According to an owner in the US (posting on diamondaviators.net) you can run the engines beyond TBR on Part 91 operations.
Obviously you still need to comply to the replacement schedule of gearboxes/clutches and other parts.
Are these airworthiness limitations?
We are extending our Swedish reg DA42 2.0 l to 1800 hrs and replaced gear boxes, high and low pressure pumps at 1500 hrs.
Total cost for that 100 hrs service was ca 15 000€. They also fixed some other issues like changed the sensor for the TKS-fluid, and a few other things.
Best regards /Mats
Thx, I’m active on the diamond aviators board but somehow missed this.
Flew the DA42 a couple days ago and really liked the way it flew and the performance. Thinking seriously of getting one.
My instructor tells me a DA42 is not a good plane to own, so does my CAMO (or rather CAMP as it’s a one man organisation).
So what do you owners think about your plane? Any second thoughts after your purchase?
I’m flying on two DA42 2.0 135hp (own by 2 friend of mine). If you need details send me a PM.
I also flew a couple of times the DA42-VI
I really like the aircraft (just coming back from Ibiza)
Romain
For a CAMO organisation, you can see with “Aero Flandres Maintenance” in Merville (LFQT).
They are very good and have a extensive knowledge of Diamond aircraft.
They also have all the details about cost of ownership (they have 10+ DA42 in contract)
My instructor tells me a DA42 is not a good plane to own
I think that would depend on why he thinks that?
Running costs, serviceability, flying characteristics etc
The DA42s when re engined with Austros seem to deliver in a tough environment (IR instruction). They also are found on some missions in some remote, extreme operational conditions where some legacy piston twins might struggle.
I wouldn’t fly them into an active CB/TS but am sure the lightning protection mesh works, but then you need to want the Darwin Award to take light GA into heavy convective conditions.
As to cost, I don’t think there is a more economical light twin, unless you have access to extremely cheap Avgas.
As to mission profile, which really varies between pilots of course, the aircraft fits mine perfectly. But it does not fit the mission profile of someone who regularly wishes to haul a family of 4 plus bags for 800 miles non-stop, although the -VI does that..
But it is basically senseless to react to such generic criticism, Piotr. Like Fuji-abound says, please be specific on what your instructor and the CAMO said and we can have a sensible discussion here.
