Many of your statements above indicate you have a lot of misinformation regarding the Aerostar. Not really interested in opening a debate. I was just curious as to why you did not see a valid comparison.Star57 wrote:Tommy, be realistic?!...the only comparable aircraft is the Seneca v, the Aerostar is a cabin class twin, for one its available brand new, similar price range, similar HP, similar or techniclly the same avionics, just the A/P in itself makes it a desirable comparison, similar performance and stall speeds.
Better support and service network, but let's not get too far ahead on that service statement.
The Aerostar was a fine aircraft in the 70's and 80's but today's younger generation pilots want integrated avionics, digital A/P,s light carbon fiber bodies, Fadec engines, one could go on and on.....
Just compare Cessna182 and Bonanza sales to Cirrus.
Tommy, you can put a lot of lipstick on an old pig, but it will always be an old pig.
Take the fact that you can get checked out on it, in couple hours if you're current on a DA42, having said all that I'm the first one to say that it's too expensive, should have the Garmin G2000 and a bit more power.
The control stick on the right should be removable for the non flying right seater.
To end my comparison statement I will say, that it's like comparing Raquel Welch today to Kate Upton, hope I shouldn't have to expand further....
Enjoy your Aerostar
Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray
-
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 801
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:48 am
- First Name: Tommy
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N591CA
- Airports: KCGF
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 33 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
- Kai
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:14 pm
- First Name: Kai
- Aircraft Type: DA40F
- Aircraft Registration: XXXX
- Airports: VTCY
- Has thanked: 127 times
- Been thanked: 99 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
Both views are valuable opinions. Just Tommy is comparing the numbers and facts while Frank counts in sex appeal and other emotional factors. It all depends on the pilot's personality and what they expect from a plane. Raquel Welch and Kate Upton will both be playing in the upper league for whatever you fancy women.Star57 wrote: To end my comparison statement I will say, that it's like comparing Raquel Welch today to Kate Upton, hope I shouldn't have to expand further....
Enjoy your Aerostar
Thanks to Frank for not expanding any further and not confronting me with the dilemma of deleting a funny but maybe inadequate post. For what it's worth: Kate Upton and a DA62 are both out of my reach.
DA40F - N405FP/HS-KAI (sold)
- Kai
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:14 pm
- First Name: Kai
- Aircraft Type: DA40F
- Aircraft Registration: XXXX
- Airports: VTCY
- Has thanked: 127 times
- Been thanked: 99 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
Who cares? She won't end up neither in your nor in my hangar.Tommy wrote:By the way, who's Kate Upton?
DA40F - N405FP/HS-KAI (sold)
- Star57
- 3 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:15 pm
- First Name: Frank
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: C-FRZA 40.509
- Airports: CYBW
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
This morning while having coffee, I looked out the window and saw the weather getting better, it still is -8 Celsius, beats -20 yesterday, decided to look at DAI and see what's new, read Kai's last posting and just broke out laughing my self silly.....
Awesome way to end a thread!
Thanks Kai
Awesome way to end a thread!
Thanks Kai
-
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 2043
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:00 pm
- First Name: Antoine
- Aircraft Type: OTHER
- Aircraft Registration: N121AG
- Airports: LSGG
- Has thanked: 87 times
- Been thanked: 220 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
I took some time to dissect the DA62's specs. While there are a few things I really like (creature comforts, beautiful instrument panel, low fuel burn, diesel), I am still scratching my head about such things as wingspan and specs.
I happen to be studying in depth the AFM of my Extra 400, which as we all know was designed in the nineties. This is *not* about "mine is better than yours", it just happens that the E400 has the same MTOW as the DA62 and a comparable cabin cross section, but its wingspan is much smaller - by a full 10 feet or 3 meters. So the Diamond should run circles around the Extra in terms of stall speed, right?
DA62 stall speed: 70 Knots clean, 64 knots in landing configuration.
E400 stall speed 76 Knots clean, 58 knots in landing configuration.
Now max cruise. I picked the only "real world" test I could find from
http://www.flyingmag.com/we-fly-diamond-da62
Both aircraft have similar engine power (the Extra's max continuous is 325 HP, and I guess the DA 62 must be around the same number? Flying mag tested at 14'000 ft, below MTOW.
The DA62 will do 195 KTAS while the Extra's AFM says 210 KTAS (at MTOW) I don't know for a fact it will do it, but it's the AFM number.
Of course the twin diesels will burn a lot less fuel, but the point here is aerodynamic efficiency ...
I am willing to allocate a lot of goodwill towards Diamond's totally idiot-proof stall characteristics, but the above data makes me wonder if they aren't getting a bit complacent in terms of engineering ambition. 6 knots of Vs gain in landing configuration is ... not much. And this wingspan is ... an awful lot!
I happen to be studying in depth the AFM of my Extra 400, which as we all know was designed in the nineties. This is *not* about "mine is better than yours", it just happens that the E400 has the same MTOW as the DA62 and a comparable cabin cross section, but its wingspan is much smaller - by a full 10 feet or 3 meters. So the Diamond should run circles around the Extra in terms of stall speed, right?
DA62 stall speed: 70 Knots clean, 64 knots in landing configuration.
E400 stall speed 76 Knots clean, 58 knots in landing configuration.
Now max cruise. I picked the only "real world" test I could find from
http://www.flyingmag.com/we-fly-diamond-da62
Both aircraft have similar engine power (the Extra's max continuous is 325 HP, and I guess the DA 62 must be around the same number? Flying mag tested at 14'000 ft, below MTOW.
The DA62 will do 195 KTAS while the Extra's AFM says 210 KTAS (at MTOW) I don't know for a fact it will do it, but it's the AFM number.
Of course the twin diesels will burn a lot less fuel, but the point here is aerodynamic efficiency ...
I am willing to allocate a lot of goodwill towards Diamond's totally idiot-proof stall characteristics, but the above data makes me wonder if they aren't getting a bit complacent in terms of engineering ambition. 6 knots of Vs gain in landing configuration is ... not much. And this wingspan is ... an awful lot!
- CFIDave
- 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: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
The difference is that the E400 has sophisticated/complex Fowler flaps, while the DA62 has the same simple flaps as the DA42 (the DA62 uses the same DA42 wings) -- this design goes back to the DA40's wing and flaps. The E400 Fowler flaps generate considerably more lift at lower airspeeds, resulting in a slower landing configuration stall speed.Antoine wrote:DA62 stall speed: 70 Knots clean, 64 knots in landing configuration.
E400 stall speed 76 Knots clean, 58 knots in landing configuration.
6 knots of Vs gain in landing configuration is ... not much
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
- rwtucker
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 1283
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:24 pm
- First Name: Rob
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N831BA
- Airports: KFFZ KEUL
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 110 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
Even though I agree, most of time time completely, there occasions where I have extra appreciation for Diamond's handling characteristics. Today was such a day. Four and one half hours solitary non-stop from northern Idaho to Phoenix at 15,500 MSL . . . fatigued more than I knew by the time I crossed the Grand Canyon (I had an O2 leak and didn't know it) . . . then into Phoenix's complex airspace at a point where three air spaces, a traffic-intensive alert area, and an Air Force base restricted area that was visibly hot at the time of my arrival. I finally make it to my airport, high and hot (don't ask) facing a turn to base where anything short of a 70-72 degree bank chasing the runway back (no skid) would have broken military airspace. I'm too fast for flaps but not that far above theoretical stall. Unsurprisingly, my Diamond flew much better than I did; brought be back to center line ready for an aggressive slip. (At least my fatigue disappeared.) I'm not sure I would have tried that (or survived, had I tried) in most other aircraft I have flown. It would be correct to say that the Diamond's stability may lead to poor habits. On the other hand, there are days when we part-time, occasional, much less than perfect pilots appreciate what Diamond has done. In my mind, they don't get enough credit for it.Antoine wrote:I am willing to allocate a lot of goodwill towards Diamond's totally idiot-proof stall characteristics, but the above data makes me wonder if they aren't getting a bit complacent in terms of engineering ambition. 6 knots of Vs gain in landing configuration is ... not much. And this wingspan is ... an awful lot!
-
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 2043
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:00 pm
- First Name: Antoine
- Aircraft Type: OTHER
- Aircraft Registration: N121AG
- Airports: LSGG
- Has thanked: 87 times
- Been thanked: 220 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
Robert I can only agree. This DA40 saved my face, and maybe my whole body a couple of times in situations similar to what you describe. Dont't get me wrong, I think the DA40 is a masterpiece in pilot fault tolerance (ask me how I know). But I don't think that the low tech flaps have anything to do with it.
Proof: DA40 NG... a killer plane.
I think my position can be summed up as follows:
1) Diamond could use some help in structural design (read: lighter) and in advanced aerodynamics (Fowler flaps with fully enclosed mechanism).
2) The DA62 is an enormous plane that cannot compete with well designed singles unless the buyer absolutely needs (the hassle of ) two engines.
Proof: DA40 NG... a killer plane.
I think my position can be summed up as follows:
1) Diamond could use some help in structural design (read: lighter) and in advanced aerodynamics (Fowler flaps with fully enclosed mechanism).
2) The DA62 is an enormous plane that cannot compete with well designed singles unless the buyer absolutely needs (the hassle of ) two engines.
- Colin
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 2006
- Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:37 pm
- First Name: Colin
- Aircraft Type: DA42
- Aircraft Registration: N972RD
- Airports: KFHR
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 527 times
Re: Saw it, sat in it, and have my opinion...
Robert, I am pretty sure that the same move killed some people in a Columbia 400 out in Kern Valley. All the things you described except it was a spin/stall on final.
And those handling characteristics are why I have an offer in on a DA42. I think I'm a very good pilot a lot of the time. That's not good enough for flying my family. One of those times I am not on my game would be very bad. I talked to the guy that owned two DA42s down at Angel City. He now has a Turbo Commander and was describing all these amazing trips and blasting past a Citation into North Las Vegas and the performance of that aircraft... And he said he sold the last of the DA42s recently and flew it to the new owner in Colorado and he said, "I'd forgotten how incredibly docile those planes are."
That's what I need. I don't rely on it, but that's what I need to have. If I have the resources I will follow them all the way up into jets.
And those handling characteristics are why I have an offer in on a DA42. I think I'm a very good pilot a lot of the time. That's not good enough for flying my family. One of those times I am not on my game would be very bad. I talked to the guy that owned two DA42s down at Angel City. He now has a Turbo Commander and was describing all these amazing trips and blasting past a Citation into North Las Vegas and the performance of that aircraft... And he said he sold the last of the DA42s recently and flew it to the new owner in Colorado and he said, "I'd forgotten how incredibly docile those planes are."
That's what I need. I don't rely on it, but that's what I need to have. If I have the resources I will follow them all the way up into jets.
Colin Summers, PP Multi-Engine IFR, ~3,000hrs
colin@mightycheese.com * send email rather than PM
http://www.flyingsummers.com
N972RD DA42 G1000 2.0 s/n 42.AC100 (sold!)
N971RD DA40 G1000 s/n 40.508 (traded)
colin@mightycheese.com * send email rather than PM
http://www.flyingsummers.com
N972RD DA42 G1000 2.0 s/n 42.AC100 (sold!)
N971RD DA40 G1000 s/n 40.508 (traded)