IFR trip with the Diamond DA42-VI using the GWX68 on-board weather radar (fully integrated with the G1000 avionics system) to avoid isolated embedded CBs.
I would have turned and gone another way, but I am chicken. That is a clearly attenuated shadow on the right side of the display. U am guessing at some point you made a turn left?
EDVK, nice. Just a short hop from where I am (EDLI). I plan to go there sometime in spring or summer. We still consider it a bad and expensive joke, even compared to low-traffic Paderborn (EDLP). At least it was finished, unlike the new EDDB.
jaunty17 Since I haven't been to Kassel yet, I cannot really compare them. To me as a low-time VFR pilot, EDLP has always seemed very friendly and uncomplicated, so why not? Would be interesting to read about your impression about their relative benefits, if either suits your needs.
Thanks! I love the stick. The Citabria I fly also has a stick. Feels very natural, even though I did all my schooling on PA28s and 172s. To me, a center stick says, "This is an airplane you are meant to fly, not just to plug numbers into." (That said, the autopilot does overtime in the 42, of course.)
Cool to watch you work the weather radar on this flight. White knuckles at all? Do you have access to external radar overlays via satellite radio (like we do in the US via SiriusXM)?
Philip Meese no real-time radar, but can get periodic updated radar overlayed on the MFD map, via the Iridium satellites. IR, precip, wind at different levels, strikes and METARs are all included.
What do you mean CB's embedded? Would you do a video on pilotage regarding weather? I'm glued to your videos, great stuff thanks. I'm a student pilot and I find weather the biggest challenge right now. What's the best way to plan for weather? In the states we use 1800wxbrief -- what an inefficient system given the state of computer technology. Also, after 4 yrs living in Italy I'd love to go back and fly there. Is it true in Europe you pay for Tower/Center time?
+Daniel Dandrea "Embedded CBs" refers to cumulonimbus ("CB") clouds that occur inside another kind of cloud, often a stratus layer of some kind. The CBs are of particular interest because they mean updrafts and downdrafts, sometimes extreme, which bring with them rain, icing, hail, windshear, turbulence... just about everything you want to avoid in a plane. That they are embedded is especially interesting, since you can't see them with the naked eye, thus the radar use.
For about the same money as a Twinstar, one could purchase an older Meridian/Jetprop, and have pressurization, which will yield more comfort, less fatigue, and a greater altitude envelope to work with for weather avoidance, up to FL280. Another benefit is some more cabin room, and 250KIAS vs 180 in the Twister. Of course fuel flows will be 40 GPH vs 15 GPH (partially offset by higher TAS), so more fuel burn, and not the same level of avionics integration as G1000 and GFC700. I would be really interested in what decision criteria made your choice Twinstar instead.
A real comparison of the different Meridian and Jetprop alternatives would be interesting to do. I do make a cursory survey of the field now and then. It seems that there's no way around the single biggest cost differentiator: the wondrous PT6. In both capital and running costs, the economic jump to that engine from a piston is breathtaking. A piston Malibu from '97 sells for maybe $750k, more or less what a new DA42-VI costs. Then you have to do the Jetprop conversion on top of that. The efficiency of the DA42 airframe give it an amazing TAS performance for the fuel flow. (For example, the economy variant of the Jetprop with the "21" engine only gives 10-15 kts more in TAS, even at altitude.) But there is more than just cost. A pressurised cabin means you are up at F250 or so (again, for the Jetprop or Meridian). Otherwise you lose the most efficient fuel use for that engine. This means that an a pressure-loss event is a real risk that you have to be prepared to handle. Not a problem, but one more critical emergency procedure that you have to be current on. The Malibu/Meridian line have had a history of issues with the pressurisation system. Then there is mission. I mostly fly around Europe. Most of my flights take no longer than a total of 5-6 hrs in the air. I usually do it in two legs, just because its more comfortable. The difference between 180 and 230 kts cuts 1:15 off a six hour trip. I've never thought that this difference would be worth the upgrade expense. The are other factors: load capacity, for example. A lot of this depends on what your typical mission looks like. For me its one or two passengers with a modicum of baggage. Even with TKS fluid, the DA42-VI handles that just fine. My conclusion has been that the DA42-VI is just about a perfect solution to the price/performance puzzle that all airplanes try to solve, as long as it fits your mission.
Thanks for your reply below. Perhaps European prices are different, but in North America, you can pick up a very nice Jetprop or early model Meridian certainly for under $1M. And the 42-VI with radar must be over $900/950 (I should really get a quote). So price delta is not significant. The Meridian comes with Radar. Agree that the TAS/fuel flow of the Twinstar is amazing. However, in the total cost of ownership, and if you are flying say 150 hours per year, the increase in fuel cost between Twinstar and small variant PT6 I don't think is so meaningful. In the Twister's favour, you can do fun sightseeing flights for a fraction of the fuel bill Note that the Meridian or Jetprop / Dash 35 will do 260KIAS at altitude, so speed is significantly faster, and it will climb up quickly. Yes, loss of pressurization is an issue that must be taken very seriously, but it's a rare emergency, and the benefit of pressurization is just huge. Once you have it, there's no pilot that wants to go back (so I am told). What we all want is to try and get above weather, and the turbine certainly gives you more altitude to play with. I assume you have Nexrad satellite weather in your Twinstar, and i have seen you using the radar for great advantage in tactical decision making. Having had the utility of radar now, how much value do you put in it vis a vis all the other weather avoidance tools at your disposal. Could you go back to NEXRAD/stormscope only, and so strategic decision making whereby you are giving weather a much wider birth, and not trying to go through holes ? It also might mean cancelling certain trips, where you go today because you have radar. I'm just trying to get a sense of the utility value you now place on having onboard radar versus routing concessions you would have to make if you didn't have it, given the cost.
I understand the attraction of the Meridian. Altitude for weather avoidance - yes. Pressurized cabin - yes. 4 very comfortable passenger seats - yes. 260kts cruise - yes. For me, that would mean Stockholm to London in 3 to 4 hours, depending on upper winds. But I think the price differential in reality is more than you are thinking, if you want comparable technology and age.
I only have the radar in MIR, not the storm scope, which i now realise was a mistake. I would rather have both, since they tell you different things. I do use the radar for tactical avoidance of build-up in IMC, and my experience is that it works pretty well. More info is always better, so the Iridium satellite weather is also very useful. Not least for planning arrivals when ATC is not forthcoming with weather reports (unfortunately happens with the regional ADs we tend to fly to).
Great work. Keep those videos coming ! Question for you: I fly my Mooney Ovation regularly at FL120 - 140, with built in oxygen and cannula. O2 saturation levels around 92-94%. However, I do feel the physiological effects of being at altitude during longer flights, and then somewhat more some hours after the flight. I would call it a kind of accelerated fatigue, and it must be from reduced oxygen. I can't imagine flying at FL160-180, as it would be even more acute there. Do you experience any level of increased fatigue or mild headache when flying up high? As much as I love the Twister, it is for this reason that I think I could only seriously consider a pressurized aircraft next time around. You can reach me at : hellocharles35@yahoo.ca
Well, I do regularly fly at 150-180 (service ceiling for the DA42-VI) for the improved TAS. I use the Mountain High pulse-feed system with cannulas. I sometimes feel some effects after a couple hours up at 180, but not at 160. Nowadays, I usually try to stay at 160 or lower, unless the weather pushes me up. I've understood that sensitivity to low pressure/O2 levels is very individual. I test all the time with the oxymeter, just to keep an eye on it. And, thanks for the positive feedback!
Развлечения
Great to see "on board operations". Use of Radar and TKS system. Thanks for posting these. They are helpful and enjoyably.
Jaunty17,
Thoroughly enjoyed this flight! Thanks,
Martin
Thank you for sharing your flight videos.
Nice video, very instrutive!
Great videos! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks!
Awesome! Thanks for sharing & keep 'em coming : )
Thanks!
Great again :)
My hometown airport, very nice. Not much traffic here, unfourtunately. Though the equipment is very nice...
Nice
I would have turned and gone another way, but I am chicken. That is a clearly attenuated shadow on the right side of the display. U am guessing at some point you made a turn left?
How do you get the possibility to fly a DA42-VI?? I thought it is still in certification process? By the way....great videos!!
No it's fully certified. www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraft/pilot-reports/diamond/fourth-times-a-charm.html#.U9EtGICSzFZ
EDVK, nice. Just a short hop from where I am (EDLI). I plan to go there sometime in spring or summer. We still consider it a bad and expensive joke, even compared to low-traffic Paderborn (EDLP). At least it was finished, unlike the new EDDB.
pinkdispatcher I always have Paderborn as my Alternate for Kassel, but I've never landed there. Should I give it a try next time?
jaunty17
Since I haven't been to Kassel yet, I cannot really compare them. To me as a low-time VFR pilot, EDLP has always seemed very friendly and uncomplicated, so why not? Would be interesting to read about your impression about their relative benefits, if either suits your needs.
Great stuff! The DA42 looks great to fly. How's the center stick compared to the regular yoke?
Thanks! I love the stick. The Citabria I fly also has a stick. Feels very natural, even though I did all my schooling on PA28s and 172s. To me, a center stick says, "This is an airplane you are meant to fly, not just to plug numbers into." (That said, the autopilot does overtime in the 42, of course.)
Cool to watch you work the weather radar on this flight. White knuckles at all? Do you have access to external radar overlays via satellite radio (like we do in the US via SiriusXM)?
Philip Meese no real-time radar, but can get periodic updated radar overlayed on the MFD map, via the Iridium satellites. IR, precip, wind at different levels, strikes and METARs are all included.
What do you mean CB's embedded? Would you do a video on pilotage regarding weather? I'm glued to your videos, great stuff thanks. I'm a student pilot and I find weather the biggest challenge right now. What's the best way to plan for weather? In the states we use 1800wxbrief -- what an inefficient system given the state of computer technology. Also, after 4 yrs living in Italy I'd love to go back and fly there. Is it true in Europe you pay for Tower/Center time?
+Daniel Dandrea "Embedded CBs" refers to cumulonimbus ("CB") clouds that occur inside another kind of cloud, often a stratus layer of some kind. The CBs are of particular interest because they mean updrafts and downdrafts, sometimes extreme, which bring with them rain, icing, hail, windshear, turbulence... just about everything you want to avoid in a plane. That they are embedded is especially interesting, since you can't see them with the naked eye, thus the radar use.
For about the same money as a Twinstar, one could purchase an older Meridian/Jetprop, and have pressurization, which will yield more comfort, less fatigue, and a greater altitude envelope to work with for weather avoidance, up to FL280. Another benefit is some more cabin room, and 250KIAS vs 180 in the Twister.
Of course fuel flows will be 40 GPH vs 15 GPH (partially offset by higher TAS), so more fuel burn, and not the same level of avionics integration as G1000 and GFC700. I would be really interested in what decision criteria made your choice Twinstar instead.
A real comparison of the different Meridian and Jetprop alternatives would be interesting to do. I do make a cursory survey of the field now and then. It seems that there's no way around the single biggest cost differentiator: the wondrous PT6. In both capital and running costs, the economic jump to that engine from a piston is breathtaking. A piston Malibu from '97 sells for maybe $750k, more or less what a new DA42-VI costs. Then you have to do the Jetprop conversion on top of that. The efficiency of the DA42 airframe give it an amazing TAS performance for the fuel flow. (For example, the economy variant of the Jetprop with the "21" engine only gives 10-15 kts more in TAS, even at altitude.)
But there is more than just cost. A pressurised cabin means you are up at F250 or so (again, for the Jetprop or Meridian). Otherwise you lose the most efficient fuel use for that engine. This means that an a pressure-loss event is a real risk that you have to be prepared to handle. Not a problem, but one more critical emergency procedure that you have to be current on. The Malibu/Meridian line have had a history of issues with the pressurisation system.
Then there is mission. I mostly fly around Europe. Most of my flights take no longer than a total of 5-6 hrs in the air. I usually do it in two legs, just because its more comfortable. The difference between 180 and 230 kts cuts 1:15 off a six hour trip. I've never thought that this difference would be worth the upgrade expense.
The are other factors: load capacity, for example. A lot of this depends on what your typical mission looks like. For me its one or two passengers with a modicum of baggage. Even with TKS fluid, the DA42-VI handles that just fine. My conclusion has been that the DA42-VI is just about a perfect solution to the price/performance puzzle that all airplanes try to solve, as long as it fits your mission.
Thanks for your reply below.
Perhaps European prices are different, but in North America, you can pick up a very nice Jetprop or early model Meridian certainly for under $1M. And the 42-VI with radar must be over $900/950 (I should really get a quote). So price delta is not significant. The Meridian comes with Radar.
Agree that the TAS/fuel flow of the Twinstar is amazing. However, in the total cost of ownership, and if you are flying say 150 hours per year, the increase in fuel cost between Twinstar and small variant PT6 I don't think is so meaningful.
In the Twister's favour, you can do fun sightseeing flights for a fraction of the fuel bill
Note that the Meridian or Jetprop / Dash 35 will do 260KIAS at altitude, so speed is significantly faster, and it will climb up quickly.
Yes, loss of pressurization is an issue that must be taken very seriously, but it's a rare emergency, and the benefit of pressurization is just huge. Once you have it, there's no pilot that wants to go back (so I am told).
What we all want is to try and get above weather, and the turbine certainly gives you more altitude to play with.
I assume you have Nexrad satellite weather in your Twinstar, and i have seen you using the radar for great advantage in tactical decision making. Having had the utility of radar now, how much value do you put in it vis a vis all the other weather avoidance tools at your disposal. Could you go back to NEXRAD/stormscope only, and so strategic decision making whereby you are giving weather a much wider birth, and not trying to go through holes ? It also might mean cancelling certain trips, where you go today because you have radar. I'm just trying to get a sense of the utility value you now place on having onboard radar versus routing concessions you would have to make if you didn't have it, given the cost.
I understand the attraction of the Meridian. Altitude for weather avoidance - yes. Pressurized cabin - yes. 4 very comfortable passenger seats - yes. 260kts cruise - yes. For me, that would mean Stockholm to London in 3 to 4 hours, depending on upper winds. But I think the price differential in reality is more than you are thinking, if you want comparable technology and age.
I only have the radar in MIR, not the storm scope, which i now realise was a mistake. I would rather have both, since they tell you different things. I do use the radar for tactical avoidance of build-up in IMC, and my experience is that it works pretty well. More info is always better, so the Iridium satellite weather is also very useful. Not least for planning arrivals when ATC is not forthcoming with weather reports (unfortunately happens with the regional ADs we tend to fly to).
I thought the DA42 was pressurized. Why the O2 nose hose?
No, unfortunately, Diamond has no pressurized airframe on any model.
Great work. Keep those videos coming !
Question for you: I fly my Mooney Ovation regularly at FL120 - 140, with built in oxygen and cannula. O2 saturation levels around 92-94%. However, I do feel the physiological effects of being at altitude during longer flights, and then somewhat more some hours after the flight. I would call it a kind of accelerated fatigue, and it must be from reduced oxygen. I can't imagine flying at FL160-180, as it would be even more acute there.
Do you experience any level of increased fatigue or mild headache when flying up high? As much as I love the Twister, it is for this reason that I think I could only seriously consider a pressurized aircraft next time around. You can reach me at :
hellocharles35@yahoo.ca
Well, I do regularly fly at 150-180 (service ceiling for the DA42-VI) for the improved TAS. I use the Mountain High pulse-feed system with cannulas. I sometimes feel some effects after a couple hours up at 180, but not at 160. Nowadays, I usually try to stay at 160 or lower, unless the weather pushes me up. I've understood that sensitivity to low pressure/O2 levels is very individual. I test all the time with the oxymeter, just to keep an eye on it. And, thanks for the positive feedback!
Its called avoiding