Diamond Twin-star
Well, trained on the Diamond DA42 with the G1000, now flying the Citation CJ's with Collins Proline setup and all i can say is that flying the G1000 if nothing else made the whole transition to the CJ's a whole lot easier with the Proline setup - all looks very similar in various respects to me and i would consider that if i'd flown the Seneca etc. for the IR it would have made my own personal transition a more protracted affair !.
Will say the FADEC setup made life easier for engine failures - will also admit that all the Senecas i've flown compared to the DA42 were awful bloody things - always different layouts etc., tatty and well past their sell by date in my opinion - each to their own i'd guess but if i had to choose again i'd take the DA42 every time, notwithstanding current engine problems.
Not sure how things are now with aviation recruitment but find it strange if a majority of recruiters out there are rejecting candidates because they did it the DA42 way rather than the PA34 etc., seems very short sighted if so as i'm sure there are equally good newbies from both the old and new camps - i get the feeling there is a little bit of a feeling amongst some individuals of "cheating" with regard to completing an IR on the DA42 which in my opinion is not so - suspect this is more to do with "doing things the good old fashioned way" rather than welcoming new equipment to the training arena although i will accept that the "good old fashioned way" may benefit those seeking work in the air taxi world with traditional analogue setups.
Just an opinion with all the above, i'm still fairly new to the world of commercial aviation and this should be borne in mind with all of the above comments i've made !!
Will say the FADEC setup made life easier for engine failures - will also admit that all the Senecas i've flown compared to the DA42 were awful bloody things - always different layouts etc., tatty and well past their sell by date in my opinion - each to their own i'd guess but if i had to choose again i'd take the DA42 every time, notwithstanding current engine problems.
Not sure how things are now with aviation recruitment but find it strange if a majority of recruiters out there are rejecting candidates because they did it the DA42 way rather than the PA34 etc., seems very short sighted if so as i'm sure there are equally good newbies from both the old and new camps - i get the feeling there is a little bit of a feeling amongst some individuals of "cheating" with regard to completing an IR on the DA42 which in my opinion is not so - suspect this is more to do with "doing things the good old fashioned way" rather than welcoming new equipment to the training arena although i will accept that the "good old fashioned way" may benefit those seeking work in the air taxi world with traditional analogue setups.
Just an opinion with all the above, i'm still fairly new to the world of commercial aviation and this should be borne in mind with all of the above comments i've made !!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Age: 37
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shouldn't the school be in touch with the airlines about this if ppl are spending their hard earned cash on a expensive rating, only to find that this leaves them at a dissadvantage.
at the end of the day an IR is an IR, it shouldn't matter what you do it in all that matters at the end of the day (half an hour after sunset) is how good you are at it i would have thought
at the end of the day an IR is an IR, it shouldn't matter what you do it in all that matters at the end of the day (half an hour after sunset) is how good you are at it i would have thought
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Euroland
Age: 53
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybee not completely in line with the current discussion, but...
I would not even consider flying an aircraft that shuts down the engines in case of total electrical failure.
An example, here Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » DA-42 engine failure
Bart
I would not even consider flying an aircraft that shuts down the engines in case of total electrical failure.
An example, here Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » DA-42 engine failure
Bart
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
at the end of the day an IR is an IR, it shouldn't matter what you do it in all that matters at the end of the day (half an hour after sunset) is how good you are at it i would have thought
An IR is ALL about systems management and planning.
The two go together and if you learnt in an aircraft where the systems were looking after you, the systems management becomes CONSIDERABLY different than when you get chucked into an 30+ yr old Aztec where the ADF has to be tuned and the DI and VOR are split.
Not to mention having an autopilot that only works on Sunday.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybee not completely in line with the current discussion, but...
I would not even consider flying an aircraft that shuts down the engines in case of total electrical failure.
An example, here Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » DA-42 engine failure
Bart
I would not even consider flying an aircraft that shuts down the engines in case of total electrical failure.
An example, here Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » DA-42 engine failure
Bart
Loads of other aircraft have crashed because they took off with empty fuel tanks - I suppose you won't fly any of those aircraft either?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Derby
Age: 45
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmm
I did my IR on the Glass.
Renewed my IR on the Analogue.
Not shocking at all to see someone go woot woot FMC died, we dead..
I mean you train them on that, makes life easy, no?
A bit horrid though if they can't use backup systems which have worked for eons.
1/60
Renewed my IR on the Analogue.
Not shocking at all to see someone go woot woot FMC died, we dead..
I mean you train them on that, makes life easy, no?
A bit horrid though if they can't use backup systems which have worked for eons.
1/60
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh yawn yawn. This has been discussed endlessly. If you are too stupid to read the flight manual of an aircraft then what do you expect? The manual states perfectly clearly that you should not take off with a flat battery.
Ultimately the DA42 is a new airframe, and while I am sure that there may be one or two flaws still to come out, it has a commendable safety record.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Euroland
Age: 53
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Maybee not completely in line with the current discussion, but...
I would not even consider flying an aircraft that shuts down the engines in case of total electrical failure.
An example, here Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » DA-42 engine failure
Bart
Oh yawn yawn. This has been discussed endlessly. If you are too stupid to read the flight manual of an aircraft then what do you expect? The manual states perfectly clearly that you should not take off with a flat battery.
Maybee not completely in line with the current discussion, but...
I would not even consider flying an aircraft that shuts down the engines in case of total electrical failure.
An example, here Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » DA-42 engine failure
Bart
Oh yawn yawn. This has been discussed endlessly. If you are too stupid to read the flight manual of an aircraft then what do you expect? The manual states perfectly clearly that you should not take off with a flat battery.
has it occured to you that a total electrical failure can occur, even without the pilot causing it. I guess not.Nice aircraft I would say, if you are to stupid to read the flight manual, then you deserve to die. I did not see the manual but I suppose there is a
page-size large red boxed warning stating in big bold letters, "TAKING OFF WITH A FLAT OR WEAK BATTERY COULD RESULT IN LOSS OF BOTH ENGINES"
Having a total electrical failure you will have your hands full trying to get to a suitable aerodrome and making a safe landing. Having the two engines fail at the same time will not make it easier.
I would not want to be in an aircraft, flying IMC over the mountains, limited panel as a glider.
Loads of other aircraft have crashed because they took off with empty fuel tanks - I suppose you won't fly any of those aircraft either?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Deepest Europe...
Age: 39
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bullsh.it remark but it is very easy to see if a tank is empty, not so obvious to see how weak a battery is.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Age: 37
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can i be bold, and ask how come if the battery is flat then it will cause engine failure?
is it something to do with a diesel engine's ignition system?
is it something to do with a diesel engine's ignition system?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Deepest Europe...
Age: 39
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, a diesel engine works using compression ignition, i.e. there is no spark plug or electricity required for the actual ignition, it occurs spontaneously due to the very high compression of air and fuel in the cylinders. It's more to do with the Thielert's reliance on electronics than anything wrong with the engine itself.
Each engine has two electric Engine Control Units (ECUs). At least one must be working on each engine for that engine to operate. Normally if there is a major electrical failure in flight, the battery will supply the ECUs for up to half an hour meaning the pilot at least has chance to make a landing. Obviously, if the battery is knackered, that won't happen.
The battery being flat won't cause engine failure on its own - if the engines are running, the alternators will be working and supplying power. The problem occurs when the battery is weak and a large load is placed on the electrical system - such as raising the gear, which is what caused the crash in Speyer. The momentary power spike from raising the gear interrupted the supply from the alternators to the ECUs; the battery, being too weak, was unable to cover the drop in voltage, therefore the ECUs went dead and the engines stopped.
Each engine has two electric Engine Control Units (ECUs). At least one must be working on each engine for that engine to operate. Normally if there is a major electrical failure in flight, the battery will supply the ECUs for up to half an hour meaning the pilot at least has chance to make a landing. Obviously, if the battery is knackered, that won't happen.
The battery being flat won't cause engine failure on its own - if the engines are running, the alternators will be working and supplying power. The problem occurs when the battery is weak and a large load is placed on the electrical system - such as raising the gear, which is what caused the crash in Speyer. The momentary power spike from raising the gear interrupted the supply from the alternators to the ECUs; the battery, being too weak, was unable to cover the drop in voltage, therefore the ECUs went dead and the engines stopped.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DA42 POH is quite specific - if you start with a flat battery, you may only start the first engine with external power. You have to wait until the battery recharges ti start the second on internal power. The crash in question was caused by failure to follow procedures.
the ECUs now have a battery backup fitted so the problem should be avoided now, anyway.
the ECUs now have a battery backup fitted so the problem should be avoided now, anyway.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish people would actuall look at the checklist as it was at the time before they spout nonsense like "big fat warning - stupid pilots".
This is what it looked like at the time:
< normal starting engine stuff >
WARNING
If the oil pressure has not moved from the red range within
3 seconds after starting, set the ENGINE MASTER switch
to OFF and investigate problem. When starting the cold
engine, the oil pressure can be as high as 6.5 bar for a
maximum of 20 seconds
10. Circuit breakers.................. check all in / as required
11. Idle RPM........................... check, 900 +-20 RPM
12. External Power................... disconnect
13. Opposite engie................... Start with normal procedure
14. Warm up .......................... IDLE for 2 minutes / thereafter 1400 RPM
END OF CHECKLIST
So yes, it is clear that the other engine should be started normally, and yes, following this procedure would have (probably) prevented the accident (assuming the drain of the glow plug / starter motor would have caused the voltage to drop sufficiently).
But from the above it is pretty clear that no-one did see that one coming, and the procedure was not designed to catch that error. Just look at the WARNIG about oil pressure (which might cost you an engine) and not a single peep on the risk of engine failure on gear retraction (which probably costs you the airframe and perhaps your life).
This is what it looked like at the time:
< normal starting engine stuff >
WARNING
If the oil pressure has not moved from the red range within
3 seconds after starting, set the ENGINE MASTER switch
to OFF and investigate problem. When starting the cold
engine, the oil pressure can be as high as 6.5 bar for a
maximum of 20 seconds
10. Circuit breakers.................. check all in / as required
11. Idle RPM........................... check, 900 +-20 RPM
12. External Power................... disconnect
13. Opposite engie................... Start with normal procedure
14. Warm up .......................... IDLE for 2 minutes / thereafter 1400 RPM
END OF CHECKLIST
So yes, it is clear that the other engine should be started normally, and yes, following this procedure would have (probably) prevented the accident (assuming the drain of the glow plug / starter motor would have caused the voltage to drop sufficiently).
But from the above it is pretty clear that no-one did see that one coming, and the procedure was not designed to catch that error. Just look at the WARNIG about oil pressure (which might cost you an engine) and not a single peep on the risk of engine failure on gear retraction (which probably costs you the airframe and perhaps your life).
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cobalt,
The checklists are not a flight manual. The checklists assume that you have read and understood the flight manual. The flight manual has always been perfectly clear - do not take off with a flat battery! The checklists have also always been clear - check the voltage! It is not the job of a checklist to give a detailed description of why every check is necessary - it is up to the pilot to understand his aircraft by reading the flight manual, and understand why each check is necessary.
And it is perfectly obvious when you have a flat battery - the plane won't start so you need the jump-pack. You then have voltage and alternator current clearly displayed on the system page of the MFD so that you can monitor the state of the batteries and how they are charging.
There is an external guage supplied with every aircraft - plug it into the purge, slip it onto the purpose made notch on the wing leading edge, and it tells you very precisely how much fuel in each wing. You then reset the fuel flow counters to the amount you have in your tanks. The fuel flow counters then give you a highly accurate readout of what you have left. You also have capacitive guages in the tanks with a display on the MFD to give you a second opinion.
The checklists are not a flight manual. The checklists assume that you have read and understood the flight manual. The flight manual has always been perfectly clear - do not take off with a flat battery! The checklists have also always been clear - check the voltage! It is not the job of a checklist to give a detailed description of why every check is necessary - it is up to the pilot to understand his aircraft by reading the flight manual, and understand why each check is necessary.
And it is perfectly obvious when you have a flat battery - the plane won't start so you need the jump-pack. You then have voltage and alternator current clearly displayed on the system page of the MFD so that you can monitor the state of the batteries and how they are charging.
Actually on the Twin Star, due to its design, it's not that easy to see if the tank is empty without looking at the fuel gauges!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: India
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
having trained on both the DA42 and the PA34-220T - i would go for the DA42 any day, even though the Seneca has over 1.5 times the power and doesn't require any rudder.
It's true the G1000 makes life really easy with the full motion map display, GPS assistance and what not and realy spoils you. but while training, my instructor would have me shoot ILS approaches under the hood, single engine, with a couple of breakers popped.
so be it glass or analog, when it comes to partial panel flying, it's all about situational awareness. But when it comes to normal flying, why not learn on and get used to glass? After all, it's the present and the future.
Once you go Glass, there's no looking back!
It's true the G1000 makes life really easy with the full motion map display, GPS assistance and what not and realy spoils you. but while training, my instructor would have me shoot ILS approaches under the hood, single engine, with a couple of breakers popped.
so be it glass or analog, when it comes to partial panel flying, it's all about situational awareness. But when it comes to normal flying, why not learn on and get used to glass? After all, it's the present and the future.
Once you go Glass, there's no looking back!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so be it glass or analog, when it comes to partial panel flying, it's all about situational awareness. But when it comes to normal flying, why not learn on and get used to glass? After all, it's the present and the future.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Age: 59
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a 'new' aircraft, there are a suprising number of DA42's appearing on the second hand market of late. Are owners getting jittery about their engine warranties/servicing ?
Also, one flight school checked today, are deferring their choice of IR Simulator which was to be a DA42 but may now be a PA34/44.
Hmmm...
Also, one flight school checked today, are deferring their choice of IR Simulator which was to be a DA42 but may now be a PA34/44.
Hmmm...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: India
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the engine issues could be a reason ... but they seem to be resolved now ...
Jun. 18, 2008
Centurion Engines
Jun. 18, 2008
Full Head of Steam for Engine Production at THIELERT
Lichtenstein/Saxony, June 18, 2008 – The insolvent Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH (THIELERT) has resumed full production of aircraft engines. With immediate effect, the company can once again supply the THIELERT Centurion 2.0 engine in large quantities. Centurion Engines
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAA CPL/IR in DA42
I'm soon starting the flying part of the conversion of my FAA CPL/IR to JAA CPL/IR and I'm doing it all in a DA42 as that is what I am used to.
Can anyone tell me what manoeuvres (in particularly the types of stalls) you have to carry out in the DA42 for the JAA CPL test?
They practice slightly different stalls in FAA land (they don't do the base to final stall) I think so I'd like to get an idea of what I'm in for.
Thanks very much.
Can anyone tell me what manoeuvres (in particularly the types of stalls) you have to carry out in the DA42 for the JAA CPL test?
They practice slightly different stalls in FAA land (they don't do the base to final stall) I think so I'd like to get an idea of what I'm in for.
Thanks very much.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Da42 Ir Pass Rates
I don't have any experience of training students on the DA42, although a lot on Senecas. However, an old pal who is now teaching on the DA42 told me that his opinion of the reason for the improved pass rates was that the G1000 display forces the pilot to fly attitudes correctly, leading to better technique and accuracy; you simply cannot 'chase the needles' using the G1000. That has to be a good thing, does it not?
Certainly, given that the candidate may not use the G1000 mapping displays to improve SA during the Skills Test, that cannot be the cause of the improved pass rates.
Although I am fond of the old Seneca, it has to be said that it is a little long in the tooth.
Certainly, given that the candidate may not use the G1000 mapping displays to improve SA during the Skills Test, that cannot be the cause of the improved pass rates.
Although I am fond of the old Seneca, it has to be said that it is a little long in the tooth.