BeechTalk - BT - interesting Diamond new retract diesel single

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Nov 2019, 05:29

Username Protected wrote:

Does The 1200 hour TBO include the gear reduction unit?

Considering how many issues there were with the original Thieliert GRU, i'd guess yes.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Nov 2019, 10:30

Username Protected wrote:

1200 hours is where all the new engine designs start, and as time is built on the fleet, the TBO/TBR numbers have gone up to approximately the same as conventional gas engines’s numbers. Austro is now 1800 hours TBO, and CMI CD135 is up to 2100. In the case of the Austro, the increase was retroactive, and in the case of the CMI, there was a serial number cut with many design and parts changes.

The 12 year life limit exists also for most gas engines, though opinions on how to interpret the language, which chapter of the maintenance manual it’s published in, and under what authority the aircraft is operated.

TCO compares quite favorably with a gas engine. I believe we have the same TSIO550 G on our planes, and the invoice for a factory reman is something like $85,000. I’m not looking forward to that. I ran the numbers some time ago on a 1500 TBO austro and TVD-equipped CD135, and for 2 engines on a DA42, the scheduled mx and overhaul reserve came to something like $46 and $87 per hour. Both engines. Obviously it’s a different application than our go-fast singles, but throw in a mid-life top and 50 hour oil changes, and you’re right there with the hourly cost for 2 austro engines.

Diamond did fly the DA50 with an austro 170 hp engine. They called it the DA50 magnum, but I was thinking at the time that “rimfire” might be closer to the mark. Performance on this single should be quite a bit better. The DA62 performs nicely on 20% more power, and it has more drag and almost certainly more weight.

One challenge that Diamond and its dealers need to overcome is the density of service centers. Pretty much anyone can work on my TSIO550. The continental and austro diesels, on the other hand, require special equipment and training. This problem goes away with a concerted effort by DAI and dealers and with more in service.
-dan

The 1200 hours doesn't surprise me being a new engine. But there's no guarantee that it is going to get extended. It's also a TBR at this time, so no "overhaul", it's replace.

While those things will likely change over the life of an engine program, it could take years.

All that uncertainty makes it hard-to-sell.

The thing I was wondering though, is if the TBR is an airworthiness limitation that's a whole different matter than a recommended TBO. Our TSIO550's have a recommended TBO, which means we can ignore it. But, an airworthiness limitation would be mandatory, even for pt91.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Nov 2019, 22:57

Username Protected wrote:

Depends on the polar.

Also depends on whether we’re talking about drag polars to LBGTQ polars. :hide:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Nov 2019, 13:29

Username Protected wrote:

Great figures in my mind, considering how much weight it's moving.

Wish the engines had a little more sauce. 200 or 210 hp for better runway performance.

More sauce means more fuel burn. There is no getting away from that no matter what your engine is.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Nov 2019, 19:00

More power, higher horse power = more weight = more fuel burn.
That formula will never change, at least for Avgas and Diesel engines.
There is no free lunch.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Nov 2019, 20:02

Username Protected wrote:

I'm betting on Re-generative gas turbo-props, like this initiative : https://www.turbotech-aero.com/solutions/

- Extremely simple & reliable turbine technology
- Light weight
- Compact (low cowling/cooling drag)
- Burns just about anything: JetA1, Bio-fuel, Un-leaded mo-gas, & even AvGas (yuck !)

That looks interesting. Any out in the field yet though? The list of orphan "next gen" aircraft engine projects is long...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Nov 2019, 16:07

Username Protected wrote:

More power, higher horse power = more weight = more fuel burn.
That formula will never change, at least for Avgas and Diesel engines.
There is no free lunch.

I know what you're staying, but Diamond left room on the table. They increased power on Austro diesels by 12 hp on DA62s. Same weight engine, more boost, TBO quickly increased to the same 1800 hour TBO as the DA42 version.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Nov 2019, 10:11

General aviation is ripe for a new and improved power plant.

Better fuel specifics not only increase fuel economy and lower operating costs but they also effectively increase useful load because one doesn’t need to carry as much fuel.

Better reliability (longer TBO, less maintenance) is another holy grail of GA and is currently the domain of the turbine engines.

How many folks buy twins because of concerns over an engine failure in a single?

We’ve read about the “promise” of Diesel engines in GA for a long time but as a practical matter that promise has not been realized.

When engine and conversion costs are factored in often times the conclusion is “the juice isn’t worth the squeeze”.

:shrug:

I think diesels have promise but remain skeptical. For now I’ll remain a big bore Continental customer.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Nov 2019, 10:44

Wasn’t the performance issues with the CMI Diesel with the Skylane that tarnished this engine?

Cessna had a couple of engine failures in test flights that made them retrofit all the manufactured diesel 182’s back to gas? This was what I was told by a Cessna rep.

I wonder how much additional engineering CMI put into this diesel since then?

Curious what others may know.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Nov 2019, 12:33

Username Protected wrote:

Wasn’t the performance issues with the CMI Diesel with the Skylane that tarnished this engine?

Cessna had a couple of engine failures in test flights that made them retrofit all the manufactured diesel 182’s back to gas? This was what I was told by a Cessna rep.

I wonder how much additional engineering CMI put into this diesel since then?

Curious what others may know.

Skylane was the SMA diesel, which is a non-automotive-based power plant. Skyhawk was re-engined by Redbird with the CDI 135, and cessna was making noises about doing the 155 hp CMI.

Piper has 155 HP CMI engines in archers/warriors in the world market.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Dec 2019, 02:49

I own a DA42NG, I am based in Europe and I am out to buy a new plane, that is why I have joined BeechTalk - a great forum!

In a nutshell and since I own the plane for almost 5 years now and have clocked 900h on it: It is a very reliable plane and I really love(d) to fly it!

The performance is not sky-rocketing: 14.000ft (sweet spot), 165 knots at 13,2 GL. I run the plane on Diesel during summer (1,50 US/LITER) and on JET A in winter (2,50 US/LITER). If I look in the hangars around at my home base there are plenty of Diamonds.

Cost of ownership is quite high due to the complex engines. My Austro's are now close to TBO (1.800h) and I have just ordered OVH engines (55.000 US :sad:

). TBO is TBO in EASA land, no extension on condition...

Really annoying are frequent AD's e.g. costly replacement of all 2x4 fuel injectors every 900h. Diamond tends to forget you after they have sold the plane to you, e.g. SW upgrades on legacy G1000s. There is a big discussion and even a "petition" of Diamond owners in the Diamond Aviator Forum.

So I am out for a new plane. I love the Baron G58, but the AVGAS bill would kill me here. Among others I am interested in a Bonanza G36. See where I end up with. Would be great to have one or two big Diesel engines...

The DA50 looks interesting, but I think the CD300 needs to mature. Wonder if it comes with a parachute. And if yes, does Diamond have the experience? It took Cirrus years to offer a reliable CAP.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Dec 2019, 06:08

Soloy are trying to get the latest generation SMA engine STCed. Apparently they just sold all the assets; I spoke to the guy who bought them, and he says it's still ongoing, but it's already very delayed compared to what Soloy had promised. Cost for the conversion was being quoted at about $160,000.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Dec 2019, 11:47

Look at the Jetprop conversion. For EU it falls under 2MT so you save on airway fees.

Username Protected wrote:

I own a DA42NG, I am based in Europe and I am out to buy a new plane, that is why I have joined BeechTalk - a great forum!

In a nutshell and since I own the plane for almost 5 years now and have clocked 900h on it: It is a very reliable plane and I really love(d) to fly it!

The performance is not sky-rocketing: 14.000ft (sweet spot), 165 knots at 13,2 GL. I run the plane on Diesel during summer (1,50 US/LITER) and on JET A in winter (2,50 US/LITER). If I look in the hangars around at my home base there are plenty of Diamonds.

Cost of ownership is quite high due to the complex engines. My Austro's are now close to TBO (1.800h) and I have just ordered OVH engines (55.000 US :sad:

). TBO is TBO in EASA land, no extension on condition...

Really annoying are frequent AD's e.g. costly replacement of all 2x4 fuel injectors every 900h. Diamond tends to forget you after they have sold the plane to you, e.g. SW upgrades on legacy G1000s. There is a big discussion and even a "petition" of Diamond owners in the Diamond Aviator Forum.

So I am out for a new plane. I love the Baron G58, but the AVGAS bill would kill me here. Among others I am interested in a Bonanza G36. See where I end up with. Would be great to have one or two big Diesel engines...

The DA50 looks interesting, but I think the CD300 needs to mature. Wonder if it comes with a parachute. And if yes, does Diamond have the experience? It took Cirrus years to offer a reliable CAP.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Dec 2019, 01:13

Username Protected wrote:

I own a DA42NG, I am based in Europe and I am out to buy a new plane, that is why I have joined BeechTalk - a great forum!

In a nutshell and since I own the plane for almost 5 years now and have clocked 900h on it: It is a very reliable plane and I really love(d) to fly it!

The performance is not sky-rocketing: 14.000ft (sweet spot), 165 knots at 13,2 GL. I run the plane on Diesel during summer (1,50 US/LITER) and on JET A in winter (2,50 US/LITER). If I look in the hangars around at my home base there are plenty of Diamonds.

Cost of ownership is quite high due to the complex engines. My Austro's are now close to TBO (1.800h) and I have just ordered OVH engines (55.000 US :sad:

). TBO is TBO in EASA land, no extension on condition...

Really annoying are frequent AD's e.g. costly replacement of all 2x4 fuel injectors every 900h. Diamond tends to forget you after they have sold the plane to you, e.g. SW upgrades on legacy G1000s. There is a big discussion and even a "petition" of Diamond owners in the Diamond Aviator Forum.

So I am out for a new plane. I love the Baron G58, but the AVGAS bill would kill me here. Among others I am interested in a Bonanza G36. See where I end up with. Would be great to have one or two big Diesel engines...

The DA50 looks interesting, but I think the CD300 needs to mature. Wonder if it comes with a parachute. And if yes, does Diamond have the experience? It took Cirrus years to offer a reliable CAP.

The 210 turboprop conversion, a Meridian, or Jetprop like Marc suggested.

Did you rule out the DA62? Gives you an extra 10-15 knots, tons of room inside, and the engine OH (even with injectors, high pressure pumps, and TVDs) will be a wash with a 58 baron.