Look what we are getting

[HH-60CC]

The DA-42

Hopefully we will get it by early next year, I have no idea how they will ship it, but I'm anxiously looking forward to it's arrival. Has anyone ever flown in one of these? If so, let me know how it is!

[88MPH]

Hey, do you know why they designed the copilots stick with reverse ergonomics?

Edit: ...used the same stick for both sides, causing reverse ergonomics for the copilot?

[FlyingNole]

I like flying the Diamonds but I have one big complaint...The cockpit is small as hell. You can't even wear a kneeboard in it. (the cabin vent window will also cover ur leg when open...smalllllll

[Chris_Ford]

How much does the Twin Star rent per hour? I imagine it can't be that much...

[FlyingNole]

Note to Chris Ford: Lay off the pot

[KBUF]

I saw one of those at my FBO today...never flown one, but that's one good lookin' airplane!

[Dugie8]

Doesn't that thing have like a 12 hour endurance at 55% power, or did they axe the diesel engine idea?

[HH-60CC]

Originally Posted by Chris_Ford

How much does the Twin Star rent per hour? I imagine it can't be that much...

Not sure yet, I think they are still figuring that out.

Originally Posted by Dugie8

Doesn't that thing have like a 12 hour endurance at 55% power, or did they axe the diesel engine idea?

If I read right, it runs off of JetA

[FlyingNole]

Yep, Jet A

[JEP]

AS for shipping, I believe the plane is designed to have the wings "snap on" almost. I believe the desgin makes for easy shipping. Probably jsuty crate it up and ship away. I thought I recall as well, that the diesel engine was an extra option (see $$$).

[Chris_Ford]

Originally Posted by FlyingNole

Note to Chris Ford: Lay off the pot

It burns like 10 GPH for two engines, doesn't it? And it's something like $250k new?

New C172s are $235k and they rent for $129/hr wet here...

[Killtron2000]

Is it turbocharged?

[FlyingNole]

Good point Chris, but it is a twin and has glass...So you know the schools will rape you on it.

[JEP]

...

The DA42 Twin Star is available with two engine options.
The fi rst option uses Thielert Centurion 1.7 turbodiesel
engines that can run on either diesel or Jet A1 fuel.
With just the standard tank (52 US gallons), the aircraft‘s
sensationally effi cient fuel consumption gives a maximum
range of 900nm, depending on power setting. The second
option is fi tted with Lycoming IO-360-M1A injection
engines.

aso.com has one for sale (our it is an option, don't know)

$477,404

http://www.aso.com/i.aso3/aircraft_v...1<Sweet Plane>

JetA or Diesel.......

[Cheechako]

From my understanding, it's more like a FADEC airplane with just one lever per engine. The computer does everything else- mixture, prop, etc. Pretty cool for the doctor type who forgot how to identify, verify. . .mmmm, what's next? See, that would be a good airplane for me!

I wonder how the FAA is going to look at training in it without the blue and red knobs?

[E_Dawg]

That's a really nice looking airplane. Nice to see some movement forward in GA with respect to engine operation, technology, and avionics!

But as a multi engine trainer it really, really needs to be 'traditional'; otherwise maybe a limitation similar to centerline thrust only needs to be established (single power lever limitation).

[C150J]

I have about fifty hours in the DA40 (the single engine version), and hope the twin behaves differently. Uncomfortable, untrimmable, small, and incompetent. They advertise 150 TAS... I don't know how they came up with that number, as the highest TAS I saw was 130. It really talked the talk (Garmin G1000s, composite design, etc.), but was not a capable aircraft. I would rather fly a C172P any day of the week.

The only redeeming quality was a 4.4G tolerance in the utility category and a fantastic glide ratio (39 feet of wing - one foot longer than the Seminole IIRC).


J.

EDIT -

I should add that the forty or so hours I've spent in a Cirrus proved to me that all composite a/c don't behave like this one, so I'm really hoping that the TwinStar isn't just a fad airplane.

[flyingmaniac]

[quote=C150J]I have about fifty hours in the DA40 (the single engine version), and hope the twin behaves differently. Uncomfortable, untrimmable, small, and incompetent. They advertise 150 TAS... I don't know how they came up with that number, as the highest TAS I saw was 130. It really talked the talk (Garmin G1000s, composite design, etc.), but was not a capable aircraft. I would rather fly a C172P any day of the week.

QUOTE]

Yeah the TAS is a little different but unless you are a big person the DA-40 is nice and comfortable. It has a lot more space in the back seat than the 172, and the seats are comfortable. As far as flying the glass G-1000, it is NICE. I recently got checked out in one and OMG there are a lot of things to learn, but it is fun.

[moxiepilot]

Originally Posted by C150J

I have about fifty hours in the DA40 (the single engine version), and hope the twin behaves differently. Uncomfortable, untrimmable, small, and incompetent. They advertise 150 TAS... I don't know how they came up with that number, as the highest TAS I saw was 130. It really talked the talk (Garmin G1000s, composite design, etc.), but was not a capable aircraft. I would rather fly a C172P any day of the week.

The only redeeming quality was a 4.4G tolerance in the utility category and a fantastic glide ratio (39 feet of wing - one foot longer than the Seminole IIRC).


J.

EDIT -

I should add that the forty or so hours I've spent in a Cirrus proved to me that all composite a/c don't behave like this one, so I'm really hoping that the TwinStar isn't just a fad airplane.

honestly I hate teaching in the diamond

[C150J]

Originally Posted by flyingmaniac

Yeah the TAS is a little different but unless you are a big person the DA-40 is nice and comfortable. It has a lot more space in the back seat than the 172, and the seats are comfortable. As far as flying the glass G-1000, it is NICE. I recently got checked out in one and OMG there are a lot of things to learn, but it is fun.

What kind of seat covers do you guys have? What's the longest you've been up in it? I believe you, but in my experience, there was no lumbar support (I'm twenty two, 6'1", and 180lbs.) and flights over 1.5 hours were awful.

Do you have any Avidyne experience? Personally, I think the 1000s are not even close to the Entegra systems. Then again, you do need to 430s in addition to the screens with an Avidyne layout.

I should add that the first time I flew a Diamond, the non-essential bus tie fried, causing the MFD to explosively turn off. During a debriefing, I found a very pathetic description of the electrical system in the POH. The only location where you can find what belong in each bus is on the actual panel. Don't get me started on the fuel quantity "stick," either!

Again, not contesting your knowledge, just stating my experience.

-J.

PS - I flew mine in the desert. We came up with some interesting ways to block the sun - talk aboout a greenhouse (good visibility though).

[HH-60CC]

Soooo, someone like me, who is 6'0" 210lbs going to have a rough time in the left or right seat? Is it comparable to sitting in the back of a volkswagon?

[C150J]

Originally Posted by HH-60CC

Soooo, someone like me, who is 6'0" 210lbs going to have a rough time in the left or right seat? Is it comparable to sitting in the back of a volkswagon?

Haha - well, it really depends on whether or not the seats have been modified from the 40s. It LOOKS like they are leather in the picture you provided, so maybe we're all in for a pleasant surprise. In the 40, the seats are actually part of the airframe - composite (covered by a futile piece of sheepskin) and immobile (pedals adjust). It kind of feels like you're in stirrups. The seats are also leaned a bit back (ala an Extra 300). I can accept such a feeling in a plane designed for acro, but find the design questionable for XC flight.

I really wouldn't say it is a bad plane to screw around the practice area in. However, it seems to me that they are marketing these things for non-training purposes (especially the 42). The marketing is what really kills me. Yes, they look cool, but most of those I have met who have flown them share the same stories with me.

J.