DA42 Austro engines - another aircraft being retrofitted
 

Heard a few rumours about a Twinstar being taken apart and loaded onto a low loader at a local airfield, so popped down for a look... Turns out that it's HGFC's original DA42, G-FCAB, which is being transported down to Austria to get the new Austro Engines AE300 lumps. Looking through the mags it sounds like a useful upgrade - more power, less fuel burn at sensible speeds, and should be more robust than Thielert POS! Might even have to think about getting a go for next year's ME-IR renewal to see what they're really like, after doing all my training in a Thielert equipped 42. Flight Centre staff told me the aircraft's expected back in 5-6 weeks with the new engines, vortex generators as per the NG DA42, and some software upgrades to the G1000 EFIS - sounds interesting.

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i2...DSC01496PS.jpg

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i2...DSC01510PS.jpg

That looks in better shape that the last DA-42 I saw on the back of a truck... G-SUEA !!.
:\

It should be in good condition! its hardly been used!!!

A real poor show from Diamond! :=
I am amazed that it never put more companies out of business, I know our school looked at the engines early days for the PA28's and nearly took the leap! I still have a job and am very glad they did not bother!
Hope the new motors are as good as they look and sound on paper. :ok:

Are they offering any kind of customer service on the new motors?

What happened to G-SUEA? Do tell please!

I completed my IR checkride in her, hate to think she might be in bits 'n pieces.

SUEA's the one that got piled in at Land's End, using wet grass in rather unfavourable conditions... AAIB report is available to stop me commenting further! AFAIK FCAB did the full 1050 hours until the existing Thielerts were grounded, so not an insignificant amount of hours to fly in well under 3 years CPL/IR training.

RE Thielert PA28s: I did my FI rating on them, and do a fair amount of work with some at the moment. They are rather fragile, good maintenance is absolutely vital, as is a good installation. As training tools they are actually quite good for teaching the basics on - I've no doubt that FADEC and SLPC is the way that PPL training will go in the future. Just annoying that basic faults get repeated so often in the design process!

Does sound like Diamond are doing a good deal for FCAB's owners - far better than Thielert would ever have done, so maybe salvaging something from the wreckage? They certainly can't afford to have a disaster with the Austro Engines, that'll close them down permanently!

Thanks for the info, just read the AAIB report.

Like the last line, "the pilot stated that it was the wrong decision to attempt a takeoff at all and concluded that he would not be operating a DA-42 from a wet grass surface again."

I always took off and landed on runway 22 with the Twinstars at Stapleford - two thirds of which is hard surfaced anyway.

Just sad really, it was a lovely aircraft. Still have a picture of her in my study...

Now can I ask the obvious, why wasn't said a/c flown to Austria for the mods ?. Not exactly a trip the DA-42 couldn't handle.

:confused:

I'm thinking the CAA wouldn't issue a permit to fly? Out of hours on many lifed parts and probably robbed for spares over the last year or so.

It was indeed because the engines were out of hours and the aeroplane had been standing a while. The engines were complete and running but although the CAA were happy for it to fly, the man from EASA said "NO!".

Care to explain Just-local?
I don't think Diamond can be blamed in any way, shape or form for the Thielert situation.
I think it's pretty amazing they managed to design and certify a new engine (Austro) in the little time that they have, both EASA and FAA.

Care to explain?
 

Yes!
It would seem the product is not really fit for purpose.
Schools/ private operators have purchased or worse on finance a very expensive aircraft which in many cases seems to have been flown out early due to low TBO of the engines (these were supposed to go to another 100% +) and many faults with fuel pumps, cluches, gearboxes etc.
What was supposed to be a super efficient aircraft with lower operating costs is either sat on the ground dead or very expensive due to the unforseen component changes which are now required.
I understand that the engines were not made by Diamond but its part of the product!
I don't know the aircraft mentioned here G-FCAB but ginfo puts its ARC expired on 15/11/08! It may have become unairworthy before this time?
A poster mentions 1050 flight hours, it is a Jan 2006 machine, these are reasnable hours for a uk flown machine but they have had no use of the asset for a long time and all that money sat dead! :ugh:

Yes they have done well to get a new engine to this stage in such a short time, I hope it is the best thing since the 0-320, watch this space and your wallets!

Agree, mostly.
It's not a first in the world of aviation that a product suffers because of a sub-contractor.
Lycoming crankshafts come to mind, entire fleets grounded.
AvioNG on the Eclipse jet, 50% certified for use.
And Thielert was supposed to get the engines certified for 2000hrs at some point, they just didn't manage it prior to the collapse.
But new engines were prorated if you reached 1000hrs, as in you only pay half the normal price.
So whether you run 2000 hrs and full price or 1000hrs and half price is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
Anyways let's hope that the Austro will turn out to be the magic bullet to really get the DA 42 going.

JUST-local:

G-AB has proven to be a very reliable and effective aeroplane and, after a few teething problems (mostly water ingress into the ECUs), went on to do 1050 hours in a little over two years. It has proven to be nice to fly and has a much better CPL/IR pass rate than the Seneca that preceded it.

When Thielert ran into trouble mid-2008, this was at just about the worst possible time because the engines were approaching 1000 hours and were therefore due for replacement - but Thielert were no longer honouring the warranty! There was the choice of spending a lot of money on new Thielerts without any warranty at all (at that time) or parking the aeroplane and waiting for the new Austro Diesel to become available and leasing in replacement DA42s to ensure that training could continue.

A "strategic" decision was made, and the aeroplane was parked up whilst Diamond developed and certified the AE300 - although that did take longer than anticipated.

Diamond have been very co-operative with financing etc., by the way, and appear to have realised that although they were not to blame for the Thielert collapse, they did need to work to minimise the fallout.

If the promises for the AE300 come true then it will be a much more reliable and economical engine than the Thielert. If my memory serves correctly, the cost of parts used during scheduled maintenance should be about 90% lower than for a Thielert.

I believe one of your competitors did just that, and the new engine lasted not much over 3 hours before it suffered major damage...

It arrived safe and sound and work should be starting very soon. With a bit of luck, there will be something about this in the next issue of "Loop".

There's a nice write up about the DA42 NG in the November issue of Loop and this particular aeroplane is pictured on page 35.

Ae300 Tbo?
 

At Dubai Airshow last week a Diamond salesman suggested that the new engines' TBO was 1,000hrs. Can this be correct? Is it only until experience has been gained with the unit on the DA42?

I'll try to remember to find out for you tomorrow. However, off the top of my head, the warranty is for 1,000 hours but the expected TBO is 1,500+ hours.

As an aside, the aeroplane should be returning from Austria in the middle of next week.

Don't overlook the IO-360 powered DA42-L360, it's a great option too, and a delightful plane to fly...

http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/o...g/File0258.jpg

Don't let the fact it's not turning bother you, I had it shut down on purpose during a certification test...

http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/o...g/File0262.jpg

The newly re-engined Twinstar should be back tomorrow (1 Dec).

I'm sure it is - but a bit expensive on fuel for European tastes!

A couple of photos:

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w.../DA42NG003.jpg
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w.../DA42NG004.jpg
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w.../DA42NG002.jpg

Excellent !

I'm very curious to hear about the first impressions in flight...

Looks like a nice installation.

How much does it cost?
What is the TBO?
What are the lifed items?
What is the typical fuel burn?

:)

All the following are off the top of my head, so apologies if any numbers are a bit out.

In terms of the performance, etc, the AE300 is smoother than the Thielerts across the rev range and gives better climb performance, requires a lower percentage power setting for a given speed and (speed for speed) gives similar fuel burns.

TBO is currently 1,000 hours but is expected to move to 1,500+ before too much longer. Unlike the Thielert, the AE300 can be overhauled rather than requiring a complete new unit.

It's not a cheap upgrade at €99,000 plus VAT but compared to fitting two new Thielerts there is actually little difference in overall cost - so the savings are due come from much lower maintenance costs. The upgrade includes quite a bit of work on the undercarriage, beefing it up and giving a higher MTOW.

Overhauls are currently quoted at about €18,000 per engine which is a bit over half the price of a new Thielert.

Diamond Aircraft :: Austro Engine Upgrade

Off the top of my head, I believe that the gearbox, fuel pumps etc are all lifed for the life of the engine with just routine service items such as filters needing to be replaced.

No flight experience with AE300 but according to a magazine article I read:
For a similar speed the AE 300 fuel burn is about 20% less then the Thielert.
From what I understood a powersetting of 60% on the Austro will give the same speed as 80% on the Thielert.

We're still fine tuning the settings and finding out what works best. I expect that the engine will free up a bit over the next few hours as it gets run in and we'll see how it goes then.

Does this mean you will actually deliver the CPL MEP course in the 4-5 weeks as advertised rather than the 10-11 weeks it took some of us a while back? :bored:

Yep they certainly do. Just finished my MEP CPL with HPFC, took 4 weeks. First time pass no problems. The DA42 NG is fantastic to fly and climbs like a rocket on take off!!!:ok:

Heard the other day that Stapleford also have the DA42 NG

Any feedback regarding the dispatch/reliability rates of the austro engine would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

I have about 400 hours on the original DA42, and about 60 on the NG.

The AE300 engines are about 35kg heavier than the Thielerts, mostly due to having a cast-iron block instead of aluminium. This allows for a higher compression ratio, and a bigger turbo, which yields better specific fuel consumption. The troublesome clutch damping of the propeller has been replaced with a visco-damper, and the idle speed is about 100rpm lower.

The additional weight has meant that the undercarriage has had to be modified, and the MTOW and MLW have both been increased, so although the aircraft is heavier, the useful load has been increased by about 40kg (I can't remember the exact figures now without looking them up - but they are approximately correct).

The COG of the aircraft has also moved forward by around 5cm, slightly ahead of the point which was intended by the designers.

You notice the difference from start-up. The motors are much smoother and quieter at idle - it is perfectly safe and comfortable to start the motors with the canopy fully open, and you can carry on a conversation with the pax.

Directional stability in taxying is slightly diminished, due to more weight on the nosewheel.

Run up is slightly simplified in that the FADEC has "voters" rather than manual/auto selection, and the FADEC and prop auto-test procedures are smoother.

The extra 20% power is clearly noticable in the take-off run and initial climb. But whereas the Thielerts had no limitation on using 100% power, the AE300s are limited to 90% after approximately 5 mins (again, I'd have to look it up to be sure of that figure). The oil is cooled by a heat exchanger with the main engine cooling, rather than with its own radiator, so oil temp climbs rapidly in the climb.

Whereas the Thielert's were unable to generate full power from an altitude density of around 8000', the AE-300s maintain full power up to about 13000' due to the bigger turbo.

Stall speeds, flap limiting speeds are all slightly different by a couple of knots.

Single-engine performance is better, but the asymmetric rudder forces required are noticably higher, despite the forward COG. However, N-1 is still far more benign than any other MEP aircraft I know. A big disadvantage for FTOs is that in simulated N-1 with one engine in idle and the prop in a transparency position, the gear-warning horn continues to sound (previously it was silenced) so all single-engine training will have to conducted with the gear horn blaring - not ideal.

Specific fuel consumption is better by about 10% overall, so you can either cruise faster at the same fuel consumption of the old aircraft, or use less fuel at the same speed. I'd have to dig out my notes to give the exact figures.

The NG also comes with some nice upgrades to the G1000 - Jepp cards on the MFD, Safe-Taxi (in the USA), synthetic vision, a decent VNAV setup, offset airways and the excellent GFC700 autopilot.

There are lots of minor improvements to the build quality and ergonomics - for example the fuel cut-off protectors are still spring-loaded, but click into place, so it is possible to cut off the fuel with just one hand instead of two!

The AE300s were tested ruthlessly at LOAN - they were forced to run on a testbed for hours - and they do appear so far to be a big improvement in reliability.

I have to admit that I mildly prefer the handling of the Thielert aircraft, but the NG is overall a much improved aircraft.

I hope that helps.

Anyone with some AE300 field experience able to give an update on how they are performing?