Another plane not to get excited about!

I wanna know what happened to the Diamond Jet. I was ready to lay down a deposit!
 
I wanna know what happened to the Diamond Jet. I was ready to lay down a deposit!

I was sorry the Piper Jet never came to fruition. But the single engine did look odd.
 
I was sorry the Piper Jet never came to fruition. But the single engine did look odd.

I'm not sure why that project got the green light. It was an obvious failure from the start. If performance was the only factor in aviation, you would see a lot more P.180's and Starships around. Looks sell.
 
Wingspan 47'7". Not many hangars for that one...
 
7 seat with a pair of 180hp engines? Seriously? What is it, a 145kt cruise wing? They should have stuck the CD-350s on it and made it really perform like its looks lead one to believe. This thing is going to be as much of a dog is the DA-42.
 
7 seat with a pair of 180hp engines? Seriously? What is it, a 145kt cruise wing? They should have stuck the CD-350s on it and made it really perform like its looks lead one to believe. This thing is going to be as much of a dog is the DA-42.

It's like 201kt cruze the specs are in that link

I have been putting a lot of time in a DA40 and have to say I really like it.
 
Well, the simple solution to not being excited about what the manufacturers are putting out is to design and build your own.
 
Wingspan 47'7". Not many hangars for that one...

That's a bit wider than a 421C or 414A, although pretty darn close. You can find hangars for those, although most are communal and they are expensive.

However, if you can afford what that plane costs new, then I suspect you won't care too much about the hangar cost.
 
180 kt cruise at 77% power via the pdf fact sheet listed

Ive always liked the look of Diamond twins. Kinda spaces hippy.

The DJet: "Diamond maintains the market introduction lead in this aircraft class. The flight testing and certification program is well underway."

Is what they are saying. An interesting Light Jet to say the least.
 
Last edited:
I was sorry the Piper Jet never came to fruition. But the single engine did look odd.

I was just thinking about that plane yesterday. I saw the prototype at the AOPA Expo in San Jose. I wonder what happened to it when they dropped the project.
 
I never like brochures that give you speeds at one power setting, and burns at a different one.

That said, I wouldn't write this off just yet. 180hp isn't going to light the world on fire, but my Apache Geronimo does 155 to 160 KTAS; even with various speed mods the Apache leaves a lot of room for aerodynamic improvement. I don't doubt that they could eek another 15 knots out of an all new plane; couple that with turbocharged engines and cruise above 10k, and 170 to 180 KTAS claims seem reasonable to me.

At max gross for the 5070 pound version climb might be interesting, both normal and one engine inoperative. Geronimo does well in that regard with the same horsepower, but weighs 1000 pounds less and has a wing optimized for low speeds. The brochure lists 1650 fpm at a bit under 4000 pounds which seems reasonable, but another 1000 pounds will make a major difference. It also seems a bit disingenuous to list performance numbers 1000 pounds under gross!

Interesting and exciting airplane, but I'd be more excited if the numbers were not so cherry picked. Obviously sales folks like to put stuff in the best light, but Diamond really went overboard on this one!
 
The plane's been certified in Europe with NA pending. The EASA docs are online in the usual places.

Unlike nearly everyone else, Diamond posts the AFM and AMM online. Here's the link to the AFM & AMM: http://support.diamond-air.at/da62+M52087573ab0.html

Selected items I found interesting:
Vmc=70/76kias (flaps t/o, up)
Vno=162kias
Vle=Vne, at 205kias.

White arc: 64-119kias. (69 min in other configurations)

Empty mass: 1600kg
MTOM: 2000/2300kg

Climb performance is dependent on weight based on the charts. OEI at max-gross at STP will hold you between 10 & 12k ft. I don't think one will ever be able to do OEI climb to 18k like you can in the 42-VI.

Time to climb to 20k ft at max gross is listed at 24 minutes, using 7.3 gallons of JetA covering 43NM.


It's not a "sporty" as the DA42-VI, but it's a lot of plane. (And it had better be for the money. Though IMO it's a better value than a new Seneca at a nearly identical price point.)

Your info's a little old Henning. The new Austro-powered revisions of the DA42 (NG, and especially the -VI) are really impressive. Unfortunately they have two generations of thielert-underpowered aircraft has poisoned perception. You don't need super heavy engines putting out a lot of power when you're dealing with an airframe that clean.

As for the DJet? That's pretty much dead. If you go to the factory in Canada you can see the prototypes, but that's about as far as it goes. No money to finish.

Everyone hurry up and buy them so I can pick one up in ten years. :D
 
It's like 201kt cruze the specs are in that link

I have been putting a lot of time in a DA40 and have to say I really like it.


First off, it says "Max Speed" that may be Vne. Second, Diamond is is quite liberal with their advertised speed. This thing isn't doing 200kts on 360hp, that isn't going to happen without an afterburner.
 
180 kt cruise at 77% power via the pdf fact sheet listed

Ive always liked the look of Diamond twins. Kinda spaces hippy.

The DJet: "Diamond maintains the market introduction lead in this aircraft class. The flight testing and certification program is well underway."

Is what they are saying. An interesting Light Jet to say the least.

I've always been a fan of the Diamond twins as well, they're just nice looking aircraft. If I could afford/justify the need for a twin I'd be looking at those (contingent on it meeting my needs that is).
 
Nice looking plane ,out of my league,hope it works out.
 
This is a plane I could see replacing the 310 with in 25 years. Of course, the 310 will be 73 by then. :eek:
 
This is a plane I could see replacing the 310 with in 25 years. Of course, the 310 will be 73 by then. :eek:

That is pretty and I'm not a hater, but I'm trying to figure out what that thing has that I don't already have in my 310 besides a slightly lower fuel bill.
 
That is pretty and I'm not a hater, but I'm trying to figure out what that thing has that I don't already have in my 310 besides a slightly lower fuel bill.

Outside of Diesel engines and hot water heat, nothing really, and you have speed and load advantage. Water heat wouldn't be that difficult to build you either. I'm surprised that Continental isn't pushing conversions for the cabin twins with a CD-350, heck, I'm really surprised not to see it in a new Cirrus yet.

There was also the Centurian that Thielert had, I always wonder what became of that, that had good horsepower.
 
That is pretty and I'm not a hater, but I'm trying to figure out what that thing has that I don't already have in my 310 besides a slightly lower fuel bill.

Answer is nothing. Our 310s are still better. My question is whether I'll still want to fly an airplane that is old enough to have Alzheimer's.
 
Answer is nothing. Our 310s are still better. My question is whether I'll still want to fly an airplane that is old enough to have Alzheimer's.

As long as it doesn't have osteoporosis, it should be just fine. It's you getting Alzheimer's that would affect the flight.:lol:;)
 
As long as it doesn't have osteoporosis, it should be just fine. It's you getting Alzheimer's that would affect the flight.:lol:;)

Who are you again? Get off my lawn! ;)
 
Back
Top