2.0s in da42 TDi

[Antoine]

Cary - I just spent an hour on the phone with a very knowledgeable person in the trade of DA42. he told me that GFC700 was the number one item for securing a good resale value, with everything else (extras) being far behind.

And here is an N-reg plane with the 2.0 Centurions AND a GFC700.
http://www.planecheck.com/index.asp?ent ... 8715&cor=y

[carym]

Cary - I just spent an hour on the phone with a very knowledgeable person in the trade of DA42. he told me that GFC700 was the number one item for securing a good resale value, with everything else (extras) being far behind.

And here is an N-reg plane with the 2.0 Centurions AND a GFC700.
http://www.planecheck.com/index.asp?ent ... 8715&cor=y

Antoine,
That's very interesting. Its serial number indicates it was built in Europe and was given an "N" registration in 2011, not 2008 when it was built. Perhaps it got the GFC700 while it was EASA registered. Nevertheless, it sounds like a nice plane and may be worth investigating for purchase. As an FYI, based on the year built it is due for prop overhaul (72 months or 2400 hrs, whichever is first), so that is an additional $9000+. My props have been in overhaul for over a month now and I am still without a plane

As I discovered when investigating whether or not a prop overhaul was required for my plane, the FAA rules are sometimes (?often) murky and the answer you get can depend upon which FSDO you talk to.

[Antoine]

Cary, thanks for investigating. Interesting finding regarding the later N-Reg.
Yes this one looks like a nice bird but too costly as a donor platform for an upgrade project.
I need to find a plane that's out of potential on both engine and props and is correspondingly cheap.

I believe that, in order to limit depreciation, my upper budget limit for a 2.0s upgrade with GFC 700 and TAS is $450K.
This is because NG conversions start at 500 K, and they even have more goodies included.

[Aart]

The Austro is roughly half the above price AND it already has a 1500 hour TBO. So the engine allowance is down to $ 40 or so.
Selecting the 2.0s versus the Austro will cost a $12'000 premium per year (not even considering the potentially higher maintenance costs). That's an awful lot of money!

Antoine,
I am not sure if I understand the above on Austro cost. AFAIK an Austro upgrade is WAY more expensive than a CD-135 or CD-155 (that's their names now ) upgrade because of the major mods to the airframe that are needed.

And of course Conti will have to increase the TBR or even go for TBO in order to remain in the race.

[Antoine]

Hi Aart

I was comparing the cost of replacing a Centurion with the cost of overhauling an AE-300. There is a huge difference which, once split over the 1200 hours TBR of the CD-155 makes this a horribly expensive proposition.
To make matter worse, the maintenance costs are also much higher on the Centurions.
All in all very expensive...

[Antoine]

Found the data sheet of the 155 HP "Centurion"
http://www.centurion.aero/typo3/fileadm ... CD-155.pdf

Note that the critical altitude has been raised to 8000 ft (vs 6000 for the 135 HP version and 10500 for Austro AE-300).

http://austroengine.at/uploads/pdf/mod_ ... _Sheet.pdf

This 2000 ft increase in critical altitude is a big deal. Charts show 85% power available at 15000 feet. With its relatively low empty weight and MTOW, this version of the DA42 will be a great climber.

[ememic99]

I got an update from John - everything remained as he estimated at the begining - pricing, availability, shops that we'll be able to perform the upgrade, props upgrade to schmitar. So I'm planning my upgrade once I reach 1500 hours on current engines (probably end of 2016).

[Doug]

I got an update from John - everything remained as he estimated at the begining - pricing, availability, shops that we'll be able to perform the upgrade, props upgrade to schmitar. So I'm planning my upgrade once I reach 1500 hours on current engines (probably end of 2016).

Sorry if I missed it but what was the pricing of engine upgrade upgrade?

[ememic99]

The pricing has several options depending on what you have to upgrade, so the easiest way is to contact John and ask based on what you actually need.

[Antoine]

Just did some graphs of power vs altitude for the four engine options

and power to weight vs altitude. The flight weight was 1780 Kg for all except -VI which has 1940 Kg. This should yield a similar useful load with equivalent equipment.

Edit : following Dave's input I have changed the graph to reflect the improved critical altitude of the Austro. ( my data came from the current data sheet but Dave reports the POH says better). I have set the critical altitude at 12'000 on the graph for simplicity.

And in fairness to the "dash six" its superior aerodynamics will yield somewhat better climb at equivalent power-to-weight...

What do you think?