DA40NG

Open for questions of visitors of DAN. Posts of our guests are on moderation queue.

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
Chris
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 935
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:34 am
First Name: Chris
Aircraft Type: DA42NG
Aircraft Registration: N449TS
Airports: KHIO
Has thanked: 1050 times
Been thanked: 481 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by Chris »

Rich wrote:It'd be useful to get a couple of ACTUAL empty weight/moments of real XLS's and NG's rather than the sample airplanes in the POH. (I constructed a NG W&B spreadsheet just because I have too much time on my hands.) The base DA40 manual shows a 1620 lb. airplane. There is no way any actual DA40 sold to a customer was this light.
A few members have contributed the empty weight/CG of their aircraft on the wiki page. It'd be nice to get some more recent aircraft as well as some NG's added.
Chris
N449TS / DA42-NG / 42.AC049
KHIO
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by Rich »

Chris wrote:
Rich wrote:It'd be useful to get a couple of ACTUAL empty weight/moments of real XLS's and NG's rather than the sample airplanes in the POH. (I constructed a NG W&B spreadsheet just because I have too much time on my hands.) The base DA40 manual shows a 1620 lb. airplane. There is no way any actual DA40 sold to a customer was this light.
A few members have contributed the empty weight/CG of their aircraft on the wiki page. It'd be nice to get some more recent aircraft as well as some NG's added.
I'll add mine as soon as I get it back from the Orion600 install (tomorrow). What would it take to add a couple more data elements, like extended baggage and ADS-B info?
Maybe also engine, i.e. whether -180, D-135, D-155 or NG
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
User avatar
nrenno
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:35 am
First Name: Nilton
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N63WP
Airports: KARB
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by nrenno »

Dave,

The August 2016 Aviation Consumer article "Diesel Reset: Improved Economics" is interesting. If the numbers are correct, the diesel engines might make sense from the economic point of view. However, I am not convinced yet that they more reliable than the simpler Lycoming engines, which might also have an impact on operating costs.

Your statement in the other post "Because of the greater weight of the Austro engine, the NG tends to be more nose-heavy than other DA40s, which allows for better use of the back seat and rear baggage area than typical tail-heavy DA40 XLS aircraft." does not make sense to me. You are trying to turn a problem into a quality. ;-)

--Nilton
User avatar
nrenno
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:35 am
First Name: Nilton
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N63WP
Airports: KARB
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by nrenno »

Tim,

I agree that the article that I cited is not based on quantitative data, and that simplicity does not always implies reliability. However, your comparison of the Lycoming IO-540, PT6-121A and RR Trent is not fair. You are comparing very different technologies, not piston engines with each other.

--Nilton
User avatar
CFIDave
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:40 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N333GX
Airports: KJYO Leesburg VA
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1473 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by CFIDave »

nrenno wrote:Your statement in the other post "Because of the greater weight of the Austro engine, the NG tends to be more nose-heavy than other DA40s, which allows for better use of the back seat and rear baggage area than typical tail-heavy DA40 XLS aircraft." does not make sense to me. You are trying to turn a problem into a quality. ;-)

--Nilton
Let me explain: When I owned a Lycoming 2008 DA40 XLS, two adults in the front seats with full fuel and baggage always required us to place all baggage in the back seats -- we could not use the rear baggage compartment (or put adults in the back seats) without exceeding the aft CG limit. This problem was "solved" in later models by Diamond adding 20 lbs of ballast in the nose of the XLS (or installing a heavier aluminum prop), but that reduced useful load by 20 lbs. This issue does not exist in the nose-heavy DA40 NG.
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by Rich »

By the way, I'd like to support my W&B analysis as a not unreasonable mission scenario for a personally owned/flown aircraft. It would seem to me that Diamond could incorporate some enhancements to the IO-360 offerings to at least get the load-carrying capabilities up to the old ones like mine without having to carry the extra weight of the NG.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
User avatar
AndrewM
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:05 pm
First Name: Andrew
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N897KC
Airports:
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by AndrewM »

A little while ago I had to sell my DA40 XLS due to a relocation. Now looking at what I will get next… considering the XLS/XLT, and the NG.
Earlier this week I flew the NG. The first difference was right at the start, it starts just like a car engine and you immediately notice just how smooth and quiet it is.
Run-up is a simple push and hold-down button.
On take off through to approx 3,500ft, there is no doubt the plane is a little heavier and slower to climb. With two of us, the NG did not “leap” off the ground like my XLS used to. The ground roll is of course longer than the avgas version. However, to be fair the differences were minimal, unless of course your mission includes short grass strips with trees at the end…
On the climb to 9,000, at 4,200ft: 700ft p/m at 94kts TAS; 6,500ft: 550ft p/m at 106kts; 7,800ft: 550ft p/m at 114kts. We were in instrument conditions, climbing through very solid soup.
Once established at 9,000ft @ 92% power we cruised at 151kts TAS.
Found some VFR and we did several steep turns – NG felt heavier, but more stable than the XLS.
Then slow flight and a bunch of stalls. Plenty of warning before things got really mushy, and just like the XLS you can pull the stick all the way back at idle and just mush along, however it is a little less stable and you do notice the weight. Do you notice a difference… yes. Is it significant and really different to the XLS, in my view no. But there is certainly a difference.
The G1000 nxi screens are brighter, more crisp, much faster, some helpful and cool new features, everything we should have expected from an upgrade.
I think the seats must be a little higher. I had a much better view over the glare shield, and my head seemed a little closer to the top of the canopy. Or perhaps I have grown in the last 6 months? The lumbar support is better, and they recline.
Over a one-hour flight with all the manoeuvres we burnt 7 gallons.
The overall ride is much smoother and much quieter. And while I did not think it’s a big deal, I did like the simplicity of the FADEC controlled engine.
Coming back to RDU, again in solid instrument conditions, we loaded in an RNAV approach and all went very smoothly. Landing was much the same. I did not notice a difference on landing ground roll.
In summary, on balance of most factors for my mission, the NG is a viable candidate that I will be very seriously considering. It is just more refined than my previous XLS, and the lack of vibration and reduced sound levels I could really get used to. I know for sure my passengers will be more comfortable.
One frustration with my XLS was that it would not fit into a standard hanger due to the wingspan. I would need to check, but the NG must have a shorter span now, which may well solve that issue.
Would I have traded in my XLS to go to an NG? No way, not worth it. But now that I am soon to be in the market again, on balance I think the NG has won me over.
User avatar
CFIDave
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:40 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N333GX
Airports: KJYO Leesburg VA
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1473 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by CFIDave »

Andrew, thanks for sharing your experience from a pilot who has flown a DA40 NG.

The new DA40 NG you flew at KRDU has factory air conditioning installed, which makes it about 80 lbs heavier than the new DA40 NG I've been flying at KJYO that lacks AC.

Just to show what a new DA40 NG can do, here's a Flightaware shapshot of the KJYO owner in cruise southeast of Chicago yesterday at 14,100 feet (GPS altitude reported by Flightaware ADS-B differs slightly from indicated altitude) doing 222 knots across the ground. :shock:
IMG_3129.jpg
The owner told me that he saw 155 knots TAS in cruise at 92% max continuous power, so he also had a 67 knot tailwind component while up high.
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
User avatar
H60 pilot
2 Diamonds Member
2 Diamonds Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 6:26 pm
First Name: Mick
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N691YW
Airports: PHNL
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by H60 pilot »

AndrewM wrote:Would I have traded in my XLS to go to an NG? No way, not worth it. But now that I am soon to be in the market again, on balance I think the NG has won me over.
Best two sentences I've read about the NG, thank you for sharing. I sure hope I can score a chance to fly one when I move to Alabama this summer.
User avatar
Karl
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:58 am
First Name: Karl
Aircraft Type: DA40
Airports:
Has thanked: 68 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: DA40NG

Post by Karl »

nrenno wrote:However, your comparison of the Lycoming IO-540, PT6-121A and RR Trent is not fair. You are comparing very different technologies, not piston engines with each other. --Nilton
A Lycoming , and an Austro might both be piston engines, but the technology is very different. CD 135 even more so than the Austro.
Post Reply