The future of general aviation is bleak. That $85/hour operation cost is more like $400+. The plane price is $1.5M. Finding a place to store it are getting more expensive and difficult as small airports are being sued for noise and turned into housing tracts.
@blu5021, kids from age 12 up and can learn to fly for free with CIVIL AIR PATROL, graduating from high school with their private pilots license and scholarships for college.
@@brandi66RNno, it DEFINITELY stopped running. They most likely shut the engine off for a training exercise for a new pilot or shut it off for some stock footage. There is a slim chance they shut it off due to higher than normal exhaust gas temperatures, turned it off from some other failure or the engine could have just quit on them due to a stall or bird ingestion. It was definitely not running in this clip though
Yea i dont own a plane but if i could it’d probably be a cessna 172 or a bonanza. after fiddling with them for a few hours in flight sim i learned all of the controls for both.
Unfortunately that fleet has, at best, 20 years left in it. Every year we lose these aircraft to accidents, fatigue, and costs to upkeep and when a brand new Piper Dakota costs $100k and the C172 an astounding $500k... GA is losing.
@@arandommanokitIt's not even mentioned on their web site. If it were pressurized it would have been mentioned as it would be more comfortable than wearing a mask or other device.
You can build an airplane with an LS in it they making enough horsepower and multiple have been approved by the FAA already. You can put an LS in the fucking anything and it will work
@@Hellothis12157knbhb I just don't like the idea of ME building an airplane. I don't want to put my life in my own hands that way. I'm not an expert plane builder.
@@acasualviewer5861 they won’t let you fly it. If it’s not safe, you have to get it checked lol I mean I think there’s certain types of aircraft you can fly on your own without a certification, but fuck that.
@@acasualviewer5861 I mean no technically you can do that. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. I don’t know much about the FAA rules but as long as it passes inspection, and you own it, and you have the right shit to fly you’re good
Those Diamond diesels are horridly expensive to maintain. Getting parts is a giant pain in the ass as they are routinely backordered on common items. Also if you leave them outside somewhere hot some of the fiberglass bits warp and capacitors will burst inside the MFDs. They just feel cheap. Most of those aluminum or chrome looking pieces are chromed plastic which flakes off after 6 months or so. You will spend more money overhauling the gearboxes than you save in gas. Seriously, if you want to fly find something cheap, fixed gear, metal, and slow with a 4 cylinder. No gearboxes, no turbo, no wood, no composites, no silly rocket parachutes. If you have a hangar fabric airplanes are great too. Something like an old Beech Musketeer, Grumman American Tiger, Aeronca, or one of Cub/Clipper/Pacer family. If its just for yourself go find an old Ag spray bird like a Pawnee or Ag Cat. They are built like tanks and with the spray reservoir empty they just float along. You can probably get a field approval to make the spray tank baggage compartment and haul along a bunch of stuff. If 100 low lead prices bother you just do the STC to run automotive fuel. That will pay for itself pretty quickly All airplanes need maintenance. Better to own one that needs the least and has the cheapest parts.
I agree with almost all of this as an A&P myself but to push back a lil bit the Cirrus parachutes do save lives they have been fairly well designed to be maintenance friendly in my experience at a GA repair station.
In 1'st place, there's no way a car engine more lightweight, means not more efficient. Parachute : lightweight plane should be able to glide & land, much like . . glider.
The future...is just getting more out of reach for us average folks. Sure, I can afford to buy an airplane....or I can afford to keep an airplane...or I can afford to fly an airplane. I can't afford to do any 2 of those 3 options.
I know a couple groups of pilots that have a shared plane between them. They are all happy to reserve the plane when they want to fly it and maintenance storage and purchase price are all split like 8 ways.
@@killeralltires Unfortunately, there is no flying club at my airport. There are a few around some of the other near-ish airports...but those are a long enough drive away, to be discouraging.
Actually Lycomings have been able to be run with non lead auto fuel for at least 20 years. I ran my Lyc on 91 octane auto gas for over 1000 hours. Ran it lean of peak, rich of peak etc. With fuel injection and electronic ignitions it ran perfectly fine. Most of the problem is getting an STC on a low wing airplane because of vapour lock lssues, but my RV7 have electric fuel pumps in wingroots that avoided this problem. So I think its a little unfair to disregard old airplane as out of date. Although I agree we need to get rid of 100LL as we shouldn't be puking lead fumes into the atmosphere. Its only turbo charged engines that really need it in any case.
Honestly how much lead or pollution does GA contribute. Most GA piston aircraft barely fly anymore. It was one thing in 1950 when you had DC-7s and Constellations burning millions of gallons of leaded fuel every year. These days GA birds, except flight schools that have mostly switched to auto fuel or diesel, fly maybe a dozen hours a year.
@@robinwells8879I don’t know, considering people fly professionally, multiple flights a day, I think it’s pretty safe. I’ve never gone to work and thought to myself man I hope I make it out alive today.
You’re absolutely right when I did my flight training I worked 3 part time jobs, every single penny went to flight training the only reoccurring payment that I had was my phone. And I still had to stop a one point because it’s so effing expensive.
@@user-kx5ro2dn4tBest thing for people these days is going to school for reduced ATP 1k hours, youll be in debt but once you get ATP you can pay it off in a few years
The fuselage has a finite life. Once it times out it is done. I wouldn't trust a Benz engine in a Benz. I do agree that Continental and Lycoming have milked the 1940's engine design for too long, and should have been forced to put whatever the engine needed to run without lead in them the same time auto manufacturers did. Probably hardened valve seats would have covered it.
Look around you and notice there are ALMOST NO air cooled VW engine cars on the road. When we went to UNLEADED fuel, the air cooled engine could not EFFECTIVELY work with LEAD in the fuel, COST EFFECTIVELY.
I wish private air-travel were remotely affordable. Costs to own and operate a relatively modern, modest, prop aircraft are north of a million dollars.
It will be interesting to see how these higher performance composite aircraft hold up in 50 years. I love the DA42, truly what a modern aircraft should be. I am, however, afraid of composites.
@@jimjamautoPerhaps this days ist is cheaper to replace the whole engine. but remember one thing: in a car a engine is typical used until it fails or shows significant wear. In a airplane, a engine must never fail! The useable hours of a engine in this use case is much less then in a car. It is very common to service avionics engines. In this process the engine is completly dismanteled and every part is inspected.
That is good to learn. There is a long list of dead pilots and bankrupt companies chasing the dream of putting “modern” piston engines in aircraft. The catch is that a typical auto engine spend most of its life at low throttle (power ) settings while aircraft engines need to run at 70 % ish max rating to maintain altitude. That means the aero engine that last must be built much stronger than and auto engines. Even though the auto engine is rated to produce large power per volume, If you try to run it at 70-100 % power it will break much earlier than in a car and get the occupants killed.
Back in the 80’s Porsche came out with a modified car engine for general aviation planes. It also had only one lever to operate the engine. Its price was in the low 20’s. A few years later they got bored with it and stopped production leaving those owners who had converted to their engine in the lurch. They wasted over $20,000. You want to stay away from manufacturers to whom GA is a sideline. The number crunchers will have no problem screwing you over.
May be fuel efficient but it's sure as hell not cost efficient when you consider what it costs to buy. You either have interest expense or the opportunity cost of the better part of a couple million dollars. It would be a great machine if it was $500k
Problem is, cost. Economy is getting worse, making purchases rising in cost as well, making flying, more costly. Mercedes engines are also very expensive, and once rated for aircraft, the cost goes up beyond sanity level. Happy sold my Beech Baron years ago...
1. The manufacturer WILL NOT ALLOW OVERHAUL OF THE ENGINE! Meaning at 1500 flight hours your engines require replacement. 2. A flight school in SC had one land on a highway because that engine died
I have an idea for the aviation of the future (at least local or medium distance travel). We should use small drones with emergency parachutes and extremely flexible external skeletons to absorb eventual collisions. They would carry 1/2 people max and they are recharged by a fast recharching system of cables, built similarly to a highway. All the drones are connected to eachother and share details on the flight plus advanced AI supports the passenger in any circumstance (e.g. If the sensors think the person has fainted or has a heart attack it will redirect the flight to the nearest hospital). They don't need to fly fast necessarily, at least when traveling in urban areas, because even if it's slower than a car or train, the straight line route plus ability to drop people off practically everywhere makes it faster. At higher altitudes it can go faster and use the recharching spots even while moving (like an electric train). This would make most private ground transport unecesary and clean up the cities from traffic. Maybe it would work like some public uber system, where you don't need to privately own them, just rent them as long as you need.
Ive flown the -42, which is the less fancy version of the -62. The engines have some of the lowest failure rate of piston engines, if i remember correctly, and will happily fly on one engine. The GPH per side is super low compared to most light twins. Just watch out for the props; theyll break if you run into them.
Reliability isn't the issue with automotive engines in aircraft. The biggest issue with reliability is in the gearbox necessary to reduce the RPM's of the propellor keeping the blade tips from going supersonic. Now since these Mercedes engines are already Diesels that make maximum torque at a very low RPM's, they may have developed something with much lower loads on the gear reduction unit.
Been here before and if they manage to get certification then they will fall on the alter of liability insurance issues. There is a reason why we still use fifties technology sadly. Stifling regulation and litigation. 😢
This is true, but if you lose one engine, you can barely maintain your level and you can forget to climb ! But yeah there are pretty cool to fly I recognize 🙃
The engines are quite heavy, the earlier ones were lighter but MB stopped making them. They also have/had serious/expensive maintenance requirments and issues. The old engine designs are still in use because of extreamly high certification costs. See how much and long it took to get the engines certified. And they got special treatment. Software glitches have caused crashes. (a power interuption would cause the engine ECUs to reboot and shut off the engines, not a good thing on take off. Sure they may be fine now but the new price of admission ahs shut out much of the public. But the FAA wants to reduce the number of the pesky GA aircraft and pilots they have to deal with.
I know I have a previous post but I'm just gonna throw a second post on. Just to give one thing more to think about. During World War, 2 of the fighter planes were made with basically rolls, Royce engines. And no, that's not an exaggeration or a lie. It was the only company making engines big enough. At the time trouble is they were a pain to work on worse. They will complicated. They had 2 coolers. Are the action pair of radiators typically each? And they didn't appreciate having holes punched in the radiators, which happened almost every time they flew, which meant you had to burnt engine. Burn out before you could get it down on the ground. Assuming there was some place to put it down. That wouldn't get you taken prisoner. Same war crop dusters were converted into inherent intercepts and ground support. Points and those things got chewed up every time they went out while they did as they took spackle and chill act and closed up the holes and repaired holes in the gas tank once in a while. And put it back in the air. With a fresh load of animal, they were more durable than the spitfires, almost as fast as a spitfires, which were twin-engine planes and they had legs like nobody's business.I'm not saying older's better.But nowhere isn't better either
Those engines have made them extremely unpopular with anyone that wants to use it for a regular business. My old flight school got rid of theirs for brand new Seminoles.
The engine design may come from the 50s. But they surely have done some modification since then for fuel economy. I guess they still use something that was designed 70 years ago because it's reliable, easy for maintenance (parts and cost)
My question for whoever thinks this is the future of GA is: what is the useful load and SGR of the machine using a 600m dirt strip on a 45 degree Celsius day? Because if it’s not great then it’s completely useless.
There’s a reason why there’s more older single engine planes out there instead of newer twin engines. And that’s cost. You just need social media validation to not feel like an idiot for falling for the sales pitch of this plane.
This thing is gonna cost half a million dollars or more. It might be clean but definetly kot affordable. Couple that with the fact that you need the big license to even fly this thing and the 20k for just getting the license alone will seem like pocketchange compared to the initial price of the aircraft alone
1.5 mil, so it’s definitely out of reach for most. But then the 172 is a half million new now, and that’s a lot less plane. The plane itself is less interesting than the tech they’re progressing. Much like we see really cool new stuff from the S class that trickles down into even the cheapest of cars a few years later.
Kind of worried hearing a modern Mercedes engine being used in an airplane. I hope they majorly reworked this engine or they're in for a lot of engine failures.
Never saw a Mercedes from the ‘80s on the side of the road. Viceversa I see actual cars on top of tow truck. On top of that there are not that many aviation related incident in regards of Cessna engine failures
The future of GA is the same reliable and affordable planes its been for decades... The DA62 is a really cool plane youll see once in a blue moon because the vast majority of pilots arent looking to drop a mil + on an aircraft
The future of general aviation is bleak. That $85/hour operation cost is more like $400+. The plane price is $1.5M. Finding a place to store it are getting more expensive and difficult as small airports are being sued for noise and turned into housing tracts.
They wonder why there’s a pilot shortage, when kids learning to fly is near impossible
@blu5021, kids from age 12 up and can learn to fly for free with CIVIL AIR PATROL, graduating from high school with their private pilots license and scholarships for college.
God bless living in a rural area.
@@ThePTSDRetreatCAP is trash
i seriously dought u can run one for 400 a hr😢
"The engines are EXTREMELY reliable!"
Shows engines stopping while in flight 💀
Lmao I've literally been looking for this comment.
@@frequentflyer8592
Right there with you
That was a test because you can fly with the other engine, those engines hold the most reliable engines in GA, that’s why that plane is $1.5 million.
The propellers are going, roughly this same speed as the camera’s shutter, so it looks like they are not spinning
@@brandi66RNno, it DEFINITELY stopped running. They most likely shut the engine off for a training exercise for a new pilot or shut it off for some stock footage. There is a slim chance they shut it off due to higher than normal exhaust gas temperatures, turned it off from some other failure or the engine could have just quit on them due to a stall or bird ingestion. It was definitely not running in this clip though
The future of GA remains old Cessnas and Cherokees
Let’s not forget Beechcrafts and Mooneys !😊
Yea i dont own a plane but if i could it’d probably be a cessna 172 or a bonanza. after fiddling with them for a few hours in flight sim i learned all of the controls for both.
Unfortunately that fleet has, at best, 20 years left in it. Every year we lose these aircraft to accidents, fatigue, and costs to upkeep and when a brand new Piper Dakota costs $100k and the C172 an astounding $500k... GA is losing.
And Cubs. I can literally buy every single part needed to build a Cub brand new except the data plate.
The future is in the current homebuild designs.
Funny, a modern mercedes engine being incredibly reliable
Haha - yeah I was thinking the same thing
my thoughts exactly
Sure. For exactly 8 years then everything brakes all at once.
@badbatch974 you mean 2
That's the thing, they ain't as they don't last very long and the highest cost on these are the engines not the usual avgas fuel price
No Pressurized cabin for the high price it goes for is a deal breaker.
does it really not have a pressurized cabin? from what i know it does but correct me if im wrong
@@arandommanokit It doesn’t
Edit: some sources say it's pressurized but documentation confirms you can have oxygen onboard (77cu/m / 7 souls/ angel 20 / 1.5 hours)
@@arandommanokitIt's not even mentioned on their web site. If it were pressurized it would have been mentioned as it would be more comfortable than wearing a mask or other device.
It has a service ceiling of 20,000 ft. You don't need pressure
A new Cessna 172 cost half a million dollars. The future of general aviation is bleak.
You can build an airplane with an LS in it they making enough horsepower and multiple have been approved by the FAA already.
You can put an LS in the fucking anything and it will work
@@Hellothis12157knbhb I just don't like the idea of ME building an airplane. I don't want to put my life in my own hands that way. I'm not an expert plane builder.
@@acasualviewer5861 they won’t let you fly it. If it’s not safe, you have to get it checked lol I mean I think there’s certain types of aircraft you can fly on your own without a certification, but fuck that.
@@Hellothis12157knbhb I rather pay someone experienced to build it for me. But I understand that's not allowed.
@@acasualviewer5861 I mean no technically you can do that. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. I don’t know much about the FAA rules but as long as it passes inspection, and you own it, and you have the right shit to fly you’re good
Those Diamond diesels are horridly expensive to maintain. Getting parts is a giant pain in the ass as they are routinely backordered on common items. Also if you leave them outside somewhere hot some of the fiberglass bits warp and capacitors will burst inside the MFDs.
They just feel cheap. Most of those aluminum or chrome looking pieces are chromed plastic which flakes off after 6 months or so.
You will spend more money overhauling the gearboxes than you save in gas.
Seriously, if you want to fly find something cheap, fixed gear, metal, and slow with a 4 cylinder. No gearboxes, no turbo, no wood, no composites, no silly rocket parachutes. If you have a hangar fabric airplanes are great too.
Something like an old Beech Musketeer, Grumman American Tiger, Aeronca, or one of Cub/Clipper/Pacer family. If its just for yourself go find an old Ag spray bird like a Pawnee or Ag Cat. They are built like tanks and with the spray reservoir empty they just float along. You can probably get a field approval to make the spray tank baggage compartment and haul along a bunch of stuff.
If 100 low lead prices bother you just do the STC to run automotive fuel. That will pay for itself pretty quickly
All airplanes need maintenance. Better to own one that needs the least and has the cheapest parts.
What is STC
@@chubbybrown4real Supplemental Type Certificate i.e. an FAA approved modification to an aircraft or engine.
I agree with almost all of this as an A&P myself but to push back a lil bit the Cirrus parachutes do save lives they have been fairly well designed to be maintenance friendly in my experience at a GA repair station.
@Ihatedsigningup I used to be Chief Inspector for a Cirrus Service Center. Cirrus are nice airplanes. I wouldn't pay the premium for the parachute.
In 1'st place, there's no way a car engine more lightweight, means not more efficient.
Parachute : lightweight plane should be able to glide & land, much like . . glider.
As the old saying goes… “If you fly it, float it or fuck it.. rent it!”
…..it’s cheaper!” … is how I’ve heard that saying end.
Never heard that before. Excellent advice. 😂❤
@@f0xstrike Yup! Except my wife of 33 yeas has a lot more money than I have.
Wise words.
In 30 years from now a 1950’s Bonanza will still be standing, as these things perish.
Why?
Doubt it
@randallsmerna384 I agree. Why? I've seen people driving 1967 Mustangs and flying Cessnas from the 70's. Clearly that nimrod has no clue.
It'll be timed out😂
@@jamesgui3733carbon fiber life span
The future...is just getting more out of reach for us average folks.
Sure, I can afford to buy an airplane....or I can afford to keep an airplane...or I can afford to fly an airplane.
I can't afford to do any 2 of those 3 options.
And a lot of people that would’ve been buying airplanes 30 years ago are still trying to buy a house, let alone an airplane lol
@@zgrifAnd a house just got much harder to acquire...
FJB
I know a couple groups of pilots that have a shared plane between them. They are all happy to reserve the plane when they want to fly it and maintenance storage and purchase price are all split like 8 ways.
@@killeralltires Unfortunately, there is no flying club at my airport. There are a few around some of the other near-ish airports...but those are a long enough drive away, to be discouraging.
you will own nothing and be happy. agenda 2030 WEF CFI dictatorship
I want to hear Scotty Kilmer’s opinion on those Mercedes engines first
Haha. Right
Scotty’s a legend!
Rev up your airplane!! Would be awesome! Haha classic
He wouldn't fly in anything outside of a Toyota Celica with wings
Scotty is the last person I would ask an honest opinion of.
Actually Lycomings have been able to be run with non lead auto fuel for at least 20 years. I ran my Lyc on 91 octane auto gas for over 1000 hours. Ran it lean of peak, rich of peak etc. With fuel injection and electronic ignitions it ran perfectly fine. Most of the problem is getting an STC on a low wing airplane because of vapour lock lssues, but my RV7 have electric fuel pumps in wingroots that avoided this problem. So I think its a little unfair to disregard old airplane as out of date. Although I agree we need to get rid of 100LL as we shouldn't be puking lead fumes into the atmosphere. Its only turbo charged engines that really need it in any case.
Honestly how much lead or pollution does GA contribute. Most GA piston aircraft barely fly anymore. It was one thing in 1950 when you had DC-7s and Constellations burning millions of gallons of leaded fuel every year.
These days GA birds, except flight schools that have mostly switched to auto fuel or diesel, fly maybe a dozen hours a year.
The lead should have been taken out decades ago, the reality is lead did more harm than good to engines.
>Affordable
>MSRP of $1.5M
yeah GA is dead
Aviation remains a pursuit of doctors, lawyers, dentists and children of rich people.
Probably for the best. It’s bloody dangerous.
@@robinwells8879I don’t know, considering people fly professionally, multiple flights a day, I think it’s pretty safe. I’ve never gone to work and thought to myself man I hope I make it out alive today.
You’re absolutely right when I did my flight training I worked 3 part time jobs, every single penny went to flight training the only reoccurring payment that I had was my phone. And I still had to stop a one point because it’s so effing expensive.
@@user-kx5ro2dn4tBest thing for people these days is going to school for reduced ATP 1k hours, youll be in debt but once you get ATP you can pay it off in a few years
The fuselage has a finite life. Once it times out it is done. I wouldn't trust a Benz engine in a Benz. I do agree that Continental and Lycoming have milked the 1940's engine design for too long, and should have been forced to put whatever the engine needed to run without lead in them the same time auto manufacturers did. Probably hardened valve seats would have covered it.
Look around you and notice there are ALMOST NO air cooled VW engine cars on the road. When we went to UNLEADED fuel, the air cooled engine could not EFFECTIVELY work with LEAD in the fuel, COST EFFECTIVELY.
It’s cheaper to run but overhaul times are shorter and more expensive
“Affordable”
Did my multi on the 42. FEDEC’s are nice until the computers don’t work and the engine fails on the run up tests. Still a slick airplane though.
I wish private air-travel were remotely affordable. Costs to own and operate a relatively modern, modest, prop aircraft are north of a million dollars.
It will be interesting to see how these higher performance composite aircraft hold up in 50 years. I love the DA42, truly what a modern aircraft should be. I am, however, afraid of composites.
Mercedes engines reliable? 💀💀💀
Are you familiar with this particular engine?
@@porcupinepunch6893yes it is off a Renault megane
Future of GA is probably Rotax engines. They are small, cheap and reliable. Also run on Mogas
And dangerously unreliable💀
Rotax engines don't have the best reliability reputation.
As I know, these engines can't be rebuild like other Aviation Engines.
If they reached theier specified operation hours, the engine must be replaced.
Probably because it's cheaper. Shops don't often rebuild engines on newer cars, it's a waste of time and money.
@@jimjamautoPerhaps this days ist is cheaper to replace the whole engine.
but remember one thing: in a car a engine is typical used until it fails or shows significant wear.
In a airplane, a engine must never fail!
The useable hours of a engine in this use case is much less then in a car.
It is very common to service avionics engines.
In this process the engine is completly dismanteled and every part is inspected.
@@klaust.2769 Gotcha I see what you are saying
That is good to learn. There is a long list of dead pilots and bankrupt companies chasing the dream of putting “modern” piston engines in aircraft. The catch is that a typical auto engine spend most of its life at low throttle (power ) settings while aircraft engines need to run at 70 % ish max rating to maintain altitude. That means the aero engine that last must be built much stronger than and auto engines. Even though the auto engine is rated to produce large power per volume, If you try to run it at 70-100 % power it will break much earlier than in a car and get the occupants killed.
As a service advisor for a Mercedes dealership; that A-class engine is literally one of the LEAST reliable engines that comes in.
Back in the 80’s Porsche came out with a modified car engine for general aviation planes. It also had only one lever to operate the engine. Its price was in the low 20’s. A few years later they got bored with it and stopped production leaving those owners who had converted to their engine in the lurch. They wasted over $20,000.
You want to stay away from manufacturers to whom GA is a sideline. The number crunchers will have no problem screwing you over.
Interesting fact: the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper also uses Mercedes A-Class engines.
And the Mercedes a class gets its engines off a Renault megane!
The MQ-9 Reaper has a Honeywell 331 turboprop engine.
The Predator uses a Rotax 914.
Neither of those came in automobiles
When people ask me what is the future of aviation - wait - no one asks me that.
Anyone else watching this while training on a 6 pack?
I literally saw one of these the other day, thing looked like a spaceship next to the cessnas lol. Gotta love this thing!
The good part: less throttle bs
The bad part: what do you think i am, made of money? I live on the obscure part of the east end!
May be fuel efficient but it's sure as hell not cost efficient when you consider what it costs to buy. You either have interest expense or the opportunity cost of the better part of a couple million dollars. It would be a great machine if it was $500k
I like my Cessnas and I’m pretty sure they aren’t leaving in the future of aviation
The future of aviation looking back and laughing at this plane lmao
Why?
its gonna be the f-150 lightning of the aviation world! lol!
100%
I've heard recently in the US at least they certified some type of lead-free fuel for those old type engines
Yes, it is a regulatory issue, not a technical one.
Problem is, cost.
Economy is getting worse, making purchases rising in cost as well, making flying, more costly.
Mercedes engines are also very expensive, and once rated for aircraft, the cost goes up beyond sanity level.
Happy sold my Beech Baron years ago...
It’s a Renault engine
1. The manufacturer WILL NOT ALLOW OVERHAUL OF THE ENGINE! Meaning at 1500 flight hours your engines require replacement. 2. A flight school in SC had one land on a highway because that engine died
I have an idea for the aviation of the future (at least local or medium distance travel). We should use small drones with emergency parachutes and extremely flexible external skeletons to absorb eventual collisions. They would carry 1/2 people max and they are recharged by a fast recharching system of cables, built similarly to a highway. All the drones are connected to eachother and share details on the flight plus advanced AI supports the passenger in any circumstance (e.g. If the sensors think the person has fainted or has a heart attack it will redirect the flight to the nearest hospital). They don't need to fly fast necessarily, at least when traveling in urban areas, because even if it's slower than a car or train, the straight line route plus ability to drop people off practically everywhere makes it faster. At higher altitudes it can go faster and use the recharching spots even while moving (like an electric train).
This would make most private ground transport unecesary and clean up the cities from traffic.
Maybe it would work like some public uber system, where you don't need to privately own them, just rent them as long as you need.
Legends know that this is a repost
Guess I’m a legend
I had to cut out the chunk that still gets me comments to this day. :)
I thought this sounded familiar 😂 I still love it tho 👍🏽
Favorite plane on MSFS, glad they did the sim well. I'll never own one, but dang is she a sweet looking plane
The DA62 uses JetA or diesel. It's not a gas engine.
Yest jet fule
E85 turboed 4 cylinders on haltech with some rife sensors.. a little bit of racing tech could make these small engines so much safer.
I keep returning to this plane in MSFS, I really wish I could afford one irl lmao. they are really nice I love flying it in the sim.
”Leaded fuel”. Bro We in Europe stop used that 30 years ago 😂
Europe still uses AVGAS in airplanes... Which is leaded fuel...
Check out EAA AIR VENTURE, annually in Oshkosh WI USA for the most incredible air show in the world! For 1 week it's the busiest airport in the world.
Future of GA is a depowered Corvette engine that is much less expensive to buy and maintain.
Ive flown the -42, which is the less fancy version of the -62. The engines have some of the lowest failure rate of piston engines, if i remember correctly, and will happily fly on one engine. The GPH per side is super low compared to most light twins. Just watch out for the props; theyll break if you run into them.
I'm so happy you didn't say electric.
Reliability isn't the issue with automotive engines in aircraft. The biggest issue with reliability is in the gearbox necessary to reduce the RPM's of the propellor keeping the blade tips from going supersonic. Now since these Mercedes engines are already Diesels that make maximum torque at a very low RPM's, they may have developed something with much lower loads on the gear reduction unit.
Aircraft engines were already expensive to overhaul so I can imagine a Mercedes being twice that.
Big problem is something goes wrong, one button doesn't fix everything flying a plane isn't like playing a video game
Delta Hawk in WI. Is TRYING to make an engine for small planes 🤔 to also run on diesel fuel.
That’s it. You’ve convinced me to buy one. SOLD!
Real world results will prove if DA-62 will be commercially successful.
But it acquisition cost is a barrier.
love flying this in MSFS 2020
Diesel is so much more efficient and dependable than gas. That's why long range trucks use them
Been here before and if they manage to get certification then they will fall on the alter of liability insurance issues. There is a reason why we still use fifties technology sadly. Stifling regulation and litigation. 😢
This is true, but if you lose one engine, you can barely maintain your level and you can forget to climb ! But yeah there are pretty cool to fly I recognize 🙃
SE ceiling 1400 ft
Lexus 1uz v8 is another car engine that was rated for use in airplanes
Planes that run on leaded fuel don’t “need” it. It’s a consequence of flight schools not being bothered to maintain their fleet.
Howard would be happy ❤
The engines are quite heavy, the earlier ones were lighter but MB stopped making them. They also have/had serious/expensive maintenance requirments and issues. The old engine designs are still in use because of extreamly high certification costs. See how much and long it took to get the engines certified. And they got special treatment. Software glitches have caused crashes. (a power interuption would cause the engine ECUs to reboot and shut off the engines, not a good thing on take off.
Sure they may be fine now but the new price of admission ahs shut out much of the public. But the FAA wants to reduce the number of the pesky GA aircraft and pilots they have to deal with.
I know I have a previous post but I'm just gonna throw a second post on. Just to give one thing more to think about. During World War, 2 of the fighter planes were made with basically rolls, Royce engines. And no, that's not an exaggeration or a lie. It was the only company making engines big enough. At the time trouble is they were a pain to work on worse. They will complicated. They had 2 coolers. Are the action pair of radiators typically each? And they didn't appreciate having holes punched in the radiators, which happened almost every time they flew, which meant you had to burnt engine. Burn out before you could get it down on the ground. Assuming there was some place to put it down. That wouldn't get you taken prisoner. Same war crop dusters were converted into inherent intercepts and ground support. Points and those things got chewed up every time they went out while they did as they took spackle and chill act and closed up the holes and repaired holes in the gas tank once in a while. And put it back in the air. With a fresh load of animal, they were more durable than the spitfires, almost as fast as a spitfires, which were twin-engine planes and they had legs like nobody's business.I'm not saying older's better.But nowhere isn't better either
Those engines have made them extremely unpopular with anyone that wants to use it for a regular business. My old flight school got rid of theirs for brand new Seminoles.
Is that the diesel Renault engines Mercedes uses?
Im still planning to buy a V22 when they go on sale for the public.
Must admit I've always wondered why they haven't made aircraft more car like
Give me a twin commanche any day.
That loop was perfect
The future of aviation is high speed train networks
Fact
Beautiful Diamond twin engine, 4 seater Aircraft.
The engine design may come from the 50s. But they surely have done some modification since then for fuel economy. I guess they still use something that was designed 70 years ago because it's reliable, easy for maintenance (parts and cost)
Love it! Thats why I love my ls swapped rv7
Other people: Oh look my tine plane i LOVE it!
Me: An prop plane? i want to fly a Blackbird SR71
Push to start on aircraft never works out and the engines aren’t actually reliable as well as expensive to maintain
Would be nice if they made a 6 seater with a reasonable useful load.
The future remains in experimental planes. You maintain them, and they cost a fraction of the cost new
The future of General Aviation better be lightweight and fuel efficient Liquid Piston Rotary engines.
Well I fly the DA-62 professionally and it is easy to fly single pilot IFR in, but damn does it break a lot. A lot.
Don't just stand there! Buy me one!
Hell, I can't even afford the parking at an airport.
you forget that it cost 2.5 million dollars 💀💀
My question for whoever thinks this is the future of GA is: what is the useful load and SGR of the machine using a 600m dirt strip on a 45 degree Celsius day?
Because if it’s not great then it’s completely useless.
That engine isn't even supported anymore.
You’re thinking of the Thielert engine in the DA42. This is the Austro engines in the DA62.
It's getting 2.5 mi to the gallon and that is apparently efficient
There’s a reason why there’s more older single engine planes out there instead of newer twin engines. And that’s cost. You just need social media validation to not feel like an idiot for falling for the sales pitch of this plane.
This thing is gonna cost half a million dollars or more. It might be clean but definetly kot affordable. Couple that with the fact that you need the big license to even fly this thing and the 20k for just getting the license alone will seem like pocketchange compared to the initial price of the aircraft alone
1.5 mil, so it’s definitely out of reach for most. But then the 172 is a half million new now, and that’s a lot less plane. The plane itself is less interesting than the tech they’re progressing. Much like we see really cool new stuff from the S class that trickles down into even the cheapest of cars a few years later.
It was about the Diamond DA52 plane
Reliable and Mercedes now a days shouldn't be spoken in the same sentence.
Kind of worried hearing a modern Mercedes engine being used in an airplane. I hope they majorly reworked this engine or they're in for a lot of engine failures.
Never saw a Mercedes from the ‘80s on the side of the road. Viceversa I see actual cars on top of tow truck. On top of that there are not that many aviation related incident in regards of Cessna engine failures
We have 1 at oshawa .. as AME its on ground more then the air. I agree with previous DAI employee.
The future of GA is the same reliable and affordable planes its been for decades... The DA62 is a really cool plane youll see once in a blue moon because the vast majority of pilots arent looking to drop a mil + on an aircraft
I love this aircraft.
I'll go back to ultralights...far more fun!
It also costs as much as many private jets... $1.5 million +
Remind me of a diamond star
You don’t mean the Renault engines mounted in the A Class, do you?
Aviation engines have critical redundancies that automotive engines do not. Even if upgraded, I wouldn't trust those engines to fly.
What about the ls motor, I've heard that the faa approved of it as long as it's a new motor out of the crate.
Just imagine your plane has 1.5 dci renault diesel engine. 😂
😂not many people seem to know it’s off a Renault here
I guess I should order two of them 😂
Have you ever looked at the maintenance schedule on a diesel? Good lord the hanger queen! And the cost of maintenance these days… yikes
If they put a Toyota engine in it, it would be exceptionally trustworthy