Transition to DA40

ki4lzk

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
172
Location
Milford, KS
Display Name

Display name:
Joshua Jones
Good Evening;

Tomorrow I am going to start the transition to a DA40 from the 172. How difficult is this process? I have never flown the G1000 nor a Constant Speed Prop.

Thanks

Josh
 
I suspect the new avionics will be harder than the plane. Diamonds are really easy to fly.
 
Won't take you long to learn the prop. Hook up with someone who knows the avionics.
 
The actual flying of the plane should be much easier. What you'll need to learn is the prop, avionics, and a free-castering nose wheel.
 
I have been told it should take an hour and a half for the transition. To me this sounds a little quick. I have watched the king g1000 video and read through the Garmin manual for the da40.
 
Hardest thing for me was the free castoring nose wheel.

Gotta learn how to tap a brake when you want to make a correction.

Other than that - easy airplane to fly.
 
Joshua,

Try to find a time when you can just sit in the plane with the POH.

Switches and gauges and the like may be in different locations, and there may be new switches and knobs and selectors you're not used to.

At first, each plane seems very different. With time, the similarities start to overshadow the differences.

But good luck and have fun!
 
I have been told it should take an hour and a half for the transition. To me this sounds a little quick. I have watched the king g1000 video and read through the Garmin manual for the da40.

Considering that you never flown the 40, or any Diamond (the way I understand), it will probably take a minimum of 1.5hrs. Realistically expect 3-4hrs, but again I don't know how thorough your checkout will be. Are you doing an IFR checkout as well?
 
Try to find a time when you can just sit in the plane with the POH.

Switches and gauges and the like may be in different locations, and there may be new switches and knobs and selectors you're not used to.

:yeahthat:
 
The airplane is fine.
I would like a DA52, personally.

The glass panel - well now, I have some reservations about that issue (all planes, not limited to Diamond)
Go to youtube and look at the self posted videos of both instruction flights and general flights where a glass panel is featured. 98% of the pilot's time and attention is flying the glass - programming climb and descent rates and altitudes, programming the flight route on the MFD then frantically reprogramming it when center gives them even a tiny change in the route, then worrying that center will change something at the last second.
If you watch closely you will not see them heads up nearly enough for safety.

Interestingly, there have been recent insurance industry reports of crash rates for the same make and model airframe, but having glass versus steam panels, that suggests the glass equipped have a higher accident rate. That tends to support my gut feeling. It is interesting to see how this will play out in coming years.

Now having said that I am not stating that just because someone is flying a glass panel they are a poor pilot.
And I love my moving map GPS. But other than including it in my normal scan - to see if I am still clear of the big hungry Class B off to my left - I spend 98% of my time seeing and avoiding.
 
The glass panel - well now, I have some reservations about that issue (all planes, not limited to Diamond)
Go to youtube and look at the self posted videos of both instruction flights and general flights where a glass panel is featured. 98% of the pilot's time and attention is flying the glass - programming climb and descent rates and altitudes, programming the flight route on the MFD then frantically reprogramming it when center gives them even a tiny change in the route, then worrying that center will change something at the last second.
If you watch closely you will not see them heads up nearly enough for safety.

I think you watched videos of pilots not knowing how to use their instruments. A good pilot will spend most of the time head-up even in a plane with a glass cockpit. I got a few hundred hours with a G1000 in various planes, I spend minimum amount of time typing in everything and my head is outside for as much as it would be in a steam-gauged airplane. If ATC gives me a re-route, no problem, quick change to the flight plan and continue. You just got to know what you're doing, simple as that.
 
Last edited:
I plan to get to the airport an hour and a half before hand to play with the G1000. I have used a 430 in the past and think it will similar.
 
I plan to get to the airport an hour and a half before hand to play with the G1000.

Call them in advance and ask for a GPU.


I have used a 430 in the past and think it will similar.

Even thought both are made by garmin and have a slightly similar operating system, there are a lot more differences than similarities (especially on the PDF). Try to familiarize yourself with it before you go there, search for instructional videos and just pictures of it to see where the buttons are.
 
I find a DA40 easier to fly than a 172. It lands a little flatter than a 172 but I think you'll figure that out the 3rd time around the pattern.

I have 1,000 hours behind a G1000 and there are still things I'm learning about the system. That said, it won't take long to understand the basics. Max Trescott has a great book on the G1000 and the simulator CD from Garmin is <$30. If you get the one with SVT and hook up a joystick to your computer, you will learn tons just flying around with the manual or Tescott's book on your lap.
 
Tomorrow I am going to start the transition to a DA40 from the 172. How difficult is this process? I have never flown the G1000 nor a Constant Speed Prop.
Not hard at all if you follow an organized, step-by-step transition training program, but really hard if you jump in the airplane and try to just start flying it. I would expect someone to need a couple of days of ground training just to learn the G1000 system, although that's something you can get a big jump on if you have a good G1000 training program like one of the ones offered here, especially the Jeppesen one or the combination of the book and course from Max Trescott. I'd probably then spend a few hours of ground training on the DA40 airframe and engine systems, especially if you have no prior experience with c/s props and fuel-injected engines. I'd make use of a good DA40/G1000 ATD for much of that work. After that, the amount of flight training would depend on whether you're VFR-only or looking for a full IFR checkout. All things considered, I'd probably expect to need about 24 total ground and flight training hours (some of which could be self study) to take someone with only steam gauge 172 experience to being ready to take a G1000 DA40 into the goo on an IFR flight.
 
Considering that you never flown the 40, or any Diamond (the way I understand), it will probably take a minimum of 1.5hrs. Realistically expect 3-4hrs, but again I don't know how thorough your checkout will be. Are you doing an IFR checkout as well?
Nobody with only steam gauge 172 experience and no prior glass panel experience will be ready to fly a G1000 DA40 IFR in 3-4 hours of training. Not even close. Might be done in 2-3 flights of a couple hours each, but only after a lot of ground training.
 
Nobody with only steam gauge 172 experience and no prior glass panel experience will be ready to fly a G1000 DA40 IFR in 3-4 hours of training. Not even close. Might be done in 2-3 flights of a couple hours each, but only after a lot of ground training.

Those numbers were assuming that he's only doing the VFR checkout, which he confirmed in a later post.
 
Those numbers were assuming that he's only doing the VFR checkout, which he confirmed in a later post.

Agreed, on both counts. My checkout was a yawn. I don't have experience with a glass DA40, and I just did a VFR checkout, but with a couple hours of studying the POH, flying the plane was a non event.
 
It took me 3 lessons and almost 5 hours til I felt comfortable flying a DA40. Flying the plane is fun and a blast but the G1000 takes some time to learn. If you are not familiar with the G1000 I'd recommend getting the G1000 PC Trainer and watch some videos on Youtube. Also, another thing you have to do is switch fuel tanks.
 
Last edited:
I have been watching youtube videos all weekend and playing with the simulator.
 
As a low time VFR pilot with about 20 hours of g1000 time in a 172 and 182, I got checked out in a G1000 DA40 in 1.1 hours. I needed a little more alone time with the plane before I felt comfortable to take the family, but it's a real nice ride. Handles well. The view is great. I love the huge rudder smooth controls, and the speed. I spent a week with Max Trescott's book when I did my g1000 transition (172S to 172SP) and it was pretty straight-forward for me. Then again I use it like a steam gauge plane with moving map, xm radio, traffic, and a lean assist -- none of the advanced functions. I tend not to even use the autopilot.
 
Here's a few other DA-40 tips:

-You may need to learn to take it like a man: some models have absolutely horrible seat cushioning. Combined with a long wingspan, rough air can really be uncomfortable.

-Be careful in a T-hangar: The wing-span may be bigger than the hangar ...the DA-40 has the highest incidence of hangar rash on my field.
 
Those numbers were assuming that he's only doing the VFR checkout, which he confirmed in a later post.
Even just a VFR checkout is going to require some G1000 training, and you're not going to get even VFR-proficient with that system as well as the airplane in a total 3-4 hours of training. There would pretty much have to be at least that much each of ground and flight training time.
 
Tomorrow I am going to start the transition to a DA40 from the 172. How difficult is this process? I have never flown the G1000 nor a Constant Speed Prop.

Sorry I didn't catch this earlier, but maybe you're going this evening or you're not done yet, so I hope this will still help.

Regarding the constant speed prop: FAA materials on engine operation with a CS prop absolutely suck. Step one here is to go read Manifold Pressure Sucks by John Deakin, that will help immensely in your understanding of how things work.

That said, here are some differences between the 172 and the DA40 to think about:

1) Flying characteristics: The DA40 flies beautifully compared to the 172. However, people who are used to the 172 will tend to overcontrol the DA40 at first. So, try this: Don't think about moving the controls. In fact, don't even keep your hand on the stick at all times. I found that the best way to fly it at first is to keep your hand surrounding the stick but not really touching it, and then just "think" it where you want it to go and it'll go. The main thing here is, again, don't think about moving the controls, think about control pressures - And they'll likely be lighter than you're expecting at first. Once you get used to it, though, you may not enjoy flying the 172 any more! :)

2) Castering nosewheel. You don't have direct steering control of the nosewheel on the ground like you do with the 172. You can use differential braking to steer, but avoid using the brakes as much as possible. Shallow turns can be accomplished with the rudder at taxi speeds, especially if you momentarily increase the throttle to 1200-1300 RPM, propwash + full rudder in the direction you want to go will make it go that way. But do NOT use the brakes for steering on the takeoff or landing roll! You'll have plenty of rudder authority. Use it, and don't use the brakes at any time unless you have to. Again, once you get used to it, you'll like it - And you can darn near turn on a dime at slow speed with the brakes.

3) Takeoff - You'll take off with a notch of flaps in the DA40, and you'll notice when you retract them that you'll sink unless you simultaneously pitch up slightly. When you take people for a ride, be sure you've got that compensation down as a first-timer may find the momentary sink unsettling. You'll also notice that takeoffs feel completely different: Your view over the nose is so much better than in a 172 that you'll feel like you're in an elevator raising off the ground. Avoid the tendency to lift the nose above the horizon as that's a good way to get into a departure stall. Personally, I can see down about 30 degrees below the horizon in level flight! So, be sure you trim for the climb airspeed and fly the airspeed, not the nose.

4) Landing - For some reason, some CFI's do not know how to teach good landings. They can get away with it in a Cezzna, but it doesn't work well in the Diamond. Fly it the way the book says to - 67 knots on final (IIRC, check the book for your plane because they have different gross weights) and FULL FLAPS. Every time. I know of multiple places where the CFI's have taught 90 knots and half flaps - And that inevitably leads to prop strikes. If the CFI tells you to fly final at 90 knots, land, taxi in, and get a new CFI because the one you're flying with is worthless. When you fly a proper approach as per the book, you can get some really sweet touchdowns in the DA40. Done right, it's the easiest-to-land plane there is.

5) Speed. The DA40 is significantly faster than the 172, and if you're not used to that it's easier to get behind the plane in high-workload situations. If you start to feel behind the plane, though, there's an easy fix: Slow down. Pull power back to about 17" MP and she'll settle in nicely at around 90-100 knots in level flight.

6) Maneuvers - You'll LOVE doing steep turns. They're almost effortless compared to the 172. Stalls won't break the way they will in a 172, you'll feel a buffet and if you hold it there you'll just begin descending in a falling leaf with some slight phugoid oscillations. The rest won't be much different once you're used to the normal flight characteristics of the DA40.

7) Altimeter settings - You may have up to three places to adjust the altimeter setting depending on how it's equipped. You'll always need to adjust the backup altimeter and the G1000 altimeter, but if it has the KAP 140 autopilot (separate unit near the bottom of the panel on a 2004-2006 model), you'll need to adjust it there as well. Even if you're not using the autopilot yet, it's good to get used to those adjustments.

8) Avionics - Yeah, everyone else is focusing on this, but it's really not that important for a VFR checkout.* Forget it, keep your eyes outside to start with. Altitude and airspeed are easily read from the tapes, and you have the backup instruments as well. Fly the plane first. You'll probably find that you'll quickly get used to the PFD. Since you said you have some 430 experience, if you know your way around that box well you'll have no problem with the G1000 - The flight plan functions work exactly the way they do on the 430, and the design philosophy is similar - You have page groups and pages, and they're similar to the 430 with some extras. If you've read the books and you're good with a 430, it'll be easy and you probably won't need to spend much time on it with the CFI.

* Yes, you need to know how to use the G1000 to find the information you need on it to complete the checkout. No, it should NOT be the focus of the checkout. With 430 experience and adequate self-study and preparation on the ground, the G1000 is an easy transition.

9) Checking fuel. This is something a lot of people poo-poo, but once you know the reason why, you'll like it. If you're not within about 5 gallons of full fuel, you won't be able to see any fuel in the tanks by looking in through the filler cap on preflight. To check partial fuel, there's a contraption that you fit to the front of the wing where the dimple in the stall strip is, and connect its hose to the sump drain. It's weird, but the reason for it is good: The DA40 has dual main wing spars and aluminum tanks between them. There has not yet been a post-crash fire in an otherwise survivable crash in a DA40, and that's a major part of why their safety record is so good.

The DA40 is one of the nicest all-around airplanes I've ever flown, and very enjoyable if you get a checkout from a good instructor. Have fun!
 
Nobody with only steam gauge 172 experience and no prior glass panel experience will be ready to fly a G1000 DA40 IFR in 3-4 hours of training. Not even close. Might be done in 2-3 flights of a couple hours each, but only after a lot of ground training.

Even just a VFR checkout is going to require some G1000 training, and you're not going to get even VFR-proficient with that system as well as the airplane in a total 3-4 hours of training. There would pretty much have to be at least that much each of ground and flight training time.

I don't buy that at all. The OP has some 430 experience, and that combined with reading a book on the G1000 will get you most of the way there. I felt comfortable with the G1000 after less than an hour behind it. The design philosophy is very similar to the 430.

Also, the DA40 is not a tough airplane to fly, merely different. A prepared student should easily be able to get checked out with 2 hours each of ground and flight training. A well-prepared student with good learning aptitude and comfort with tech should be able to do it in even less than that.
 
We did about .5 of ground and 1.1 of flight. It was 20G28 but straight down the runway. Adjusting to the castering nose wheel was not difficult at all. All my friends say an airplane flies like an airplane and I must say that statement was surprisingly correct. The G1000 was very intuitive and I didn't really have a difficult time adjusting to it.

We went and did a few stalls and then played with the autopilot. Once again, this is the first time I have had the privilege of using one. I felt like I was flying on a cloud. I was then shown how to load a GPS approach into the G1000. That wasn't too difficult. The point of this was to show me why the CFI does not recommend using that airplane for primary instrument training.

We did 6 touch and goes and the landing attitude was surprisingly easy to adjust too. I thought It would be difficult for me to get the sight picture due to the fact I had issues with this during my private training. Nope! The first landing was a nice one and they only got better.

At the end of the flight I told the CFI that I feel really comfortable with the plane but I would like to go up on a smoother day just to make sure that I am completely comfortable. It is difficult to be sure when it was gusting so bad.

All in all the plane was a joy to fly and I look forward to many hours in it. Oh I almost forgot. The constant speed prop was a breeze! All my reading paid off!
 
I don't buy that at all. The OP has some 430 experience, and that combined with reading a book on the G1000 will get you most of the way there.
My experience as an instructor giving instrument training to people in G1000 DA40's is different. It's a very complex, very sophisticated system, with some unusual displays, especially in degraded states like AHRS-out. It took more than two hours of flying approaches in that mode for one recent trainee to master that latter condition alone (the residual display is physically spread out and difficult to interpret, especially under the hood which limits peripheral vision). Even with prior GNS430 experience, I cannot imagine anyone without glass panel experience learning the G1000 to IR PTS standards in less than a full day of ground training (academic and sim) on that system alone, maybe more. Doing one of the training programs I mentioned above could reduce the amount of time one needs with an instructor, but it's still time you'd have to spend learning the system, and I'd include in my 16-24 total hours of learning.

OTOH, I think I could take a proficient steam gauge C-172 pilot with zero DA40 knowledge or experience to VFR proficiency in a steam gauge DA-40 in half a day or a bit more (2 hours ground including preflight, 1.5 in the plane, lunch, then 1.0 in the plane to be sure it took), just as I've done with pilots checking out in the Grumman Tiger more times than I can count. Probably wouldn't take much longer to get a proficient G1000 C-172 pilot to IFR proficiency in a G1000 DA40, either. But getting to real IFR proficiency in the G1000 with no prior glass panel experience is not happening in that amount of time, no less no prior experience in the airframe.

Of course, YMMV, so if you have some exemplary cases, please share them. But I've seen too many folks who thought they were truly proficient in a G1000 airplane who really weren't. Usually takes less than an hour in the air to disabuse them of that thought. :wink2:
 
Last edited:
My experience as an instructor giving instrument training to people in G1000 DA40's is different. It's a very complex, very sophisticated system, with some unusual displays, especially in degraded states like AHRS-out.

Ron, we're talking a simple VFR checkout here.

I agree that IFR would take longer, especially if it's done right. Pulling the AHRS breakers (both of them) should be a must for an IFR checkout. BTDT, and it's an eye-opener. The hardest part about it is that you have to look at the bottom center of the PFD for your nav information on the now-not-turning HSI and they leave the tick marks around the HSI painted on the screen (just not the numbers) as well as leaving the bank index painted, both of which I think are major mistakes. You have to continually scan past the still-painted bank index to see both the nav needle and the backup instruments, and those clues lead you to want to believe you're flying in a straight line when you're not.

Even with prior GNS430 experience, I cannot imagine anyone without glass panel experience learning the G1000 to IR PTS standards in less than a full day of ground training (academic and sim) on that system alone, maybe more.

Again, this is only a VFR checkout we're talking about.

OTOH, I think I could take a proficient steam gauge C-172 pilot with zero DA40 knowledge or experience to VFR proficiency in a steam gauge DA-40 in half a day or a bit more (2 hours ground including preflight, 1.5 in the plane, lunch, then 1.0 in the plane to be sure it took)

Then why did you say this: :confused:

Even just a VFR checkout is going to require some G1000 training, and you're not going to get even VFR-proficient with that system as well as the airplane in a total 3-4 hours of training. There would pretty much have to be at least that much each of ground and flight training time.
 
Back
Top