
a 20-year-younger airplane, with cheaper insurance and (I'm given to
believe) cheaper maintenance due to (a) ease of access and (b) availability
of parts. Plus, the gull-wing doors are appealing to me (ease of
entry/exit, not to mention "cool factor"). Can anyone weigh in here, either
to confirm these observations or to squash my newbie analysis? Other
thoughts?

I've been in the TB9 before, which is the 160 hp version..the
trainer/entry level plane. I agree that the airframe is AWESOME.. great
vis, great ergonomics, great handling. The tb9 version is underpowered
but that shouldnt be a prob in the -20. I can tell you hands down that
the tb9 is not acceptable for where you are. Two big guys and a tankful
of gas we ran out of lift at 8000 feet, and had anemic climb rates at
sea level compared to the others. Its a big airframe.

However. Ongoing costs may be the "gotcha" here. what are the costs for
airframe parts, where do they come from (europe?. If you want a newer
cruiser, this may be the plane for you, but its not as common as the
other american brands.

Dave