Diamond Rolls Out D-Jet S/N002

[sternone]

Hull #2 released... what do you think about this bird ? I sat in one in Friedrichshaven, i loved the G1000 panel, but found the air intake location dangerous for taking up debris ?? One of the more cheaper VLJ's around...with BRS

http://www.aero-news.net/images/content/genav/2007/D-Jets-rollout-0707a.jpg

http://www.aero-news.net/images/content/genav/2007/D-Jets-0707b.jpg

Aero-news:


First Flight Expected In August
On Friday, July 20, 2007 Diamond Aircraft celebrated the roll out of its second single-engine D-Jet, S/N002. S/N002 is the first D-Jet intended to conform to the expected production configuration in its structural layout, and aerodynamic design.

From the photos, the most obvious differences between the two aircraft are the lack of winglets on S/N002, as well as deicing surfaces on the leading edges of the wing, and horizontal and vertical stabilizers. The production-spec aircraft also incorporates a pair of small stablizers on the underside of the empennage, added to the prototype during flight testing, as well as what appears to be an aluminum-framed forward windscreen.
The D-Jet team is now preparing S/N002 for first flight next month, while simultaneously building the next three certification test planes on the same production-spec tooling used for S/N002.
The most obvious differences between the two aircraft are the lack of winglets on S/N002, as well as a larger windshield on the production-spec aircraft.
Diamond expects to certify the D-Jet by in mid-2008, with deliveries starting immediately thereafter.

The London, Ontario planemaker reports demand for the D-Jet has been very strong, with over 300 orders taken world-wide. The North American retail delivery schedule is completely sold out for the first year and a half of production, with only a very limited number of Premium deposit slots available for late 2009 delivery from select Diamond Distributors.

[B2N2]

The fuselage looks to be a little wider on #2.
Miss the winglets, they add a certain "cool-factor".
I've only been in the mock-up fuselage that tours the US, have seen #1 but they didn't let us get close.
I'm sure it will have some sort of inertia separator in the inlet.
Looking from the front the inlets are almost completely covered by the underside of the cockpit section.
This should help prevent ingestion of birds and such as they will bounce of the fuselage.
The nosewheel will probably have the grooves as seen on other jets, runway contamination will be spread outwards, away from the inlets.
Something like this on the Fouga

http://www.eaa1000.av.org/pix/fouga/nosegear.jpg

[scooter boy]

I think they look strangely like baby sperm whales with the bump in the cockpit roof.

I would also suspect that it will be a total hairdryer performance-wise compared with the Eclipse.

The now defunc'd winglets were the best bit IMHO.

Certainly there were more gaps than seals around the flap and aileron hinges on the Friedrichshafen and Paris demo models.

Lets see how it performs.

SB

[IO540]

Diamond seem to be aiming at the FL250 market (just above most weather) which is quite different to the FL350+ market which Eclipse etc are going for.

There is IMHO a nice gap in the FL250 market, for mostly 1 or 2 person missions, because the only present contenders are turbocharged pressurised twins or turboprops. The former are mostly very old (and not "nice" unless you comprehensively refurbish one) and the latter are very expensive if bought new.

I am not sure if the D-jet is under 2000kg but if so that is a dramatic operating cost saving for European IFR, a couple of hundred quid on a long leg, compared with a > 2000kg piston twin. The only piston twin I know of which is < 2000kg is the Seneca witht he STC mod and that is not pressurised so FL250 is not a realistic habit to get into, especially with passengers.

[B2N2]

I think they look strangely like baby sperm whales with the bump in the cockpit roof.

Well, that bump is gone now.
Straight from the brochure:
Powerplant Williams FJ33-4
Dimensions
Length 35 ft 1in
Height 11 ft 7 in
Wing span 37 ft 6 in
Cabin seating 2 + 3
Pressurization 5.5 psi
Cabin altitude 8,000’ @ FL250
Weights
Ramp weight 5,110 lbs
Useful load
(ramp weight less empty weight) 2,240 lbs
Maximum fuel 1,740 lbs
Performance
Maximum cruise speed 315 ktas
Certified ceiling 25,000 ft
Time to climb to 25,000 ft 15 minutes
Long range cruise speed 240 ktas
Max range 1350 nm

Diamond has a bit of a history in keeping their numbers down, their aircraft tend to perform better then published.
Question is as with the Eclipse if it can reach predicted numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if the production model will perform slightly better.

[IO540]

5,110 lbs = 2300kg - bad news on that front. A Jetprop Malibu conversion will probably be cheaper to fly. Mind you, somebody who wants a jet will buy a jet no matter what, IMHO.

Diamond has a bit of a history in keeping their numbers down, their aircraft tend to perform better then published

Not sure I would agree. Look at the DA42. They talked various figures e.g. 210kt, +700fpm SE climb rate. None of these were achieved, not by a long way.

[Andy_RR]

If I've got my numbers right, that's 6.4 (still air) miles per imperial gallon at max range cruise - not really the future, is it?

Surely a turboprop would be able to generate a massive saving over this at 240KTAS and FL250?

This VLJ stuff just doesn't make much sense to me. Using a jet for international(?) travel, you choose FL300+ and near transonic or it's not worth bothering. What am I missing?

[IO540]

My TB20 does about 16-18MPG (UK miles, UK gallons) at economical cruise, say 130kt IAS.

A twin version of it will do about 10MPG. However, a plane with two IO-540 engines would be a bigger thing anyway, 6 seats, more room, i.e. something like an Aztec. A Seneca should do about 12MPG.

6 MPG is not unreasonable for a turboprop. On a European fuel price basis that is about the same cost as 10MPG on an avgas engine. The probability of a single jet going down due to loss of power is (on NTSB data I read somewhere) about 5x better than that of a piston twin going down, so a piston twin owner going to one of these should be happy.

Lots of assumptions of course. If avtur goes up to match avgas for all non-AOC operations (already the case in some parts of Europe) then the figures look very different.

Also whether you think 6 MPG is "reasonable" is a matter of opinion. I don't think it's reasonable, but then I don't think it's reasonable for people to drive massive 4x4s on the school run or to do shopping; they are pushed to get above 10 MPG. Many people, in turn, would think it's unreasonable for me to burn so much avgas in the TB20 when I should be taking a cheap airline... what is the MPG of a 737, per passenger? :)

I believe the main VLJ business case is for travel within the USA. That's why they have such short ranges - comparable to a TB20 in most cases. A decent turboprop like a TBM700/850 will beat most of them by a big margin on utility, at a small cost of speed, but at Euro 2.85M (US$3.85M) a TBM is very expensive.

[scooter boy]

"Diamond has a bit of a history in keeping their numbers down, their aircraft tend to perform better then published."

Perhaps this statement should have the word worse substituted for better.

The DA-42 is the recent example of far poorer than predicted performance that sticks in everybody's mind. 200+ kts predicted and in reality only 155 kts or so. That is not just a few knots, it is an outrageous 25%!!!

The issue was the size of the Thielert engines (and cooling I believe) and I know that all the previously delivered DA-42s will be getting an engine upgrade FOC in the near future which should go some way to getting from their currently sluggish cruise to something more respectable with not much effect on fuel burn. I am pretty sure they will still not get 200 kts though.

Take a look at the back view of the D-jet it has more gaps than seals - their chief aerodynamicist needs to go back to school - and as for the design - definitely Austrian.

Not for me!

SB

[B2N2]

Perhaps this statement should have the word worse substituted for better.
The DA-42 is the recent example of far poorer than predicted performance that sticks in everybody's mind. 200+ kts predicted and in reality only 155 kts or so. That is not just a few knots, it is an outrageous 25%!!!

Ok..Ok..Ok...my mistake, what I (probably) meant to say was that the performance is better then POH/AFM figures.
In old brochures (2000-2001) they do anticipate 200+ KTAS for the DA-42.
Still 16 NM/gallon is not that bad...
http://eaa-fly.com/2.0/gallery/DA42_neworleans/image/bild_061
They are working on different engines, this could be one of them;
in cooperation with Austro Engine GmbH and the German Mercedes Benz Technology (MB-Tech). The new diesel has a power output of 170 hp 570 Nm.
But lets wait and see what the numbers will turn out to be for the D-Jet.

[Fuji Abound]

I thought Diamond were already delivering the 42s with uprated engines?

I believe their is already one based at Bournemouth?

However arent the new engines derated at the moment?

I think 155 knots maybe optomistic. In my experience 145 at sensible power settings is far more realistic.