Piston MSB affecting newer engines - MSB-E4-043

[Boatguy]

I checked with a Diamond dealer. New Austro engined aircraft delivered today are still subject to MSB-E4-043 and 50 or 100 hour borescope inspections depending on the model. Makes sense, unlike the first piston MSB -039 which had a large but limited list, the range of affected engines in -043 is a certain serial number “& subsequent.” Until an MSB revision is released saying otherwise that includes all new Austro engines.

Yes, I stand corrected. The owner who recently took delivery was told that his plane would not be affected, but after he picked it up, it turns out it is affected and he'll need new pistons at some point.

[krellis]

Given all the Austro issues and the unknowns surrounding the current and previous MSB’s/AD’s (will an eventual terminating action really be the end of the engine problems) - why would anyone buy a new Austro powered Diamond today? I see long time owners finally throw in towel and yet, others take delivery of a new plane. I’m just curious to understand the thought process of why you would take this risk? Not even discussing the years of poor customer support and delayed avionics upgrades.

[krellis]

Our engines will need to be stripped of accessories, boxed, and given to a trucking company to deliver to Nova Scotia

Why Nova Scotia?

Austro has sub-contracted the work to Aerotec Engines.

https://aerotecengines.ca

...they are shipping new planes that are not subject to this MSB/AD, while leaving existing owners out in the cold.

New planes are not subject to MSB-E4-043?

That's what I've been told by owner's who have recently taken delivery.

It's stands to reason. Would you take delivery of your new $1.8M airplane while it was subject to an AD and good chance of being AOG for a few months while they install new pistons?

But the question is why can they ship good engines to new buyers, but not existing owners?

Apparently, some people don't seem to care about this.

Interesting that an aircraft manufacturer can deliver a new $1.8m airplane with defects that is subject to an AD without the availability of a terminating action - unlike a car manufacturer that cannot deliver a $30K vehicle if it is subject to a recall.

[Jeff]

There has been a lot of speculation about the current situation regarding the terminating action for MSB E4-043 and its associated AD’s. In an effort to stop the speculation I would like to advise as follows based on information I received from Diamond today.

• Austro Engine has received new pistons from the supplier for testing one week ago. These pistons are intended to be the terminating action for MSB E4-043. There are two engines running in the test cell with these pistons and there are others which are undergoing destructive testing all of which is required to certify the new pistons. This testing effort, unfortunately, does take some time.
• The duration of this testing/certification is expected to be approximately 3.5 months from now. That timing could change based on testing results.
• Assuming all tests are passed as required, it is expected that pistons will be available for new manufacture and in-field replacements in late April.
• New pistons will be available simultaneously for both new production engines and in field replacements for in service engines.
• Since MSB E4-043 was issued, there have been no engines produced or delivered with pistons not subject to MSB E4-043. Claims to the contrary are false.
• Upon final testing and approval of the new pistons they will immediately be incorporated into deliveries of all E4 series engines. The cut in to production will be dependent on the final approval date of the new pistons.

Diamond/Austro will endeavor to provide updates as new information is known. As of this time this is the current and up to date status of the piston replacement matter related to MSB E4-043 . Speculation to the contrary is not accurate information.

I hope this will assist all of us to be better informed as to the current status and I will do my best to stay on top of this and communicate correct and accurate information as the situation changes.

In the meantime, if any Diamond owner affected by this or other MSB's I urge you to contact an Authorized Diamond Service Center for accurate information. If they do not have the answer to your questions immediately, they can get it for you.

[Karl]

Interesting that an aircraft manufacturer can deliver a new $1.8m airplane with defects that is subject to an AD without the availability of a terminating action - unlike a car manufacturer that cannot deliver a $30K vehicle if it is subject to a recall.

Boeing and other manufacturers deliver aircraft with open ADs daily. Stopping the production line would bankrupt the company, which doesn't make sense. Obviously, various risk assessments are made whenever an SB or AD is issued. As mentioned earlier in this thread, terminating action is planned, but it takes time to implement.

[krellis]

Interesting that an aircraft manufacturer can deliver a new $1.8m airplane with defects that is subject to an AD without the availability of a terminating action - unlike a car manufacturer that cannot deliver a $30K vehicle if it is subject to a recall.

Boeing and other manufacturers deliver aircraft with open ADs daily. Stopping the production line would bankrupt the company, which doesn't make sense. Obviously, various risk assessments are made whenever an SB or AD is issued. As mentioned earlier in this thread, terminating action is planned, but it takes time to implement.

Yes, I am aware of this. I've done delivery flights on a number of B737-900's with outstanding AD's - most of which were minor and did not materially affect the usability or safety of the aircraft. My comment was meant more for individuals who have a choice about accepting an airplane with an AD that doesn't have a terminating action currently available. Why take the risk at this point? It's not like Austro has a spectacular history of reliability or longevity.

[dant]

It's not like Austro has a spectacular history of reliability

They used to be considered quite reliable! Then it was "oh, mechanics aren't putting hoses back on right", then the high pressure fuel pumps, etc.

For me I wonder how many DA62s fly more than 100 hours a year. This might just be another annual item for a lot of owners? And if it's that long between inspections, maybe they figure the pistons will be ready by then.

IDK, just brainstorming.

[ememic99]

For me I wonder how many DA62s fly more than 100 hours a year.

Probably all because of plane's capabilities.

[mfdutra]

I’d certainly fly a lot more if the airplane was more reliable.

[nickname]

I'm not sure if there's a material difference in reliability in the 42 and 62 - but I've flown over 600 hours in 2024 despite the screw cap (1 week) and piston inspection ADs (no additional downtime). Finding independent mechanics with Diamond & Austro experience as well as building a relationship (or multiple) with service centers has helped. I encourage folks to work with 2-3 service centers to determine which will offer you the best price and least downtime.

Power settings and flying habits contribute significantly to downtime, and that's not unique to Diamond aircraft.