DA-40 experience and thoughts?

[PilotAlan]

I have a chance to be a non-equity partner in a DA40, but I'd have to sell the Cherokee. Can't afford to pay fixed costs of one and hourly rate on another.
I need impressions and thoughts from folks who have DA40 time.

My thoughts:
Seems light in cargo space and useful load. Useful was ~850. With three adults and luggage (if you can put the bags someone), that's not much left for fuel.

The G1000 was nice, but I found myself glacing at the analog instruments because they were closer to my field of view (in other words, closer to eyes outside).
Admittedly, for IFR training, the G1000 would be sa-weeeet.

What speeds do you use for base, final, and over the numbers? The owner had me going at 80kt on final, 75 over the numbers (former fighter guy). That seemed WAY fast.


Someone kick me, but my Cherokee seems to have more utility, although somewhat slower.

 

[DanielH]

The DA40 does well with two passengers, bags, and full fuel. Three people and bags does not leave too much for fuel.

The one I fly does not have G1000 so I can't speak on that. I did use it for IFR training and found it to be a very good IFR platform. Because it has such long wings you'll have to watch your altitude when training on bumpy days. But overall, a very good IFR training.

80kts on final is WAY too fast. 70-75 on final and 65-67 over the numbers still produces a good bit of floating even at higher weights. Usually would be 100-105 on downwind, put in a notch of flaps abeam the numbers and shoot for 90 in the descent on downwind, 80 on base, and final notch of flaps when field is made then slow to 70 or so.

Another note: It can become pretty uncomfortable on XC flights over 2 hours or so, especially if you're taller. Let me know if I can answer any more questions. Overall a great airplane though!

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Another note: It can become pretty uncomfortable on XC flights over 2 hours or so, especially if you're taller. Let me know if I can answer any more questions. Overall a great airplane though!

It's not too bad. I did about 10 hours solo in 1 day on a X/C in a DA40. Nice airplane. GFC700/G1000 combo is the best avionics package in the bird.

 

[Henning]

DA-40 is ok, I don't like it as an IFR platform because it is hell in turbulence. Those numbers you were flying are WAY too fast. The one I flew most cruised at 133kts, the most annoying thing was the stall horn would come on 12 kts above stall so it was just screaming all the way down short final, I ended up using tape over the top of the hole to tune it to 4 kts over stall and put a little mark there so I could accurately replace the tape each flight. If you don't get it slowed down early or slip aggressively at the bottom or in your flair, it's a runway hog and will float in ground effect for a long ways. It always seemed heavy in the aileron controls to me, and keeping wings level in turbulence was a real workout, trying to "crank and bank" it was virtually impossible. On long cross countries, the center stick and low canopy makes it a pain in the neck to refill a Gatorade jug. You have to trust the fuel gauge if you intend to depart with less than full fuel although I'd imagine that someone has come up with a Burdon tube type gauge that you can use on the sump, I used to use a piece of clear vinyl tubing to do a quick cross check of limited accuracy. Not my favorite of all planes, but well built. I wouldn't buy one, but I have no qualms about flying them.

 

[DanielH]

DA-40 is ok, I don't like it as an IFR platform because it is hell in turbulence. Those numbers you were flying are WAY too fast. The one I flew most cruised at 133kts, the most annoying thing was the stall horn would come on 12 kts above stall so it was just screaming all the way down short final, I ended up using tape over the top of the hole to tune it to 4 kts over stall and put a little mark there so I could accurately replace the tape each flight. If you don't get it slowed down early or slip aggressively at the bottom or in your flair, it's a runway hog and will float in ground effect for a long ways. It always seemed heavy in the aileron controls to me, and keeping wings level in turbulence was a real workout, trying to "crank and bank" it was virtually impossible. On long cross countries, the center stick and low canopy makes it a pain in the neck to refill a Gatorade jug. You have to trust the fuel gauge if you intend to depart with less than full fuel although I'd imagine that someone has come up with a Burdon tube type gauge that you can use on the sump, I used to use a piece of clear vinyl tubing to do a quick cross check of limited accuracy. Not my favorite of all planes, but well built. I wouldn't buy one, but I have no qualms about flying them.

The one I fly has a gauge similar to what you described that will let you know how much is in the tank if less than full. Usually end up getting gas all over your hands though.

It seems that people transitioning to the airplane tend to over control it. I think the aileron may be heavier than pitch but still requires nowhere near the control forces of a Cherokee. If you're willing to compromise comfort and a few oddities for speed and efficiency its a good plane, otherwise I'd stick with he Cherokee

 

[poadeleted20]

Seems light in cargo space and useful load. Useful was ~850. With three adults and luggage (if you can put the bags someone), that's not much left for fuel.

Sounds like this one doesn't have the gross weight upgrade kit which modifies the landing gear. Check to see about this, and whether the current owner is willing to spend the bucks to add it. Adds 50 kg (111 lb) to MGW with no significant EW increase, and that makes a big difference. That said, with only 180HP, you can't expect it to be a 4-adults plus bags airplane -- for that, you're looking at 230-235HP like the C-182 or Piper Dakota.

The G1000 was nice, but I found myself glacing at the analog instruments because they were closer to my field of view (in other words, closer to eyes outside).
Admittedly, for IFR training, the G1000 would be sa-weeeet.

You'll adjust to it very quickly with good training. Make sure whoever teaches you the G1000 has a good DA40 simulator with the G1000 package. If you want to combine that with your IR training, give PIC a call, as we have such a sim (FlyThisSim Touch Trainer -- Cessna, Cirrus, and Diamond packages all installed).

What speeds do you use for base, final, and over the numbers? The owner had me going at 80kt on final, 75 over the numbers (former fighter guy). That seemed WAY fast.

I think you are a perceptive pilot. From the DA40 POH:

13. Approach speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 KIAS (1200 kg, 2646 lb)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 KIAS (1150 kg, 2535 lb)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 KIAS (1092 kg, 2407 lb)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 KIAS (1000 kg, 2205 lb)​

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 KIAS (850 kg, 1874 lb)

And yes, if you come in much faster, those long skinny glider wings will float forever.

BTW, I've taken a couple of people through their IR in a G1000 DA40, so while I've got about 50 hours in the right seat, I don't have a lot of stick time other than a couple of demonstration instrument approaches plus cadging a few trips around the pattern just for the feel. It's not exactly my sort of plane (in this class, I like both the Tiger and SR20 better), but it flies nicely and has no bad habits I've noticed. However, the comments on turbulence are not inaccurate -- those long skinny wings do not give the best ride in bumpy conditions, although not so bad you can't do instrument flying in light to moderate turbulence.

And yes, if you're coming from a comparable Cessna, Beech, or Piper, you are going to be overcontrolling it at first until you learn to fly it with 2-3 fingers instead of grabbing the stick like you're strangling a chicken.

 

[DanielH]

Sounds like this one doesn't have the gross weight upgrade kit which modifies the landing gear. Check to see about this, and whether the current owner is willing to spend the bucks to add it. Adds 50 kg (111 lb) to MGW with no significant EW increase, and that makes a big difference. That said, with only 180HP, you can't expect it to be a 4-adults plus bags airplane -- for that, you're looking at 230-235HP like the C-182 or Piper Dakota.

We were quoted 6k to upgrade the landing gear. Have to decide whether its worth that for 111 lbs.

 

[kontiki]

I've got under 10 hours in a G1000, DA-40. I thought it was really nice. Thay can get hot in the sun.

 

[PilotAlan]

The main thing is lack of cargo space. I'm not crazy with the idea of tossing suitcases in the back seat and not having a separate cargo compartment.
And if I have a third in the back, where does the baggage go? I don't want my sister sitting next to a suitcase and duffel, if there's significant turbulence or a forced landing....

 

[moonshine]

I'm very content with mine

Cherokee will haul more lbs, Diamond will fly faster and is more fun to fly.
Yet to have anyone barf in the airplane, and it is bumpy around these areas almost all year round. You get about the same wing loading as a 182. It feels different in turbulence, but I couldn't call it worse.

Cargo - depends on the airplane. They can either be "standard" - 66 lbs behind the rear seat, or have a tube (don't think G1000 ever came with one), or have a 4-way extended baggage - which has a ton of room and something like 100 lbs weight limit.

Good reasons to buy a 40 are
- safest single engine airplane in the sky, stats-wise
- joy to hand fly and a blast to xc with when GFC700 equipped
- good speeds on reasonable fuel burn
- great visibility and will keep you warm in the winter

 

[Gary F]

Sounds like this one doesn't have the gross weight upgrade kit which modifies the landing gear. Check to see about this, and whether the current owner is willing to spend the bucks to add it. Adds 50 kg (111 lb) to MGW with no significant EW increase, and that makes a big difference. That said, with only 180HP, you can't expect it to be a 4-adults plus bags airplane -- for that, you're looking at 230-235HP like the C-182 or Piper Dakota.

You'll adjust to it very quickly with good training. Make sure whoever teaches you the G1000 has a good DA40 simulator with the G1000 package. If you want to combine that with your IR training, give PIC a call, as we have such a sim (FlyThisSim Touch Trainer -- Cessna, Cirrus, and Diamond packages all installed).

I think you are a perceptive pilot. From the DA40 POH:
And yes, if you come in much faster, those long skinny glider wings will float forever.

BTW, I've taken a couple of people through their IR in a G1000 DA40, so while I've got about 50 hours in the right seat, I don't have a lot of stick time other than a couple of demonstration instrument approaches plus cadging a few trips around the pattern just for the feel. It's not exactly my sort of plane (in this class, I like both the Tiger and SR20 better), but it flies nicely and has no bad habits I've noticed. However, the comments on turbulence are not inaccurate -- those long skinny wings do not give the best ride in bumpy conditions, although not so bad you can't do instrument flying in light to moderate turbulence.

And yes, if you're coming from a comparable Cessna, Beech, or Piper, you are going to be overcontrolling it at first until you learn to fly it with 2-3 fingers instead of grabbing the stick like you're strangling a chicken.

I'm very content with mine

Cherokee will haul more lbs, Diamond will fly faster and is more fun to fly.
Yet to have anyone barf in the airplane, and it is bumpy around these areas almost all year round. You get about the same wing loading as a 182. It feels different in turbulence, but I couldn't call it worse.

Cargo - depends on the airplane. They can either be "standard" - 66 lbs behind the rear seat, or have a tube (don't think G1000 ever came with one), or have a 4-way extended baggage - which has a ton of room and something like 100 lbs weight limit.

Good reasons to buy a 40 are
- safest single engine airplane in the sky, stats-wise
- joy to hand fly and a blast to xc with when GFC700 equipped
- good speeds on reasonable fuel burn
- great visibility and will keep you warm in the winter

Both of these previous posts offer great insight. There are several variants of this airplane in terms of improvements or modifications (Powerflow exhaust, gross weight increase, fairings, baggage area, AmSafe airbags, etc) and most of them can be retrofitted in older models. If I knew more about the airplane in question I might be able to give an idea of what's possible and the approximate cost. In general it's better to buy a DA40 already equipped as you need but the upgrade option has worked for me but at a significant cost premium.

I have over 600 hours in a 2003 DA40 I have owned since 2007. A few years ago I replaced the steam gauges with Garmin G500 glass. In my opinion it's a great airplane with a few mostly innocuous quirks. You can learn more about the airplane on the free Diamond aviators forum. If you want to join the forum to post a question you will need the tail number of the DA40 you are considering but anybody can read the posts without joining. http://www.diamondaviators.net/forum/

PM me if you have any specific questions for a positively biased opinion.

 

[kontiki]

One thing that creeped me out about the DA-40 I rented was the composite prop. It had surface cracks in the paint across the blades, at one point as many as 12, and the leading edge (tipping?) had a lot of dents up and down the blade.

Now I know the FBO, photographed it and sent it to the OEM and they said it was OK, but I wasn't entirely comfortable with it.

I felt like I should photograph each blade at the start of a trip, so I could compare to see if they were getting worse at the start of each leg.

I'm much more comfortable with metal probs.

 

[Gary F]

One thing that creeped me out about the DA-40 I rented was the composite prop. It had surface cracks in the paint across the blades, at one point as many as 12, and the leading edge (tipping?) had a lot of dents up and down the blade.

Now I know the FBO, photographed it and sent it to the OEM and they said it was OK, but I wasn't entirely comfortable with it.

I felt like I should photograph each blade at the start of a trip, so I could compare to see if they were getting worse at the start of each leg.

I'm much more comfortable with metal probs.

There are multiple prop options available for the DA40. There are 2 different 3 blade MT props, Hartzell 2 blade metal and Hartzell 2 blade composite. I am not aware of any in-flight prop failures for any DA40.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

My thoughts:
Seems light in cargo space and useful load. Useful was ~850. With three adults and luggage (if you can put the bags someone), that's not much left for fuel.

Useful load is definitely lower than on an old Cherokee. However, it's higher than on a new Archer.

What speeds do you use for base, final, and over the numbers? The owner had me going at 80kt on final, 75 over the numbers (former fighter guy). That seemed WAY fast.

That is way fast. You want about 70 knots (see the speeds Ron posted), and FULL FLAPS. I know of a DA40 that had a prop strike on landing, and they were teaching 90 knots and half flaps!

Someone kick me, but my Cherokee seems to have more utility, although somewhat slower.

Cherokee will have a higher useful load. Diamond will be faster, more efficient, sexier, better flight characteristics, very safe, etc. It's a VERY nice plane. Best 4-seat fixed-gear certified single ever made, IMO.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

DA-40 is ok, I don't like it as an IFR platform because it is hell in turbulence.

Different, yes. Hell, no. The long wing catches more bumps, but it also makes them gentler.

It always seemed heavy in the aileron controls to me

Again, different. I don't think it's heavy at all, in fact it has about the best-harmonized controls I've flown in a single.

You have to trust the fuel gauge if you intend to depart with less than full fuel although I'd imagine that someone has come up with a Burdon tube type gauge that you can use on the sump

Diamond did. The planes come from the factory with one.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Sounds like this one doesn't have the gross weight upgrade kit which modifies the landing gear. Check to see about this, and whether the current owner is willing to spend the bucks to add it. Adds 50 kg (111 lb) to MGW with no significant EW increase, and that makes a big difference.

May not even need the gear mod. If the max landing weight is 2535, it already has the gear it needs and the MTOW mod consists of only a plastic collar on the elevator pushrod.

You'll adjust to it very quickly with good training.

Yup.

And yes, if you're coming from a comparable Cessna, Beech, or Piper, you are going to be overcontrolling it at first until you learn to fly it with 2-3 fingers instead of grabbing the stick like you're strangling a chicken.

Yes! That was about the hardest part of learning to fly it. Don't grab the stick, just surround the stick with your hand and "think" it where you want it to go, and it'll go.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The main thing is lack of cargo space. I'm not crazy with the idea of tossing suitcases in the back seat and not having a separate cargo compartment.
And if I have a third in the back, where does the baggage go? I don't want my sister sitting next to a suitcase and duffel, if there's significant turbulence or a forced landing....

Whaaa??? The DA40 does have a baggage compartment behind the rear seats. In fact, most of them have the "4 way" baggage compartment that is HUGE compared to similar singles. The back door is used to load both the rear seats and the baggage compartment, and the seats are easily released and folded down to carry even more.

 

[DJTorrente]

I remember reading they had a problem because the models having extended range fuel tanks gave up a couple inches of aft CG envelope compared to those with standard tanks. The net effect was that two adults plus any appreciable weight in the baggage compartment put it outside the envelope.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I remember reading they had a problem because the models having extended range fuel tanks gave up a couple inches of aft CG envelope compared to those with standard tanks. The net effect was that two adults plus any appreciable weight in the baggage compartment put it outside the envelope.

I had this concern as well when purchasing the DA40 for the club. Turned out to be a non-event for us, it's easier for me to get out of the front CG than the aft. There is a kit that adds some weight in the engine compartment to alleviate the issue, but most owners simply choose the heavier metal prop instead.

And yes, we do have the long-range tanks.

 

[moonshine]

I have standard tanks, and my CG range allows for me to sit up front, wife and kid in the car seat in the back, stroller and other luggage behind them, and I'm not at the aft CG limit.

All in all, agree that the DA40 is the best certified 4-seat fixed gear single. Sure love mine, refused a very nice offer beginning of this month (plane's not for sale, but the guy figured he'd try)

 

[Wingsofglass]

Send him my way. Mine is for sale. Very sad to see her go. I have the 50 gal tanks and the nose ballast and have never had a problem with CG. It's a great plane and magnificently forgiving and fun to fly.

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...ND-DA40-XLS/2008-DIAMOND-DA40-XLS/1283157.htm