• Review: Carenado TBM 850 HD Series

    Socata TBM 850 HD Series

    Publisher: Carenado

    Review Author:
    Meng Yu

    Suggested Price:
    $39.95

    Buy Here

    To Start Off

    The newest add-on from Carenado has arrived in the FS Pilot Shop! Carenado has been well known to be the best in providing quality add-ons and their latest work is this TBM 850. In this review, we'll take a look at many aspects of the aircraft, which will hopefully give you a better understanding of this new product. Let's begin!

           

    Background Information On The Aircraft

    In the early 1980s, the Mooney Airplane Company of Kerrville, Texas designed a six-seat pressurised light aircraft powered by a single 360 hp piston engine, the Mooney 301, which made its maiden flight on 7 April 1983. Mooney was purchased by French owners in 1985, which resulted in talks between Mooney and the French company Socata to build a turboprop derivative of the 301. The result of these discussions was the TBM 700, which was much heavier than the 301 with more than twice the power, with a joint venture, TBM International, being set up in June 1987 between Mooney and Socata's parent company Aerospatiale to design and build the new aircraft. In the designation TBM, "TB" stands for Tarbes, the city in France in which Socata is located, the "M" stands for Mooney.

    The TBM 700 is a single engine, turboprop powered, six to seven seat low-wing monoplane of mainly aluminium and steel construction, but with the tail surfaces built of Nomex honeycomb. It has a retractable tricycle landing gear and is powered by a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-64 engine delivering 700 shp. The first prototype TBM 700 made its maiden flight on 14 July 1988 with French certification following on 31 January 1990 and US Federal Aviation Administration certification achieved on 28 August 1990. The TBM 850 was the production name for the TBM 700N.

    Manufacturer Socata
    Engine Pratt & Whitney Canada
    PT6A-66D turboprop
    Fuselage Length 35 feet (10.65 meters)
    Max Speed 320 kt
    Cruising Speed 252 kt
    Service Ceiling 31,000 feet
    Range 1519 nm

           

    First Impressions

    Carenado definitely did well with the add-on, and in more than one single aspect. The textures are of high quality, the model is highly detailed, and more importantly, the flying dynamics seem believable. We'll cover more of this as we progress into the review.

    Exterior

    The exterior may not be the first thing you see when you load the simulator (apart from the preview pane), but is definitely what plenty of flight simmers look for. Developers do not make quality aircraft just because their work has good systems, and accurate dynamics, but lack the visual quality and feel. As such, I would like to compliment Carenado for making a high quality exterior, with some animations, and extremely high quality textures, which are indeed in high definition. You would notice later on that I'll split the topics I have to say for each section into separate paragraphs for your easy reading. However, I would like to show you a few screen shots now:

           

           

    Firstly, the model. The model is very detailed, and if you look at the development shots of the model without the textures, you'll be blown away by the detail put into the model, at least on the exterior. You'll find the details being given a lot of attention, and it is this attention to detail that truly gives this add-on a good impression not only to me, but to perhaps anyone and everyone that sees it. I do think that perhaps not everyone would agree with this point, so if you have a differing opinion, please share it in the comments below, so that we can discuss more on it. After all, a review is something that gives the buyer a more informed choice, so exploiting some of the flaws is all right in my opinion.


    18 Comments
    1. greenberg1940's Avatar
      greenberg1940 -
      I just finished your review and was a little taken aback by the review of the extierior. I am considering this a/c for my next purchase, but now, I have some questions. I run FSX on my hp laptop and it handles all the sp2 a/c well. My frame rates are approx. 18 to 22 and there isn't any gliches or flickering at those fr's. My ram is dual channel @ 4gb. The integrated graphics is ati 4650. Do you think that I will have a great loss of fframe rate? Thanx,
      Jerry
    1. N069NT's Avatar
      N069NT -
      Getting tired of the max-260kt Flight1 PC-12 I've been flying for years, I've had my eye on this for some time now. Would have liked to have seen more info here however, specifically regarding performance. How is the time to climb to FL260, econ & max cruise speeds and ranges, payload effects on climb performance through the envelope, etc.? Are the numbers on par or close to the real thing like a 320kt max speed? Things like that and interior aesthetics (including night cockpit lighting) and avionics performance mean more to me than exterior eye candy - but I still like to appreciate "walking around" the aircraft while on the ground and admiring good work. They also make the difference of something being worth $40 or not to add to my hangar.
    1. RaysAviation's Avatar
      RaysAviation -
      Quote Originally Posted by greenberg1940 View Post
      I just finished your review and was a little taken aback by the review of the extierior. I am considering this a/c for my next purchase, but now, I have some questions. I run FSX on my hp laptop and it handles all the sp2 a/c well. My frame rates are approx. 18 to 22 and there isn't any gliches or flickering at those fr's. My ram is dual channel @ 4gb. The integrated graphics is ati 4650. Do you think that I will have a great loss of fframe rate? Thanx,
      Jerry
      Hi Greenberg1940,
      I have this aircraft in my hangar and I found no loss in FPS. I also run FSX but on a stationary computer with an NVidia GTX580 - I don't know about the performance on the ATI4650 though.. but my experience was that this add-on runs similar to other Carenado add-ons as the Cirrus SR22 etc, so if you don't have any issues with running other Carenado add-ons, I don't think this one will be an issue either.

      Ray
    1. RaysAviation's Avatar
      RaysAviation -
      Quote Originally Posted by N069NT View Post
      Getting tired of the max-260kt Flight1 PC-12 I've been flying for years, I've had my eye on this for some time now. Would have liked to have seen more info here however, specifically regarding performance. How is the time to climb to FL260, econ & max cruise speeds and ranges, payload effects on climb performance through the envelope, etc.? Are the numbers on par or close to the real thing like a 320kt max speed? Things like that and interior aesthetics (including night cockpit lighting) and avionics performance mean more to me than exterior eye candy - but I still like to appreciate "walking around" the aircraft while on the ground and admiring good work. They also make the difference of something being worth $40 or not to add to my hangar.
      Hi N069NT,

      I have this aircraft in my hangar too and it is really worth every penny in my opinion. In regards to performance, then included in the manual there are performance charts together with emergency and standard procedures etc. This helps getting to know the specifics of the aircraft.

      The climb that this aircraft performs is awesome - I tested a full climb from ground level and until I could not climb any higher and that was about 36,400 feet. The ceiling for the TBM850 is 31,000 feet, so in a way you could say that this was a little off, but to justify it a bit, the climb from about 31,000 to 36,400 to a very long time. The climb to 31,000 feet was performed with full power and various "nose-up" degree settings to maintain fair KIAS and the climb took about 15 minutes all-in.

      I also tried out the stall speed for 2 configurations. 1 was gear up and flap up in an altitude of 2,000 feet and weather set on fair. The aircraft stalled at 77 KIAS as also written in the real aircrafts specs. Config 2 was gear down and full flaps in an altitude of again 2,000 feet and fair weather - now the aircraft stalled at 61 KIAS which is also according to the real specs. Combining that there actually was a difference in the stall speed tests + that the KIAS for both configurations were correct, I would assume that the general flight dynamics are close to the real aircrafts performance, but to be honest I have not flown the real aircraft and therefore cannot confirm it.

      Just another think that I found was in regards to stall. When I pushed the aircraft to stall both straight out and during a turn with 45 degrees of bank, I got no shaking of the yoke or the aircraft - the nose simply just lowered and I gained airspeed again. I don't know if this is true to real life, but I believe that the TBM850 is built as a very steady aircraft, so it might be correct.

      I have not tested the climb rate with various payload settings, so that I cannot confirm - sorry.

      I hope that some of this helped


      Ray
    1. henri5's Avatar
      henri5 -
      I also use the PC12 a lot, but unfortunately the version sold is not the recent version of the PC12, and I prefer the location of the moving map on this aircraft, so I bought it. I flew around a bit and it is easy to use. The FMC is a bit difficult to use especially for flight planning, but there is a manual for it. There are no pictures of the instruments explaining the various instruments, and the autopilot modes are not well explained. The plane is so stable is that you can actually do a feather-smooth autoland (although in principle it probably does not support autoland) just by slowing down to about 85 knots on the ILS landing and it will land lightly.

      So this plane is a good alternative to the PC12, can fly faster and farther and is more modern.
    1. andreaswoe1's Avatar
      andreaswoe1 -
      Waste of time: please Carenado: no more of youre useless G1000 avionics ! Default GPS datas and functionality and nearly unclickble spots in VC ! What should I do with that ? Useless informations on 10 years old maps with wrong datas !
    1. scottm's Avatar
      scottm -
      Yes, stop with the g1000 planes and bring back more Fs9 aircraft, please.
    1. yeager74's Avatar
      yeager74 -
      who cares about updated databases on small GA aeroplanes? These are reasonably basic airplanes and why not just use them as such. NAVIGRAPH updated databases are for the big boyz toyz.. ;-)

      Anyways - just my opinion.
      Claus
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by greenberg1940 View Post
      I just finished your review and was a little taken aback by the review of the extierior. I am considering this a/c for my next purchase, but now, I have some questions. I run FSX on my hp laptop and it handles all the sp2 a/c well. My frame rates are approx. 18 to 22 and there isn't any gliches or flickering at those fr's. My ram is dual channel @ 4gb. The integrated graphics is ati 4650. Do you think that I will have a great loss of fframe rate? Thanx,
      Jerry
      Hey,
      I do not think that there will be a major loss of frame for you.
      M.Y
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by N069NT View Post
      Getting tired of the max-260kt Flight1 PC-12 I've been flying for years, I've had my eye on this for some time now. Would have liked to have seen more info here however, specifically regarding performance. How is the time to climb to FL260, econ & max cruise speeds and ranges, payload effects on climb performance through the envelope, etc.? Are the numbers on par or close to the real thing like a 320kt max speed? Things like that and interior aesthetics (including night cockpit lighting) and avionics performance mean more to me than exterior eye candy - but I still like to appreciate "walking around" the aircraft while on the ground and admiring good work. They also make the difference of something being worth $40 or not to add to my hangar.
      I'll try to add more of that in my next reviews. Thanks for telling me.
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by RaysAviation View Post
      Hi Greenberg1940,
      I have this aircraft in my hangar and I found no loss in FPS. I also run FSX but on a stationary computer with an NVidia GTX580 - I don't know about the performance on the ATI4650 though.. but my experience was that this add-on runs similar to other Carenado add-ons as the Cirrus SR22 etc, so if you don't have any issues with running other Carenado add-ons, I don't think this one will be an issue either.

      Ray
      Interesting information. Thanks for sharing an reading!
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by RaysAviation View Post
      Hi N069NT,

      I have this aircraft in my hangar too and it is really worth every penny in my opinion. In regards to performance, then included in the manual there are performance charts together with emergency and standard procedures etc. This helps getting to know the specifics of the aircraft.

      The climb that this aircraft performs is awesome - I tested a full climb from ground level and until I could not climb any higher and that was about 36,400 feet. The ceiling for the TBM850 is 31,000 feet, so in a way you could say that this was a little off, but to justify it a bit, the climb from about 31,000 to 36,400 to a very long time. The climb to 31,000 feet was performed with full power and various "nose-up" degree settings to maintain fair KIAS and the climb took about 15 minutes all-in.

      I also tried out the stall speed for 2 configurations. 1 was gear up and flap up in an altitude of 2,000 feet and weather set on fair. The aircraft stalled at 77 KIAS as also written in the real aircrafts specs. Config 2 was gear down and full flaps in an altitude of again 2,000 feet and fair weather - now the aircraft stalled at 61 KIAS which is also according to the real specs. Combining that there actually was a difference in the stall speed tests + that the KIAS for both configurations were correct, I would assume that the general flight dynamics are close to the real aircrafts performance, but to be honest I have not flown the real aircraft and therefore cannot confirm it.

      Just another think that I found was in regards to stall. When I pushed the aircraft to stall both straight out and during a turn with 45 degrees of bank, I got no shaking of the yoke or the aircraft - the nose simply just lowered and I gained airspeed again. I don't know if this is true to real life, but I believe that the TBM850 is built as a very steady aircraft, so it might be correct.

      I have not tested the climb rate with various payload settings, so that I cannot confirm - sorry.

      I hope that some of this helped


      Ray
      Thanks ray for this helpful information!
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by henri5 View Post
      I also use the PC12 a lot, but unfortunately the version sold is not the recent version of the PC12, and I prefer the location of the moving map on this aircraft, so I bought it. I flew around a bit and it is easy to use. The FMC is a bit difficult to use especially for flight planning, but there is a manual for it. There are no pictures of the instruments explaining the various instruments, and the autopilot modes are not well explained. The plane is so stable is that you can actually do a feather-smooth autoland (although in principle it probably does not support autoland) just by slowing down to about 85 knots on the ILS landing and it will land lightly.

      So this plane is a good alternative to the PC12, can fly faster and farther and is more modern.
      Well, with your description, I might just try the pc-12 out some time!
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by andreaswoe1 View Post
      Waste of time: please Carenado: no more of youre useless G1000 avionics ! Default GPS datas and functionality and nearly unclickble spots in VC ! What should I do with that ? Useless informations on 10 years old maps with wrong datas !
      Try turnin off your reflection all detail to fix the I functional clicking spots problem. And yeah, Carenado could perhaps update the database, but their G1000 systems look nice!
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by scottm View Post
      Yes, stop with the g1000 planes and bring back more Fs9 aircraft, please.
      Fs9 seems impossible...
    1. 7hepro's Avatar
      7hepro -
      Quote Originally Posted by yeager74 View Post
      who cares about updated databases on small GA aeroplanes? These are reasonably basic airplanes and why not just use them as such. NAVIGRAPH updated databases are for the big boyz toyz.. ;-)

      Anyways - just my opinion.
      Claus
      Well, GAs are still planes
    1. captnmel66's Avatar
      captnmel66 -
      Quote Originally Posted by RaysAviation View Post
      Hi N069NT,

      I have this aircraft in my hangar too and it is really worth every penny in my opinion. In regards to performance, then included in the manual there are performance charts together with emergency and standard procedures etc. This helps getting to know the specifics of the aircraft.

      The climb that this aircraft performs is awesome - I tested a full climb from ground level and until I could not climb any higher and that was about 36,400 feet. The ceiling for the TBM850 is 31,000 feet, so in a way you could say that this was a little off, but to justify it a bit, the climb from about 31,000 to 36,400 to a very long time. The climb to 31,000 feet was performed with full power and various "nose-up" degree settings to maintain fair KIAS and the climb took about 15 minutes all-in.

      I also tried out the stall speed for 2 configurations. 1 was gear up and flap up in an altitude of 2,000 feet and weather set on fair. The aircraft stalled at 77 KIAS as also written in the real aircrafts specs. Config 2 was gear down and full flaps in an altitude of again 2,000 feet and fair weather - now the aircraft stalled at 61 KIAS which is also according to the real specs. Combining that there actually was a difference in the stall speed tests + that the KIAS for both configurations were correct, I would assume that the general flight dynamics are close to the real aircrafts performance, but to be honest I have not flown the real aircraft and therefore cannot confirm it.

      Just another think that I found was in regards to stall. When I pushed the aircraft to stall both straight out and during a turn with 45 degrees of bank, I got no shaking of the yoke or the aircraft - the nose simply just lowered and I gained airspeed again. I don't know if this is true to real life, but I believe that the TBM850 is built as a very steady aircraft, so it might be correct.

      I have not tested the climb rate with various payload settings, so that I cannot confirm - sorry.

      I hope that some of this helped


      Ray
      The ceiling of 31,000 is a limit set by the manufacture, it is not a performance limit saying the airplane cannot climb any higher!! I flew Dash 8's for 11 years and we had an altitude LIMIT of 25,000 feet, the airframe still had quite a bit of performance once we would lever off at FL250 to go higher. One thing to look at is the pressure exerted by on the cabin by the pressurization system, when you lever off in most GA airplanes at the Altitude set by the maker you will either have a 8000 or 10,000 foot cabin at max Diff. Just my thoughts on the climb you did to 36,000 feet.
    1. Urbano's Avatar
      Urbano -
      and about the MTL for TBM 850?
      The other players cant see my new and fantastic airplane (