Real world numbers – FL12 – 180 TAS, 14 gph – so max cruise power the range is pretty poor
– 8:20 into the video – 90% power
but the flight characteristics are completely benign – looks like it flies on rails
It’s roughly the SR22na performance, being ROP at 15.3 following the POH (I may have an old one). But they are usually flying LOP and then we are around 12.5USG/h With the cost of the retract, the engine with turbo, the absence of the chute, there is not a lot of advantage on this plane. JetA1, Single lever, back door?
Now the easy question? Would you go for a brand new engine or a good old IO550?
Nice video, I found the roll time a lot with only 2 pob, 22s? This is about 10 to 12s in a 172, probably 12 to 15 in a SR22.
greg_mp wrote:
JetA1, Single lever, back door?
I assume cost – Jet A1 is cheaper as well as the MOH cost (if it is Austro engine, and the same rules for the MOH costs as for the Austro engine on DA42).
Those numbers are just about par compared to real numbers on NA SR22 fixed gear Cirrus (175TAS@16GPH) or NA M20R retractable Ovation (175TAS@13GPH), only advantage being the nice look and cheap/available JetA (if no extra BP h**ker fee 
)
arj1 wrote:
if it is Austro engine
No, it’s CD-300.
I just dont see “economic fuel costs” even being a factor if you have a million bucks to spend on an aeroplane… and why are new aeroplanes not being designed with chutes? Can you really amortisize that kind of money into any training business…and how much is a Cirrus? This particular aeroplane has to be for someome intending to operate it outside of the US/western Europe where Avgas supply isnt assured.
Edit: As someone that will never have that kind of cash to spend on an aeroplane, I struggle to understand what factors make a buying decision for such a product.
@skydriller I agree. Fuel cost cannot really be the issue. Avgas availability maybe a bit.
There are a few advantages over the Cirrus though:
1. Noise. External- but in particular inside noise and vibration is probably a lot lower. Like with cars, a big differentiator in perception of comfort.
2. Space. The cabin is clearly roomier. So a lot more comfort for four on on board. The fifth seat, well, that’s a gimmick only applicable enabling three kids in the back I guess, and how many families have three nowadays?
3. Quality of the interior. The interior is probably a notch higher. Think Mercedes vs Tesla.
And then there is the intangible argument of looks.
aart wrote:
2. Space. The cabin is clearly roomier. So a lot more comfort for four on on board. The fifth seat, well, that’s a gimmick only applicable enabling three kids in the back I guess, and how many families have three nowadays?
Actually, all 5 seats are for adults. DA62, which DA50 shares cabin with, has 7 seats in three rows and, while 5 seats are for adult persons, the 3rd row is really for children or very small people. If I was in market for DA62, I would definitely ordered it without 3row of seats and use this space for luggage/cargo. I sat in both planes at Aero (actually I flew DA62) and the cabin is definitely roomier that in Cirrus.
Coming back to DA50, for me it’s very hard to understand why somebody would buy it. I heard the price would be in the range of DA42 (1 mil), practically same performance (even a bit slower), lower range (at current figures too low for serious touring), no chute, single engine… Simply, I don’t get it.
Really good that Cirrus gets some competition and it looks and feels like a very well built airplane.
But…I guess they have to fix the range (seems to be the main complaint, also in the of course biased Cirrus camp) ..and work on the price tag, to have a chance. A super nice plane, but the competition is very very tough!
Man look at that takeoff run (previous video at 3m20), 2 adults with full fuel (200lt, ) which is 330kg out of 550 usufull load, so around 1t8…
It rotates at 60kn 3m50). I’m quite surprise by the right seat guy “whao it accelerates”. Actually it may be a surprise :lol: , but this plane is heavy and I doubt that it really produces 300hp on the ground.
Look also on the initial climb, how the pilot has to reduce climb rate to accelerate to (I suppose) Vy 79kn.
A DA42 moved by 2x CD135 with the same weight (I’m used to takeoff at 1.7t) doesn’t take that long to reach 72kn…
