DA40 TDI Crashes in Sweden north of Gothenburg

[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 discussion

Nor 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-MEDG

There is one incident 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. 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.

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?

[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.

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.