Did you notice that the DA-62 comes in two gross weights?

The first one listed is 1999 Kg (4,407 lbs). This is for the European market where IFR enroute charges start at 2000 Kg aircraft. So flying the 1999 Kg version saves you a ton of users fees in Europe.

The "normal" one is 2300 Kg (5,071 lbs). If you believe the brochure numbers, then you have 1,609 lbs useful load, 1,024 lbs cabin load full fuel (assuming 6.8 lbs/gal). Now that's quite decent, 4 people and bags quite easily.

I think the two versions of the plane are actually identical, so one can play the game of buying the "light" one and loading it up, yet get excused from the user fees. Wink, wink.

The brochure annoyingly gives fuel flow at one engine setting and cruise speed at another, so you can't work out range straightforwardly. Assuming fuel flow scales linearly with engine power (fairly typical for diesels), then 75% power is 176 KTAS and 14.8 GPH. With 86 usable, set aside 15 gallons for reserve, 5 extra for climb and takeoff, we have a range of about 800 nm carrying 1000 lbs. That's respectable.

Of course, we're talking "brochure lbs", a strange unit of measure, particularly for composite airframes.

Will it be FIKI or have deice? Pictures show heated props, but I could find no indication there is any airframe protection.

Mike C.

I think the Hawkeye is beautiful. It looks like freedom to me. The F22 might be sexier but the radar platforms are the most important airborne asset AFaIK.

Neat plane, but too slow for the $ IMO. I can't imagine paying a million $ for a sub 200 knot plane regardless of the efficiency.

Its about the speed and price of a Baron G58 but burns Jet A.
It actually looks pretty good in silver. Call it a 4 or 5 seater on shorter legs.
Fill does 2 child seats and your out of bagage space.

I think it looks great. Look at all the doors. Nice.

I was just thinking about those doors also, great but relying on Passengers to close them properly or children playing around in flight with all those doors scares me... Especially when they are out of reach of the pilot. I fly a Jetranger and it never fails people want to slam doors, leave seatbelts out, etc... These doors don't look like the kind that the air would just keep them blowed shut either.

Also, I'd be curious to know if the gear stance is as wide as a baron, looks awful narrow to me?? Nice aircraft no doubt and everybody loves that new car smell. But like pointed out above, these numbers are just speculation and I'm sure they are to the most optimum side. Also, it doesn't say that 86 gals are useable, maybe it is but if not its probably about 10 percent less Id say??? Really like to see what the Single enging service ceiling would be a max gross and 180hp in a twin would be too?? Long live the Baron!

Edited: I really hate to say this, but this thing looks like a glorified Piper Tramahawk Twin with the high T tail, doors swing up, etc... Sorry guys, just my .02$

I remember the original DA42 flew direct from St John to Porto in Portugal with the long range tanks coming back from Oshkosh years ago. Think he reduced to 40% thrust and flew around 12,5hrs non stop. Average fuel burn was like 6gal/hr in total! He used less than $200 in fuel to cross the Atlantic. That's pretty cool. This one should be able to do similar numbers if you're willing to spend the time.

While I can see the appeal for those living in places where avgas is unavailable or very costly, same as the DA42 for European flight schools, I'd want more speed and carrying capacity for that kind of money. They really need more powerful engines.

This is universally true of Diamond aircraft. I still don't think it can make those speeds with those engines.

The da42 has the same engines, is smaller, weighs less and doesn't make that kind of speed.

Agree regarding their TDI models not putting out enough power for the weight.
With the DA40-180, which I had, it was a good power/weight/airframe combination.

An acquaintance of mine owns a Grumman Mallard. He bought a version of it which came with upgraded brakes, and the STC for it allowed for a gross weight increase to something like 12,600 lbs. Well, while restoring it he discovered he would not be able to get into a couple airports he liked with the higher gross weight, and there was some other restriction I'm not remembering at the moment. So he got a field approval to set the gross weight to 12,499 lbs even with the new brake package.

I may be misremembering some minor details, but that's the gist of the story. Paperwork can easily be formed to fit operational requirements when necessary.

The da42 is a fine plane, it performs just as well as my 1958 travel air for only 15X the price

That thing DOES NOT resemble a Baron...sorry

The little ones fly out of my airport from MTSU as well and I just can't get myself to like the look of them. Oh well, I have the Bo and am about to start the LOW time 58P remake soon so I won't ever have to worry about buying one anyway. That is as long as they keep making gas to put in mine

Username Protected wrote:

My problem with Diamond is two-fold:

They keep announcing all of these great airplanes, but it never happens. DA-50, DA-52, D-Jet, etc. If they build this one great, I'll wait until I can see it.

Customer service seems very suspect. I wasn't impressed by the way that they handled the engine issues on the DA-42. If I owned one, lost $350K in value over-night, and then had to spend another $300K to put some good engines on an almost new aircraft, I would be super pissed.

Other than that I have flown the DA-42 and it makes you realize the possibilities, start it like a car, burn 10 GPH of jet-A total, simple. Agreed, the DA-62 could be a game changer.

Alex speaks the truth. And I am in no way in the "Beech Camp" that they are the equal to modern aircraft; they are not.

I almost bought one of the early Diamond Twins. Had I done so, I would probably be in prison now for murder.

I wouldn't buy a ********** Diamond product if my only other choice was walking. They have ZERO credibility with me.

Jgreen

Alex speaks the truth. And I am in no way in the "Beech Camp" that they are the equal to modern aircraft; they are not.

I almost bought one of the early Diamond Twins. Had I done so, I would probably be in prison now for murder.

I wouldn't buy a ********** Diamond product if my only other choice was walking. They have ZERO credibility with me.

Jgreen