What do we think of the DA62

[GRG55]

I don't see them selling too many either. They are in Seneca and Baron territory and those seem like much more airplane for the money. Let's face it, someone who can afford a 1M airplane isn't going to scoff at the gas it eats. The Twin Star makes a much more appealing argument as its more closely priced with the Seneca. Let's be honest, the only people buying new twins are flight schools and they do care about operating cost. The price difference between a Seneca and the Twin star will more than pay for it's self after 1000 hours.

I'm really surprised there aren't more Tecnam's at flight schools as twin trainers.

Diamond sells about as many DA42s each year as Barons and Senecas combined (roughly 50 out of 100 total for the 3 models recent stats).

The DA62 doesn't seem a training airplane at all, and the USA commercial market may be a tough one. Avgas is readily available in the USA and Canada, and it would seem the DA62 might have more success in commercial markets overseas where avgas is very expensive and/or difficult to impossible to find.

One of our local flight training colleges is using Tecnam twins in their program. Seems a modern version of an Apache with those little engines.

Our flying club sold the two single engine DA20-C1s it used to have. They both proved to be seriously maintenance prone with a lot of time offline in the shop. They seem just a bit too fragile and brittle to put up with the rigours of a student training and rental environment. They were replaced with two refurbished 152s and a used 172, all of which combined are measurably less expensive to keep flying than the DA20s.

 

[JC150]

Looks nice, but there's something about the back doors on a baron or seneca I really like. STC for diesel baron would be nice to have. Will it ever happen?? Probably not

 

[GRG55]

Love both the DA42 (with the new Austro engines) and the DA62. The idea of flying a new airplane with a reinforced cabin, 27g seats, incredible glide ratio, auto-feathering props is very appealing.

Anyone see the crash-test between a late-model Chevy Malibu and a 59 Bel Air? https://youtu.be/fPF4fBGNK0U The cabin in the Malibu was virtually undamaged, the Bel Air was crushed, the entire steering column came up thru the crash dummy's face. Same with our spam cans. Our old Cessnas and Pipers were not built to handle a crash so even a low speed accident often results in a fatality often with gruesome results.

The crash-worthyness and safety features of new airframes is what appeals to me. If I had the money to buy a nice new G58 or a DA62, I'm going with the Diamond every time. Even the deadly scenario where you lose an engine on take-off you pull back on the control lever for the dead engine and the FADEC + auto feathering takes care of the rest. I understand this is one of the reasons why the Austo engines do not have counter-rotating props.

Safety, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. As with any engineering exercise there are always trade offs.

Composites when deformed to failure do so in a completely different fashion from aluminum. The Diamond airframe is quite heavy to achieve the strength it requires.

For an airplane with a 48 ft wingspan (10 ft more than my Aztec) I find some of the speeds more than a bit interesting. Vmc is 70 knots, 6 knots higher than the Aztec. Stall speed clean is 70 knots, dirty 64 knots, both are 9 knots higher than the Aztec. Those higher stall speeds mean higher approach speeds which mean more momentum if something goes wrong.

But I sure do like that FADEC/autofeathering. And the simplicity of no ignition system.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Looks nice, but there's something about the back doors on a baron or seneca I really like. STC for diesel baron would be nice to have. Will it ever happen?? Probably not

I don't know. I honestly don't know if anyone is actively working on it, but there are tons of Barons out there. I think there is certainly a market for a diesel STC.

 

[GRG55]

I don't know. I honestly don't know if anyone is actively working on it, but there are tons of Barons out there. I think there is certainly a market for a diesel STC.

Engineering a diesel piston aircraft engine and propeller combo seems a challenge. Cessna discontinued taking orders for the 182 JT-A diesel Skylane last May, apparently because of turbocharger issues and some problems with the certification process. They put the avgas 182 back in production at a base price $50k less than the diesel base price. Diamond of course had its trials and tribulations with its original diesel engine supplier, Thielert.

 

[JC150]

I don't know. I honestly don't know if anyone is actively working on it, but there are tons of Barons out there. I think there is certainly a market for a diesel STC.

If there happened to be a diesel STC, I would buy a used baron and upgrade with diesel engines in a heartbeat. Longer TBO, cheaper gas, and reduced fuel burn are attractive to me. Maybe its just me though.

 

[dans2992]

Malibu with a runout engine and the new EPS diesel seems like a good combo...

 

[labbadabba]

Safety, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. As with any engineering exercise there are always trade offs.

Composites when deformed to failure do so in a completely different fashion from aluminum. The Diamond airframe is quite heavy to achieve the strength it requires.

For an airplane with a 48 ft wingspan (10 ft more than my Aztec) I find some of the speeds more than a bit interesting. Vmc is 70 knots, 6 knots higher than the Aztec. Stall speed clean is 70 knots, dirty 64 knots, both are 9 knots higher than the Aztec. Those higher stall speeds mean higher approach speeds which mean more momentum if something goes wrong.

But I sure do like that FADEC/autofeathering. And the simplicity of no ignition system.

You raise a good point however the DA42 with Austro300 (not so much with the Tielert and Centurion motors) reaches Vmc quickly so should something happen you still should be able to climb. Though it is alarming somewhat that Vmc and Vs are the same speed but I would assume that take-off flaps would be a 10% which would lower the stall speed below Vmc a bit.

That said, in the event something catastrophic happens, Diamond's safety record (at least in the DA40) speaks for itself. With a crash-tested cabin, AMSafe airbags 27g seats and very well protected fuel tanks I'd wager your chances for survival are much higher than in any legacy airframe.

As for composites failing, yes it happens and they can be extremely difficult to detect. Two things I'll say about this:
1. Diamond aircraft do not have an airframe limit like other plastic airplanes
2. Aluminum remembers.

 

[DJTorrente]

I really like the Diamond twins! I wish someone would design a light experimental twin utilizing two O-200's or 2 VW or Corvair engines. Better yet develop a reliable gear box for a VW TDI twin.

Reliable is easy. It's "light" that is the rub.

 

[DJTorrente]

I'd love to see a twin Panthera.....

Lets see if they get a single to production first.

 

[Shepherd]

Personally, I'm okay with burning 40gph to fly something that isn't butt ugly......but that is just me. I think I've killed too many brain cells by breathing AVGAS.

I don't disagree with this. The DA62 is not my idea of eye candy.
But it does make some impressive numbers.

Probably my age showing.