Diamond V Cessna v Piper
 

Some discussion recently about the merits of each. I have a couple of thousand hrs in the Warrior and G1000 c172 but nothing in the Diamond.

Its been mentioned that the Diamond aircraft, besides the economy of the Austro diesel engines in the DA42, the airframes being new type of material and design are significantly less maintenance intensive than the traditional airframes. especially as they get older.

So....is there any truth to this?

Oz3 not sure about the Diamond series of aircraft, but I've done just on 600 hours in the Cirrus and so have six 100 hrlys to look back on. Now the nice people from Cirrus tell me that their airframes are also made from that nice new modern material and are of a modern clean sheet design which if you believe what they say, ****s all over those old dinosaur Cessnas and Pipers.

However the interesting thing is, is that the hundred hourly on the Cirrus is always, without fail, twice as much as what the 210 would normally cost. In fact the last hundred hourly for the Cirrus cost nearly eight times (!!!) as much.

So yes, new materials and later design go into the airframes, but it doesn't always translate into lower costs. In fact for us, it's been the exact opposite.

GB, just out of interest, how were the extra costs on the Cirrus justified? We're they due to the system of maintenance requiring special inspections or replacements, in service failures of airframe parts or big ticket items such as glass screens going U/S? I know the chute line cutter replacement every 8yrs can add a bit to the cost of maintenance. JS

I can assure you that the maintenance requirements are just as expensive on the Cirrus or diamond as on any Cessna or Piper, it is just the expense is in different places.

Take a good look at the items on both glass types with a Hard Life, the Cirrus for instance has a ten yearly ballistic chute repack and a life on the line cutters.

The other major problem is if you damage these aircraft as there are very few places that can repair any more than a minor surface scratch.

Diamond Experience
 

Yesterday I picked up my Diamond DA 40 XLS from its 4th 100 hourly at Moorabbin. According to the LAME who also does Cirrus servicing as well, they each have their special quirks.

Certainly having the composite airframe means that there less risk of corrosion, and less work doing inspections in the 100 hourly as there are no inspection ports to check. BUT when there was a faulty fuel sensor, the wing had to come off to have it replaced, fortunately still under warranty! When there was an issue with one of the GPSs, the rear seats had to come out to reset one of the LRUs - line replacement units.

Having glass is great, I would not fly IFR without the glass now, your SA is amazing Some of my airline pilots at the Flying Club have been blown away with its avionics and the Garmin 1000. In fact one of my good mates traded his old C172 in for the newer Garmin 1000 C172 after flying the Diamond.

I love flying the DA 40. Last year we did a fly away with some mates from the flying club. We left in the DA 40 10 to 15 minutes after the C-172, arrived 5 to 10 minutes earlier than the C172 after a 2.5 to 3 hour flight AND BURNT less fuel!

Re maintenance issues on the Diamonds, there is an excellent website, the Diamond Aviators Network. There is lots of useful info there
DIAMOND AVIATORS NET, the forum for Aviators of Diamond Aircraft DA20, DA40 and DA42

The Australian Distributors for Diamond are currently doing a demo tour around Australia in the DA 40 and there will be a display day in Melbourne Saturday July 6th
http://www.hawkerpacific.com/events

Safe Flying

JERR