POA Plane Sweepstakes (Twin Edition)

Choose your twin!!!!!!!

  • Cessna 310

    Votes: 14 21.9%

  • Diamond DA-42

    Votes: 24 37.5%

  • Piper Seneca

    Votes: 6 9.4%

  • Aero Commander (680)

    Votes: 20 31.3%
  • Total voters
    64
L

LJS1993

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
584
Location
Riverside, California
Display Name
LJ Savala
It's that time again ladies and gents!!!!!!! Yes you guessed it!!!!! The hypothetical POA win-a-plane sweepstakes!!!! This time we're talking twins!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Duh...:D Although if I was going to win one to add to the stable, it would be a DA-42
 
The twins I might actually consider buying are Twin Comanche (most likely); Apache for a mogas time builder; Aztech for a roomy go places 6 seat and I constantly think about the Cessna 337 as a possibility.
 
The twins I might actually consider buying are Twin Comanche (most likely); Apache for a mogas time builder; Aztech for a roomy go places 6 seat and I constantly think about the Cessna 337 as a possibility.

But to win, I select the twin Diesel Diamond
 
I owned a Travelair,and miss it also like the 337 ,but one I would like to win would be the DA 42.
 
Twin Comanche, BE-58P, King Air 200 are the three I most frequently lust after... But I do love the DA42 as well. I just don't lust after them nearly as much because the purchase prices are still high.
 
I picked the DA42 since we already have a 310. I think the DA42 is a great option if you can you only need 4 seats Jet A, efficiency, and a truly modern airplane. The 310 is great if you need 5-6 seats and people in seat 5-6 are small and you can hit "pilot isolate" on the intercom. It's also good on speed - we do 187 @ 27 combined, and in the RAM T310R we did 225 on 45. :)

The Seneca falls under the category of a plane that I just don't get why someone would buy (sorry, Bruce :)), and the Commander 680 is neat but going to be very expensive on engines.

Other planes I'd like to see on there are a 340 and (if we're being impractical!) a Duke. :D
 
Diamond would be fine, but I'd likely sell it to fund a 337 for a lifetime
 
Skylane81E said:
Diamond would be fine, but I'd likely sell it to fund a 337 for a lifetime
Click to expand...

And I'd probably sell it to keep the 310 flying for a lifetime, but let's have some fun here. :)
 
The one issue with the DA42 to me is it needs more power. Really it should be a 200 kt plane. So that would make it hard to downgrade on speed, and perhaps one of the reasons it's not done as well as its single engine counterparts.
 
Baron2PG said:
You left off the best light twin in GA: Beechcraft Baron BE58.... of course I'm a little biased.
Click to expand...

Yep, I sure wish I had less shoulder room and less interior space. :no:
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The one issue with the DA42 to me is it needs more power. Really it should be a 200 kt plane. So that would make it hard to downgrade on speed, and perhaps one of the reasons it's not done as well as its single engine counterparts.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was always disappointing.
 
Henning said:
Yeah, that was always disappointing.
Click to expand...

The one with TIO-360s was a hot rod and gave the required performance, but then you lose the other big advantage of the DA42: FADEC/diesel.
 
MSPAviator said:
As long as it's hypothetical, why not give away a BE-58?
Click to expand...
That's what I was thinking as well. None of the poll choices would satisfy my flying needs as well as the Baron I already own although each has some individual characteristics I would like and it would probably take something like a G58 to tempt me. In any case a list of piston twins simply isn't complete without at least one Baron on it.
 
gismo said:
That's what I was thinking as well. None of the poll choices would satisfy my flying needs as well as the Baron I already own although each has some individual characteristics I would like and it would probably take something like a G58 to tempt me. In any case a list of piston twins simply isn't complete without at least one Baron on it.
Click to expand...

56-TC...weeeeeeee.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The one issue with the DA42 to me is it needs more power. Really it should be a 200 kt plane. So that would make it hard to downgrade on speed, and perhaps one of the reasons it's not done as well as its single engine counterparts.
Click to expand...

It sounds like the new DA42-VI is finally starting to fulfill the promise of the original - The DA42-NG has higher powered engines (168hp AE300 diesels as opposed to the original 135hp Thielerts) which helped somewhat, but the -VI has some more aerodynamic cleanup.

End result? An airplane that's a good 20 knots faster and still has a ridiculously low fuel burn, lower than many singles. It's too bad it took them nearly a decade to get it right. The DA42 has always been a great plane, but really hasn't lived up to its potential until now.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
It sounds like the new DA42-VI is finally starting to fulfill the promise of the original - The DA42-NG has higher powered engines (168hp AE300 diesels as opposed to the original 135hp Thielerts) which helped somewhat, but the -VI has some more aerodynamic cleanup.

End result? An airplane that's a good 20 knots faster and still has a ridiculously low fuel burn, lower than many singles. It's too bad it took them nearly a decade to get it right. The DA42 has always been a great plane, but really hasn't lived up to its potential until now.
Click to expand...

It still has a ways to go in my opinion, although it is around 90% of the way there. Pretty much just needs more power. If they're able to get up to 200 HP a side, I think they'll get there.
 
Henning said:
That would be nice as well.
Click to expand...

I always thought those would be nice in a 58P or 340. Get close to turbine performance out of a piston. The RAM IV T310R is a good portion of the way there.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I always thought those would be nice in a 58P or 340. Get close to turbine performance out of a piston. The RAM IV T310R is a good portion of the way there.
Click to expand...

I had an idea a while back about putting a set of 36 wings on a 58P fuse and putting GTSIO 520K on the nose. I talked to a FAA guy at the last OSH I went to and he said I could do it EXP R&D and I would have few if any operating restrictions after the initial proof flying was done. He also pointed out that they let you operate and collect data for a good while (the Orenda Twin Commander is still flying on its Exp R&D for over a decade now).
 
Henning said:
I had an idea a while back about putting a set of 36 wings on a 58P fuse and putting GTSIO 520K on the nose. I talked to a FAA guy at the last OSH I went to and he said I could do it EXP R&D and I would have few if any operating restrictions after the initial proof flying was done. He also pointed out that they let you operate and collect data for a good while (the Orenda Twin Commander is still flying on its Exp R&D for over a decade now).
Click to expand...

I think i've seen something similar done with a turbine. Pics are out there somewhere on the net
 
Henning said:
I had an idea a while back about putting a set of 36 wings on a 58P fuse and putting GTSIO 520K on the nose. I talked to a FAA guy at the last OSH I went to and he said I could do it EXP R&D and I would have few if any operating restrictions after the initial proof flying was done. He also pointed out that they let you operate and collect data for a good while (the Orenda Twin Commander is still flying on its Exp R&D for over a decade now).
Click to expand...

While it sounds cool in theory, having a single fire-breathing piston engine out front I think would cause more problems. You'd have P-Baron weight which would negate much of the climb benefit. While it would be quiet you'd have the various other concerns with GTSIOs that I think makes them a bad choice for a single. In a twin I'd worry a bit less.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
While it sounds cool in theory, having a single fire-breathing piston engine out front I think would cause more problems. You'd have P-Baron weight which would negate much of the climb benefit. While it would be quiet you'd have the various other concerns with GTSIOs that I think makes them a bad choice for a single. In a twin I'd worry a bit less.
Click to expand...

I like the GTSIO, gasoline engines trying to put out more than .5hp/ci are much better off turning up a few more RPM. 3200 rpm is a just fine speed, 2500 rpm is low and when you are trying to make 325hp at the prop on a direct drive, your ICP is higher than that required to make 380hp at the prop turning the engine 3350 with a 1.5:1 gear reduction.
 
I haven't even started going for my PPL yet, but after all the reading I've done, I think the DA42 NG will fit my desires and missions very well. Maybe over the next 2 to 3 years, after I'm more financially set, move back to Colorado, and get my cert, they'll have improved it even more. I'd love to see if they can get a 200+ kt version of it, while still keeping diesels, FADEC, and a reasonable GPH.

I'll keep my fingers crossed :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top