DA-42 Twin Star as PPL/CPL-Multi Trainer
04-30-2010, 06:29 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by Grumble
Yeah, until you're over water/mountainous terrain and that 30 minute clock starts (30 minutes being best case I assume)!!!!! Or at night, in the weather, etc.
In any case, I was talking about the technological fix to somebody starting the engines in an unapproved manner - not the battery life after two generators fail.USMCFLYR
04-30-2010, 08:08 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Advanced Newbie
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by the King
I've not flown a DA-42, but in terms of multi-engine training, I hope that's not the first time students are seeing a prop lever.
Last edited by Badgeman; 04-30-2010 at 08:58 PM.
05-01-2010, 12:50 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,187
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
Well we have been there in the aircraft that your currently flying right? That max 20 minutes isn't the most comforting thought! In any case, I was talking about the technological fix to somebody starting the engines in an unapproved manner - not the battery life after two generators fail.
USMCFLYR
In any case, I was talking about the technological fix to somebody starting the engines in an unapproved manner - not the battery life after two generators fail.USMCFLYR
A light piston that sh1ts itself after an electrical failure? Not a chance I'd fly it in anything other than day VMC.
Badge, whats your problem with the Gutless. It's a great plane. And there are PLENTY of complex singles out there. Arrows, Cardinals, RG's, M20's, C-24's etc.
05-01-2010, 07:53 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Advanced Newbie
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by Bashibazouk
Is it an early one with the 1.7 litre engines? The 2.0 L models have some of the kinks worked out. Mind you, we've seen our share of engine failures (1), bogus fire warnings (1) and generator failures (1) in 300 hrs of owning a 2.0 L 2008 model. None happened without warning, though...they all gave some hint that something was amiss, but the mechanics were not able to fix these latent failures until they very obviously broke in flight.
As for whether it's a good trainer or not, I leave that up to the CFIs among you. I already had "blue knob" experience when I used a DA42 to add a multi to my commercial, so I didn't miss it, but since it's the only twin I've flown (80 hrs now) I can't tell if I'd be overwhelmed by transition a Baron, 310, Aztec, etc.
I think that training people to fly regional jets was part of its design intent. Aside from the FADEC, its glass cockpit, lots of busses, and the lack of good visual cues ahead of the glareshield were (I'm told...hearsay) intended to prepare future regional jet pilots.
I also have a bit of exposure to the new Austro-engined version, which is intended to fix the engine, gearbox, and ECU woes. So far so good, but we've only got 50 hrs or so on it.
As for whether it's a good trainer or not, I leave that up to the CFIs among you. I already had "blue knob" experience when I used a DA42 to add a multi to my commercial, so I didn't miss it, but since it's the only twin I've flown (80 hrs now) I can't tell if I'd be overwhelmed by transition a Baron, 310, Aztec, etc.
I think that training people to fly regional jets was part of its design intent. Aside from the FADEC, its glass cockpit, lots of busses, and the lack of good visual cues ahead of the glareshield were (I'm told...hearsay) intended to prepare future regional jet pilots.
I also have a bit of exposure to the new Austro-engined version, which is intended to fix the engine, gearbox, and ECU woes. So far so good, but we've only got 50 hrs or so on it.
05-01-2010, 06:01 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: USAF
Posts: 1,398
Originally Posted by Bashibazouk
Those pilots took off after starting the engines on external power (specifically forbidden by the POH.).
Don't know too much about the TwinStar's antics... but wouldn't you let the one engine recharge the battery anyway...
I'm just a little confused on how/why someone ever does that...in any airplane?
05-01-2010, 06:54 PM
#26
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 26
I guess they were in a hurry :)
Originally Posted by ryan1234
Ok call me stupid.... but why both engines on externals?
Don't know too much about the TwinStar's antics... but wouldn't you let the one engine recharge the battery anyway...
I'm just a little confused on how/why someone ever does that...in any airplane?
Don't know too much about the TwinStar's antics... but wouldn't you let the one engine recharge the battery anyway...
I'm just a little confused on how/why someone ever does that...in any airplane?
When the DPE was quizzing me about systems during my Commercial AMEL checkride, he was very focused on how much I understood the differences between DA42s and "normal" light twins...and even asked me about this accident.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
