Texas Top Aviation at the AOPA Fly-In

Where were you on April 26th?

AOPA Fly In LogoTexas Top Aviation was at the AOPA Regional Fly-In at the San Marcos Regional Airport (KHYI).  If you weren’t there, you certainly missed out spending time with 2,500 other airplane and flying enthusiasts!

The day began somewhat gloomy and windy with the threat of rain.  Organizers feared that weather would keep a lot of people from coming.  Boy, were they wrong!

There were many classic airplanes, many modern and pretty nicely equipped airplanes, and everything in between.  There were aviation celebrities, Rod Machado and the Kings of King Schools fame, to name a few.  Not to mention the fabulous BBQ!

N132BBTexas Top Aviation had several drawings for free training and 3 lucky winners.  We also had a Lancair Super ES for sale, N132BB (which made the San Marcos Record newspaper!). It definitely stood out with it’s unique paint job.  The flames on the tail drew many oohs and aahs.

Departing the San Marcos Airport after the fly in was like battling traffic in Austin at rush hour (though, Austin doesn’t have any air traffic controllers).  The San Marcos controllers probably hadn’t seen that much traffic since the airport was an Army Air Base back during WWII.  It was quite a sight to see all the exhibitor’s airplanes lined up ready to head skyward.

Thanks to all of you who stopped by the Texas Top Aviation booth!  It was a pleasure meeting all of you and we look forward to working with you in the future!

Texas Top Aviation
Hank Gibson and Russell Moore of Texas Top Aviation

 

Similar Posts

  • Cirrus SR22 Partnership in Houston

    Ever wanted to be a Cirrus owner, but the economics of being a single owner just don’t make sense for you? If you’re in the Houston area, you now have a chance to join a Cirrus SR22 partnership at the West Houston Airport, KIWS.

    The group, CirrusShare, is a 4 member group, but one of the members is looking to sell his share.  The airplane is a 2007 G3 SR22.  It is in excellent condition, with dual WAAS 430s and air conditioning.

    If you would be interested, please contact Texas Top Aviation for more information.

    N578AG

     

  • GAMI Gains STC for G100UL, Unleaded Avgas

    For years, there has been clamoring for airplanes to get rid of lead in piston engine Avgas. In the early 2000s, Thielert created a Jet A burning piston engine for Diamond Aircraft that gained some traction, but Thielert had internal issues and ended up declaring bankruptcy. Several other Jet A piston engines have come down the line since then to some success (Diamond is currently using 2 Austro manufactured Jet A piston engines on it’s DA62 and a Continental manufactured Jet piston on the new DA50).

    The problem with a Jet A burning piston engine, though, is that those engines would be very expensive to put on existing airplanes, not to mention the cost of the STC alone.

    Insert GAMI (General Aviation Modifications, Inc.), the famed Ada, Oklahoma company that championed turbo normalization, balanced injectors, and lean of peak operations. For those that have been to GAMI’s engine class, you know that these guys are at the very top of their game in engine knowledge.

    In 2010, GAMI started the process of creating an Unleaded form of Avgas, terming it G100UL (the irony of traditional Avgas, 100LL, is the LL starts for low lead, but the lead levels in 100LL are actually quite high. UL stands for UnLeaded). Just before Osh Kosh in 2021, GAMI revealed that it’s work has come to fruition, gaining an STC for G100UL for Lycoming powered Cessna 172s.

    The amazing thing about GAMI’s product is that it is able to mix with 100LL and not cause any issues. This means fuel trucks, fuel lines, fuel pumps, and aircraft fuel tanks don’t have to have any modifications to them to use G100UL. Plus, pilots will see longer engine life using G100UL because of the simple elimination of the lead. In tests, combustion chambers in cylinders burned cleaner, so theoretically, cylinders and engines will last a lot longer.

    According to the company, GAMI has a few more tests to run and, assuming those go well, G100UL will be available for a whole lot more airplanes. An STC will still be required for the use of G100UL in a specific airplane, but the hope is, eventually, 100LL will be completely replaced by G100UL. The only downside is that G100UL is expected to cost about $1/gallon more than 100LL.

    GAMI has partnered with Avfuel, so expect to see 100UL showing up at all Avfuel FBOs in the next year or two.

    To read more, check out the press release on AOPA’s website.

  • Thanks For Flying With Us!

    From our family to yours, thank you for flying with Texas Top Aviation in 2014.  We wish everyone a Happy New Year and a great 2015!

    Texas Top Aviation Family

  • Oh, Deer (Part 1)

    As far as I knew when I woke up, October 26, 2016 would be an ordinary day for me. It was a Wednesday, and I was scheduled to fly our Company’s BE58 Baron on a charter from Wings Field (KLOM), a non-towered airport just north of Philadelphia, to Pittsburgh International Airport (KPIT) and spend the day there waiting for my 3 passengers to finish up their meetings. The plan was to fly them back to Wings that evening and then make the short hop back to home base at Lancaster, PA. (KLNS).

    It was a flight that I had done countless times, and I was comfortable with the airports, the passengers, and the airplane. Everything went smoothly that morning and my short flight from Lancaster to Wings was uneventful. I even made it there in time to spill coffee all down the front of my pants before my passengers arrived. The weather was clear, calm and beautiful as we loaded into the Baron and the sun was just starting to come up as I taxied toward runway 24 for departure. I was departing VFR and had an IFR plan on file which I intended to pick up with Harrisburg Approach once we were airborne. According to my calculations, I was on schedule to be drinking my coffee at the Pittsburgh FBO right around 8:30.

    At 7:05, I advanced the throttles for departure. A few moments later, I received a very unpleasant surprise. I was quickly approaching rotation speed when 2 deer ran onto the runway directly in front of the aircraft. It was still dark enough that I was relying on my landing/ taxi lights to illuminate the runway for take-off.  As a result, I was unable to see the animals before it was too late. I don’t remember making a conscious decision to pull back on the yoke, but it was that or plow directly into them at about 85 knots. I pulled up as quickly as I could and the airplane rotated immediately.  A fraction of a second later I heard and felt a sickening THUD.

    There was no doubt that I had hit one of them, but, somewhat unbelievably, the airplane was climbing as though nothing had happened. I put the nose down to get the airspeed back up and began to try and piece together what damage the airplane had sustained. Based on the noise and the feeling of the impact, my suspicion was that I had hit the deer with the left main landing gear. A review of the instrumentation showed no abnormalities and the airplane was behaving normally, so I didn’t suspect any damage to the airframe/ flight controls. I couldn’t see anything out the windows that looked unusual, and somewhat unbelievably I still had 3 green lights.

    After gaining a safe amount of speed and altitude, I turned around and told the passengers that we had hit a deer. It was obvious that we had hit something and I was sure that they wanted to know what was going on. Then, I checked all my indications again and satisfied with what I was seeing, tried to bring up the landing gear. No dice. When I pulled the gear lever to the up position, the master “GEAR UP” warning light came on and I got a horn. There was never any change in the 3-green indication and the gear motor never came to life at all.

    At this point it was obvious that, minimally I was going to have to divert to Lancaster and have the maintenance guys look at the airplane to see if anything was broken. I figured that they would either give me the green light to continue or I would just jump into one of our PC12s and complete the trip while they worked on the Baron.

    The landing gear’s refusal to come up was my first indication that there was substantial damage. I set course for Lancaster and called our Chief Pilot. After explaining the situation to him, we agreed that KLNS was the best option and that he would let the maintenance guys know that I was coming.

    The logic was that proceeding to Lancaster would allow a visual check of the landing gear by maintenance people as well as the tower and result in the safest outcome if an emergency landing were required. Lancaster would likely have better services available in terms of emergency responders and, not to mention, I was fairly certain that there was a dead deer on the only runway at Wings that I didn’t feel like hitting for a second time. In addition, the relatively long runway at Lancaster combined with light traffic at that time of day made it the ideal option to divert to.

    I again turned around to brief the passengers. I told them that we were going to have to make precautionary landing before continuing to our intended destination and that I would be performing a few low passes for the tower.

    Due to the drag from the landing gear, the flight to Lancaster seemed to take forever. The long cruise home, however, gave me time to try and reach someone on the ground at Wings in hope of having the runway inspected and cleaned off before other traffic tried to use it. After several attempts to raise anyone on the Unicom/ CTAF frequency, I called Philadelphia Approach for help instead. Philly answered right away and I explained to them what had happened. I requested that they call over to Wings on the phone or send someone out to check the runway. They told me that they would get it done and asked if there was any other way that they could assist me. I told them I was headed to Lancaster and that I appreciated their offer, but didn’t require any further assistance. I then switched over to Lancaster Tower and let them know that I was about 15-20 minutes out, but I would need to perform a couple of passes to have them check my gear. The tower cleared me for a low approach over runway 26.

    I arrived at LNS at about 7:30. I performed my first low pass by the tower, not really expecting anything to appear out of place. I figured I had bent something or damaged the squat switch, but not much more. I climbed to pattern altitude and awaited the good word. Shortly after the fly-by, Tower reported that the left main gear didn’t appear to be down and locked. They suggested that I make another pass. The airport maintenance personnel chimed in, reporting the same. We had just started discussing whether cranking the gear a little by hand might help when Philly approach called the Lancaster tower on the phone.

    Philly informed Lancaster that someone had inspected the runway at Wings and found the left main strut and wheel in the grass. I quickly concluded that cranking the gear down probably wouldn’t help!

    This was found in the grass by the runway at Wings Field

    To Be Continued…

    (Read Part 2 Here)

    Andrew Robinson is an airline pilot for Piedmont Airlines.  He is a former 135 Charter Pilot and flight instructor who lives with his wife and 2 daughters in Pennsylvania.  He instructs in Beechcraft Bonanzas.

  • As Fast as a Cirrus — Better Tech, and Less?

    2008 Cessna 400 Corvalis TT N422TJ on the ramp — a faster, better-value alternative to a Cirrus SR22T
    2008 Cessna 400 Corvalis TT (N422TJ) — 235 KTAS and Garmin G1000 glass, priced under a comparable Cirrus.

    If you’re weighing a Cessna 400 vs Cirrus, start here. The 2008 Cessna 400 Corvalis TT cruises at 235 knots true — the fastest fixed-gear piston single ever certified. It’s faster than a turbocharged Cirrus on the same fuel and the same class of engine, and it costs less than a comparable SR22T. If you’re shopping a high-performance single for speed and value, N422TJ deserves a hard look.

    The Airplane Cirrus Shoppers Overlook

    The Cessna 400 is a Lancair design — a clean-sheet, all-composite airframe built to go fast. Cessna certified and refined it, and built N422TJ in 2008. It seats four, carries a real load, and handles weather. Most buyers shopping a high-performance single default to Cirrus, so airplanes like this one get overlooked. That’s where the value is.

    Faster on the Same Fuel

    The 400’s 235 KTAS is a true max cruise at 25,000 feet on oxygen. A 2011–2012 Cirrus SR22T (Gen 3) trues about 211 KTAS. Both burn 100LL and run turbocharged Continental engines in the same ~310-horsepower class.

    That’s about 24 knots up high — roughly 45 minutes off a 1,000-nautical-mile leg — with no bigger engine and no more fuel. And it isn’t only a flight-levels number: at 10,000 feet the 400 still trues about 180 KTAS, roughly 10 knots faster than an SR22T at the same altitude.

    Side profile of the all-composite, fixed-gear airframe
    Lancair-designed, all-composite, fixed-gear — the airframe that makes 235 knots possible.

    The Value Gap

    N422TJ is priced at $350,000. A comparable Gen 3 SR22T typically trades between $450,000 and $550,000 used. (A new SR22T is a $1M-plus airplane — not the comparison.) Against the newer turbo Cirrus, that’s roughly $100,000 to $175,000 less for a faster airplane.

    Cessna 400 Corvalis TT N422TJ on the ramp, front three-quarter view
    N422TJ — no damage history, complete logs since new, Van Bortel-maintained.

    Cross-Shopping a Turbonormalized Cirrus SR22

    A lot of buyers looking at N422TJ also weigh a Cirrus SR22 with the Tornado Alley turbonormalized engine. It’s a fair comparison — the same ~310-horsepower-class Continental, the same all-composite fixed-gear layout, the same 100LL — so here’s the honest math.

    Speed and engine: the turbonormalized SR22 trues around 211 KTAS; the 400 does 235. The 400 also runs a true twin-turbocharged TSIO-550-C, not a turbonormalized system — a true turbo makes boosted power up high, which is a big part of that speed edge.

    Avionics and price — 2006–2008: those Cirrus came with the Avidyne Entegra panel. N422TJ’s Garmin G1000 with WAAS and Synthetic Vision is a clear step up — better glass for comparable or less money.

    Avionics and price — 2009 and later: Cirrus moved to Garmin Perspective (G1000-class) glass, but the price moved with it. A 2009 SR22 turbonormalized with Perspective typically runs around $400,000 or more — one representative listing is $429,900. N422TJ is $350,000: less money, comparable glass, and 24 knots faster.

    The SR22 still brings the CAPS parachute and the Cirrus owner community. But on speed, engine, and price, the Cessna 400 stays ahead.

    MetricCessna 400 Corvalis TT (N422TJ)Cirrus SR22T — Gen 3 (2011–2012)Cirrus SR22 Turbonormalized (2006–2009)
    Max cruise (25,000 ft)235 KTAS~211 KTAS~211 KTAS
    Cruise at 10,000 ft~180 KTAS~170 KTAS~170 KTAS
    EngineTwin-turbocharged Continental TSIO-550-C (true turbo, ~310 hp class)Turbocharged Continental (~310 hp class)Turbonormalized Continental IO-550-N (~310 hp class)
    Glass panelGarmin G1000 — WAAS + Synthetic VisionCirrus Perspective (Garmin)Avidyne Entegra (2006–08) / Garmin Perspective (2009+)
    Fuel100LL100LL100LL
    Airframe / gearAll-composite, fixed gearAll-composite, fixed gearAll-composite, fixed gear
    Useful loadComparable (often equal or a touch better)ComparableComparable
    Whole-airframe parachuteNoYes (CAPS)Yes (CAPS)
    Typical used price$350,000~$450,000–$550,000~$300,000–$450,000 (est.; 2009 Perspective ~$400K+)
    Cessna 400 Corvalis TT vs. Cirrus SR22T (Gen 3) and the turbonormalized SR22. Speeds and prices are typical estimates; verify against the aircraft records and current market.

    The fastest fixed-gear piston single ever certified — and it out-runs a turbo Cirrus on the same fuel.

    The Avionics You Can’t Buy Anymore

    Garmin G1000 glass panel with WAAS and Synthetic Vision (SVT)
    Garmin G1000 with WAAS and Synthetic Vision (SVT) and the GFC-700 autopilot.

    N422TJ has a Garmin G1000 with WAAS and Synthetic Vision (SVT) and the GFC-700 autopilot. WAAS gives you LPV approaches — near-ILS precision at runways nationwide.

    This matters because the WAAS upgrade path for the G1000 in these airframes is closed. A Cessna 400 that left the factory without WAAS can’t be upgraded — it will never fly an LPV approach. So a WAAS-plus-SVT 400 like this one is a scarce find. You either buy one that has it, or you don’t get it.

    Glass cockpit with dual Garmin G1000 displays and leather interior
    Both G1000 displays with synthetic vision — a modern, integrated flight deck.

    Built to Actually Go

    This airplane is equipped to be flown hard and often:

    • Thermawing electric de-ice with a backup alternator — a de-ice system (not certified known-ice)
    • Factory air conditioning
    • Speed brakes
    • Hot prop, built-in oxygen, and ADS-B Out
    Cabin door open showing cabin access and seating
    A comfortable four-seat cabin built for real trips.

    The engine is a twin-turbocharged Continental TSIO-550-C with about 1,503 hours total time — the original engine, 1,503 since new. No damage history, complete logs since new, maintained by Van Bortel.

    Leather interior seating
    Leather interior, comfortable for four.

    An Honest Word: What the Cirrus Does Better

    One thing every Cirrus has that the 400 doesn’t: the CAPS whole-airframe parachute. Pull the handle and the airplane comes down under canopy. For a lot of buyers that’s the deciding factor, and it’s a fair reason to choose a Cirrus. Cirrus also has a large owner community and a strong support network.

    Useful load is comparable across all three airplanes — the 400 is often equal or a little better. If the parachute and the community are your priorities, a Cirrus may be the right airplane, and we can help you find one. If your priorities are speed, avionics, and value, the 400 is hard to beat at this price.

    Cessna 400 vs Cirrus: Quick Answers for Shoppers

    Is the Cessna 400 faster than a Cirrus SR22T?

    Yes. The Cessna 400 Corvalis TT trues up to 235 KTAS at 25,000 feet versus about 211 KTAS for a Gen 3 Cirrus SR22T — about 24 knots faster on the same 100LL and the same ~310-horsepower class of turbocharged Continental engine, or roughly 45 minutes saved on a 1,000-nautical-mile leg. At 10,000 feet the 400 still trues about 180 KTAS, roughly 10 knots faster than an SR22T at that altitude.

    How does the Cessna 400 compare to a turbonormalized Cirrus SR22?

    The Cessna 400 trues 235 KTAS versus about 211 KTAS for a turbonormalized SR22, and it uses a true twin-turbocharged Continental TSIO-550-C rather than a turbonormalized system. A 2006-2008 SR22 turbo has the older Avidyne Entegra panel, while the 400 has a Garmin G1000 with WAAS and Synthetic Vision. A 2009-and-later SR22 turbo with Garmin Perspective glass typically costs around $400,000 or more, versus $350,000 for N422TJ. The SR22 still offers its CAPS whole-airframe parachute.

    Does the 2006-2008 Cirrus SR22 have a Garmin G1000?

    No. Cirrus SR22s from 2006-2008 typically came with the Avidyne Entegra glass panel; Garmin-based Perspective glass arrived in 2009. The 2008 Cessna 400 came with the Garmin G1000, and N422TJ has the WAAS and Synthetic Vision version.

    How much less is a Cessna 400 than a comparable Cirrus SR22T?

    N422TJ is priced at $350,000, while a comparable 2011-2012 Cirrus SR22T (Gen 3) typically sells for about $450,000 to $550,000 used — roughly $100,000 to $175,000 less for a faster airplane.

    What is the fastest fixed-gear single-engine airplane?

    The Cessna 400 Corvalis TT, at 235 KTAS maximum cruise, is the fastest fixed-gear piston single-engine airplane ever certified.

    Does the Cessna 400 have a parachute like the Cirrus?

    No. A whole-airframe CAPS parachute is the one meaningful capability the Cirrus offers that the Cessna 400 does not. On speed, avionics, and useful load, the 400 matches or beats a comparable SR22 or SR22T.

    Can the Cessna 400’s Garmin G1000 be upgraded to WAAS?

    No. The WAAS upgrade path for the G1000 in these airframes is closed, so a non-WAAS Cessna 400 can never gain LPV approach capability. N422TJ already has WAAS plus Synthetic Vision, which makes it a scarce find.

    Does the Cessna 400 carry less than a Cirrus SR22?

    No. Useful load is comparable — the Cessna 400 is often equal to or a little better than a comparable SR22 or SR22T.

    Contact Texas Top Aviation

    ✈️ See the full N422TJ listing, specs & photos →

    Call to see N422TJ or to talk through the Cessna 400 vs Cirrus decision: (512) 270-1298 · txtopaviation.com. Austin & San Antonio, TX.

  • Embraer Legacy 450

    Brazilian manufacturer Embraer recently received FAA certification for it’s “mid-light” Legacy 450.  Capable of Mach .83 and a 2,500 mile range, this is one sweet airplane.  Embraer designers gave passengers headroom as the cabin stretches up to 6 feet in height down the center.  Complete with fly by wire controls and a full glass cockpit configuration, Embraer did a wonderful job with this airplane.  The club seats even fold down to a bed!

    The airplane’s list price is $16.5 million.  To learn more about the Legacy 450, visit Embraer’s website.

    Embraer Legacy 450

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *