Im not so sure Peter. There are aircraft out there where a max continuous power is specified. In other words, use the extra horses for getting airborne and after that (let's say five minutes), limit power to 80%.
It isn't exactly a pretty solution but I suppose it depends on the rationale behind the original application. I suspect a 155hp Twinstar will get out of places that the 135 wouldn't. We are certainly keeping an eye on this STC as we have a couple of aircraft due for new engines in the next year or so and we're not keen on the weight penalty of the Austro version.
You may well be right Dave but the way I understand this, this (being able to use the extra power legally) cannot be done without changing the perf section of the POH, at least.
That makes it a major certification job - if you wish to retain the speedo markings.
But maybe EASA offers a better route than the FAA which was traditionally the first port of call for STCs.
The greatest increase in power under an STC that I'm aware of is for the Luscombe 8, originally certified with 50 HP, and STC'd for a 150 HP O-320 Lycoming under the McKenzie conversion.... a 300% increase. As I understand it, the sticky issue in that case was gross weight, versus performance. Obviously in the case of twin there are different control issues. I did fly one once (over gross, I'd guess) and it climbed rather well! (as do the DA42s that have 180 HP per side, or so I'm told)
The Jetprop is more than 2x increase too.
We are certainly keeping an eye on this STC ...
I got info from one local Diamond dealer that 155 HP engine would be certified for D42 in H2 this year.
FWIW, Diamond appear to be dropping the D-Jet project.
As I discussed a little, much earlier in this thread, I was involved in the STC certification flight testing of the 180HP IO-360 powered DA-42. When you increase the engine power of a twin, Vmca can be affected, and things can change. The DA-42 was challenged in this respect.
It is doable, and an applicant can accomplish it, though they will be doing so within a narrow band of capability.
What does this mean for Diamond?
"Diamond Aircraft on Feb. 25 announced that it had laid off most of its staff, saying it needs several weeks to restructure. Work on the company’s costly prize project, the D-Jet, has been suspended. Remaining is a support staff needed to fulfill sales of spare parts, provide technical information to owners, and provide airworthiness support"
They say the US company is separate, but the overall business is obviously the same one.
Or was the US company just working on the D-Jet and doing little else?
The Ontario company is separate from the Austrian company. From what I remember, they sold most of the Canadian company to some Middle East investor last year.
What was the Ontario company doing, apart from D-Jet work? Was it a US marketing franchise of some sort?
