Now Thielert is dead.. what plane for cheap flying?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: the air please
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now Thielert is dead.. what plane for cheap flying?
I'm wondering, what would be your choice to buy with the current Avgas prices if you would be buying a new plane for cruising 300-400nm trips, is Rotax the answer? I'm looking for a 4 seater, running hourly costs are important for me.
I was considering a DA40 TDI but now I'm trying to look at other options.
I was considering a DA40 TDI but now I'm trying to look at other options.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thielert won't die. If it did, Diamond will go too. Diamond cannot go on with an unsupported engine.
But it depends on what you mean by 'cheap flying'. There is no such thing as 'cheap flying' if you want reasonable comfort with at least one non-anorak passenger, and reasonable weather capability.
The Rotax engined planes should be cheapest to run.
Then you get a gradual progression. The DA40 is by no means at the bottom of that scale, because the total operating cost of a plane is not just the fuel but a whole big raft of other crap.
Even on my IO-540 engined TB20 the fuel is 41.5 litres/hr and at 155kt TAS I am doing 19.5 MPG (UK miles, UK gallons) which most people would be delighted with in their gas guzzling road car driven flat out.
But by '400nm' do you mean 400nm plus reserves? If so then you need 600nm+ zero-fuel capability, which is not that common until you get to proper tourers.
Really 'cheap' flying is a bottom end microlight; a hang glider where you strap yourself into a sleeping bag... I went to Aero Expo in Pribram LKPM this w/e and there was a machine with a 1-cylinder motor, open cockpit, and probably cheap to fly.
But it depends on what you mean by 'cheap flying'. There is no such thing as 'cheap flying' if you want reasonable comfort with at least one non-anorak passenger, and reasonable weather capability.
The Rotax engined planes should be cheapest to run.
Then you get a gradual progression. The DA40 is by no means at the bottom of that scale, because the total operating cost of a plane is not just the fuel but a whole big raft of other crap.
Even on my IO-540 engined TB20 the fuel is 41.5 litres/hr and at 155kt TAS I am doing 19.5 MPG (UK miles, UK gallons) which most people would be delighted with in their gas guzzling road car driven flat out.
But by '400nm' do you mean 400nm plus reserves? If so then you need 600nm+ zero-fuel capability, which is not that common until you get to proper tourers.
Really 'cheap' flying is a bottom end microlight; a hang glider where you strap yourself into a sleeping bag... I went to Aero Expo in Pribram LKPM this w/e and there was a machine with a 1-cylinder motor, open cockpit, and probably cheap to fly.
Last edited by IO540; 29th Apr 2008 at 21:14.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm wondering, what would be your choice to buy with the current Avgas prices if you would be buying a new plane for cruising 300-400nm trips, is Rotax the answer? I'm looking for a 4 seater, running hourly costs are important for me.
So for a certified four-seater, you are either stuck with the Lycosauri of this world, or the Thielert 1.7/2.0. Unless there's another reasonably common and certified engine in the 160 HP+ range out there which I don't know about.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the DA40 is not capable of carrying four present-day adults. A pilot with three anorexic chain smoking size zero supermodels, yes 
If you actually want to carry four normal adults for 400nm plus alternate plus reserves then there is no cheap way of doing it. A TB20 (or a few others) will do it. Work out the W&B of a DA40 and see for yourself.
The Tecnam twin is some way from certification, and with two engines it won't be especially cheap to fly.
If you actually want to carry four normal adults for 400nm plus alternate plus reserves then there is no cheap way of doing it. A TB20 (or a few others) will do it. Work out the W&B of a DA40 and see for yourself.
The Tecnam twin is some way from certification, and with two engines it won't be especially cheap to fly.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Backpacker you need to get out more - there has been a 4 seater flying behind a Rotax for some years now MCR4 ring any bells.
Of course 4 well fed types and its not possible. Indeed most of the 1950s designs from the US will not do it either until you get to C182 or PA28-235.
Whilst fuel is an important element of the cost of flying (particularly with engines over 200hp) the certification regime probably has even more influence.
As Thielerts are only fitted to certified airframes then they would never represent 'cheap' flying.
Of course 4 well fed types and its not possible. Indeed most of the 1950s designs from the US will not do it either until you get to C182 or PA28-235.
Whilst fuel is an important element of the cost of flying (particularly with engines over 200hp) the certification regime probably has even more influence.
As Thielerts are only fitted to certified airframes then they would never represent 'cheap' flying.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Stockholm,Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumour is that for example the MCR 4S will be produced under the new ELA. Low fuel consumption and decent cruise gives excellent range even with four 80kg adults on board!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
even with four 80kg adults on board!
I agree, to carry 4 adults any distance, you're looking to enter the market at the C182 level. REAL costs (not just direct operating costs) are probably at least £150 per hour, more likely £200. Try owning one for a few years and work out the finances properly (including engine and airframe depreciation, all maintenance, fuel, parking, respray/cabin refurb etc etc)
Most owners have their head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the real cost of flying. Motorists are the same. An ordinary family car costs around 40 pence per mile to run, 12,000 miles a year costs £4800, a big whack out of many household budgets.
TheOddOne
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
TOO - mild thread drift - 80 kg isn't that unusual. I'm 6'0", and weigh 12 st /76 kg in my birthday suit, so 80 kg max when booted and suited. I'm not that unusual, am I?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the MCR4 has a 100 HP Rotax 912. It's a kitplane and the typical equipped empty weight is 350 kg, so the website claims, and MTOM is 750 kg. That leaves a very healthy 400 kg to play with, which is on par with a typical Warrior. And the fuel consumption and V-speeds are quire impressive as well. But since this is a kitplane, I wonder how many MCR4s actually manage to stay below 350 kg after the builder added all the bells and whistles that he/she thinks are required. Any data on actual MCR4s flying already?
Nevertheless, I'm impressed. It would be good to see it certified and available as a factory-built without gaining additional weight.
Nevertheless, I'm impressed. It would be good to see it certified and available as a factory-built without gaining additional weight.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOO - mild thread drift - 80 kg isn't that unusual. I'm 6'0", and weigh 12 st /76 kg in my birthday suit, so 80 kg max when booted and suited. I'm not that unusual, am I?
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Yes you are. .... Most average non obese male adults weigh more than 80kg.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheOddOne
Most owners have their head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the real cost of flying.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also the argument that capital costs should be disregarded, because if you applied that to everything, you would die with every penny you ever earned invested in various financial instruments; you'd die very rich but never having got out of bed.
The only time capital cost needs to be taken into account is when buying an asset to rent out - i.e. just another investment scenario.
A lot of people ask for a true 4 seater without realising the huge price they will be paying for it all along the line, while rarely carrying more than 2 people. I fly a 4-seater (TB20) and find that 2 people plus holiday luggage is a full house, or 2 plus a child for a weekend trip. The raft, emergency bag, and oxygen take up one seat. My girlfriend weighs 45kg, I weigh 77 and we could carry a child on a holiday, and the TB20 is unbeaten on load carrying v. economy v. speed.
Taking 4 Brit-sized people with holiday luggage would need something bigger and the cost increment is pretty substantial, or you have to be willing to chuck away a lot of performance and get something with the same -540 motor but which flies considerably slower.
Sure enough there are people whose mission is to carry four for a short distance in which case a lot of spamcans can do it (partially fuelled).
There is a lot of AOC work done in this area (charter) in piston twins such as the Seneca and (because you never know how much the next five fat golfers will weigh) the fuel management practices are sometimes rather dubious. Look up G-OMAR for one example.
One should never fly a plane with a fuel level which is below what can be physically (visually) verified and if you apply this rule rigorously you are in for some big suprises in the way the mission capability of some popular 4/6 seaters shrinks!
The only time capital cost needs to be taken into account is when buying an asset to rent out - i.e. just another investment scenario.
A lot of people ask for a true 4 seater without realising the huge price they will be paying for it all along the line, while rarely carrying more than 2 people. I fly a 4-seater (TB20) and find that 2 people plus holiday luggage is a full house, or 2 plus a child for a weekend trip. The raft, emergency bag, and oxygen take up one seat. My girlfriend weighs 45kg, I weigh 77 and we could carry a child on a holiday, and the TB20 is unbeaten on load carrying v. economy v. speed.
Taking 4 Brit-sized people with holiday luggage would need something bigger and the cost increment is pretty substantial, or you have to be willing to chuck away a lot of performance and get something with the same -540 motor but which flies considerably slower.
Sure enough there are people whose mission is to carry four for a short distance in which case a lot of spamcans can do it (partially fuelled).
There is a lot of AOC work done in this area (charter) in piston twins such as the Seneca and (because you never know how much the next five fat golfers will weigh) the fuel management practices are sometimes rather dubious. Look up G-OMAR for one example.
One should never fly a plane with a fuel level which is below what can be physically (visually) verified and if you apply this rule rigorously you are in for some big suprises in the way the mission capability of some popular 4/6 seaters shrinks!
Last edited by IO540; 30th Apr 2008 at 11:13.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
Sure enough there are people whose mission is to carry four for a short distance in which case a lot of spamcans can do it (partially fuelled).
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: S Warwickshire
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a few relatively old designs could move a 1000 lb-ish payload on a 180 HP Lycoming. Jodel D140, Beagle Husky, Wassmer Baladou, Boelkow 207 spring to mind.
In fact two of those are certificated as 5-seaters. Cruise varies from about 90 knots for the Husky to 125 for the Boelkow. Scarcity, condition and ongoing maintenance may be issues though.
The Jodel DR250 gives you a pretty good 4-seat ability on only 160HP.
If you can afford to lose a seat and a bit of space then a Jodel 1050 can do it all on 100HP and is now migrating onto the permit system - quite a bargain at about £16-25K if they suit you.
In fact two of those are certificated as 5-seaters. Cruise varies from about 90 knots for the Husky to 125 for the Boelkow. Scarcity, condition and ongoing maintenance may be issues though.
The Jodel DR250 gives you a pretty good 4-seat ability on only 160HP.
If you can afford to lose a seat and a bit of space then a Jodel 1050 can do it all on 100HP and is now migrating onto the permit system - quite a bargain at about £16-25K if they suit you.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I own a Hawk XP, 21OHP Wobby prop 172. It has a 960lb useful load at 128kts cruise and I sit in the airways usually between FL100 and FL140 but it will do FL180 if pushed.
Thats 4 adults and 4plus hours of fuel.
The Malibu will carry 4 and bags at up to FL250 and over 1200nm at 220kts TAS. I did Paris to Guernsey on Saturday in 50mins. Thats on a 350hp engine derated to 310hp and doing 17GPH LOP.
Thats 4 adults and 4plus hours of fuel.
The Malibu will carry 4 and bags at up to FL250 and over 1200nm at 220kts TAS. I did Paris to Guernsey on Saturday in 50mins. Thats on a 350hp engine derated to 310hp and doing 17GPH LOP.