SR22 Generation 5

[Joey]

The SR22 Generation 5 was just announced. The biggest thing I see is a 200 lb max gross weight increase, along with a jump in price. Where's the Diamond counter with the 80 Kg increase as in the austro powered version? I0-390? supercharger?

[Antoine]

Well Joey this is certainly great news in terms of usability and it further highlights that Diamond really should do something to keep their market share.
In terms of aero engineering, I believe that Cirrus are all ... wrong.
If I were making decisions at Diamond, I would redesign the airframe to reduce weight versus increasing MTOW. This IS possible, they proved it with the DA42 VI.
*sigh*

[Keith M]

DIA, certainly in Austria, don't seem to get marketing. They work on the Field of Dreams principle that if they build it, he (the customer) will come. Numbers sold prove that the approach of Cirrus is more successful, whatever the relative merits of their aircraft. Diamond only increase gross weight to cope with a heavier engine!

[pilotpaul]

DA50 would have been the SR22 competitor but Diamond shelved their plans. It is disappointing but I understand why that is. It would be very difficult to get significant number of buyers in already crowded segment. Maybe Diamond is waiting for the right diesel engine for DA50? Certifying DA50 that runs on avgas would be expensive and risky. Diesel version would have better prospects but we do not have any feasible ~300hp aviation diesels yet.

[bcocheran]

If Diamond's website updates are any indication of their airplane updates, they will lag behind in design for a long time!!

[CFIDave]

DA50 would have been the SR22 competitor but Diamond shelved their plans. It is disappointing but I understand why that is. It would be very difficult to get significant number of buyers in already crowded segment. Maybe Diamond is waiting for the right diesel engine for DA50? Certifying DA50 that runs on avgas would be expensive and risky. Diesel version would have better prospects but we do not have any feasible ~300hp aviation diesels yet.

Austro Engines (next door to Diamond Austria) may still be working to adapt the Steyr monoblock 6-cylinder diesel marine engine for aircraft applications. If they can reduce engine weight, it may be produced as the Austro AE500 model 270 hp engine for the DA50.

The Cirrus announcement will have the greatest effect on direct competitor Cessna, since the Corvalis TTx (formerly Lancair/Columbia/Cessna 400) has a very limited useful load with full fuel. Pricing and performance of the 2 aircraft are very similar.

[bcocheran]

So is the DA50 still in development or not?

[Kai]

So is the DA50 still in development or not?

Brad, Diamond will say "of course" and "we are currently waiting for the certification of the new powerplant" (Austro engine) and yet it doesn't mean anything from a company which still promotes the D-Jet while it would not return the funds it accepted over 4 years ago nor start the production.

I am quite sure they are not even purposely giving false information, they just don´t know what they are doing and keep working on projects until they reach a stage where it seems more beneficial to work on another one. And they might never finish any of them.

One more funny thing to add to the credibility of the announcements of Diamond:

http://www.diamondaircraft.com/aircraft ... eviews.php

There is "Sarah Richardson" holding a position on the DA50 already, means they are telling us that she has probably made a downpayment already. Great news! She also works for Diamond, see her profile http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profil ... id=profile

It wouldn't amaze me at all if she wouldn't exist or wouldn't even work for Diamond anymore after the great disappointment that she still isn't flying her DA50 Magnum...

If you do make a downpayment for a "position" in the large waiting list, be reminded that any payment is refundable but that they don't necessarily do that and would never tell you under which conditions they might refund. At least this has been the case for many D-Jet buyers for years.

[Henrik]

Pricing and performance of the 2 aircraft are very similar.

I would agree. While their respective owners would probably disagree violently, the two types seem 95% identical. Same engine, range, speed, ceiling, both 4 seat (well, 4½ with the 2012 SR22) modern composite airframes, glass, side stick (C400) / side yoke (SR22), same exterior/interior dimensions etc. I couldn't think of any mission which I'd fly in a SR22 but not a C400, or vv. The 2013 SR22 would enable an extra passenger though.

Incidentally, Cirrus aren't updating their SR20 either, so I guess there's still parity with the DA40.

By the way, what happened to the TTx - wasn't it supposed to enter the marketplace 1½ year ago?

DAI & Cirrus seems to focus mostly on their higher powered models these days. Same thing with Cessna - they've discontinued their non-turbo C350 as well.

[CFIDave]

[By the way, what happened to the TTx - wasn't it supposed to enter the marketplace 1½ year ago?

I got to actually fly the one-and-only Corvalis TTx demonstrator with Garmin 2000 a few months ago when it visited our airport. It was the the first aircraft produced since Cessna shut down the former Columbia factory in Oregon and moved composite part production to Mexico with final assembly in Independence, Kansas (where 172s/182s are also built).

As you may recall, Corvalis production has been in limbo ever since the first aircraft produced with Mexican parts had composite wing panels de-laminate in flight! Cessna had to relearn how to build composite parts properly -- apparently they needed to better control humidity in the Mexican factory. With Mexican parts production fixed, Cessna expects to deliver the first customer TTx planes in the next few months, although the first few won't have TKS panels.

The plane I flew had EXPERIMENTAL signs on the sides, and didn't yet have the new TKS FIKI option installed. It flew just like a 2008 Cessna 400 I had flown earlier, which is to say very nicely. Despite gusty winds, the relatively high wing loading really smoothed out the ride.

But I had a love/hate relationship with the new Garmin G2000 avionics. The touch screen, the ease-of-use, and the vastly-improved navigation capabilities were a huge improvement on the G1000. But the location of the touch screen on the center console IMHO required way too much "heads-down" activity. If only they could have located it closer to the panel so you wouldn't have to keep looking down so much...