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

[Antoine]

Lol Erik you make me jealous.
(I did not recommend the Extra 400 because Florian had already considered it and ruled out due to its exotic status in the US.)

[fqb]

Hi all,

thank you for the many replies i such a short time. I agree with a lot that was said but also there are reasons I cannot follow some of them.
For business flying, it is not flying in a hurry but moving my family between business locations. In general, it does not matter if I go today, tomorrow or next week. I am absolutely not intending to go into bad weather. I dont have appointments so I am flexible.

Hiring a safety pilot is something I considered a lot, but it does not really work for two reasons. First you need a much bigger plane to carry another 200lbs. The proposed Malibu/Mirage actually has very little full fuel payload. The second issue is that we are not talking about going somewhere for a few days, but staying at each location for a week, or a few weeks. So having a safety pilot sit around or live with me is no good.

I train in the mountains, and every hour of my PPL is in the rockies on short strips and tight approaches. I will do the IFR and another local training which is one week intensive on low AGL mountain operations afterwards. I wont take any passngers until I feel very very comfortable doing so.

I am not going to buy a plane that does not fit my family. If I want to keep flying alone for more training locally, I shoult do that in club planes - whether that number is 100 or 500 hours or 1000 hours does not really matter.

Can I get more input on the feasibility to load us all into a DA42? It is true the kids will grow, but at the same time our dog will be getting old too, although it makes me very sad to say that.

Florian

[Tommy]

Antoine I agree completely with what you said - only I was a little surprised to see you recommend a Mirage (a great plane) vs an ... Extra 400 which fills the same mission space. (Plus a safety pilot - most important part).

A DA40 is surely more safe for a new pilot and family than a DA42 in the hands of a new pilot with a heavy dose of get-there-itis.

Love your french saying. I have heard the same thing around here, "If you want to get there late, then fly". Or "A safe pilot is a flakey pilot" (Meaning you are willing to cancel, or be late if weather etc dictate).

I am convinced I fly because I love it because of flying for its own sake. And it "saves me time" wherever I go, but not really if I factor in the maintenance (time to oversee delivering it to shops), training (which for me is fun so it is not a time cost but if you are flying mostly to save time, then this should be considered lost time), not to mention the times you...need to be late. All in, I am sure flying commercial saves time.

The way to really save time in GA is to be filthy rich, and hire people to fly your plane, prep your plane, manage the maintenance, etc. So you just show up in your Black gas guzzling SUV and walk up the stair ramp into your at least pressurized twin turbine (or turbofan) which has the reliability and strength to really be an all weather machine, and the pro pilot and pro copilot to match that mission.

Ok Donald.

[CFIDave]

Can I get more input on the feasibility to load us all into a DA42?

Let's start with the latest DA42 model and work backwards:

The newest DA42-VI (including 100 kg/220 lb weight increase) could be a good fit for a family with significant baggage weight. It has roughly 1300 lbs useful load. If you want to fly 3 hours or less with a family, fill just the main tanks with 50 gal JetA, so subtract 50 gal x 6.7 lbs/gal = 335 lbs for fuel. Payload is then 1300 - 335 = 965 lbs. (If you want to fly max range, fill the mains + aux tanks, so subtract 76gal x 6.7 lbs/gal =509 lbs. Payload is then 1300 - 509 = 791 lbs.) But you may want to subtract 74 lbs more from these numbers to fill TKS deice fluid tanks (9.2 lbs/gal x 8 gal max capacity).

The DA42NG (Austro-powered) has roughly the same empty weight as the -VI but without the 100 kg max gross weight increase. So that will reduce your useful load by another 220 lbs.

The DA42 TDI (Thielert-powered) has roughly the same useful load as the DA42NG. The TDI model is about 200 lbs lighter than the NG since the Thielert engines have aluminum (instead of cast iron) engine blocks, but Diamond strengthened the landing gear to increase the NG's useful load to compensate for the increased empty weight.

So you may find you can carry your family with full fuel and TKS fluid only in the DA42-VI. Other model DA42s may force you to only fill the main tanks and limit your endurance to about 3 hour flights. Most families with kids won't tolerate flights of much longer than 3 hours. And there's still the issue of O2 I raised earlier, which may force you to fly lower through mountain passes if you don't expect your passengers to wear cannulas.

[Chris B]

Hi Florian -

FWIW, I have a friend with a similar family situation (sans dog) who regularly makes 300nm trips in mountainous terrain. From the SF Bay Area, that is pretty much any direction except West - but that has bigger problems.

He has seriously considered a Cirrus (22T), turbocharged Bonanza & DA42, all used. Any of these alternatives can handle the range and payload, and depending on your priorities, any are viable choices.

After a bunch of test flights, he is probably going to get a DA42 upgraded with Austro engines. The decisive reason is benign low speed handling, plus the fact that the twin engines provide most of the chute benefits (and in some cases - e. g., Catalina - is clearly superior).

I happened to fly back-seat on one of his 2 hr demo runs (3 larger-than-FAA guys, full TKS and plenty of gas for >400 nm), and can confirm that an engine-out is a non-event for a multi-engine novice. Just add rudder. Also, my non-scientific perception was that turbulence is noticeably less jarring than the DA40, though that is a low bar!

The biggest remaining issue is that sufficiently large hangars in this area are hard to find and very expensive.

Chris

[Rich]

In this class of aircraft you are almost always limited in how much you can trade off fuel weight to get more cabin payload. So pay attention to max zero fuel weight. True for the DA42 AND SR22.

Knowing you're based out of Steamboat mad me unconcerned about tut-tutting of the effects Density Altitude. You'll be well-versed in dealing with this, given being trained there. Steamboat's environment will give you a deep-in-your-bones understanding of the challenges, especially in the summer. The bad news is high MDA's AGL makes arrivals inadvisable-to-impossible on some days. And IFR departures something you really want to be on top of. Lose an engine, in most twins, prepare to pull both throttles and pump adrenaline. In a Cirrus, one hand on the chute launch, VFR or IFR.

[Rich]

Hi Florian -

FWIW, I have a friend with a similar family situation (sans dog) who regularly makes 300nm trips in mountainous terrain. From the SF Bay Area, that is pretty much any direction except West - but that has bigger problems.

Chris

Seriously? Years ago, in a Hershey-bar-wing Cherokee 150HP, I flew into OAK from the South (up the coast) with 3 adults, my 8-year-old son, and assorted baggage. I don't recall anything particularly mountainous along that route. And a day or so later, with a full load of fuel and one less adult, departed OAK to the NE, over the Sierras toward our home in Idaho. Fuel stop at Battle Mountain, NV. No particular problems. The Oakland hills are not "mountains" and being low-elevation to start and plenty of distance before having to clear the Sierras I don't quiver at the thought. Heck, MEA's to the East and Northeast are only like 5,000 ft until well past Sacramento. And to the South like 5-6000 ft. and to the North like 4-5000 ft. You do eventually have to deal with the Sierras, of course, but even as far as RNO MEA's are 11,500 ft. or so. Our OP, with his SS base, has to hit 12,100 on a missed approach.

Did I mention that this particular aircraft type is a real dog at altitude with a load? Not too bad at SL-ish, though.

[Erik]

Seriously? ... The Oakland hills are not "mountains" and being low-elevation to start and plenty of distance before having to clear the Sierras I don't quiver at the thought. ...

Depends on how much horsepower you bring to the problem. I went to UC Berkeley and I rode on the cycling team. I went up those not mountainous mountains hundreds of times I would estimate, sometimes full tilt against my team-mates. I beg to differ they are quite mountainous depending on the vehicle of choice!

[Rich]

Those of us who have spent hundreds and thousands of hours flying around the vast high-altitudes in the Rocky Mountain areas tend to be a bit dismissive of the "lowlanders. Last year I had occasion to be bemused by a sign I encountered in North Carolina along the highway proclaiming I had just crossed the "Eastern Continental Divide".

[Erik]

Lol Erik you make me jealous.
(I did not recommend the Extra 400 because Florian had already considered it and ruled out due to its exotic status in the US.)

How is your Extra 400? Beautiful airplane.

When you come to USA I still owe you a ride in the Mooney.