DA 42 Twinstar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DA 42 Twinstar
Hello
I am interested to hear from anyone that has flown a Twinstar and what they thought of it, how was the performance, comfort, noise etc?
Thanks
I am interested to hear from anyone that has flown a Twinstar and what they thought of it, how was the performance, comfort, noise etc?
Thanks
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comfort is excellent, but more akin to a sports car than a typical twin. I guess it might be your thing or not - you would certainly want to try first.
The ergonomics I think are superb - I doubt anything beats it including the Cirrus.
Noise levels are I suspect as quite as you are likely to get in any twin.
Single engine performance in the cruise is fine, but marginal on take off, and good technique is important. Asy loads are reasonably pronounced.
It is of course only four seats and load carrying is not great with much fuel, but on the other hand only a very little fuel is needed to give the same range as a conventional twin.
Handling I felt was very good and the 42 is a joy to fly.
There seems to be a suggestion it might well be MEP type rated because the differences are sufficiently significant and it takes a while to be comfortable with the G1000 avionics.
The ergonomics I think are superb - I doubt anything beats it including the Cirrus.
Noise levels are I suspect as quite as you are likely to get in any twin.
Single engine performance in the cruise is fine, but marginal on take off, and good technique is important. Asy loads are reasonably pronounced.
It is of course only four seats and load carrying is not great with much fuel, but on the other hand only a very little fuel is needed to give the same range as a conventional twin.
Handling I felt was very good and the 42 is a joy to fly.
There seems to be a suggestion it might well be MEP type rated because the differences are sufficiently significant and it takes a while to be comfortable with the G1000 avionics.
load carrying is not great with much fuel
Full fuel takes away 350 lbs, leaves 824 lbs.
824/4= 4 people of 200 lbs each or lighter weights with some luggage for a 5 hour endurance. Safe 4 hrs, 4*160kts= 640 miles. Not bad.
With auxiliary tanks the pax load drops to 654 lbs. Still 3 adults plus luggage, this time for 7 hrs.
7* 160 miles= 1120 miles.......
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are correct. Compared with a SEP, four seater load carrying isnt bad.
However with the extended tanks and full fuel two reasonable sized adults puts the aircraft close to MTOW. Some might expect more of a four seater twin but the range with full fuel is so great this is a most unlikely configuration.
Compared with a PA31 however, which can absorb six adults, fuel and baggage in terms of load carrying it is in a different class. Horses for courses.
However with the extended tanks and full fuel two reasonable sized adults puts the aircraft close to MTOW. Some might expect more of a four seater twin but the range with full fuel is so great this is a most unlikely configuration.
Compared with a PA31 however, which can absorb six adults, fuel and baggage in terms of load carrying it is in a different class. Horses for courses.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Greece
Age: 50
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ive had three people, luggage with std tanks, it performed great, still climbed at 700-800 ft min below 5000, and 600-700 ft min up to fl100 (average), so no probs there.
I find it a great plane to fly, could just do with being faster.
EI
I find it a great plane to fly, could just do with being faster.
EI
is slow compared with other twins
is anywhere bwteen 155-170 KTAS.
That puts it in the same league or slightly faster then:
- Grumman Cougar
- Seminole
- Dutchess
- Twin Comanche
- Seneca I (maybe even Seneca II, never flown that one)
- Most Aztec's
- All Apache's
You cannot fairly compare a DA-42 to a Baron, AeroStar or Shrike Commander, that's a different league of aircraft.
So I would argue the DA-42 is just as fast or slightly faster the most commonly flown twins out there with half the fuel burn.
Would I like a higher speed out of the DA-42?
Absolutely, but that has more to do with my ever increasing addiction for flying speed than the design.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Retford, UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Retford, UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose the unknown factor here is depreciation, with the DA42 being relatively new. A big chunk of the hire charge is made up of that.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bonny Scotland
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi guys,
i hired a twin-star recently from a very nice chap who is based at bagby airfield in yorkshire. was very reasonably priced to hire and only a few months old so in as new condition, a bargain i thought.
had to do the conversion at humberside with one of the flight schools there, before being let loose to build some hours. took it up to scotland for the weekend.
an excellent passage maker. inverness, sab vor, nt ndb, td ndb, otr vor, then into humberside in two hours.
i hired a twin-star recently from a very nice chap who is based at bagby airfield in yorkshire. was very reasonably priced to hire and only a few months old so in as new condition, a bargain i thought.
had to do the conversion at humberside with one of the flight schools there, before being let loose to build some hours. took it up to scotland for the weekend.
an excellent passage maker. inverness, sab vor, nt ndb, td ndb, otr vor, then into humberside in two hours.
Professional Student
Out of interest StraightLevel, apart from a multi rating of course, what were the license/hours requirements to hire said Bagby DA-42?
I quite like the DA-42 - although personally I'd prefer it with a slightly higher speed (not that I'd mind the fuel economy at all!), better vision around the front canopy (it'd be better with a full transparent canopy as opposed to the airliner-style one right now IMHO)...and possibly a BRS?
I stand by to be corrected on the engineering feasibilty of the above items
On the discussion of the speed/fuel economy front versus other twins....didn't a DA-42 cross the Atlantic without refuelling? Can other GA twins do that?
Edit: Found the link for the Atlantic DA-42 crossing!
http://www.aero-news.net/Community/D...1254&Refresh=1
I quite like the DA-42 - although personally I'd prefer it with a slightly higher speed (not that I'd mind the fuel economy at all!), better vision around the front canopy (it'd be better with a full transparent canopy as opposed to the airliner-style one right now IMHO)...and possibly a BRS?
I stand by to be corrected on the engineering feasibilty of the above items
On the discussion of the speed/fuel economy front versus other twins....didn't a DA-42 cross the Atlantic without refuelling? Can other GA twins do that?
Edit: Found the link for the Atlantic DA-42 crossing!
http://www.aero-news.net/Community/D...1254&Refresh=1
Last edited by hobbit1983; 11th Oct 2006 at 15:10. Reason: to add link
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bonny Scotland
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wilco MichaelJP59
can't remember the exact requirements. i have a M/E CPL IR, and had to do a conversion course which was ok. i also already had da40 tdi experience so it wasn't too big a step for me.
the G1000 took a bit of getting used to but an excellent piece of equipment once your upto it.
if you do a google search for "da42 twin-star, bagby airfield" you'll find the website.
hope i'm not breaking the rules by posting thus info.
can't remember the exact requirements. i have a M/E CPL IR, and had to do a conversion course which was ok. i also already had da40 tdi experience so it wasn't too big a step for me.
the G1000 took a bit of getting used to but an excellent piece of equipment once your upto it.
if you do a google search for "da42 twin-star, bagby airfield" you'll find the website.
hope i'm not breaking the rules by posting thus info.
Professional Student
Thanks for the info - will search around. Still beyond my reach on the ratings front..maybe one day soon hopefully!
Don't think you're breaking the rules - you've not posted any direct info! It's hardly advertising in any case.
Don't think you're breaking the rules - you've not posted any direct info! It's hardly advertising in any case.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: god knows
Age: 40
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straight and Level,
Can I ask who you rented the aircraft from and how much he charged for the rental?
Would love to fly twinstar and fly it cheap. Please feel free to Pm if you dont want to publish on here. If you dont wanna say no worries.
Dom
Can I ask who you rented the aircraft from and how much he charged for the rental?
Would love to fly twinstar and fly it cheap. Please feel free to Pm if you dont want to publish on here. If you dont wanna say no worries.
Dom
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bonny Scotland
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
price was £235/hr wet.
www.papa-bravo.com
hope i am not going to get into trouble for posting this.
straightlevel
www.papa-bravo.com
hope i am not going to get into trouble for posting this.
straightlevel
englishal - Differences training is mandatory when moving to any new MEP type, whether it's a Twinstar, a Duchess or a Seneca. However, there are specific issues when moving to aircraft such as the Twinstar with 'glass' cockpits and FADEC. Try reading AICs 31 & 32/2006 (Pink 98 & 99), which should tell you all you need to know.
As far as rental prices go, there are still some unknown factors here;
as mentioned before, depreciation.
Also engine replacement which is currently called for at 1200 hrs.
That will change to 2000 with eventually 2400 hrs if I am not mistaken.
As a business you will have to calculate with 1200 for now so as to not lose a lot of money when it's engine time.
So a portion of the rental charge goes into the engine fund.
Another biggie, at least in the USA is insurance.
The hull value of the airplane is $500,000+.
That is quite a difference from the hull value of a Seminole or Seneca I or Aztec which could be between $80,000 and $100,000.
The insurance premiums are usually calculated as a percentage of the hull value.
So if you are looking at $25,000/year insurance premiums and you expect the plane to fly 500 hrs a year that means $50/hr is insurance premium.
250 hrs/year means $100/hr.
Now add maintenance, hangarage,cleaning cost, rent, personnel, miscellanious overhead etc etc etc.
So it won't be cheap to rent.
But neither is a 25 year old Seminole/Dutchess nor a 40 year old Aztec.
By the way,it will be cheaper to learn the Garmin 1000 on a single before you fly the DA-42.
No need to spend the first 4 hrs just learning the avionics.
as mentioned before, depreciation.
Also engine replacement which is currently called for at 1200 hrs.
That will change to 2000 with eventually 2400 hrs if I am not mistaken.
As a business you will have to calculate with 1200 for now so as to not lose a lot of money when it's engine time.
So a portion of the rental charge goes into the engine fund.
Another biggie, at least in the USA is insurance.
The hull value of the airplane is $500,000+.
That is quite a difference from the hull value of a Seminole or Seneca I or Aztec which could be between $80,000 and $100,000.
The insurance premiums are usually calculated as a percentage of the hull value.
So if you are looking at $25,000/year insurance premiums and you expect the plane to fly 500 hrs a year that means $50/hr is insurance premium.
250 hrs/year means $100/hr.
Now add maintenance, hangarage,cleaning cost, rent, personnel, miscellanious overhead etc etc etc.
So it won't be cheap to rent.
But neither is a 25 year old Seminole/Dutchess nor a 40 year old Aztec.
By the way,it will be cheaper to learn the Garmin 1000 on a single before you fly the DA-42.
No need to spend the first 4 hrs just learning the avionics.
Last edited by B2N2; 13th Oct 2006 at 00:25. Reason: Incorrect numbers first time....
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
englishal - Differences training is mandatory when moving to any new MEP type, whether it's a Twinstar, a Duchess or a Seneca. However, there are specific issues when moving to aircraft such as the Twinstar with 'glass' cockpits and FADEC. Try reading AICs 31 & 32/2006 (Pink 98 & 99), which should tell you all you need to know.
Not sure you are right on that, MEP is a class rating and as such your entitled to fly any MEP. I learnbt on a duchess and in over 500hrs of twin flying have never been required to differences training on the myriad of other types I have flown.
If you are quoting regs for this can you post a linke please?