Katamarino - I knew you would be in here sooner or later
achimha
Diamond do have a
good safety record and a lot has happened since the first Thielert engines went into service.
What concerns me with stats like that is that it seems obvious from simple observation of the GA scene that there is a big skew in ownership towards flight training (FTO) ownership, and their mission profile is short flights, mostly over land.
FTOs have a strong business motive to suppress reports of problems. It is only if you know somebody in maintenance (as I do) that you discover the extent of it. I know of FTOs who have boasted of a superb relationship with Diamond, when in fact they had more than 1/2 of their fleet grounded, and a very difficult relationship with Diamond. It's business; expect no less, nobody gets the queen's award for enterprise for shafting their business, but it does skew the stats
I know personally just 2 DA42
private owners and both of them are extremely unhappy with the constant hassle the aircraft has given them. Neither would trust the factory (or Mr D specifically) as far as they can throw them. Neither is going to post their dirty washing on an open forum, not least because it would destroy the MV if they wanted to sell. I know of several private owners (of other types) who have carefully concealed severe long term issues, prior to a sale. No; I don't think it is nice...
Whereas the old engines have a massively wide ownership / mission profile, worldwide. You cannot hide anything there. Since the internet was invented, all of Lyco/Conti's dirty washing has been in the open.
I haven't heard much at all about issues with the Austro Engine.
I really hope this is a new phase, but only time (and experience over a more broad mission profile) will tell.
I have heard a lot about bad cylinders, crankshafts, camshafts, valves, etc. from Lycoming and Continental.
Sure - see reason above. The fleet is, what, 100x or 1000x bigger.
I have at one point considered a Cessna P210 (pressurized) but after having found out how easy it is to cook the engine,
Only by thermal mismanagement, supposedly. But probably easy to do, because with pressurisation you fly high and you then want to come down quick, but you can't...
Admittedly PA46 owners say the same, but perhaps the twin turbo 300HP+ installations do push those engines too far.
I could buy a TB
21GT today if I wanted to. Or a PA46. I choose not to, largely because I quite enjoy a currently trouble-free aircraft which does most of my mission profile adequately.
Airplanes like the 182RG or TB20 which give you long range, high altitude and good speeds are no longer in production and there is currently no diesel engine that can deliver 250bhp. Once Diamond get to certify their 6 cylinder diesel and start shipping the DA50/DA52, things might change.
I think the
retrofit market for private-owner aircraft is dead and buried, with the duty on non-commercial avtur use. It made very little sense beforehand.
It would be great if Cessna restarted the C210 but word is that they wouldn't even consider getting back into the retractable gear business.
There is nothing difficult about retractable gear. Socata have not had any remotely significant issues with their simple design. RG bites you if you don't grease it for 10 years at a time (as many people do) or lube it with "WD40" once a year (as I think quite a lot of people get from maintenance firms).
My guess is that Cessna would not restart those designs because they are so old. Cessna sell the 182 because it fits an important mission profile (utility, short field capability). A 210 has a much more specific appeal, for demanding private owners, but they have other options today.