Pilots of America Message Board

Home Live Chat
Go Back   Pilots of America Message Board > Controlled Airspace > Flight Following

Flight Following Got a general question to ask or aviation topic to discuss? Establish contact here!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 11th, 2011, 11:02 AM   #126
Gary F Gary F is online now
(User ID: Gary F)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Da U.P.
Posts: 8,411
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
My opinion and experience is that the DA40 is just not a very well designed airplane. Sure it flies decently and is pretty efficient but it has quite a few downsides both in design and ergonomics that make it a bad choice for the cost.

The front seats don't move, it seems from a design standpoint the CG is so critical that the front seats are fixed, so the designers reacted by making the controls move instead. To get real utility out of the plane, it sucks not being able to move around. Can't slide the seat back to stretch out for some comfort room and there's a stick always between your legs. I'm mid-sized athletic build and I find it uncomfortable. It might be cool to fly with a stick, but to use it for business or travel, the reasons most new airplanes are purchased, it just fails. It's no wonder air-taxi operations dropped them and bought more Cirrus.

There's quite a few other quirks that point to the airplane, as a whole, being designed with a european, reactionary mindset in converting a motor glider. The front doors and step are stuck where they are because of having to fit them around an existing wing design that can't be stepped on. Since the front seats don't move they stuck a third, rear hatch for the passenger seats (which also don't move) that's not easily reached from inside by the pilot, it adds overall weight and complexity and frankly is annoying to get in an out of. In general, everything about the plane feels to me like it's lightweight, kinda cheap, and designed in response to problems rather than clean-sheeted from the start as Diamond claims. Really the best way to describe the plane is to say it's too European in style...which means they're just too quirky.

Diamonds don't to any job very well and at their price point, there's a lot of other airplanes out there that do for the same money.
Well I asked for it. I still don't really understand why you have such a negative perception of the DA40.

The fixed front seats are an advantage in my opinion, probably more crash worthy and will not slide backwards on takeoff. I always thought the Cessna adjustable seats were a PITA. I think it is much easier to load the rear seats with a separate rear door. It's a little tricky to get in and out of the front seats at first but not a real issue unless you have an elderly passenger but that is true for many airplanes. I love the stick but admit that it can be harder to use a larger kneeboard or large paper charts. I have not had any W&B issues as my useful load is 934 lbs and full fuel payload is 694 lbs with fairly generous CG limits. The newer DA40s with long range (50 gal tanks) have a lower useful load and narrower CG range so you have a point there.

I really don't understand what you mean by European or reactionary mindset. The design is a significant departure from the usual decades old spam can but I don't see why this is a bad thing. It has a longer wingspan so I decided to rent a wide hangar usually used by twins, no big deal.

The DA40 was not really designed as a cross country machine but my passengers and I have not found it to be uncomfortable, sheepskin seat covers help. It is a joy to fly and has a spectacular view. It's not quite as fast as a Cirrus SR20 but the maintenance costs are probably a lot lower and I think it is a much safer airplane. I love my DA40.
Gary F is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 02:01 PM   #127
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
I have talked to plenty of folks who really like their DA's and it's a good fit for its market. It's a fine airplane. My qualms are that's it's clearly designed in a way that attempt to fix its inherent shortcomings. In the cabin, it's lack of flexibility in loading and comfort makes it not very suitable for xcountry flying.

For the pilot flying the guy in the backseat, the DA doesn't do that job well at all. Passenger doesn't want to sit in a formed seat with his feet in a cubbyhole or over the hump or sit up front with pedal rail at his ankles and stick between legs so he can't use his laptop. As the pilot, I don't like having to hope he closed the back door properly or ask him to move over so I can put some luggage in the back.

DA's are great trainers, perfect fit for the "172 but newer" niche, but just don't work as a real utility or xcountry business tool. Proof? Go to a busy Class D exec airport around a bigger city and compare the piston singles on the ramp hidden among the big boy airplanes. There's three distinct categories -

The ones you see alot: the "SR22/Bonanza/maybe Mooney, Matrix, Malibu" category for single business guy who's time is money.

The planes you'll see pretty regularly: the "182/Cherokee variants for the self-flown/not as fast" category

The planes you don't see too often: the "I rented it at the flight school" category for the 172's and DA40's flown by occasional business, mostly VFR, not used to controlled field pilot. SR20's kind of cross over the last two categories.

My opinion is that the Diamonds are flawed from the start in trying to create a new airplane by adjusting exisitng designs, cobble it together and fix the resultant shortcomings. (There's a lot of similarities between it and the Cessna 177. Good idea hampered by incomplete design philosophy)
as far as that comparison goes: Diamond started in 1991.
You'll be hard pressed to find many 182 or 172 that are newer than 1991 that are not rentals.

I think the comparison is much closer than you think when you put that into perspective.
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 02:45 PM   #128
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
But for the cost of a DA40, I could have an SR20 or a nice older 182 or PA-something or maybe a Bo. All of which would be a better choice than the Diamond.
I disagree with the last part. but you make a good point, it's definitely a little high priced for its mission.

I think the fact that it's a stick instantly takes away from its XC missions. I LOVE flying stick I really do, but on a XC I'm glad I can just sit back and touch the yoke a little here or there.


I would get a diamond for having fun. Flying low, maneuvering, doing fun stuff, not for XC

But it's still a great aircraft
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 02:51 PM   #129
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Please explain how it's safer. I've never understood why Cirrus aircraft are thought of us unsafe.
when they burn, they BURN


and its lovely spin recovery characteristics. (or lack thereof)

in the hands of a decently talented pilot it's not that dangerous. in the hands of a once in a while dr type, it's a killer

Last edited by elmetal; April 11th, 2011 at 02:52 PM. Reason: GRAMMARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 03:03 PM   #130
Bob Noel Bob Noel is online now
(User ID: Bob Noel)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,443
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmetal View Post

I think the fact that it's a stick instantly takes away from its XC missions. I LOVE flying stick I really do, but on a XC I'm glad I can just sit back and touch the yoke a little here or there.

A little more thread hijacking here...

Having never flown a stick, I have to wonder why would a stick be harder for XC? If the airplane is trimmed does it really matter if there is a stick or a yoke? Plus can't you nudge a stick with your knee?
Bob Noel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 03:20 PM   #131
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Noel View Post
A little more thread hijacking here...

Having never flown a stick, I have to wonder why would a stick be harder for XC? If the airplane is trimmed does it really matter if there is a stick or a yoke? Plus can't you nudge a stick with your knee?

the stick is always between your legs. you can't move much around as far as how you're sitting. sometimes I like to cross my legs and a few other things that the stick just kinda gets in the way.


This (along with money of course) is why I don't own an aircraft, I just can't pick the perfect machine.

But it's 99% money
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 03:28 PM   #132
weilke weilke is online now
(User ID: weilke)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,399
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Noel View Post
Having never flown a stick, I have to wonder why would a stick be harder for XC? If the airplane is trimmed does it really matter if there is a stick or a yoke? Plus can't you nudge a stick with your knee?
Once the plane is on AP, what difference does it really make ?

There are very few DA40 without autopilots on the market. Really only the trainer variants sold on goverment or fleet training contracts. Who flies with full-size maps these days anyway ?
weilke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 03:53 PM   #133
Bob Noel Bob Noel is online now
(User ID: Bob Noel)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,443
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by weilke View Post
Who flies with full-size maps these days anyway ?
I do (or rather I will once I get back in the air - taking care of eldering parents prevented me from flying the past 12 months)
Bob Noel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 04:11 PM   #134
Pete Zaitcev zaitcev is offline
(User ID: zaitcev)
Pattern Altitude
 
zaitcev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,173
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmetal View Post
when they burn, they BURN

and its lovely spin recovery characteristics. (or lack thereof)
LOL OWT
zaitcev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 04:31 PM   #135
iMooniac flyingcheesehead is offline
(User ID: flyingcheesehead)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
flyingcheesehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UQACY, WI
Posts: 18,637
Send a message via AIM to flyingcheesehead Send a message via Yahoo to flyingcheesehead Send a message via Skype™ to flyingcheesehead
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmetal View Post
I disagree with the last part. but you make a good point, it's definitely a little high priced for its mission.
Disagree - The reason they're "expensive" is that they didn't start making 'em until 2001. Compare it to a 172 of the same vintage and airframe time, and I think they'll compare favorably.

The problem is getting two that are the same vintage and airframe time - The 172's tend to be trainers and are already worn out. One of the most worn-out airplanes I've ever flown was a 172SP!

Quote:
I think the fact that it's a stick instantly takes away from its XC missions. I LOVE flying stick I really do, but on a XC I'm glad I can just sit back and touch the yoke a little here or there.
I don't understand what the difference is? You can do the same thing with a stick. I've had the DA40 from Madison, WI to Houston, TX and back and didn't think anything of it being a stick vs. a yoke. I flew it like I fly the 182 on a long XC - Flight plan in the GPS, take off, hit the autopilot and enjoy the view.

Quote:
I would get a diamond for having fun. Flying low, maneuvering, doing fun stuff, not for XC
One of the things I really like about the DA40 is that it's great for BOTH. It's really fun to fly and the view is spectacular, but it's also good for hopping in, punching the autopilot, and getting you places reasonably fast.
__________________
Kent.CP-ASMEL-IA.KMSN
Subscribe to The Pilotcast for free in iTunes! Or, join my club so you can fly this beauty:
flyingcheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 04:42 PM   #136
PilotAlan PilotAlan is offline
(User ID: PilotAlan)
Pattern Altitude
 
PilotAlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,779
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

On the topic of Navions, I've looked very closely at them.
I love them as well designed, rugged, classic birds. Like a Tiger, if I lived on the east or west coasts, I would buy one in a second.

Out here in Colorado, where there's nothing nearby and any cross country trip is 500 miles up to 1000 miles, my mission requires speed. Hence, Bonanzas, 182RGs, etc are the planes I am looking at.
The up-engined Navions are 150-160mph (130-140kt) airplanes (and burn LOTS of fuel to get there). I need something in the 150-175kt area.

But again, on the East Coast where 300 miles will take you to lots of different places, a Navion would be on my very short list.
__________________
Alan
Denver Front Range Airport
==========================
A helicopter is an in-flight emergency which has reached equilibrium.
PilotAlan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 05:13 PM   #137
iMooniac flyingcheesehead is offline
(User ID: flyingcheesehead)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
flyingcheesehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UQACY, WI
Posts: 18,637
Send a message via AIM to flyingcheesehead Send a message via Yahoo to flyingcheesehead Send a message via Skype™ to flyingcheesehead
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
My opinion and experience is that the DA40 is just not a very well designed airplane. Sure it flies decently and is pretty efficient but it has quite a few downsides both in design and ergonomics that make it a bad choice for the cost.
After reading your whole post, it looks like you're trying pretty hard to hate it for some reason.

Quote:
The front seats don't move, it seems from a design standpoint the CG is so critical that the front seats are fixed, so the designers reacted by making the controls move instead.
That's not why the seats are fixed. The seats are fixed because the stick goes through the seat, F/A-18 Hornet style. (I dunno if the Hornet seats move or not, but for $millions per copy and jet power, they can afford the extra cost, weight and complexity of doing so.)

Quote:
To get real utility out of the plane, it sucks not being able to move around.
What does utility have to do with moving seats around?

Quote:
It's no wonder air-taxi operations dropped them and bought more Cirrus.
Huh? The DA40 was never used by any air-taxi operations, to my knowledge. Those that were using newer singles were using the SR22, and that's because it goes fast and carries more - It's in a different class. They're not using SR20's either. Has nothing to do with the Diamond design.

Quote:
There's quite a few other quirks that point to the airplane, as a whole, being designed with a european, reactionary mindset in converting a motor glider.
Reactionary mindset? The glider-like aspects of the DA40 are mostly excellent characteristics, IMO - The high aspect ratio wing gives it both great efficiency and an excellent glide ratio, which is a good thing to have in a single IMO. Hell, I'm going to get MORE utility out of it because of that - I'll be able to cross Lake Michigan in some spots and remain within gliding distance of shore for the entire crossing. That's going to greatly increase its utility for me.

Quote:
The front door and step are stuck where they are because of having to fit them around an existing wing design.
Huh? Existing wing design? The DA40 uses a different wing than any of their other stuff. It has some glider-like characteristics, but it is not an "existing wing design".

Also - There is no front door - It's a canopy, which allows for pax to get in from both sides, makes it easier to get into, and also allows for EXCELLENT visibility. And I kind of like the step being on the front instead of behind the wing - I can get directly into the plane rather than grabbing a handle and walking up the narrow wing-walk, then trying to squeeze and contort myself in through the door while trying not to place too much weight on the seat back like I have to do in a "normal" low wing. With the Diamond, it's open the canopy, left foot on the step, right foot on the wing, left foot on the cockpit floor, right foot in and sit down. Easiest low wing to get into, IME.

Quote:
Since the front seats don't move they stuck on a rear hatch for the passenger seats (which also don't move) that's not easily reached from inside by the pilot, it adds overall weight and complexity and frankly is annoying to get in an out of.
See, this is what makes me think that you're trying too hard to hate the DA40. Most single-engine 4-seat airplanes have a single front door, or two front doors, and a baggage compartment door. If you put adults in the back seat, how do you think they feel about moving a seat forward and climbing in? I haven't done that since I was a kid and rode in the back seat of my dad's Nissan. Do you carry adults in the back seat of a 2-door car?

Rather than having a baggage compartment door, Diamond made the rear door so that it can be used for both people AND bags. It's easier to get into the back seat, and at 6'4" I actually fit in the back seat of the Diamond!

Quote:
In general, everything about the plane feels to me like it's lightweight, kinda cheap,
Hmmm. It's actually the sturdiest plane I fly. Very solidly built.

Quote:
Really the best way to describe the plane is to say it's too European in style...which means they're just too quirky.
Funny, automakers *advertise* "European styling" as a positive thing. Do you have something against Europe?

Quote:
Diamonds don't to any job very well
They go places well, they're very efficient, they have the most roomy, flexible baggage compartment of any 4-seat single, you can get directly into 3 of the 4 seats without having to slide across anything or move anything...

They do a LOT of jobs very well. Since we picked up the DA40, I've only flown the 182 once and that was because I had to carry somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 pounds of people. Every other mission I've had, it has done very well. I wouldn't take it into the Idaho backcountry, and it won't carry what the 182 can, but the 182 is a different class of airplane. Compared to every other currently-produced fixed-gear 180hp single - That is, other airplanes in its class - It compares VERY favorably, which is why we bought one.

Quote:
and at their price point, there's a lot of other airplanes out there that do for the same money.
Price point is only a problem because you can't buy a 1978 DA40.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
That's an awesome solution. The Spirit of St Louis also had great range, but really poor passenger comfort and no room for golf clubs.
The DA40 has more room for golf clubs than any other plane in its class.

Quote:
As someone who uses airplanes as tools, I don't want to have to customize something that's an average performer when I can much more easily buy an airplane that's been built to do the job required.
Okay, that guy was flying across a lot of territory where there were no airports. Haven't you ever heard of putting ferry tanks in other airplanes? It's not like he wouldn't have had to add tanks to any other airplane to do the exact same job.

The DA40 is also not an "average performer." Again, you need to compare it to airplanes in its class - It's not an SR22 or a Bonanza. Neither is a 172. But when you compare it with other planes in its class, it's faster, more efficient, carries more (compared to other NEW airplanes - A 1970's Archer carries way more than a new one does), climbs faster, yadda yadda yadda - It outperforms other fixed-gear 180hp singles, and by a lot in many cases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
I have talked to plenty of folks who really like their DA's and it's a good fit for its market. It's a fine airplane.
There's a reason for that.

Quote:
My qualms are that's it's clearly designed in a way that attempt to fix its inherent shortcomings.
Every airplane has inherent shortcomings, and every airplane is designed in a way that attempts to mitigate them. That's why there's no such thing as a "perfect" airplane. Some come closer than others, and the DA40 is as close to perfect as I think you can get in a fixed-gear 180hp single.

Quote:
In the cabin, it's lack of flexibility in loading and comfort makes it not very suitable for xcountry flying.
I still don't know where you're getting this "lack of flexibility in loading" thing. And as someone who has flown it on a long cross-country trip - It's quite comfortable for 3-hour legs, more so than a lot of other airplanes.

Quote:
DA's are great trainers, perfect fit for the "172 but newer" niche, but just don't work as a real utility or xcountry business tool. Proof? Go to a busy Class D exec airport around a bigger city and compare the piston singles on the ramp hidden among the big boy airplanes. There's three distinct categories -

The ones you see alot: the "SR22/Bonanza/maybe Mooney, Matrix, Malibu" category for single business guy who's time is money.

The planes you'll see pretty regularly: the "182/Cherokee variants for the self-flown/not as fast" category

The planes you don't see too often: the "I rented it at the flight school" category for the 172's and DA40's flown by occasional business, mostly VFR, not used to controlled field pilot. SR20's kind of cross over the last two categories.
You don't see DA40's too often because Diamond does a pretty crappy job of marketing them, especially compared to Cirrus. They're also viewed as a "newcomer" compared to a company like Cessna, but that's mostly because most people don't realize they've been building aircraft since 1981 - The fact that they only built gliders and changed their name twice prior to 1995 when they started building airplanes didn't help.

Your assertion that the DA40 is something that you only find rented from a flight school is also incorrect - Diamond expected that to happen more than it did, but they found that they were ending up with a lot of single owner pilot customers - That's a large part of why they created the DA40XL and DA40XLS, and split the flight-school variants into the DA40FP and DA40CS - Neither of which has sold particularly well, further reinforcing that most of the customers for the DA40 are owners, not flight schools.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Please explain how it's safer. I've never understood why Cirrus aircraft are thought of us unsafe.
Cirri have their fuel in a wet wing. Metals tend to bend in a crash, while composites shatter. So, when Cirri crash, they tend to dump all of their fuel out very quickly, leading to flash fires.

Diamond, OTOH, built a wing with dual main spars and put the fuel in an aluminum tank between them so it's very well protected, and extremely unlikely to burn. We've discussed this recently, I suggest you go check out that thread.
__________________
Kent.CP-ASMEL-IA.KMSN
Subscribe to The Pilotcast for free in iTunes! Or, join my club so you can fly this beauty:
flyingcheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 05:25 PM   #138
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
So if you catch it on fire, it's unsafe.
If the pilot's skills are so poor that you spin, then the aircraft is unsafe.

Yeah, that's a good argument. Cirrus sure do suck....
it spins easily, but that's not the point, I agree that spinning an aircraft is the pilot's fault.
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 05:25 PM   #139
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by zaitcev View Post
LOL OWT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8502704.stm

Really? the lovely parachute helped the plane not crash into the ground and kill its victims. But the composite continued to burn, burning the passengers to death before they even reached the ground


OWT right?
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 05:30 PM   #140
elmetal elmetal is offline
(User ID: elmetal)
Pre-takeoff checklist
 
elmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 345
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingcheesehead View Post
I don't understand what the difference is? You can do the same thing with a stick. I've had the DA40 from Madison, WI to Houston, TX and back and didn't think anything of it being a stick vs. a yoke. I flew it like I fly the 182 on a long XC - Flight plan in the GPS, take off, hit the autopilot and enjoy the view.
Moving my legs in a plane with a stick is hard, like crossing my legs, or moving around my seat trying to do something else with my legs. If I'm the one flying it's fine but if I'm not flying it can be a pain.

But still, unless I'm doing something like 3+ hours it's not an issue, it's just more incentive to zigzag through the skies... who flies straight anyway!
elmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 06:42 PM   #141
weilke weilke is online now
(User ID: weilke)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,399
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
The front seats don't move, it seems from a design standpoint the CG is so critical that the front seats are fixed, so the designers reacted by making the controls move instead.
The fixed seats have nothing to do with CG, this is simply how the seats are designed in the composite gliders that the DA40 can be traced back to.


We get it. You don't like the plane.
weilke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 07:36 PM   #142
Gary F Gary F is online now
(User ID: Gary F)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Da U.P.
Posts: 8,411
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Please explain how it's safer. I've never understood why Cirrus aircraft are thought of us unsafe.
I did not mean to imply that Cirrus aircraft are unsafe, only that the DA40 is a safer, more forgiving airplane.
I have reviewed every Diamond accident report in the NTSB database as well as most if not all Cirrus accident reports. I agree that my comparison is not mathematically rigorous since I do not know the total hours flown but the numbers are concerning for Cirrus.

Total SR20 produced 1999 -2009 (per GAMA) 1057 with 14 fatal accidents
Total DA40 produced 2002- 2009 1352 produced with 5 fatal accidents

Of the 5 DA40 accidents, one occurred buzzing a lake, 2 were during instrument approaches, one in a snowstorm after the pilot reported icing and one following aerobatics- possible suicide by airplane vs. really bad judgment.
Gary F is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 07:39 PM   #143
Gary F Gary F is online now
(User ID: Gary F)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Da U.P.
Posts: 8,411
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
I don't know what OWT means...sorry, can't respond to that.
I think OWT means Old Wive's Tale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Would the outcome have been different without the parachute? Can you really say if a different plane wouldn't have burst into flames and crashed only killing them more quickly? What caused the fire?

Honestly I don't know, maybe the Cirrus design and materials killed those folks and I'm sorry for it.

But not hitting the tow cable might have made a bigger difference.
There has been speculation that the CAPS rocket serves as an ignition source.
Gary F is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 08:05 PM   #144
Gary F Gary F is online now
(User ID: Gary F)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Da U.P.
Posts: 8,411
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
I don't have to try really hard to dislike the DA40, I've disliked it from the first time I flew it. Like I said before, it's a fine airplane, fits its niche, flies well but has design issues that I don't like. By "european" design, I mean the penchant for designing something then fixing the flaws rather than changing the original design philosophy. Also european is the design attitude of, for example, "this is where the pilot and passengers will sit, no options". I like lots of european designs. It's great in my cars, motorcycle and coffee maker. In the Pilatus it makes me feel all tingly. In the Diamond it's just not as successful. Like I said before, it feels reactionary.
I disagree with your analysis. All airplanes are a collection of engineering trade offs and compromises. Diamond simply did things differently than you would have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
I think, in it's class, the Cirrus SR20 is a superior product and one that I like very much. Same displacement engine with 20 more HP, bit more fuel load, much more comfortable cabin, really sturdy airframe (certificated normal category, 150% of 3.8g at 4500 lbs rather than its 3000 lb paper gross). Yes it has wet wings, but so do many other aircraft. If you crash in such a way to rupture the fuel tanks and have the fuel run towards the hot parts, yup, you're gonna have problems. But they aren't isolated to fire and certainly not isolated to Cirrus. Checking older posts doesn't cut it because the same argument with the same bad premise is repeated.
I flew a SR20 three times when I was shopping for my first airplane. I thought that is was not nearly as fun to fly as a DA40. I did not like the awkward side stick until a few hundred feet then A/P for the rest of the trip. I am fairly certain that maintenance costs are higher for the SR20 with 2 additional cylinders and the CAPS to maintain. I suspect that insurance costs may be a lot higher for Cirrus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
Kent, you like the DA40. I understand you put a lot of time and effort into purchasing it for your flying club so you are completely personally and emotionally invested in it. I'm cool with those reasons for that opinion. I don't share it. Maybe if you had more experience in more aircraft you'd notice other differences as well.
Me too. I had enough experience in other comparable aircraft to know which was the most fun to fly. I have found the DA40 to be practical for my requirements. Most of my flights are 160 to 300 miles with an occasional 800 to 1000 mile trip. If I flew more long cross country trips I probably would have gone with something faster like a Bonanza or a Mooney. I just don't like Cirrus aircraft but it's fine if you do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
There was an air taxi operation in our metro area that was using SR22's and as a cheaper option the DA40. DA40's sat on the ramp because the customers didn't want to fly in them. Maybe it had to do with their flimsy look, or with sticking their feet in a cubbyhole under the front seat or having a control stick in their crotch. Who knows? Capitalism made the choice in this instance and the Diamonds disappeared.
I also do not think that the DA40 is well suited for air taxi.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
For the casual flier and hobbyist, the DA40 is, great,
Yes it is.
Gary F is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2011, 08:12 PM   #145
Freiburgfan31 flyersfan31 is offline
(User ID: flyersfan31)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
flyersfan31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 13,791
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

182. Period.

Add turbo if you'll be in the mountains. Consider the turbo even if not.
__________________
If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!

States I have flown to:
flyersfan31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2011, 01:08 AM   #146
DenverPilot denverpilot is offline
(User ID: denverpilot)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
denverpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 24,077
Send a message via ICQ to denverpilot Send a message via AIM to denverpilot Send a message via Yahoo to denverpilot Send a message via Skype™ to denverpilot
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
In the Pilatus it makes me feel all tingly.
Have you discussed this with your AME?

Dr. Bruce will be along here in a minute...
__________________
--
Nate Duehr, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
N1279M KAPA C-182P Robertson STOL
denverpilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2011, 01:50 AM   #147
iMooniac flyingcheesehead is offline
(User ID: flyingcheesehead)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
flyingcheesehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UQACY, WI
Posts: 18,637
Send a message via AIM to flyingcheesehead Send a message via Yahoo to flyingcheesehead Send a message via Skype™ to flyingcheesehead
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmetal View Post
Moving my legs in a plane with a stick is hard, like crossing my legs, or moving around my seat trying to do something else with my legs. If I'm the one flying it's fine but if I'm not flying it can be a pain.
You can still cross your legs (below the knee)... You can't move your legs to the pax side, but that's also because of the center console, not just the stick. The only time I've actually had to do that to remain comfortable was in an Archer on a longish XC (Madison -> Kansas City and back). Yoke didn't help me much there!
__________________
Kent.CP-ASMEL-IA.KMSN
Subscribe to The Pilotcast for free in iTunes! Or, join my club so you can fly this beauty:
flyingcheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2011, 01:56 AM   #148
weilke weilke is online now
(User ID: weilke)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,399
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary F View Post
I also do not think that the DA40 is well suited for air taxi.
Neither is the 172 or the ArcherIII.
weilke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2011, 01:58 AM   #149
Wayne wabower is offline
(User ID: wabower)
Touchdown! Greaser!
 
wabower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,018
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Is it therefore your opinion, sir, that moveable rudder pedals are the equivalent of an adjustable seat insofar as pilot comfort is concerned?


Quote:
Originally Posted by weilke View Post
The fixed seats have nothing to do with CG, this is simply how the seats are designed in the composite gliders that the DA40 can be traced back to.


We get it. You don't like the plane.
wabower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2011, 02:59 AM   #150
weilke weilke is online now
(User ID: weilke)
Final Approach
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,399
Re: GA Airplane question: Good All-around airplane

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabower View Post
Is it therefore your opinion, sir, that moveable rudder pedals are the equivalent of an adjustable seat insofar as pilot comfort is concerned?
I find the semi-recumbent position with a parachute or foam-pad behind my back to be very comfortable, including longer trips. My upper body is too long for the older DA40 versions, but that problem dodges me in every plane that is not either an open biplane or a Cessna 182.
weilke is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply
Home Register New Posts Today's Posts
Go Back   Pilots of America Message Board > Controlled Airspace > Flight Following

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good airplane day - Long tonycondon Flight Following 9 April 17th, 2009 06:01 AM
Quick question about airplane part Toby Flight Following 26 August 2nd, 2008 04:16 PM
Saboteur passenger jumps out of perfectly good airplane mikea Hangar Talk 5 May 14th, 2008 04:37 PM
Would you jump from a perfectly good airplane? woodstock Hangar Talk 55 June 25th, 2007 12:35 AM
Question for you Oklahoma airplane owners Dean Hangar Talk 8 January 9th, 2007 11:41 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 2005 - Pilots of America