DA40 TDI Crashes in Sweden north of Gothenburg

[Founder]

A DA40 belonging to SPU crashed due north of Gothenburg.

http://gfx.aftonbladet.se/multimedia/archive/00535/planeee_535715w.jpg

[GBALU53]

False landing at night? if so congratulations.

[Founder]

In Sweden we do PPL darkness training due to the many hours of darkness during winter time. The student was doing such training...

[GBALU53]

If it was a problem with the aircraft the student did a very good job of a false landing?

[Jay.Walker.DUS]

On a news website a journo in his infinite wisdom decided it would be prudent to stick this photo next to the story:

http://i30.tinypic.com/2j1a8ba.jpg

Not content that would be sufficent to confuse the general public, he also chose to do a cut and paste job on the brief incident description

An Alpine Air owned turboprop Beechcraft 99 is shown after it crash landed shortly after midnight Friday, Dec. 29, 2006, in a pasture south of Caputa, S.D., about eight miles southeast of Rapid City Regional Airport. The plane struck the ground, lost both main landing gear and skidded about 100 yards on its belly before coming to rest. The pilot was hospitalized for observation in Rapid City after the early morning crash of the twin-engine airplane. (AP Photo/Rapid City Journal, Steve McEnroe)

I think a suitable gong should be awarded. :ugh:

[AvroLincoln]

According to the Göteborgs-Posten newspaper web site it was an engine problem that caused the pilot to attempt a landing on a road, knocking down three lamp standards. One wing struck a car but the driver was taken to hospital without serious injury. The pilot was also slightly injured but declined hospital treatment.

[DX Wombat]

knocking down three lamp standards. One wing struck a car but the driver was taken to hospital without serious injury. The pilot was also slightly injured but declined hospital treatmentIf that really is what happened they are all very, very lucky. The DA40 has a big (39'+) wingspan but I'm surprised it was strong enough to knock down three streetlights. :eek:

[BackPacker]

Aren't lampposts supposed to bend or break easily, in case they're hit by a car?

Still, knocking three out, plus a car, without serious injury to the pilot impresses me.

I just saw that our own DA-40 TDI is finally back in the air after I don't know how many months on the ground. My last flight was 7th July, so I have to do a checkflight before I can take her up again on my own (club policy for this plane is 6 months rolling currency).

[Papa Charlie]

A post from Sternone must soon be due.... ! ;)

[DX Wombat]

Papa Charlie! Shhhhhhhhhhh! :\

[100LL]

Sternone's a bit like Beetlejuce, Say his name 3 times and he appears.

[Solar]

Sterone,Sterone,Sterone,

[AvroLincoln]

Pretty cool pilot, after making the emergency landing on a straight stretch of road, he managed to steer it onto an exit ramp!
The car that was struck was travelling in the opposite direction, by the way. Must be terrifying for a motorist to be suddenly confronted by an approaching aircraft in the opposite carriageway - no wonder he/she went to hospital (I would guess mainly to recover from shock - the injuries are reported to be minor) after the wingtip smashed the windscreen!

[M609]

was strong enough to knock down three streetlights

According to vg.no the left wing lost the struggle with the streetlights and was "torn off". However this picture suggests that only the left wingtip got sheared off.
http://www.gt.se/polopoly_fs/1.1037831!defaultImage/4232021722.jpg

Lights still standing apparently.

The really interesting bit of info i got from www.aftonbladet.se was this:

Med bara några kilometer kvar till flygplatsen Säve i Göteborg slogs flygplanets två datorer ut, samtidigt. Motorn gick på tomgång och kunde inte fås igång igen.

Piloten bedömde att han måste nödlanda och svängde söderut. Han valde att landa på 45:an som är fyrfilig vid Nödinge.


http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article1791063.ab

Rough translation: "With only a few kilometers left to go to Säve (ESGP) in Gothenburg the aircrafts two computers where knocked out, simultaneously. The engine was ideling and could not be reved up again"

Now, I still have a steel cable from the plunger to the carb on the aircraft I fly. What do you think the above quote actually mean?

[soay]

Rough translation: "With only a few kilometers left to go to Säve (ESGP) in Gothenburg the aircrafts two computers where knocked out, simultaneously. The engine was ideling and could not be reved up again"

Now, I still have a steel cable from the plunger to the carb on the aircraft I fly. What do you think the above quote actually mean?
It means that the DA40-D is a fly-by-wire aeroplane, at least as far as the engine is concerned. If both the primary and backup ECUs fail, it becomes a glider. Needless to say, the redundancy should make that an unlikely event, so I'm sure a lot of people will be wondering what went wrong here.

[IanSeager]

I haven't flown a DA40 for a while, how long does the battery last if the alternator gives up the ghost?

Ian

[englishal]

I think it is 45 mins minimum......

Good testament to the strength of these things though. Had this been in a Mooney (:}) probably both legs would have been broken at the very least.

[DX Wombat]

Nice one EA! :} :D I'm pretty sure the emergency back-up battery lasts 30mins. The POH is either at the FTO or at Bristol with the aircraft so I can't check (the shortest distance from me is about 135 miles).

[BackPacker]

Rough translation: "With only a few kilometers left to go to Säve (ESGP) in Gothenburg the aircrafts two computers where knocked out, simultaneously. The engine was ideling and could not be reved up again"

Now, I still have a steel cable from the plunger to the carb on the aircraft I fly. What do you think the above quote actually mean?

I am just speculating here based on what I've heard from fellow pilots and engineers on the DA-40 TDI and the DR400-135CDI, and based on the problems we've experienced with our own ones.

First cause might be a defective load sensor - the "throttle" in previous-century terms. This is, in effect, an electric potmeter but somehow it doesn't work as reliably as you would expect from something that was already developed in the 19th century. And there's only one in the aircraft, so even though the rest of the system doesn't have a single point of failure, this one does. Ours has been found defective and has been replaced, but it took a long time to diagnose.

Another cause might have been the ECU Auto/swap switch. If no guards are installed and no HSI reset switch installed left of it, this switch is very exposed to feet and knees of pilots getting in and out of the LHS. This is what a mate of mine had in the circuit somewhere in the UK. The ECUs would swap continuously, leading initially to surges of power and eventually to an undocumented failsafe mode where you would get 0% power with the load lever at 0%, but 100% power at any other setting.

The third problem is something we've had in a Robin Ecoflyer, and for which a mandatory SB for the Thielert 1.7 has now been brought out. This is concerning the oil nozzles that spray oil on the bottom of the pistons for cooling. One of them broke off, leading to a partially seized piston and a gradual loss of power. Aircraft landed in a field, no further casualties to persons or aircraft, fortunately.

If, as the report says, the engine was "idling", I assume that the computers were still running. This engine cannot, as far as I know, idle without the computers since the fuel injection is timed by them. However, we're talking journalists here and they also may have meant "windmilling" which I think would happen if both computers would fail.

I haven't flown a DA40 for a while, how long does the battery last if the alternator gives up the ghost?

It depends on whether the aircraft has an IFR or VFR kit. I haven't checked the full POH but my emergency checklist suggest 30 minutes on the essentials bus (one radio) and one hour on the battery bus (attitude gyro and cabin floodlight). As far as I remember, if the aircraft is IFR, it has an ECU backup battery which kicks in automatically and should have juice for 45 minutes of ECU running.

Basically, any alternator caution or other indication that there's something wrong with the electrics is grounds for an immediate landing at the nearest airport, and to conserve as much electricity as you can in the meantime.

Pretty cool pilot, after making the emergency landing on a straight stretch of road, he managed to steer it onto an exit ramp!

Not unheard of. The 777 that landed "short" at Heathrow a few weeks back took the first exit too, proving that you can land a 777 on 400 meters of grass.

[bjornhall]

Second time in three years this particular aircraft makes a forced landing following an engine failure... Last time it could be repaired, looks like it's done for this time...

Engine failure at night, at 1,500 ft, with a 22-year old PPL training for his NQ at the controls... Scary as hell, outstanding outcome! :D

[stickandrudderman]

I think the fact that a certain reliable contributor is conspicuous by his absence and that it's half term may not be a coincidence!

[DX Wombat]

Perhaps mummy and daddy have locked him up in the dungeon for the break. :E Or maybe it's the other way round - his children have locked him in the dungeon. We can only live in hope. :E :E

[Contacttower]

It does look like the Diamond has good crash worthiness, but isn't it a little worrying though that this was the third engine failure this plane had had? :eek:

[DX Wombat]

but isn't it a little worrying though that this was the third engine failure this plane had had? Only from a maintenance / repair point of view (until proved otherwise.) The one I fly was sent to a maintenance facility at Coventry for routine maintenance and was returned, several weeks later, with THREE time-expired components still in situ - one of which was the alternator. It made a swift trip down to Bristol where they, and another problem which manifested itself whilst it was there, were dealt with in a matter of two days. It only took two days because the new problem was unexpected and parts had to be obtained. Did something similar happen to this aircraft? Who knows? It will be interesting to see what the Swedish AAIB discover.

[wsmempson]

That "certain contributor" who is a font of wisdom on Diamond issues does seem to have enforced periods of 'down-time'; either this is when he is back locked up in his trunk or away at school.

I reckon that the chap who landed the DA40 outside Gothenberg did an outstanding job. I doff my cap out of respect.

[100LL]

First cause might be a defective load sensor on the DA40 and probably on the other TAE engine conversions 2 load sensors are fitted.

The battery should last at least 30 Mins with correct load shedding. I dont know about the Robin or Cessna instalation but both DA40 IFR & VFR have the ECU backup battery under the rear seat, the only difference is thatthe VFR version does not have the backup battery light.

Do a serch for Sternone on google, He also gives advice on other Aviation forums around the world, go on try it. He might be busy advising others or he's been a very naughty boy and mummy has cut off his broadband for the weekend.

[BRL]

There is a SternOne on the xbox forums, check this out...

http://www.360voice.com/tag/SternOne

Hats off to the pilot of the plane by the way......

[100LL]

Hats off to the pilot of the plane by the way......

Have to agree Diamond do build a strong Aeroplane.

Maybe we should start a thread, Who is Sternone. Is he a mythical beast like the Stig,

Some say After drinking printing ink, he obtains the ability to fly. "All we know is, he's called the Sternone

[IO540]

Looking at the pic, the engine was not developing power at time of the impact.

[DX Wombat]

Looking at the pic, the engine was not developing power at time of the impact* That may be because it had stopped of its own volition (from whatever cause) but it may also be because the pilot did what he was taught and shut it down once he knew he was going to land on that street. Those engines stop very quickly unlike some others which cough and splutter before deciding to cooperate. The pilot did an excellent job. :ok:
* When I first looked at the photo I thought the first picture showed a nasty bend in the top blade but this didn't appear to be so in the second photo.
100LL: Maybe we should start a thread, Who is Sternone. :D :D :D Perhaps we should get him to post his photo on the JB Photo thread. :E

[100LL]

Found out why he's not been on aparently some Diamond driver got to him first

http://www.quedat.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/aye.jpg

[DX Wombat]

:D :D :D :D :D Brilliant 100LL, simply brilliant. :ok:
I have to say, that looking like that, there's only it's mother could love it. :(
What is it by the way? An Aye Aye?

[Fuji Abound]

.. .. .. but isnt it a composite prop?

That is a diamond of a picture - love it!

[DX Wombat]

Composite prop with metal leading edges.

[Fuji Abound]

So I dont suppose they would bend?

[englishal]

The avgas ones are metal. I saw one after a student prop struck it...and then went around! OMG I was amazed the thing flew (she got extended by ATC because she didn't tell anyone). Apparently there was a bit of vibration :)

Still it was her own aeroplane, she was doing her PPL on it, and had also bought a DA42 which was in the hangar waiting for her to get the PPL :eek:;) so I guess she didn't get a b@llocking......

[BackPacker]

So I dont suppose they would bend?

My guess is their either retain their shape in full (with minor scratches) or shatter, but nothing in between. There is no structural metal or other material that can bend in these props..

From the POH:

An mt-Propeller MTV-6-A/187-129 hydraulically regulated 3-bladed constant speed propeller is installed. It has wood-composite blades with fiber-reinforced plastic coating and stainless steel edge cladding; in the region of the propeller hub the leading edge is coated with adhesive PU foil. These blades combine the lowest weight whilst minimizing vibration.

What you should also realize is that these blades, being relatively light-weight and connected to the crankshaft via a 1:1.69 gearbox, have to windmill a diesel engine with a compression ratio of, what, somewhere between 1:20 and 1:25, whereas a direct drive petrol engine with metal blades only has to pull the engine through a 1:11 or so compression? There is not a lot of inertia or torque in this combination to keep the engine windmilling if fuel injection halts. So I think you can safely assume that if the engine is not developing power, it will stop windmilling only seconds later, unless you really keep the speed up.

BTW. I can't believe the last half a dozen of posts are about a windup instead of the topic at hand. This fine example of the failure of Darwin apparently has developed a reputation to the point where his appearance and reaction is anticipated, in fact eagerly awaited, without him being even here.

[100LL]

What you should also realize is that these blades, being relatively light-weight and connected to the crankshaft via a 1:1.69 gearbox, have to windmill a diesel engine with a compression ratio of, what, somewhere between 1:20 and 1:25, whereas a direct drive petrol engine with metal blades only has to pull the engine through a 1:11 or so compression? There is not a lot of inertia or torque in this combination to keep the engine windmilling if fuel injection halts. So I think you can safely assume that if the engine is not developing power, it will stop windmilling only seconds later, unless you really keep the speed up.

Read the AFM especially the TR's. It’s ok speculating what actually happened but until the Pilot in question actually posts on here or the AAIB publishes its findings NO ONE KNOWS!!. So lets all carry on guessing. BTW the Compression ratio is 18 –1

[playingup]

Natural Composite ........... ie WOOD with a layer of cloth over the top and stainless steel leading edge.

[Bahn-Jeaux]

Hey BRL, you missed this one (http://www.risingup.com/forums/members/sternone.html),

and this one (http://ie.youtube.com/user/sternone)

and this one too (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=10&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdiscussions.flightaware.com%2Fprofile.php%3 Fmode%3Dviewprofile%26u%3D118327%26sid%3D6ea97fc6b2c2dbcec74 ae9659ed34206&ei=9TqtR56LJoqewgHJyal7&usg=AFQjCNEew8VEnNGr535PkJC8COOKDnfZMg&sig2=VxMCtoc-yJc8s5T-1pJ1HQ)

[sternone]

I just came back from Italy, did i missed something ?

Oh, that 360xbox guy isn't me, but i'm glad you all joined my fan club.

Glad the pilot made it. The poor chap. I'm still waiting for some serious arguments and facts to prove that the Thielert/Diamond combination is the quality what they are trying to sell, it's just crap.

check out this post and let me know what you think about it.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=310819

[stickandrudderman]

Oh bugger!

[Fuji Abound]

It is really nice there.

A great place to settle.

[DX Wombat]

Oh bugger!Not my usual choice of terminology Stick, but I have to agree with the sentiment. :\

[scooter boy]

Hi Sternone, good to have you back.

Clearly there are a lot of unreliable plastic airplane lovers out there who you appear to have upset by your factually-based comments about the reliability and build quality of their crap aircraft.:D:D:D

You better not tell them what kind of car you drive because their jealousy will be unbearable!:):):)

Great (and extremely lucky) that nobody was killed.

...and the ? baby marsupial photo - I think that is the only thing I have ever seen approaching the ugliness of a DA-40.

SB

[sp6]

I'm not a very experienced pilot, and probalby no great "ace" with regard to handling either. My flying is VFR and my only points of reference are 1970's C172's and Warriors, but in every single one of my 300 hours of DA40 TDi flying I have felt safe and loved it.

I had two refusals to self test on the ground, but other than that not a single issue with the 1.7. The cabin, seats and harnesses gave you the impression that even if there had been an engine failure, you'd have survived the force landing without injury from a competently flown forced landing. (and well done to the Swedish student!)

The look of a DA40 is a personal opinion, but to me it is beautiful and I signed up a new student (a hostie) purely on the basis of the sexy aeroplane!

My only grumble would be the service costs and the approach speed sensitivity for teaching PPL. But again - it is relative, and the comparisons I make are with the usual tired old flying club hacks.

[vee-tail-1]

Lucky to get away with it, and I guess the only place to land at night was a lit road. But did he have the right to risk the lives of unknown car drivers?:(


Once again the unsuitability for purpose of an electronic injection diesel is proved. This point has been debated ad-nauseum, but so long as fuel is available a mechanical injection system keeps going regardless of electrical faults. :ugh:

[sternone]

I'm still waiting until the chaps over here are finished googling on my nickname and started googling on some Thielert facts to prove me i'm wrong and that the Diamond/Thielert combination is really excellent.

As said before, i like the WWII design with the dual magneto's..i'm really curious what the Thielert 2.0 will give.

[Rod1]

The Rotax 912 solid state ignition has non of the disadvantages of the Thielert, so no way would I go back to 1920’s tractor tec. Interesting that the Robin tdi appears to have much less problem with the same engine.

Rod1

[DX Wombat]

I'm still waiting until the chaps over here are finished googling on my nickname and started googling on some Thielert facts to prove me i'm wrong and that the Diamond/Thielert combination is really excellent.You'll be waiting a VERY long time then as nobody is going to waste his or her time writing a post when they know full well that even if the Almighty came down and told you, you would still disagree and believe only what you wish to believe. You appear to have a frighteningly closed mind.

[Deep and fast]

Hi all. I spent more than a few hours in the righthand seat of a DA40 teaching PPL's and have to say I loved it, When it was running and not in the hanger waiting for a minor part that would take weeks to come from Germany. Oh and when I would do the self test and it would fail that would spoil my day. Ever noticed that when the prop cycles in the test it seems slower to cycle, that will be the gearbox oil blocking the filter with bits of gearbox! :eek: Oh I could mention the nosewheel fracturing cos it's not strong enough(check the AAIB for their take on matters). And one last rant, you try to get an IFR version (not G1000) to be in weight and balance with 2 in the front. I may be painting a sorry picture of this aircraft but I would love to own one if only that ****ty engine would make its TBR of 1000 hours let alone the hype that it would be extended to 2400. Diamond UK did not impress either, on taking an aircraft up to Gamston for maintenance I met the customer service manager who gave me his business card and the look at me talk only to piss off when I complained about the service. :yuk: . Thinking of buying a D jet, you must be crazy :}

[moggiee]

Lots of speculation - no facts.

Maintenance standards are very important with the Thielert engine - and Diamond UK (plus a few others I can mention) should be avoided if at all possible. DX Wombat's comments makes very valid points on this subject.

Get them looked after by people who know what they are doing and you will have a nice, reliable aeroplane.

Repeat engine failures on this particular airframe may point to a problem with maintenance - but we need to wait for the results of the investigation. It could turn out to be fuel contamination or crew error, for example (the last of those being statistically the the most likely cause of all).

[englishal]

check out this post and let me know what you think about it.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=310819
I think that comparing the DA40 to an Airbus 380 is just silly. It is a bit like comparing a Mooney to submarine.

A mooney would make a **** submarine, and a DA40 would make a **** 300+ passenger aeroplane with turbines, and thousands of mile range.....

[Deep and fast]

With all the specialist care from the people who know, what is the highest time engine you now running that hasn't been back to Diamond for re build? :suspect:

[sternone]

when they know full well that even if the Almighty came down and told you, you would still disagree

DX Wombat, do you seriously mean that you win an argument in aviators land by using a God ?

Are you really starting to try to win the battle with the use of a religion ?

You are saying you have no time to give me arguments and to the poor chaps who are using this plane with such a crappy service, engine's that needs to be replaced several times before they hit 1000hours, in flight stoppages, electrical faillures, and all the false promises diamond make etc.. ??

How can you feel confident in a Diamond knowing that statisticly you have way more chance to get problems just because Diamond is using you as a test pilot. I rather pay more for fuel and stay in the air, than pay less on fuel but needs to be grounded way more than normal.

englishal and others, be serious, admid they are problems with Diamond that are unacceptable, both on reliability and service, face the facts, Diamond needs to chance fast or they will be out of business, leaving you and many others behind dissapointed...

[deice]

This must be THE most subjective discussion on PPRuNe yet. Most I know who fly DA40D think they're ok, and those who don't think they're crap. What's the point in trying to turn someone this way or that? After the DA40 went down in Sweden last week I've heard more crap about the aircraft from people who've only seen one in a magazine than from anyone who's been inside it. Nobody mentions the "good'ol" Lycoming powered flying tin can PA28 that crashed smack in the middle of Stockholm a few months ago with equal emphasis on what a crap engine/aircraft combo they make.

If you don't like the flying sperm stay the hell away. Enjoy your coke cans and shut the :mad: up.

I've flown both old and new in PPL training and as personal transportation and can't say anything bad about the DA40 - it flies like a charm. Sure the C172 works too. Mooney, yeah once you're shoehorned in there it's all fine and dandy. I consider the DA40 to be the aircraft that provides the most stressfree flying by far and I've tried a few.

Our highest time DA40 has 820 hrs on the clock so it's still relatively new. Same engine and runs like a charm.

[Mister Jellybean]

Sternone

What exactly are you trying to achieve with your posts on this subject? How well do you think it's going? If you answer this post, try developing the topic a little so it becomes interesting to the reader.

Vee-tail-one

You're right, this has been debated ad-nauseam. And in previous posts various well-informed types pointed out that most airliners now depend on purely electrical sources to power the fadecs that control their engines. As do any number of safety-critical systems in other industries, including the one I work in. And a single failure event in thousands of hours of service can never 'prove' anything. And you are pre-supposing that the cause of this forced landing was an electrical problem on the basis of a press report - why not wait for the investigation?

I think we all acknowledge that Diamond and Thielert have a difficult relationship, that there have been problems with the 1.7 caused by a combination of initial design and perhaps inappropriate maintenance, that the new engine (the 2.0) might or might not have ironed out the design problems, that the transition to the 2.0 has caused supply problems, that Diamond is developing its own engine and that many believe this will backfire on them too.

Can anyone produce some statistics on failure rate per flying hour for the Thielert? I took a browse through the UK AAIB bulletins - in about the last 18 months I know of 2 Thielert in-flight failures in the UK (the first of which could not be reproduced on the test bench afterwards and was thought to be due fuel starvation) and there have been typically 2 or 3 per month for other engine types.

Whatever, the performance of this aircraft/engine combination in the field is an issue worthy of informed debate, particularly given the context of rising fuel costs, environmental pressure on GA, and the question mark over the future availability of avgas. Endlessly repeating that something is just 'crap' doesn't really move that debate forward.

[sternone]

Deice, let's hope the day doesn't come you are in the same shoes that alot of other Diamond owners are, that means crappy service from a crappy plane company called Diamond, like with diamonds, you have real ones and you have plastic diamonds, they shine differently

I have flown some Diamonds already, i know you don't like that ofcorse, and i know owners who talk to me about there crappy service they get and the downtime.

About the discussion, may i remind you that PPrune is not a Diamond aircraft pilot/owner forum, i suggest you go find/create one, that way you can all have your talk telling them how good they are without having any honest discussion.

[Lurking123]

I find it quite ironic that a Mooney driver is spending so much energy slagging-off another aircraft type. :eek:

[deice]

Amen to that...

[DX Wombat]

About the discussion, may i remind you that PPrune is not a Diamond aircraft pilot/owner forum, i suggest you go find/create one, that way you can all have your talk telling them how good they are without having any honest discussionNor is PPRuNe a Diamond Haters Forum. Condemned by your own words there Sternone. Discussion means DIFFERING points of view may be put forward, not just a single one. It also usually implies that those taking part are, at the very least, prepared to listen to and consider carefully, the points being made then possibly adjust their own opinions on the subject, which is something you appear to have severe difficulty with as you appear to be incomprehensibly infatuated with (to my mind) an ugly, difficult to access, unreliable in hot climates(from what I saw) piece of machinery.
Deice, I think the engine on the one I fly is the original which would mean it flew its full time before its compulsory change. As Moggiee pointed out, it's neither the engine nor the airframe which we have had problems with, it has been the maintenance.

[Mister Jellybean]

I find it quite ironic that a Mooney driver is spending so much energy slagging-off another aircraft type.


He's not actually a Mooney driver. If previous posts are to be believed, he flies C152s and doesn't yet have his PPL.

[DX Wombat]

Re the prop. I've just been having a closer look at the second photo and it would appear that the prop blade nearest the ground has quite a severe bend in it. It may even have broken off part way along the blade but I can't tell. It's not possible to see it in the first photo.

[deice]

I see the point on maintenance and can't help but think of a few issues I know of with "traditional" aircraft. I'm not saying there isn't a maintenance/service/support issue at Diamond/Thielert, just that it applies to old iron as well.

A couple years ago we waited 6 months for a new wing for a Piper Warrior. There were wings in stock here and there but the service organization and insurance company made no attempts to speedy the process. Just a year or so ago we received back an engine for our Seneca, ran it 140 hrs after which we found filings in the oil. Sent back again and it took 6 months to get an engine back, partly because they claimed there was corrosion, which as it turned out later, there wasn't and second they charged enough so that we could've bought 2 brand spanking new engines instead. The interesting thing is this shop tore the engine down initially after a prop strike, and redid the repair 140 hrs later. How could they not have spotted the issue from start? What kind of junk iron are they using in their camshafts? Who ever heard of camshafts being run down in a modern car engine, even if it sits around for months.

What about all these recalled engines, service bulletins, mandatory ADs etc that have been put out over the years for what is essentially the same frikkin machine as it was 40 years ago? When will THEY get their designs right, they've had 40 or 50 years to work on them!

An acquaintance has a Lancair 4. Bought a brand new Continental which leaked like crazy from day one. Sent to the shop, torn down, repaired and still they don't know what the problem was. Unbelievable.
I just heard a simliar tale from owner above about a friend of his. Same type engine. After 1 year of troubleshooting he finally bought another 80000$ engine to replace the one he had, which was also new. Now it works, but he's bought two engines to get one that works. I'm impressed!

So, yes, there are issues with Thilert/Diamond as could be expected when throwing something so revolutionary into the pit, and it also includes service/maintenance but from my experience they're doing as good a job as anyone working with Piper/Cessnas and they've had a 40 year head start!

I should mention that we have three DA40D and two DA42 running in our school and they all have had some issues but nothing that has caused a half year delay. DA42 was down 1 month, and luckily we could borrow another. Compared to the Seneca's 6 month downtime it's still pretty quick.

Aviation seems to be a crap industry that attracts all the wrong people. Most other businesses would never accept that kind of service, but apparently we're all very gullible.

[tigerbatics]

I'm not sure Sternone doesn't have a point. I've never flown a Diamond of any type, nor any type of Cessna come to that and a Warrior only once. So I'm not biased in favour of any particular touring type but just generally and against all of them as rather boring ways in which to go flying.

However at the field where I presently fly there is an organisation, I'm not sure it should be called a club, which has several of the things. I get the impression that one returns followed by the fire truck every few flights. Either that or the thing switches itself off and has to land at Gatwick. They have become rather a good joke.

[DX Wombat]

Either that or the thing switches itself off and has to land at Gatwick. They have become rather a good joke. Just to bring things into perspective a bit more, AAIB Bulletins for January 2008 and Decmber 2007.
January 2008
BAe 146 200, EI-CZO
Dornier 328 100, TF-CSB
Raytheon Hawker 800XP, CS-DRQ
Aquila AT01, G-UILA
Cessna 152, G-BGIB
Cessna F172M Skyhawk, G-BEMB
DH82a Tiger Moth, G-ANJA and DR 400/140B Robin, G-GGJK
Jodel D120A Paris-Nice, G-BMLB
Miles M65 Gemini 1A, G-AKHP
Piper L21B Super Cub, G-SCUB
Piper PA-28-181 Cherokee Archer III, G-LKTB
Pitts S-1C Special, G-BRVL
Reims Cessna F152, G-BHCP
Reims Cessna F182Q, G-BGFH
Tecnam P92-EM Echo (Modified), G-CBUG
Tecnam P2002-JF, G-NESE
Vans RV-4, G-BULG
Vans RV-9A, G-CDMF
Enstrom F-28A-UK, G-BBPN
Easy Raider, G-CCJS
Easy Raider J2.2(2), G-OEZI
Rans S6-ES Coyote II, G-CDGH
Scheibe SF27 glider, HGM and Schleicher ASW 19 glider, GDP
Skyranger 912(2), G-CEDZ
SUMMARY: AAR 6/2007 Airbus A320-211 JY-JAR
SUMMARY: AAR 7/2007 Airbus A310-304 F-OJHI
December 2007:
Airbus A300 B4, TC-MND
Airbus A321-231, G-OZBN
Lockheed T-33 Silver Star Mk 3, G-TBRD
Agusta A109A, G-DNHI
Cessna 152, G-BNKS
Cessna 172S Skyhawk, G-GFMT
Cessna 210 Centurian, N761JU
Cessna A150L Aerobat, G-BOYU
Denney Kitfox Mk2 Kitfox, G-KAWA
DHC-1 Chipmunk 22A, G-AORW
DHC-2 Mk.III Turbo-Beaver, OY-JRR
Pierre Robin DR400/180 Regent, G-FCSP
Piper PA-25-235 Pawnee, G-BLDG
Piper PA-28-140 Cherokee, G-AVGD
Piper PA-28-140 Cherokee, G-BBBK
Piper PA-28-181 Cherokee Archer II, G-BVOA
Reims Cessna F152, G-BLZH
Reims Cessna F152Q Skylane, G-BHIB
Rockwell Commander 112TC, G-ERIC
Taylor Monoplane, G-BFDZ
Yak-50, G-IIYK
Zenair CH701SP, G-CCSK
RAF 2000 GTX-SE, G-HOWL
Robinson R22 Beta, G-UNYT
Schweizer 300, G-JAMA
Escapade Jabiru (3), G-PADE
Mainair Blade, G-MZMB
Pegasus Photon, G-MTAL
Pegasus Quantum 15-912, G-TUSA
Skyranger 912S(1), G-CDIU
Tipsy Nipper T.66 Series 2, G-ARBP
Team Minimax, G-MYAT
Summary: AAR 5/2007 Airbus A321-231, G-MEDGThere is one incident (http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/november_2007/da40d_diamond_star__g_jkmg.cfm) mentioned in November, but that was not due to any failure of any part of the aircraft.

[Papa Charlie]

I have flown all of the usual and common "PPL types" - ie C152, C172, PA28 (140, 161 and 180 powered). However I learnt in a Diamond Katana (Rotax) and now do all my flying in DA40 diesels, mainly Garmin G1000 equiped. I have about 400 hours in total so, I guess, I am an "average" PPL holder who likes going places and generally enjoying being up there under the fluffy white things.

The reason I leant in a Katana was that it looked good, was modern - and the result was that it gave me (and many other students) huge confidence because visabilty was superb and was a delight to fly. After I got my licence I started flying the Lycoming 180 powered Diamond Star.

I moved house and ended up at a different airfield flying the metal stuff. OK they got me from A to B, but was as exciting as driving a Mark 1 Ford Cortina.

New club arrives on the scene with diesel DA40's. No contest as far as I am concerned. They are wonderful to fly, looks great IMHO. So much more responsive that a PA28 - maybe it's the stick I prefer to a yoke? I just feel more attached to the plane, rather than sitting on a seat in a PA28.

One can argue forever on what is more reliable, what is better etc. Just like with cars. Oh yes Fiats are more unreliable than Toyotas, but Renaults have more style than Fords or VWs are more fuel efficient than Nissans, or.......
My camera is better, bigger, faster, more reliable than yours. Who cares?

For me I am extremely happy with the choice of plane I have chosen to fly - and certainly looking forward to the 2.0 DA40s coming soon.

:)

[moggiee]

Our oldest Thielert powered aeroplane is at 700 hours+ on it's original engines and still going strong.

Sure, we have reliability problems - but whilst operating a large fleet of Thielert powered aeroplanes have NEVER had a failure of an engine, the worst being one case of rough running with a partial power loss.

The Centurion (1.7 or 2litre) is a still an "emerging technology" - I look forward to seeing how the 2litre compares to the 1.7, my expectation being that it will be better.

[deice]

Ok tigerbatics, exactly what is Sternone's point? That Diamond build ugly crappy plastic airplanes with modern autoconversions that burn half the fuel and have similar problems getting their stuff to work as 40 year old spam cans that have been aroundsince the dark ages, and still don't work! Very objective points that.

Or, are you suggesting somehing different? I'm sure whatever aircraft it is that you do fly it is the optimum in all aspects. Other posts on PPRuNe mention the prop coming off a PA46 and C210 in flight killing all (C210), I know of a wing coming off a PA28 back in 73 when the trapeze came around. An aerobatic pilot suffered a prop failure in his Bellanca and glided to safety some years ago in Sweden. The list goes on and on. These things are complex machines, and from what I can tell the Diamonds aren't any worse than what we've had for ages already.

So, they have crappy service and maintenance organisations. That's a business opportunity as I see it - set up your own shop and do it better. Or, just keep on wining. :}

[sternone]

He's not actually a Mooney driver. If previous posts are to be believed, he flies C152s and doesn't yet have his PPL.

Haha, you funny guys, refering to previous posts of months ago! Live moves on, now i'm logging Mooney hours, but hey, why should you care ? If you feel better thinking that i'm incompetent (impotent?) , ugly, poor and i'm not a real pilot, sure feel free to think so, i'm glad i made you feel good.

Or, just keep on wining

I rather be wining, i'm still standing strong on my believe that the problems Diamond owners have are NOT what average GA owners encounter. I refer again to, which i did not received any comments yet on the facts: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=310819

[DX Wombat]

Sternone, I really DO wonder about your IQ if you think that anyone with half a grain of commonsense is going to comment on something which is currently going through a judicial process. :rolleyes: :ugh: There are two sides to every story and we have been given only one side of the argument to which Diamond will not be able to respond here in case they prejudice the outcome. :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: If you feel better thinking that i'm incompetent (impotent?) , ugly, poor and i'm not a real pilot, sure feel free to think so, I don't know where you have got that novel idea from as I described the Mooney as being ugly (in my personal opinion). Still, it provides food for thought.

[sternone]

DX Wombat, i'm glad to see that people only comment things in life on forums/books/texts/newspapers/media when all juridical ways are finished.

In what kind of airspace are you flying ? wake up and smell the coffee!!!

[tigerbatics]

Deice, I have taken Sternone to suggest that a modern designed and newly built aeroplane should have less than the constant problems which seem to afflict the DA40. Certainly less than other light touring aeroplanes some 25/30 years old that were constructed to designs over 50 years old.

Now that just does not seem to be the case here. Maybe it is in fact but the impression I have is that it is not, as I indicated earlier.

I am very happy that those flying these aeroplanes are enjoying the experience and I have nothing at all against either the pilots or the aeroplane. They plainly provide what many pilots want. They also provide many of us with innocent amusement every so often.

DA40s are about as far away from what I look for in aviation as it is possible to get and I have no desire to fly/sit in one but that does not mean I have any particular axe to grind. I havn't. I simply speak as I find.

[deice]

Well, the point I'm trying to make is that if you stay with the so called tried and true you should have less problems, which would mean that any Lycoming/Continental powered apparatus should be trouble free which, if you care to look, they aren't. The joke ought to be on the relics that still haven't managed to build decent quality engines or airframes.

I would expect the Diamond/Thielert combo to have more teething problems than a brand new Cessna with the same basic stuff they've been using for years. Yet, these old designs are not much better in fact.

Just one AD of this year: You'd think they had their design all figured out by now, or?

AD NUMBER: 2008-03-02
MANUFACTURER: Cessna
SUBJECT: Airworthiness Directive 2008-03-02
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Cessna Aircraft Company (Cessna) Models 172R and 172S airplanes.
This AD requires you to inspect the fuel return line assembly for chafing; replace the fuel return line assembly if chafing is found; and inspect the clearance between the fuel return line assembly and both the right steering tube assembly and the airplane structure, adjusting as necessary.
This AD results from reports of chafed fuel return line assemblies, which were caused by the fuel return line assembly rubbing against the right steering tube assembly during full rudder pedal actuation.
We are issuing this AD to detect andcorrect chafing of the fuel return line assembly, which could result in fuel leaking under the floor and fuel vapors entering the cabin. This condition could lead to fire under the floor or in the cabin area.

[Papa Charlie]

tigerbatics

I assume from your username you fly a certain type of fabric covered biplane? That's great.
However I prefer to fly something more modern. I've tried a Chipmunk and a Stampe and can't understand the enjoyment of something oily, smelly and old. However I don't, like some people who post here going on about "plastic diesels", condone it. We all have our own opinions and our own likes and dislikes. Whether it's planes, cars, where we live, or whatever.

I have friends who drive oily, smelly, vintage cars. Fine - but at the same time they do appreciate more modern "plastic" fuel-efficient cars.

To me, to be able to fly is great and the result of what I achieved from the money, time, sweat and tears I put into it is just fabulous. I fly plastic, others fly fabric and others fly metal rust buckets. Some fly Mooneys but that's another story! ;)

[+200 No Flags]

Haha, you funny guys, refering to previous posts of months ago!


Well, Sternone, set us straight then... DO you have a PPL in the meantime? :E

[sternone]

I don't feel sharing lot's of details with you +200 No Flags.

For me it's loads of fun seeying that instead of argumentation about the Thielert/Diamond (except for the previous user expierences which i'm happy to read that it's not all crap for the moment with these guys) you guys are more intrested in the news on my fan club. Enjoy your membership! I feel sorry you that don't have a real life and have to look up to your heroes...

[eltonioni]

I don't feel sharing lot's of details with you +200 No Flags.
That will be a no then. ;)

I have a PPL and I rather enjoy flying DA40's. Like it or not, there are plenty of failures with traditional aeroplanes. Fifty year old designs burning twice or three times the amount of expensive AVGAS cannot be the way forward as (some) Mooney drivers will eventually realise when they can't afford to operate their aeroplane because of cost and lack of availibility.

Diamond have a great aeroplane with niggles. Their customer service and PR stinks though.

[sternone]

Their customer service and PR stinks though.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

It's not only the product what makes a company great, it's the complete package.

The fact that I have a PPL/IR or not is not relevant here. It's pure personal on me, and that is very cheap to use in discussions. Especially when it's wrong also. I have never attacked any pilot here, never. (except if they have been going for my blood first, i do have the right to counteract right ? That's the fun in it!) I do attack from my personal flying expierence in Diamond and word of mouth from owners the wrong perception Diamond is trying to put up. I'm happy that at least some of you admid there is something wrong at Diamond. (service to begin with...) What are we GA pilots with such a lousy product for a tech product like a plane who is not a real mass-product in a niche market without descent support from the manufacture ?? The CEO of Diamond once stated: "No one ever makes any money out of aviation, do they ?" Well, that doesn't mean he is allowed to bring something on the market and use his customers as test pilots, because that's what happening here.

Hide it under the blanket that you don't wan't to use 50 year old proven technology, test pilots usually test new stuff, and hey, according to the FAA you only need a private pilot licence to be a test pilot! I guess Diamond has that one correct!!

[Mister Jellybean]

The fact that I have a PPL/IR or not is not relevant here. It's pure personal on me, and that is very cheap to use in discussions. Especially when it's wrong also.


So you have a PPL/IR now? You did well considering you soloed with 43 hours in October, had 70 hours in 152s a month ago and had just started on PA28s. Pleased to hear you managed to fit conversion onto the Mooney in there as well.

Actually mate, it's highly relevant. When people doubt the credibility of a poster, and yours is quite frankly below zero given your track record, the credibility of anything they say must be treated with great caution. Especially when it involves a repetitious and ultimately pointless personal vendetta against Europe's largest GA manufacturer.

[deice]

You're not paying attention Sternone. 50 year old designs ought to be completely sorted out already, but they aren't. You're being ignorant to the fact and complaining about a brand new design that is working hard to deliver something completely new. I fail to see what justification you have in your complaints.
Ofcourse there are issues, but your old tried-and-true types are also having problems. We all know you don't like Diamond and personally I couldn't care less if you did, but I don't see the point you're trying to make. What is your agenda? To transform everyone inte Mooney pilots? I'm sorry to say that won't happen.

Ok, Thielert/Diamond have issues. Happy?
Piper/Cessna/Beech/Mooney/Lycoming/Continental have issues too. Comprende?

[sternone]

Especially when it involves a repetitious and ultimately pointless personal vendetta against Europe's largest GA manufacturer.

Sorry, you must type and i quote some Diamond owners:

Europe's largest and World worst GA manufacturer.

[+200 No Flags]

and World worst GA manufacturer.


Prove it!

With statistics please, hearsay and personal opinions don't count. :)

And this time, I hope you realise changing the subject will not make you appear "cool".

[sternone]

Cool ? Haha, do you really think i'm here for coolness hahahaha, get a grip dude, you're loosing it!!


With statistics please,

According to the CEO of Diamond last year they know of 22 in flight stoppages (22 in flight!! BLIMEY!!!) and for what it counts:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=310819

[Mister Jellybean]

We'll take this very slowly.

Thielert engines have now flown in excess of 500,000 hours. In that time, as you have reminded us incessantly, they had 22 in flight stoppages. Use your calculator and work out the probability of failure per flying hour.

Now obtain some statistics for the remainder of the world's GA fleet over a representative period. Find out how many in flight stoppages there were against hours flown. Do the same calculation. When you have done this, and not before, please report back, quoting your sources.

This is called "adding value" to a debate.

[+200 No Flags]

Let me help you out a bit : what we want to see here is the total amount of flight hours since certification (per type of Diamond) versus the number of proven design-related mechanical failures for this type.

[sternone]

Ok, and what with the unacceptable downtime for example that flight school has and the last resort they have is to sue Diamond ?

If we are all really honest, and we look around, look to flight schools operating DA40's and DA42's 1.7 thielerts, we all know they have excessive downtime compared to other GA airplanes.. BE REALLY HONEST...

[+200 No Flags]

we all know they have excessive downtime compared to other GA airplanes.. BE REALLY HONEST...


Statistics please :E

[deice]

Ok Sternone - it appears you're ignoring my posts. We operate 5 Diamonds and have had 1 major delay due to problems with parts. The rest have been within reason. Our total of 5 airframes and 7 Thielerts should account for something (?), plus we've flown them 2000+ hrs in a year so far.

What's your story besides trying a DA42 that you thought was crap and hearing about problems through the grapevine?

[sternone]

You guys are all correct.

This place isn't for me. There are a lot of frustrated guys in aviation, and i understand why. It's sad that most of them doesn't have a real life and they become very bitter. It's a problem that in the GA scene these frustrated pople meet guys who are able to do whatever they wan't in GA. Anyway, as it is for me, it isn't for you a great loss that i stop posting on PPRuNe. I learned alot, met some great people in real life that i found on this forum. You all win, and i very much loose, you won the battle, i'm very ugly, very poor, very stupid and specially not a good pilot..please keep this in mind so you can be very happy, and i really don't care.

Luckely real life is a beatifull thing. It has been a long while ago that i must do things that i don't like in my life, and i'm not expecting to change that.

[eltonioni]

At least they have a PPL - though they may not have as many hours logged as you ;)





Sorry, not my style but you do walk into it with your bad attitude.

[Radar]

Just one question remains ....... Why, oh why indulge this guy????? Ignore his ranting and he'll most probably disappear. It should be obvious by now the only thing he requires / craves is an audience. I know it's probably easier said than done but try it for a while. Ignore him.

[deice]

Yes that may be a solution, but I'd rather try and understand what the point is. There is always a goal somewhere. If it is to create havoc, sell something or just piss people off, there's usually something driving a person forward. In my case what I'd like people to appreciate is that something as new and different as a plastic diesel airplane will have it's problems, ESPECIALLY in the light of traditional manufacturers having problems with stuff they've done for ages.
Yes, it's terrible that people get hurt and don't receive service they're entitled to etc, but we should work together to solve problems, not bash them down. There's a guy swimming somewhere off the coast of Iceland after his Cessna 310 sporting twin Lycosauruses gave up the ghost.
Just a few days ago a female jet pilot drove her Citation into the ground killing her son in the process. Clearly aviation is dangerous business.

I now know the reason for the failure of this particular DA40 and there's a solution to it. Interestingly it applies only to the 2.0 litre engine - the 1.7 is fine. Thank goodness nobody got hurt and I sincerely hope the fix will prevent any more from coming down.
With regards to certain posters I'd enjoy a debate based on factual evidence but apparently that is not the agenda at hand.

Fly safe Sternone.

[BackPacker]

I now know the reason for the failure of this particular DA40 and there's a solution to it. Interestingly it applies only to the 2.0 litre engine - the 1.7 is fine.

This is the second time I've heard about problems with the 2.0 engine (the first one was the DA-42 at Gatwick)- and if I read between the lines of your posts it appears that it is a structural thing, and that an SB or AD is hopefully forthcoming?

I realize that you are probably not at liberty to say anything more, but do you know of any public information with regards to the (probable) cause?

From the very few bits of info that have come out of the C310 accident so far, it looks like fuel starvation or fuel exhaustion, not necessarily an engine problem. Lycomings, Continentals and Thielerts are all the same in that respect: no fuel no power. So I think it's a bit inappropriate to drag this into the debate. If you can call this a debate, that is. It starts to look more like a pissing contest. But I guess that's what you get if you invite a notorious windup into it.

[Mister Jellybean]

I now know the reason for the failure of this particular DA40 and there's a solution to it. Interestingly it applies only to the 2.0 litre engine - the 1.7 is fine.


Had this aircraft been retrofitted with the 2.0 then? This is an early DA40, it was around in 2003.


This is the second time I've heard about problems with the 2.0 engine (the first one was the DA-42 at Gatwick)


The Gatwick DA42 had 1.7 engines.

[deice]

Ok, so the C310 accident may not be mechanical, I was referring to the dangers of flight, but alright, let's leave that one out.

Are you referring to the DA42 which had a dual engine failure after take off? From what I hear they had run the battery flat and not followed proper procedure after engine start using external power. But that may be a different event.

There is an SB for the engine issue and it involves the injector tubes. The redesigned engine with 2 liter displacement has different tubes than the 1.7 and apparently they break from vibration. Bad design perhaps and not good in an aircraft ofcourse. I wouldn't want any engine to fail on me regardless the manufacturer but that's one of the problems. They do fail, lycosauruses, complimentals, teeelerts and what have you..

My dad suffered a crankshaft failure in a Seneca over the deserts of north Africa back in 75. Continental TIO360s - best in the business... As it turns out they had a problem with resonance and quite a few of them broke down back then. I'm sure Conti took a lot of flak for that problem among all the others just like Diamond and Thielert are now.
What about the notorious O320-H engine that powered many C172s in the seventies, I'm sure there are plenty of owners/pilots that have grey hairs thanks to a badly designed Lyc.

It's a ****ty business this...

[deice]

Correction - it's the high pressure fuel line that needs fixing. SB available from Thielert.

[VeriLocation]

As a businessman needing to travel across UK and Europe regularly we invested in a DA40 2 years ago (G1000/IFR) and in that time we have had no problems whatsoever - fact. Plus I would add that after learning to fly in Cessenas, PA28's etc it is a superb piece of engineering and ironically with so much technology onboard it actually makes it very simple to fly. It has limits sure but I can fly to mid-France and come back again without refuelling for the cost of around £50. Passengers love it because it is quiet, modern and with helicopter like visibility. Only grumble is the need for a bit more power on take off but once up above the clouds she cruises very smoothly. Agree Diamond could do more on their customer interaction but may be a cultural issue, but I have a solid , reliable, modern means of transport that cannot be matched on ease of use, speed and comfort. Compared to driving in a car around the UK there is no competition. Interesting that a lot of the negative contributors in this debate are not actually owner operators of the DA40 whereas there seems to be mostly good responses from owners. Looking forward to the DA50.

[deice]

I couldn't agree with you more VL. Once you know the G1000 this is a very low workload aircraft and it has unbeatable speed/economy over Cessna & Piper equivalents.
It is, as you say, a bit underpowered. The interesting thing is, in my experience it gets off the ground pretty quick, but takes a while to build up the climb. Handling is superb and with a couple more ponies it would be the ultimate personal/trainer aircraft. I really hope the 170hp version they're putting out this fall will deliver that.

[soay]

I really hope the 170hp version they're putting out this fall will deliver that.
Letting that cat out of the bag should put a damper on sales between now and then! :ouch:

[deice]

Yes, probably, but from what I've heard they're busy delivering what's on order so they can start building the new version. Order one now and you get it next year... There are three coming to Sweden this year but they're already ordered and probably sold before long.

The DA40 that went down had just been retrofitted with the 2.0. It's a very early bird serial no 7 or so and the first one in Sweden w the Thielert. I flew it in 2004 in my first ever diesel powered flight.

For more cats you may be interested to know they'll be putting out a 350-diesel and 170-diesel DA50 in the coming two years. 350 will be loaded and the 170 stripped to bare essentials, but don't quote me on that.

Interesting evolution of a relatively new company, from motorglider to DA20, DA40, DA40D, DA42, DA50 and the D-jet. Pretty impressive me thinks.

[soay]

Order one now and you get it next year
I wonder if they'll start importing them from the new factory in China, now that it's received EASA approval (http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=c95afe1c-38c2-46d2-a695-5b0b86fdd8e0&). At the current exchange rates, the Austrian built aircraft are ridiculously expensive in the UK, compared with the likes of Cirrus from the US.

[IO540]

To be fair guys, data collection will be hard. I know some people (multi hull owners) with pretty comprehensive knowledge of the Thielert/Diamond scene, and to me it appears there are two kinds of Diamond owners:

1) Those that have problems but are getting them sorted out in a manner which they find acceptable

2) Those that have problems and are not getting them sorted in a manner they find acceptable.

In general, group 1) is not going to be washing their dirty laundry in public, because the way aviation dealerships (and warranties specifically) work is that if you start doing that, you get cut right out of any support.

And most of group 2) will not be washing their dirty laundry in public either because they know their situation will be even worse if they do.

The only people who go public are those who have tried everything and failed.

I am not suggesting that everybody has major problems. There are Diamond owners who have been OK, but on a quick count of owners who I know and meet face to face, these people are in a very definite minority. Most of the problems seem to be engine related; the rest of the plane is getting sorted out. There are very complicated politics between Diamond and Thielert right now, which don't help.

This in turn means that any attempt to deliver figures is going to fail.

I know virtually nothing about Mooneys but in general Lyco/Conti engines don't have consistent and catastrophic failure modes. They have problems with requiring careful engine management which many pilots don't do. Most instructors know nothing about engine management so this isn't trained, and as pilots become owners they often know very little about how to make the engine make TBO. But with careful management, the engines DO make TBO in most cases.

Now, one could argue that the need for careful engine management is crap and I would agree - we are in the 21st century and should all be flying with FADEC etc. But working on the basis that with technical knowledge you can make a Lyco last reliably yet with technical knowledge you cannot make a Thielert last reliably, there is a big difference.

As for Mooneys, I don't like them myself - single door, so like all similar single door designs they are hard to get in and out of. Their performance figures are (nowadays) based on silly TAS gain figures obtained at silly altitudes with silly oxygen flow rates and silly fuel flow rates into turbocharged engines. Plus they look very 1950s :) But there is nothing particularly unreliable about them. I just don't see the rationale in buying a Mooney at the new price tag when one could have something more modern and "civilised". But that is just an opinion, and somebody might think a Mooney is fantastic - they are welcome to that view.

I've flown the DA42 a couple of times and really like it, but there is absolutely no pretending the detail build quality is anywhere near the TB20. The key difference is that Diamond "will take over the world" while everybody else making IFR tourers is still trying to flog 1950s airframes fitted with GPS. Even the TB20 is a 30 year old design...

[loco667]

I own a DA40 TDI for 1,5 yrs. Bought it new and did about 130 hrs. It has been down approx 4 months since then. I had countless ecu fail and visits to service. Last time it had engine rough running in flight and engine dying short after emergency landing. I waited 2 months for the polish diamond service to get it running - no success. I am now paying 8000 Euros to Diamond Austria for disassembling and bringing the aircraft by road to Diamond HQ. I like the airplane design, but thats not good enough when it simply doesn't fly. I am considering changing for a Columbia 400.

[englishal]

Columbia 400 / DA40TDi....are they in the same league?

The DA40 100LL is a good aeroplane.

[DirectFly]

Loco667 see PM

[AvroLincoln]

Extract from the English version of the accident report:

The pilot took off from Gothenburg City Airport for a solo navigation exercise to gain a night-time endorsement to his pilot’s licence. The climb out was via the outward reporting point BOHUS and thence northwards. After about ten minutes of flight, just north of Kungälv, the engine stopped at a height of 1500 feet. The pilot went through the check list, without any result. He transmitted an emergency message and carried out an emergency landing on the only available lit area, on the E45, which is a four-lane motorway. In order to avoid the lighting columns, the pilot decided at a late stage to land against the road traffic direction in the two left lanes. Despite this the right wing struck a light-ing column before the aircraft landed on the ground. Immediately after touch-ing down the aircraft collided with a private car. The tip of the right wing of the aircraft struck the car windscreen. The aircraft then slid off the road and con-tinued along the grass to the left of the road up to a junction, where the right wing once again collided with a lighting column, which caused the aircraft to swing round to the left, whereupon it stopped. Another private car was struck by gravel and wreckage parts as the aircraft finally stopped.
The pilot was unhurt and could exit the aircraft without assistance. Neither of the car drivers were injured.