DA42 as a true four (and a half) seater?

[Colin]

Bad cold, but he was intent on getting to the annual meeting of the Society of Integrative and Comparative Biologists. (I'm not even qualified to write the name of the conference, I had it wrong for the month or so leading up to it.)

[CFIDave]

So you obviously shut off the O2 supply to his cannula -- a great way to get passengers to sleep at higher altitudes!

[Sandy]

While trying not to go off topic, I can relate to the issue presented, as I started flying (in 1973) when my family consisted of me and my wife, only, and she was definitely not a fan of small airplanes. I flew, mainly Cessna 172s and 177s, along with Piper Warriors for a long time before purchasing my first plane, a Piper Warrior, in which I got my instrument rating (in 1985). The Warrior worked well for me while we lived in New Jersey, as a typical trip was about 100 nm due north from KTTN (near our home in NJ) to KMSV (near my Mom's home). Those trips, along with trips to Washington, DC (Yes, I used to fly into Washington National, now Reagan Int'l, with no problems.), Boston, and Long Island, all of which were easy trips in the Warrior, even with our three (young) children sharing the back seat.

When we moved to Atlanta, in 1988, our three children had increased in size, and our (planned) trips from KPDK to KMSV (to Mom) and to KFLL (to my Mother-in-Law) were beyond the range or capacity of the Warrior, to I purchased a 1977 Piper Lance with club seating. As a family plane, it was ideal for the missions, as it had an extraordinary range (1500 nm, as it had a 15 gallon bladder in each wing), RNAV, Loran, GPS, StormScope, and Radar altimeter, coupled A/P, and very comfortable cabin. An advantage of "yoke" (and side stick) planes is that on long trips, it is possible to employ a "range extender" (for the pilot), which is more of a trick with a center stick configuration.

After the kids grew up and left home, and the passing of my Mom and Mother-in-Law, needs changed, and I wondered whether my flying should continue to require a Third Class Medical, so I got a Czech SportCruiser. That was replaced by my current DA40, as I have a current Third Class Medical, and I may never have to get another one, and I wanted to be able to fly IFR, again.

Looking back, I am not sorry about my "progression" from the Warrior to the DA40, so my recommendation to Florian (the original poster) would be that if his concerns are to get his instrument rating, to remain safe while gaining experience and proficiency, and to carry his family and that 70 pound "pup" along, that he forego thoughts of the SR22 at this time, and that he consider the wise counsel of others who have posted here. As far as bringing that size dog along for rides, he might wish to seriously consider how that would work out if the pup didn't have a fair amount of room without the chance to hop into the lap of the pilot (or co-pilot) where serious issues of maintaining control, with the center stick right there, would be highly problematic. With respect to FIKI, I don't know that that's an issue a low time pilot should even consider.

All that having been said, and based upon what appears to be the original poster's missions and requirements, I agree that the DA40 would be a good first choice for gaining experience and an instrument rating, but not for taking the family along with a 70 pound family dog for extended rides. Once the instrument rating was acquired, I would suggest that a turbocharged Piper Saratoga, for the high altitudes and family comfort, would be a good choice for the missions enumerated.

The other issue, business travel requirements, must always be tempered by my favorite go/no-go expression, "Time to spare... Go by air..." You MUST expect to say, "No" to certain trips, remembering the other relevant expression, "There are old pilots and bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots."

[hkavasch]

Hi.. back to the original topic DA42 as a true 4,5 seater...

I have been flying a DA40 TDI for quite a while until I got my IR two years ago.. Since then I mostly fly a DA42. I find it a great IR platform... G1000.. Turbo.. TKS...two engines... FADEC... feels very save when you fly in bad weather...
However, when it gets to moving more people around it would not be my preferred joice. First of all, it is not that convenient for the passengers to get in over the wing.. and once they are in space is quite limited (same as with the DA40). W&B with 4 people is ok, but not great..

I have never flown a Cirrus.. they seem to be a bit more spacier.. but I spent lots of time in a Bonanza G36, which is basically an A36 with G1000 panel. If I would have to fly my family (+dog) around all the time, that would be my plane of choice...
- Club seating in the back... very big "barnd doors"... very easy to entry
- ten thousands of such planes produced... all sorts of planes on the market.. depening on your budget
- lots of after market mods... Tip Tanks, TKS, Turbo... etc.. with Tip Tanks, that plane has a MTOW of 4000lbs
- very strong airframe... gear was designed for a twin... wings can deal with a certain amount of ice...
- large Bonanza community... (beechtalk)
- faster than the DA42

I still love to fly the DA42 and do not want to pomote a Bonanza within a Diamond forum. but if you have to get in a lot of people, I find the Bonanza being the logical conclusion..

[carym]

Hans,
I can't disagree with you at all. Since my family has been out of the house for many, many years, it has just been my wife and I. For the two of us, the DA42 is just about perfect because folding the back seat down gives all the room you could want for baggage (or dogs). It makes for a very comfortable long distance IFR platform. We never felt "cramped" in the plane or limited and have flown our DA42 from the bottom of Florida to the top (almost) of Alaska. Of course, this begs the topic here of a 4+ seater.

[CFIDave]

Hans: I agree with much of what you said regarding the Bo vs. DA42.

However newer G36 Bonanzas with G1000 have gotten heavier. In contrast, the newer DA42-VI is now generally faster and with the 100kg weight increase, hauls as much payload as a newer Bo. While the Bo is certainly more spacious in the back, it still has a narrower fuselage than a DA42. I also prefer to have TKS de-ice, and of course the benefit of two engines. Multiple Bonanzas have broken up in flight, whereas I've found no evidence that has ever happened to a DA42 (due to carbon fiber construction).

Don't get me wrong, the Bonanza is a sweet-flying plane (I flew an A36 to get my Commercial license), but it's based on a very old design that dates all the back to the 1940s and was certified under much less stringent safety and performance standards (not Part 23 applied to the DA42).

[hkavasch]

Ha... at the end it's always a pilot choice...

I used to be a 100% plastic / Diamond fan... liked the Diesels with FADEC a lot...
but over the last years had to experience, that a Bonanza is a very valid alternative. Comparing the maintenance bills of the BO and the DA42 I started to believe that an older design has it's advantages, as it is more proven, easier/cheaper to get spare parts and just such a broad access to after market mods. The Bonanza I know acutally has quite some add ons.. Tips Tanks, TKS, TAT Turbo.. quite an impressive plane.. When I looked closer at the performance specs of some of the older models (70's... e.g. V-Tail), I was shocked how much they outperform the DA42. Three years back we flew with two planes (V-Tail + DA42) from Germany to Oshkosh... on every leg the V-Tail guys were already having beers, when we were taxiing..

So I am not saying the the BO is better than the Diamond.. I only wanted to share my experience of begin a fantatic plastic / Diamond fan, that had to learn over time, that some of the older designs are actually quite good.

(p.s. I think BO's breaking up is a very old thing... I am not aware that this happened with the newer planes)

[Colin]

I am a member of BeechTalk and it is my second favorite aviation community. A great group of really knowledgable pilots. The Bonanza and Baron were on my list when I bought the DA42. It is amazing what you can buy a Baron for right now. A guy at KSMO got a turbo-charged model that looks brand new for $250k. But the shop that did the work on my DA40 for eight years said the maintenance bills for a Baron would sober me up a little.

So I looked hard at the Baron, but the truth is that I want to fly over the mountains at night and I am no longer young enough to do that in a single engine.

[robert63]

Our DA42NG with a MTOW of 4189 lbs is a true two and a half seater. With 2 persons in the front (176 lbs each), one (half) person in the rear (150 lbs), full main tank and 40 lbs baggage it is at MTOW.

3 persons (176 lbs each) is possible without any luggage.

4 persons (176 lbs each) is impossible due to the limitation on max. Zero Fuel Mass of 3891 lbs.

For me it is okay, because I travel mainly by myself where I can use the AUX tanks and a lot of baggage. I can also travel with my wife since she is not too heavy and take advantage of the AUX tanks. If we take our daughter plus some baggage with us I can use the Main tanks only.
Since we have oxygen, TKS, weather radar, ADF etc. our plane has an empty mass of 3240.80 lbs. Without any options it would have an empty mass of 3119 lbs. and could carry 4 persons without baggage.

I think that only the MAM 42-678 enabled version with a MTOW of 4407 lbs is a true 4 seater. It could carry 4 persons (176 lbs each) plus 38 lbs baggage plus full main tanks even with our options.

[robert63]

We have a true 4 seater now. Our DA42NG has been converted to a MTOW of 4407 lbs at Diamond. The useful load is 1151 lbs and the empty mass is 3256 lbs. So the 3 of us can travel with full AUX tanks plus baggage.
And with MAIN tanks 4 persons can travel.