DA42 Musings......... (Split from another thread and Merged with older thread)
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 yellows is on the same field as me and owns and runs a DA42; He seems to be making sense and I at least know that he flies an aeroplane. Sternone, on the other hand, claims to be a ppl student in Belgium (which may or may not be true) and has a track record of sending some of the nastiest PM's to people that I've ever seen. For all I know, he may be a "care in the community patient" - or he might be Bob Davey in disguise.
Clearly though not all think of it that way
.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just think that the joke (if it is a joke) has worn thin with a certain individual, and I don't think that I'm alone in this; furthermore, I think that firing a load of personal abuse by pm to forumites is BAD news and a sign of someone who is actually not a crusading fighter for free speech, but a nutter. presumeably there is no-one left in Belgium to talk to?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels - Twin Comanche PA39 - KA C90B
Age: 51
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just bear in mind sternone what a small world aviation is.
What a ridiculous way of arguing are you folks doing, get a grip, this is a forum were people can share their ideas and learn from each other, sometimes think you like, sometimes thinks you see proving you were wrong.
I personally like it that people now even say that i'm not even a pilot maybe i don't even exist ? Anyways, like said before ? Just click the other way, how easy can that be ? I always love it when people actually type in facts to show me i'm wrong.. Shouldn't be that difficult knowing that i don't know anything...right ?
PS: I just heard that to work on Diamonds avionics you need to connect external power ? Is that with other G1000 installations also the case ?
Last edited by sternone; 29th Nov 2007 at 15:20.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS: I just heard that to work on Diamonds avionics you need to connect external power ? Is that with other G1000 installations also the case ?
muppet. And two rules which apply
1. Don't argue with a fool. The spectators can't tell the difference.
2. Never argue with a fool, they will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience.
So lets all be warned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of our Gallic chum's exchanges rather remind me of this;
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=mXpxEqo-KZQ
Although, this was intended as a joke.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=mXpxEqo-KZQ
Although, this was intended as a joke.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels - Twin Comanche PA39 - KA C90B
Age: 51
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah it stops the battery going flat you muppet.
So that means that when you have a G1000 problem, and you know you can fix it, you can't when you do not attach an external power ?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sternone
So that means that when you have a G1000 problem, and you know you can fix it, you can't when you do not attach an external power ?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sternone, I'm sure you know the answer really.... but any engineer with a bit of common dog will use an external power source if the aircraft electrics/avionics (G1000 or not) need to be left on for any time without the engine turning.
Aircraft batteries are not the most powerful in the world so will flatten quickly with a large load applied and an external power source is more likely to give a stable power supply which is preferred by the G1000.
Aircraft batteries are not the most powerful in the world so will flatten quickly with a large load applied and an external power source is more likely to give a stable power supply which is preferred by the G1000.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gt. Yarmouth, Norfolk
Age: 68
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sternone really has got to some of you people.
I am still no nearer to an answer of the real question which started this thread: how reliable is the DA42 or other aircraft with the 1.7 or 2.0 diesel as compared to a conventional single or older twin?
If you had £500k to burn, and wanted an aircraft to take you long distance and on extended flights over water or sparse terrain would you buy one or would you save you money and go for an old but tried and tested twin such as an Aztec or twin Comanche at a third the price, or perhaps a modern but conventional engined single, i.e Cirrus? Where really do the advantages, if any, lie with the DA42?
I am still no nearer to an answer of the real question which started this thread: how reliable is the DA42 or other aircraft with the 1.7 or 2.0 diesel as compared to a conventional single or older twin?
If you had £500k to burn, and wanted an aircraft to take you long distance and on extended flights over water or sparse terrain would you buy one or would you save you money and go for an old but tried and tested twin such as an Aztec or twin Comanche at a third the price, or perhaps a modern but conventional engined single, i.e Cirrus? Where really do the advantages, if any, lie with the DA42?
)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Justiciar, with 500k to burn, you got get something really nice
Plus you'd need to find another $130,000 for the engine in a few hundred hours...
Depending on how rich I was (over and above the £500k) I'd either get a top of the range twin star and pocket the rest of the cash, or a Beach Duke with Royal Turbine conversion
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid that $2.3m is some way off £500k, even with the best will in the world and a weakening dollar.
And a new DA42 will set you back somewhere between £300-360k, depending on the options you want on it.
And a new DA42 will set you back somewhere between £300-360k, depending on the options you want on it.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid that $2.3m is some way off £500k, even with the best will in the world and a weakening dollar.
Seriously, though: having the money (I don't....) I would buy a turbine and not a piston. Of course it depends what you want to do with it. Long IFR legs in more or less any wx or rather idle touring. Horses for courses, really.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gt. Yarmouth, Norfolk
Age: 68
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Long IFR legs in more or less any wx or rather idle touring
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what is the benefit of a twin (other than being cheaper than your turbine single)?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have the reference for this but IIRC, NTSB data shows SE turboprops five times less likely to go down than piston twins.
For the ultimate mission capability for £500k I would get a used Jetprop which is a PT6 conversion of a piston Malibu. It would be a bit old at £500k; £700k seems to get much better stuff. < 2000kg means no Eurocontrol charges, it's pressurised and goes to at least FL250 and does at least 260kt TAS.
I doubt the DA42 has been around for long enough in big enough numbers to generate useful data. Especially as engine failures on privately owned twins are usually not reported.
For the ultimate mission capability for £500k I would get a used Jetprop which is a PT6 conversion of a piston Malibu. It would be a bit old at £500k; £700k seems to get much better stuff. < 2000kg means no Eurocontrol charges, it's pressurised and goes to at least FL250 and does at least 260kt TAS.
I doubt the DA42 has been around for long enough in big enough numbers to generate useful data. Especially as engine failures on privately owned twins are usually not reported.