Now Thielert is dead.. what plane for cheap flying?

[BartV]

I'm wondering, what would be your choice to buy with the current Avgas prices if you would be buying a new plane for cruising 300-400nm trips, is Rotax the answer? I'm looking for a 4 seater, running hourly costs are important for me.

I was considering a DA40 TDI but now I'm trying to look at other options.

[julian_storey]

I'd be tempted to wait a bit to see whether Thielert really IS dead.

[Zulu Alpha]

Ryanair!! !

[IO540]

Thielert won't die. If it did, Diamond will go too. Diamond cannot go on with an unsupported engine.

But it depends on what you mean by 'cheap flying'. There is no such thing as 'cheap flying' if you want reasonable comfort with at least one non-anorak passenger, and reasonable weather capability.

The Rotax engined planes should be cheapest to run.

Then you get a gradual progression. The DA40 is by no means at the bottom of that scale, because the total operating cost of a plane is not just the fuel but a whole big raft of other crap.

Even on my IO-540 engined TB20 the fuel is 41.5 litres/hr and at 155kt TAS I am doing 19.5 MPG (UK miles, UK gallons) which most people would be delighted with in their gas guzzling road car driven flat out.

But by '400nm' do you mean 400nm plus reserves? If so then you need 600nm+ zero-fuel capability, which is not that common until you get to proper tourers.

Really 'cheap' flying is a bottom end microlight; a hang glider where you strap yourself into a sleeping bag... I went to Aero Expo in Pribram LKPM this w/e and there was a machine with a 1-cylinder motor, open cockpit, and probably cheap to fly.

[BackPacker]

I'm wondering, what would be your choice to buy with the current Avgas prices if you would be buying a new plane for cruising 300-400nm trips, is Rotax the answer? I'm looking for a 4 seater, running hourly costs are important for me.

AFAIK the most powerful Rotax is the 914, which delivers 115 HP peak (5 minutes max) and 100 HP continuously. I don't know of any four-seaters that can stay in the air on those numbers, let alone actual four-seaters that use the 914.

So for a certified four-seater, you are either stuck with the Lycosauri of this world, or the Thielert 1.7/2.0. Unless there's another reasonably common and certified engine in the 160 HP+ range out there which I don't know about.

[flybymike]

BackPacker, The Tecnam people reckon that the new P200 light twin ( four seater) will stay in the air ( and presumably even climb) operating on one engine...a 100hp 912s Rotax..:)

[IO540]

Unfortunately the DA40 is not capable of carrying four present-day adults. A pilot with three anorexic chain smoking size zero supermodels, yes :)

If you actually want to carry four normal adults for 400nm plus alternate plus reserves then there is no cheap way of doing it. A TB20 (or a few others) will do it. Work out the W&B of a DA40 and see for yourself.

The Tecnam twin is some way from certification, and with two engines it won't be especially cheap to fly.

[gasax]

Backpacker you need to get out more - there has been a 4 seater flying behind a Rotax for some years now MCR4 ring any bells.

Of course 4 well fed types and its not possible. Indeed most of the 1950s designs from the US will not do it either until you get to C182 or PA28-235.

Whilst fuel is an important element of the cost of flying (particularly with engines over 200hp) the certification regime probably has even more influence.

As Thielerts are only fitted to certified airframes then they would never represent 'cheap' flying.

[kalleh]

Rumour is that for example the MCR 4S will be produced under the new ELA. Low fuel consumption and decent cruise gives excellent range even with four 80kg adults on board!

[TheOddOne]

even with four 80kg adults on board!

Finding 4 sub-80kg pilots in Western Europe is very unlikely! My 15-yr-old son who is very fit and healthy weighs more than that! 6'3" and still growing...

I agree, to carry 4 adults any distance, you're looking to enter the market at the C182 level. REAL costs (not just direct operating costs) are probably at least £150 per hour, more likely £200. Try owning one for a few years and work out the finances properly (including engine and airframe depreciation, all maintenance, fuel, parking, respray/cabin refurb etc etc)

Most owners have their head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the real cost of flying. Motorists are the same. An ordinary family car costs around 40 pence per mile to run, 12,000 miles a year costs £4800, a big whack out of many household budgets.

TheOddOne

[airborne_artist]

TOO - mild thread drift - 80 kg isn't that unusual. I'm 6'0", and weigh 12 st /76 kg in my birthday suit, so 80 kg max when booted and suited. I'm not that unusual, am I?

[BackPacker]

So the MCR4 has a 100 HP Rotax 912. It's a kitplane and the typical equipped empty weight is 350 kg, so the website claims, and MTOM is 750 kg. That leaves a very healthy 400 kg to play with, which is on par with a typical Warrior. And the fuel consumption and V-speeds are quire impressive as well. But since this is a kitplane, I wonder how many MCR4s actually manage to stay below 350 kg after the builder added all the bells and whistles that he/she thinks are required. Any data on actual MCR4s flying already?

Nevertheless, I'm impressed. It would be good to see it certified and available as a factory-built without gaining additional weight.

[S-Works]

TOO - mild thread drift - 80 kg isn't that unusual. I'm 6'0", and weigh 12 st /76 kg in my birthday suit, so 80 kg max when booted and suited. I'm not that unusual, am I?

Yes you are. I am 6ft and 13st 4lb and I am not overweight and quite fit. Most average non obese male adults weigh more than 80kg.

[airborne_artist]

Yes you are. .... Most average non obese male adults weigh more than 80kg.That would explain why ladies are always offering me second helpings and extra cakes / biscuits, and my male chums call me "Racing Snake" :ok:

[soay]

Most owners have their head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the real cost of flying.
When you start worrying about the real cost, you know you can't afford to do it!

[IO540]

There is also the argument that capital costs should be disregarded, because if you applied that to everything, you would die with every penny you ever earned invested in various financial instruments; you'd die very rich but never having got out of bed.

The only time capital cost needs to be taken into account is when buying an asset to rent out - i.e. just another investment scenario.

A lot of people ask for a true 4 seater without realising the huge price they will be paying for it all along the line, while rarely carrying more than 2 people. I fly a 4-seater (TB20) and find that 2 people plus holiday luggage is a full house, or 2 plus a child for a weekend trip. The raft, emergency bag, and oxygen take up one seat. My girlfriend weighs 45kg, I weigh 77 and we could carry a child on a holiday, and the TB20 is unbeaten on load carrying v. economy v. speed.

Taking 4 Brit-sized people with holiday luggage would need something bigger and the cost increment is pretty substantial, or you have to be willing to chuck away a lot of performance and get something with the same -540 motor but which flies considerably slower.

Sure enough there are people whose mission is to carry four for a short distance in which case a lot of spamcans can do it (partially fuelled).

There is a lot of AOC work done in this area (charter) in piston twins such as the Seneca and (because you never know how much the next five fat golfers will weigh) the fuel management practices are sometimes rather dubious. Look up G-OMAR for one example.

One should never fly a plane with a fuel level which is below what can be physically (visually) verified and if you apply this rule rigorously you are in for some big suprises in the way the mission capability of some popular 4/6 seaters shrinks!

[soay]

Sure enough there are people whose mission is to carry four for a short distance in which case a lot of spamcans can do it (partially fuelled).
Although not a spamcan, the SR22 is a case in point. According to Cirrus (http://www.cirrusdesign.com/sr22/specifications.aspx), the useful load for the base model with full tanks is 282kg. Add on all the options and that drops to 209kg, with a 310hp IO-550-N engine.

[Mark 1]

Quite a few relatively old designs could move a 1000 lb-ish payload on a 180 HP Lycoming. Jodel D140, Beagle Husky, Wassmer Baladou, Boelkow 207 spring to mind.
In fact two of those are certificated as 5-seaters. Cruise varies from about 90 knots for the Husky to 125 for the Boelkow. Scarcity, condition and ongoing maintenance may be issues though.

The Jodel DR250 gives you a pretty good 4-seat ability on only 160HP.

If you can afford to lose a seat and a bit of space then a Jodel 1050 can do it all on 100HP and is now migrating onto the permit system - quite a bargain at about £16-25K if they suit you.

[gasax]

And I was distracted by the Rotax in the statement - there is always the Jabiru 4 seater.

[S-Works]

I own a Hawk XP, 21OHP Wobby prop 172. It has a 960lb useful load at 128kts cruise and I sit in the airways usually between FL100 and FL140 but it will do FL180 if pushed.

Thats 4 adults and 4plus hours of fuel.

The Malibu will carry 4 and bags at up to FL250 and over 1200nm at 220kts TAS. I did Paris to Guernsey on Saturday in 50mins. Thats on a 350hp engine derated to 310hp and doing 17GPH LOP.

[IO540]

According to Cirrus (http://www.cirrusdesign.com/sr22/specifications.aspx), the useful load for the base model with full tanks is 282kg

A fully IFR equipped TB20 has 500kg payload, minus 240kg full fuel = 260kg cockpit payload.

Full TKS is about 50kg, a turbo (TB21) another 50kg, very roughly, so you are down to a 2-seater, but a very mission capable one: full de-ice and FL250 ceiling.

The Malibu will carry 4 and bags at up to FL250 and over 1200nm at 220kts TAS. I did Paris to Guernsey on Saturday in 50mins. Thats on a 350hp engine derated to 310hp and doing 17GPH LOP

What is the usable fuel volume?

[S-Works]

It holds 120 US gal with standard range tanks and 160 US gal with long range.

Hot prop and boots, certified for known icing. Dual everything.

Without checking the POH it works out 4 and bags for full fuel and if 6 people the fuel load has to come down but to something that is still bladder busting.

I am going to Sweden next week 4:10hrs 850nm 63 US gal of fuel according to flitestar.

[IO540]

You need to be more specific with those figures bose x. 1200nm range to zero fuel or with U.S. business aircraft reserves?

What is the TAS and payload with 120 and 160USG aboard?

[bjornhall]

Then there's always the Piper Archer II...Some 430 kg useful load on 180 hp; that's 300 kg with full tanks. And the newer specimens are still < 20 years old. Then you get 600 nm range with reserves, doing some 115 kts and 29 l/h at 65% lean-to-peak FL0-a-bit (POH figures = optimistic).

Not all that fast for sure, but quite a bit of useful load.

[TheOddOne]

Yes, the Archer II is a nice, simple machine (fixed prop & gear) so folk can fly it straight after getting their licence without 'differences' training. 300kgs might just do for 2 mixed couples but probably not for 4 middle-aged blokes.

TOO

[S-Works]

You need to be more specific with those figures bose x. 1200nm range to zero fuel or with U.S. business aircraft reserves?

What is the TAS and payload with 120 and 160USG aboard?

POH is in the aircraft so from memory.....

It has a 7hr range to empty on standard tanks at FL210 doing a TAS of 220kts.

W&B I will need the POH for I am afraid.

[soay]

Now Thielert is dead..
I'm hoping that statement is premature. Rumour has it that Diamond will announce their response within the next fortnight, so I'll reserve judgement until then.

[shortstripper]

I'm 5'5", fairly fit and weigh less than 70kg. Rarely offred flights in anything fancy though .... wrong sex maybe? :*

SS

[IFollowRailways]

Sorry - thread creep about the Malibu, but I can't let it go.

Thats on a 350hp engine derated to 310hp

No it isnt. If it is a Malibu, then it has a Continental TSIO-520BE1G which if you look at the TCDS is rated at 310 Hp. If it is a Malibu Mirage then it has a Lycoming which is actually rated at 350 hp.

But more seriously-

It holds 120 US gal with standard range tanks and 160 US gal with long range.

Hot prop and boots, certified for known icing. Dual everything.

Without checking the POH it works out 4 and bags for full fuel and if 6 people the fuel load has to come down but to something that is still bladder busting.


Total rubbish I'm afraid. I would go and have a serious look at the POH. Do it now, before you fly it again.

Typical useful load on an equipped Malibu is in the range of 1190 to about 1300 lbs. I did once come across one that had 1335 lbs, but nobody seemed to know why! The factory quote something like 16/1700 lbs, but it is a total work of fiction - presumably an aircraft with nothing in it.

Some example loads assuming an average useful load of 1250 lbs.

120 US gallons of fuel = 120 x 6 lbs = 720 lbs.
Average useful load of 1250 lbs - 720 lbs = 530 lbs available for people/bags/stuff.
Or put another way, 3 x 176 lbs people and no bags!

160 US gallons of fuel = 160 x 6 lbs = 960 lbs.
Average useful load of 1250 lbs - 960 lbs = 290 lbs available for people/bags/stuff.
Or put another way, Not even 2 people.....................

OK, Lets assume I am wrong and it is the most exceptional and lightest Malibu in the world so the useful load is 1400 lbs (No chance...!)

120 gallons = 720 lbs. 1400 - 720 = 680 lbs. or 4 x 170 lb people/no bags.

160 gallons = 960 lbs. 1400 - 960 = 440 lbs. or 2 people and some luggage.

Like many other aircraft the Malibu is seriously compromised for useful load with full fuel.

[VeriLocation]

Diamond UK have suspended any maintenance work on Thierlet engined Diamond DA40/42's as a "temporary" measure, arguement is that a/c will stack up at Gamston pending warranty work / spare non-availability. Agree that this is "critical" now for Diamond and that they sort it out asap. As for 400 nm trips, my DA40 with 2 + child is perfect and on full tanks. Tend to fly long legs in France / UK at between 5,000 - 8,000 ft which gives TAS of 135-140 kts with range of 5 hours at 5.5 gph ( 28 usg tanks + half an hour reserve ) = 700 nm. Lose some fuel and take another child ! Agree though I would NEVER take 4 adult males even on low fuel. My money is on Diamond buying Thierlet subject to Cessena staying clear but if Cessena do want a slice of the action and keep supply for themselves then don't expect delivery of a DA40/42 tdi this side of 2009.

[S-Works]

I did say the that the POH is in the aircraft and was doing from memory.... :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Part of me saying it was 310hp? I am reliably informed by my engineer that that engine is rated at 350hp in other applications and is de-rated for this application.

Either way it is a very capable machine and even using your figures and trading fuel for weight gives performance way beyond anything else out there for the cost v performance. Put it this way take 4 people and 4hrs fuel on your figures would be like taking 2 people in a TB20 for 8 hours and that is above most of the weather you would encounter.

I also don't need to be talked to like a child. I managed to pass a type rating, obviously going from memory leaves me wide open for abuse.

[IFollowRailways]

I'm sorry if I caused offence - That was not the intention.

I agree totally about the capability of the Malibu, I thoroughly enjoyed working with them. It did however appear (to me at least) that the W/B figures were being quoted as if they were fact where the reality is somewhat different.

I believe from reading previous posts that you are an instructor, so you will understand this is one of the (many) ways accidents can be caused - say it enough times and you start to "believe" it yourself, to the extent that you start to "know" that the aircraft can carry full fuel and people without checking..........

As you rightly say, the best way to consider a Malibu profile is 4 people/4 hours with IFR reserve.

[S-Works]

POH is in the aircraft so from memory.....

It has a 7hr range to empty on standard tanks at FL210 doing a TAS of 220kts.

W&B I will need the POH for I am afraid.

IFR, your apology is accepted!

Please see my post above, as an Instructor I am fully aware of the dangers of inaccuracy, hence the statement I made above.

[BackPacker]

Letter from Diamond received today

Nothing on the website as of yet. Any Diamond owner willing to scan the letter and post it here?

I've got a reservation to fly my clubs DA-40 TDI this weekend and although I am fairly sure it's going to be fine, it would be nice to know whether this is going to be my last flight in that aircraft, so that I can say goodbye properly.

[moggiee]

Diamond's last communication to us said that they are "looking at the way forward" or words to that effect.

I wonder what odd Ladbrokes will give me on Diamond buying Thielert's assets? Pretty short, I'd guess.