DA-42 over Central London this morning
 

Walking to work from the station today I looked up and saw a fast twin, probably no more than 1500ft on a northerly heading.

Looked really futuristic. Was it a DA-42 - Diamond Twin Star? if so, any ideas if it's a traffic spotter?

What a gorgous aeroplane.

Stapleford FC have replaced a Seneca with the Diamond Twin Star for use on the "Flying Eye" contract (for Capitol Radio?) There is a write up in one of the popular magazines recently
Phil

can't have been a DA42 then.:}

Is the DA-42 use exclusive for the Flying Eye? Or can they be use for instruction as well i.e: Multi Rating?

Thanks

Not sure about the other uses for the aircraft, but it has all the extra kit for the twice daily traffic reports - and funny aerials and things for speaking to the radio peeps.

So far, apart form the testing, I have only seen it flying when spotting.

Yes Atlantic have just bout a couple for multi IR training

It is EFIS equipped and diesel so not too expensive to run.

Nice looking too


Nick

Stapleford have purchased two DA42 twin stars with one being used for capital and the other being used for IR training.

I believe you are unable to complete a multi rating on it due to its classification. At present, students do there mulit rating on the seneca and then transition to the twin star for the IR.

Why? Two engines looks multi to me, I understand why a cessna O2/337 is different though.

Regards, SD..

PS..Someone once told me that you could even log twin/multi time on a Cri-Cri!!

Correct, I have 5 hours multi time on the Cri Cri. Very fun plane too!

My understanding with the multi thing and the twin star is that whilst it is most certainly twin engined it poses problems for testing and issuing multi ratings.

The fadec for the engines mean that unlike the current batch of twins used for training there are no prop or mixture levers, just the 2 for go faster, go slower. Hence then going to an older less advanced airframe is harder than going from an old airframe into the twin star.

Sounds remarkably similar to a jet to me but ho hum.

Hah! It's true, got a letter from the bastards (Diamond) saying they've unfortunately had to reduce max cruise from 203KTAS down to 163KTAS. How the hell can you lose 40 kts that easily?

That being said, compare the pre and post production models - the post model looks like a porcupine - new rads, antennae, flight control hinges, exhausts - the list goes on. Apparently Diamond aren't the geniuses I thought they were. Think I'll go for a Mooney and follow all of John Deakin's excellent engine advice.

I wonder would anyone have bought the €500k TwinStar if they knew it would do 163kts? You can buy 2 L39s for that!

The 'comparable' knots would be increased on a long flight in a DA42 as you wouldn't have to spend an hour on the ground refueling.

A bit like the hare and the tortoise.

Confab, were you a DA42 position holder?

This is quite appalling. Each rigid VHF or ELT antenna costs about 0.5kt at 160 TAS (if 160 TAS is full power). Perhaps 1kt at 200 TAS (if 200TAS is full power). Less for loc/GS antennae. That's a max of about 5kt lost due to antennae.

If true, this HAS to be an engine issue, representing a power de-rating of some 30-40%.

Is there an operating ceiling de-rating? That would reduce the TAS too.

Still 163 Kts on 270Hp using about £15 an hour in Fuel aint that bad is it.

I think it's down to the EASA and the safety requirements that they place on new aircraft. There has been a lot of alterations made from the original test aircraft.

A safer aircraft has the penalty of extra weight which in turns effects performance.

I'd rather have a safe aircraft than one that gets me to my destination 20 minutes earlier.

Better late than never!!!

I would suggest that if a drop from 203 to 163 TAS makes only 20 minutes difference then you bought entirely the wrong plane for the mission profile :O

So anyone know the real reason why Diamond reduced the max cruise speed? Was it extra drag or engine issues?

Also, when did they say max cruise would be 203KTAS? Obviously it's not on the brochure now!