BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jul 2021, 22:03

So I’m not an aeronautical engineer but why do they taper down the fuselage before the tail. Seems it would be so much stronger if they didn’t. But being a guy that has broke the tubes to the tail section, can you folks tell me?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jul 2021, 22:14

Much less surface area exposed to a cross wind.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 00:12

Username Protected wrote:

you never pay retail for JetA. Pretty much always on contract

A plane with only a 50 gallon capacity isn't going to get as good a deal on those contracts as you do.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 00:38

Just a guess, but did they just use the 62 empanage? Is that why there is no baggage door? Wtf.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 06:56

Username Protected wrote:

you never pay retail for JetA. Pretty much always on contract

A plane with only a 50 gallon capacity isn't going to get as good a deal on those contracts as you do.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 07:51

Deleted.

OOOPPPS. Posted in wrong forum.

Senior moment.

Jg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 07:54

Hard to see the innovation here, except in the use of a diesel recip engine. I admit that it really is pretty, and of course it has all the swanky new inflight automation and lots of screens.

55 years ago, Cessna delivered my '66 T210, with radios that were current for its day, and are upgradeable today. That airplane cruises faster, carries more useful load, climbs higher, lands shorter, has more interior and luggage space, and has significantly more range. I can buy an old T210 for 1/10th the price of the subject DA50. Then I can give $250k to an avionics shop and get all that swanky new Garmin automation installed in mine, or buy an AirMod interior if that suits me.

Same for a 36 Bonanza, whether factory turbocharged or aftermarket modified / turbo normalized.

Help me out, other than the diesel recip powerplant, what is the selling point for this machine?

Mark

Edit: I went and looked at the demonstrator again at Airventure. It has what looks to be very nicely implemented double slotted Fowler flaps, that's cool. And TKS deice, very nice. And three big doors.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 08:58

Username Protected wrote:

Help me out, other than the diesel recip powerplant, what is the selling point for this machine?

It's new.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 09:16

I keep "clicking" on this topic thinking it is about a Falcon 50! DA50!!!

Why did they steal the designation?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 10:44

Well, the real DA50 was always a retract, burning Jet-A.. no news on that stuff...

I think only pilots with DA50 on their type ratings list think of the Falcon 50 as a DA50. Everybody else in the world thinks of it as a Falcon 50. From a marketing perspective 0% of buyers will be confused.

But I tend to agree, DA52 is available and why not?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 15:53

Username Protected wrote:

So I’m not an aeronautical engineer but why do they taper down the fuselage before the tail. Seems it would be so much stronger if they didn’t. But being a guy that has broke the tubes to the tail section, can you folks tell me?

All Diamonds have that tapered empennage for crosswinds as indicated. And, having flown a DA42-VI for my ME training, it does make a difference for it ...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 16:11

Great video, and I think it has an attractive aesthetic. But the 44' wingspan puts it in Malibu territory.

165 knot cruise... yawn.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 17:02

Username Protected wrote:

Well, the real DA50 was always a retract, burning Jet-A.. no news on that stuff...

I think only pilots with DA50 on their type ratings list think of the Falcon 50 as a DA50. Everybody else in the world thinks of it as a Falcon 50. From a marketing perspective 0% of buyers will be confused.

Talking about marketing...

Let me be the first (and last) to say it's NOT a Falcon 50. It's a Mystère 50. A Dassault Mystère-Falcon 50 to be precise.

Nobody cares, but I. It's ok, I'll see myself out.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 20:31

Username Protected wrote:

For everyone commenting on the small fuel tanks…. If you were designing a plane and they said you had to use an engine that weighed 2x as much as usual, same power and payload as usual, what else can you do? Small fuel tanks are the obvious solution. The mitigating factor is somewhat higher fuel efficiency, so the range reduction is less severe.

I don't understand. Smaller fuel tanks would only increase the full-fuel useful load, which is too high at 888 lbs. With larger fuel tanks, a pilot could add more fuel when lightly loaded.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jul 2021, 21:21

I saw it in person. It is a very comfortable cabin. The guy quoted me 165-180 knots. I’m guessing 180 would be in the teens? Great useful load compared to a Cirrus or G36, but seems like the price is getting close to an M350.

DA 50 RG