Agreed but, at risk of being banned 
, operating costs for a DA42 are comparable to those for a TB21. The DA62, which I will be flying from April, makes even more sense, as long as you can quickly ignore initial capital investment.
Dave_Phillips wrote:
operating costs for a DA42 are comparable to those for a TB21.
I think you are forgetting that the TB line are the greatest IFR platforms ever built! :)
Agreed but, at risk of being banned , operating costs for a DA42 are comparable to those for a TB21
I flew in a DA42 a few times. We did a little experiment. At 140kt (my normal “cheap cruise”) it was burning a total of 11.5USG/hr – same as the TB20. That’s impressive, since it is running two motors. Probably a slippery airframe and the higher compression ratio are the main factors there.
BTW mine is the TB20. The 21 is the turbo version and the owners I know personally have reported significant before-TBO costs.
Is the DA62 over 2000kg? If so, it’s an “interesting experiment” to say the least, in Europe.
Peter, there are two flavours of DA62, the 2300kg version or the 1999kg version. The only appreciable difference is 5 seats or 7.
1999kg DA62 has impractical legal payload … it would really benefit from lighter engines…
Dave_Phillips wrote:
2.0 Centurion vs. TIO-540
Well, yes, but a 155hp Centurion 2s and a at least 250hp TIO-540-C are not exactly similar. Especially with an unsubstantiated assumption that most of GA is SEP, where the HP per engine matters even more.
Drifting off on a tangent here… The Centurion conversions for both the PA28 and the C172 all come with a CS prop, right? How much difference does the prop make?
Does anyone know how much does a Centurion retrofit for a PA28/C172 cost? Vliegwerk Holland mention 85k EUR for the whole conversion (with paint!) here but I’m looking for a low cost estimate, assuming no paint is needed. I know, from looking at “for sale” ads, that at least several have been done, so someone must know the ballpark figure… I’m really trying to find a way to make this work, but so far I can’t, especially when one takes mogas in the O360 into account.
Why don’t you just call vliegwerkholland ??
172driver wrote:
Don’t forget, one of the main external issues flight schools face is the NIMBY brigade. If you can fly your T&Gs with a little, quiet electric fan….
In a typical SEP installation, it seems that only half the noise is from the engine, the other half from the prop, so don’t hold your breath too much yet. Maybe ducted fans help in that regard.
The best selling light twin the last decade is the DA42, and it is diesel powered. Robin sells lots of diesel aircraft. It’s not a black and white situation. People look at what is available and chose whatever they think fits best. For light twins, the choice falls on diesel, for SEP the result is more varied, but the reason is due to the availability of things, rather than if a diesel is better/worse than gasoline.
Besides, the future is electric. Diesel aircraft will be a short living affair in any case. Diesel is complex, heavy, expensive, things we do not need in principle. VW started selling their eGolf not more than a year ago. It was state of the art at that time. This year, the battery capacity will be increased by 30%, without any increase in battery dimensions or weight. For an electric aircraft this means 30% more endurance for each year of technology development. Aviation haven’t seen this kind of speed in technology development ever, except the quantum leap from piston to turbine in the 40-50s
LeSving wrote:
This year, the battery capacity will be increased by 30%, without any increase in battery dimensions or weight. For an electric aircraft this means 30% more endurance for each year of technology development.
Classical fallacy to assume that if it’s possible once it will be possible every year.
Currently, gasoline has 44MJ/kg, while lithium ion rechargeable batteries are somewhere up to 0.875MJ/kg, so assuming yearly 30% improvement we would indeed get decent range in 15 years.
Tesla seems to think the improvement is more like 7-8% per year, and 10% during the next few years. Assuming those numbers, we would get decent range in 40-50 years.
Fraunhofer however thinks that in the medium term battery density can only be doubled
