Non-stop Atlantic crossing

[Paul Sengupta]

http://ukga.com/news/view.cfm?contentId=2197

[Rutger]

"Paul Sengupta" > wrote in message >...
> http://ukga.com/news/view.cfm?contentId=2197

Holy cow! Only $200 worth of fuel to cross the Atlantic in under 13
hours... That's amazing.

[B S D Chapman]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:38:24 -0000, karel >
wrote:

>
> "Peter" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>
>> I just wish they got the
>> engine reliability sorted out.
>
> What's wrong with diesel reliability?
> Are you aware of known issues
> or does it just remain to be proven?
>

Apparently Cabair are having lots of trouble with their DA40tdi's.

General reliability, stoppages while airbourne. Unpleasent excitement!!

Still, that's why the DA42 has two :o)

[Toks Desalu]

Now, I am impressed!

"Paul Sengupta" > wrote in message
...
> http://ukga.com/news/view.cfm?contentId=2197
>
>

[CB]

"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>
> "B S D Chapman" <mail-at-benchapman-dot-co-dot-uk> wrote
>
>>>> I just wish they got the
>>>> engine reliability sorted out.
>>>
>>> What's wrong with diesel reliability?
>>> Are you aware of known issues
>>> or does it just remain to be proven?
>>>
>>
>>Apparently Cabair are having lots of trouble with their DA40tdi's.
>>
>>General reliability, stoppages while airbourne. Unpleasent excitement!!
>>
>>Still, that's why the DA42 has two :o)
>
> An aircraft owner who is still within the two year warranty isn't
> going to talk publicly about his problems, especially if it is a high
> profile business. As I know only too damn well, one has to go back to
> the official dealer for practically everything so one needs to
> maintain a good relationship with them. So, even allowing for the fact
> that only a very small proportion of pilots are "online", we aren't
> going to find out much about what is going on here for a few years.
> But there is no way you would get me to buy this product now.
>
> There are two ** really major ** black holes for money here: the
> diesel engines and their electronics, and the glass panel cockpits.
> Both are almost entirely untested as far as a variety of operating
> patterns around the world is concerned.
>
> Maybe in 3-4 years' time.

and unless some people are prepared to test out the new technology then we
never find out what it can do. Thanks for your contribution to aviation
development, its much appreciated.

[Richard Herring]

In article >, CB
> wrote
>
>"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "B S D Chapman" <mail-at-benchapman-dot-co-dot-uk> wrote
>>
>>>>> I just wish they got the
>>>>> engine reliability sorted out.
>>>>
>>>> What's wrong with diesel reliability?
>>>> Are you aware of known issues
>>>> or does it just remain to be proven?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Apparently Cabair are having lots of trouble with their DA40tdi's.
>>>
>>>General reliability, stoppages while airbourne. Unpleasent excitement!!
>>>
>>>Still, that's why the DA42 has two :o)
>>
>> An aircraft owner who is still within the two year warranty isn't
>> going to talk publicly about his problems, especially if it is a high
>> profile business. As I know only too damn well, one has to go back to
>> the official dealer for practically everything so one needs to
>> maintain a good relationship with them. So, even allowing for the fact
>> that only a very small proportion of pilots are "online", we aren't
>> going to find out much about what is going on here for a few years.
>> But there is no way you would get me to buy this product now.
>>
>> There are two ** really major ** black holes for money here: the
>> diesel engines and their electronics, and the glass panel cockpits.
>> Both are almost entirely untested as far as a variety of operating
>> patterns around the world is concerned.
>>
>> Maybe in 3-4 years' time.
>
>and unless some people are prepared to test out the new technology then we
>never find out what it can do.

Right. They are generally called "test pilots" and trained and rewarded
accordingly. They aren't what the Marketing Dept. refers to as
"punters".

> Thanks for your contribution to aviation
>development, its much appreciated.
>
And yours is, O Anonymous One?

--
Richard Herring >

[VinMan]

"karel" > a écrit dans le message de news:

> Yes but I don't think I'd like to sit in a TB20 or anything of its class
for
> 12 hours

Especially over the Atlantic with only ONE engine available...
;o)
--
VinMan

Romani ite domum
www.ciel-et-partage.org

[John Bishop]

> >and unless some people are prepared to test out the new technology then
we
> >never find out what it can do.
>
> Right. They are generally called "test pilots" and trained and rewarded
> accordingly. They aren't what the Marketing Dept. refers to as
> "punters".
>
I don't think many flying schools would prosper if they advertised

"Come and train in the latest Thunderbird 1 aircraft, sporting the latest
technology and a great new diesel engine. (Disclaimer: This engine has not
been thoroughly tested. It may stop suddenly on final approach, or during
spin awareness training, or at any time. Also the glass cockit may fail
completely during IMC approaches. These events are completely normal and
WizzBang Flying Club cannot be held responsible for your death if this
happens)"

Great sales pitch!

John

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> . I just wish they got the
> engine reliability sorted out.
>

Show me numbers that make the Thielert appear unreliable. I haven't
heard of ANY. But I'd be real interested.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Karel,

> Yes but I don't think I'd like to sit in a TB20 or anything of its class for
> 12 hours
>

Have you sat in the DA40 or 42? The TB20 offers WAY more room.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

B,

> Apparently Cabair are having lots of trouble with their DA40tdi's.
>

References? Who is Cabair? "Apparently" doesn't convince me, sorry.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> Both are almost entirely untested as far as a variety of operating
> patterns around the world is concerned.
>

Oh yeah, that's why there is this totally worthless certification
procedure they have to go through...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> An aircraft owner who is still within the two year warranty isn't
> going to talk publicly about his problems,
>

Of course he is. Doesn't take his legal right for warranty away. Look
at the Cirrus user forums - you'll find any amount of bitching about
their products.

Show us valid numbers about problems with the Thielert (or glass
panels) - and I would start to see your point. So far, all you offer is
speculation.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Paul Sengupta]

"Peter" > wrote in message
...
> There are two ** really major ** black holes for money here: the
> diesel engines and their electronics, and the glass panel cockpits.
> Both are almost entirely untested as far as a variety of operating
> patterns around the world is concerned.
>
> Maybe in 3-4 years' time.

Still, give me one now and I'll help test it!

Paul

[B S D Chapman]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:36:22 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote:

> B,
>
>> Apparently Cabair are having lots of trouble with their DA40tdi's.
>>
>
> References? Who is Cabair? "Apparently" doesn't convince me, sorry.
>

Cabair are the largest (group of) flying school(s) in the UK, with outfits
all around london, and their main operating base at Cranfield - where they
use Katanas and DA40TDIs for professional pilot training.

"Apparently" is a) an arse covering statement by myself, and b) because
I've only heard about "instances" second-hand - from recent students and
past instructors.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135765&highlight=da40
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=138466&highlight=da40+frequent+PAN

And if you really feel like trawling, take a look through some back issues
of GASIL (the authority on "incidents and accidents" in the UK). I don't
have time to do that now!
http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/publications.asp?cattype=sercat&id=7



--

....And so as the little andrex puppy of time scampers onto the busy
dual-carriage way of destiny, and the extra-strong meat vindaloo of fate
confronts the toilet Out Of Order sign of eternity... I see it is time to
end this post.

'It is rumoured that his last words were, "Watch this..."'
Duke Elegant
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=117465

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> but there is
> plenty of "certified" junk about.
>

I have to agree. Still, a certain level of reliability can be derived
from certification. And I don't think there have been any major
problems with PFD type panels or with the DA40.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[B S D Chapman]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:25:17 +0100, Paul Sengupta
> wrote:

> "Peter" > wrote in message
> ...
>> There are two ** really major ** black holes for money here: the
>> diesel engines and their electronics, and the glass panel cockpits.
>> Both are almost entirely untested as far as a variety of operating
>> patterns around the world is concerned.
>>
>> Maybe in 3-4 years' time.
>
> Still, give me one now and I'll help test it!
>

Absolutely.
Though I'd probably want to be based a little closer to Gamston if I was
relying on the aircraft for business... I'd want to have access to the
"courtesy 'plane"!!!

DA42 is a different story though: I wouldn't hesitate to jump in that!





--
'It is rumoured that his last words were, "Watch this..."'
Duke Elegant
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=117465

[Thomas Borchert]

B,

what's mentioned in those threads sounds very circumstantial and is
mostly "hear-say". Lots of "apparently" and "I believe" in there. Not
hard numbers. Too bad. But I don't think a school would stick with an
aircraft that has the problems you alluded to.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[gwengler]

"VinMan" > wrote in message >...
> "karel" > a écrit dans le message de news:
>
> > Yes but I don't think I'd like to sit in a TB20 or anything of its class
> for
> > 12 hours
>
> Especially over the Atlantic with only ONE engine available...
> ;o)

Well, there's another spin on that: Most (all?) light twins WILL
descent on one engine for the first couple of hours (I don't have time
to quantify this) because of the weight of the extra fuel that is
required on very long-haul flights. In a single, if you have an
engine failure, you're going down. In a (too heavy) twin with one
engine failed you're also going down for some time. However, with a
twin your chances of an engine failure are double!
That does not automatically imply that a single is safer to fly than a
twin - just another aspect to think about. And, your rate of descent
in a one engined twin is much slower than in a zero engined single
which will give you more options (time wise) to do something about
your upcoming big problem of landing without an airport - perhaps you
can even make it back to land.

Gerd
ATPL

[B S D Chapman]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:39:02 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote:

> B,
>
> what's mentioned in those threads sounds very circumstantial and is
> mostly "hear-say". Lots of "apparently" and "I believe" in there. Not
> hard numbers. Too bad.

Yeah.
You're right.
They just made it all up to bring down the evil Diesel Empire.

???

> But I don't think a school would stick with an
> aircraft that has the problems you alluded to.


Like they have a choice?
We're not talking about two or three airframes here. We're talking about
a procurement programme that has been running for years.

You don't drop an investment like that because of a few hiccups. You work
with the vendor and manufacturer to develop solutions. No different from
buying a new car: Mine was one of the first off the production line last
year, and it's been back to the garage at least once a month with
repetitive faults that they are finding difficult to trace and rectify.
But we're getting there.

Fortunately, no one has died because of these faults, in either my car, or
on a TDI equiped aircraft. People all over europe are knuckling down and
quietly trying to fix them. And that is great. That is what pushing the
boundry and buying into cutting-edge technology is all about.

Just because I point out faults, or acknowledge the rumour mill, doesn't
mean that I don't think it is still the best solution out there today.
I'd buy my car again, I would have a TDI aircraft tomorrow.

Peter won't, because he's heard the stories - and they're good enough for
him to decide not to chance becoming your first Hard Number.



--

'It is rumoured that his last words were, "Watch this..."'
Duke Elegant
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=117465

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> but a particular product needs more years to prove itself than it has
> had to date.
>

And how would that happen if everybody thought like you do?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Chris W]

Paul Sengupta wrote:
> http://ukga.com/news/view.cfm?contentId=2197
>
>

This article claims that it is 1,300 nautical miles from London to
St.John's. Is this accurate? Two different mapping programs I have
give the distance to be more like 2,000 nautical miles. Which one is
right, and if my software is wrong, does anyone know of any good
software that will give me accurate measures of distance between any 2
points on the globe?

--
Chris W

Bring Back the HP 15C
http://hp15c.org

Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help.
http://thewishzone.com

[gwengler]

Thomas Borchert > wrote in message >...
> Peter,
>
> > . I just wish they got the
> > engine reliability sorted out.
> >
>
> Show me numbers that make the Thielert appear unreliable. I haven't
> heard of ANY. But I'd be real interested.

D-ECAY, a C172R, has a Thielert Diesel installed. A detailed
"Dauertest" kann be found at www.pilotundflugzeug.de I don't think
Flight Training Cologne, the operator, is happy with the performance
for various reasons, mainly engine un-reliability, Thielert customer
support and systems integration. They will not solo students on that
airplane because of sudden partial power losses and will only charters
with experienced pilots up to 5000 ft. density altitude (from the
article). Perhaps it's not the engine itself but there are certainly
problems.

Gerd
ATPL

[Peter]

Chris W wrote:

> Paul Sengupta wrote:
>
>> http://ukga.com/news/view.cfm?contentId=2197
>>
>>
>
> This article claims that it is 1,300 nautical miles from London to
> St.John's. Is this accurate? Two different mapping programs I have
> give the distance to be more like 2,000 nautical miles.

It looks right to me. Are you using the correct London? The flight
was from London, Ontario.

[Chris W]

Peter wrote:

> It looks right to me. Are you using the correct London? The flight
> was from London, Ontario.

I was reading too fast. I had the wrong London. Those distances agree
with my software. BTW I am using Street Atlas USA 2004. While it
doesn't have any roads outside the USA/Canada it does have all the
country boundaries and major cities in the world.



--
Chris W

Bring Back the HP 15C
http://hp15c.org

Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help.
http://thewishzone.com

[Ali Hopkins]

"Chris W" > wrote in message
news:9gKXc.7231$gl.5108@okepread07...

> I was reading too fast. I had the wrong London.

You don't happen to fly B-52's do you? :) :) :)

Ali

[Michael]

"John Bishop" > wrote
> I don't think many flying schools would prosper if they advertised
>
> "Come and train in the latest Thunderbird 1 aircraft, sporting the latest
> technology and a great new diesel engine. (Disclaimer: This engine has not
> been thoroughly tested. It may stop suddenly on final approach, or during
> spin awareness training, or at any time. Also the glass cockit may fail
> completely during IMC approaches. These events are completely normal and
> WizzBang Flying Club cannot be held responsible for your death if this
> happens)"

My experience working at a parachute school indicates you are
completely wrong about this. Whenever someone died parachuting and
the death made the local papers, the first jump classes were full for
weeks.

Any publicity is good publicity as long as they spell your name right.

BTW - what does it say about the value of certification if it doesn't
even assure reliability on the first production run?

Michael

[Michael]

Thomas Borchert > wrote
> > but there is
> > plenty of "certified" junk about.
>
> I have to agree. Still, a certain level of reliability can be derived
> from certification.

Really? Let's have some hard numbers. I don't believe you. And I'm
dead serious - I don't believe certification adds value (meaning
safety) - only cost.

Michael

[Graham Wilson]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 07:26:20 +0100, "John Bishop"
> wrote:


>"Come and train in the latest Thunderbird 1 aircraft, sporting the latest
>technology and a great new diesel engine. (Disclaimer: This engine has not
>been thoroughly tested. It may stop suddenly on final approach, or during
>spin awareness training, or at any time. Also the glass cockit may fail
>completely during IMC approaches. These events are completely normal and
>WizzBang Flying Club cannot be held responsible for your death if this
>happens)"
>
>Great sales pitch!

Don't forget the Unfair Contract Terms Act (1977) - you can't exclude
liability for death or personal injury.

(:-)

Graham

[Graham Wilson]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:36:22 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote:


>References? Who is Cabair? "Apparently" doesn't convince me, sorry.

I am familiar with Cabair. In the PA28, I open the little window for
cab air.

(:-)

Graham

[Graham Wilson]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:41:07 +0100, Peter
> wrote:


>For legal reasons, nobody can say anything else.

As every solicitor learns during their first week of law school:

Never ask a question to which you do not already know the answer.

Graham

[Thomas Borchert]

Gwengler,

I've read the report. Seems atypical to me. FWIW, the Thielert-172
operated by Canair here in Uetersen gets nothing but praise by the
owner. One of the comments to the report you quoted is similar.
Nonetheless, yes, these things are new and thus full of surprises. Big
traditional engines are different: A top overhaul after some hundred
hours shouldn't come as a surprise - it is expected.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Stefan]

B S D Chapman wrote:

> We're not talking about two or three airframes here. We're talking
> about a procurement programme that has been running for years.

Their Thielert procurement programme has hardly been running for years...

Stefan

[Stefan]

gwengler wrote:

> D-ECAY, a C172R, has a Thielert Diesel installed. A detailed
> "Dauertest" kann be found at www.pilotundflugzeug.de I don't think
> Flight Training Cologne, the operator, is happy with the performance
> for various reasons, mainly engine un-reliability,

You didn't read carefully enough. The enginge has proved to be very
reliable, not a singel engine out or other sudden anomly has been reported.

However, they did have problems. This seems to be mainly a problem with
integrating the engine into this particular Cessna model: Power
reduction caused by the muffler and the like. Certainly not what you
would expect, but not a problem of the engine as such. I'm not aware of
similiar problems with the DA40.

Stefan

[C Kingsbury]

Thomas Borchert > wrote in message >...
> Peter,
>
> > . I just wish they got the
> > engine reliability sorted out.
> >
>
> Show me numbers that make the Thielert appear unreliable. I haven't
> heard of ANY. But I'd be real interested.

On one hand TDi engines are the first really promising "new" engine
concept for GA in some time. Microjets may become much cheaper but
they will always be for the high, fast, and rich crowd. We need an
alternative for <200kts below the flight levels that doesn't rely on
100LL.

That being said, there's a lot of questions for the TDi to answer, and
most of those will come with experience. Airplane engines are finicky
things and even with the exact same engine you see different issues
depending on how they're installed. Plus, I know I can get parts and
decent service for a Continental or Lycoming without too much hassle,
but I suspect that it will take time to build up expertise in the
diesels.

Also, I want to know that given the cost, Thielert/SMA/whoever will
not go out of business anytime soon. If that happens then the engines
are living on borrowed time until parts inventory runs out. Then
supporting them mushrooms in price. Again, not a concern buying brands
L or C.

Still, I hope Thielert succeeds. I'd be willing to be a test pilot,
but a test owner is a bit more than I've the wallet for. Like the old
saying goes, "pioneers get arrows in the back, settlers get land."

-cwk.

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> That's not true. A well managed engine will make TBO. A mismanaged
> engine won't make 100hrs.

I know MANY owners of big bore Continentals who think otherwise. I don't
think the numbers are with you. But neither of us will be able to prove
our point.

>
> FADEC should make the need for careful ("complicated" for many pilots)
> engine management a thing of the past, but we are not there yet. Give
> me a turbine anytime, e.g. a Grob 140 :)
>

Which FADEC? Where can I buy one?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Newps]

Thomas Borchert wrote:

>
>
>>FADEC should make the need for careful ("complicated" for many pilots)
>>engine management a thing of the past, but we are not there yet. Give
>>me a turbine anytime, e.g. a Grob 140 :)
>>
>
>
> Which FADEC? Where can I buy one?

FADEC is full authority digital engine control. One version goes to a
full electronic ignition just like your car, you ditch the mags and you
also get fully variable timing. So you lose the mixture control too.
You have to have fuel injection for this to work. Your engine will
always be running as lean as it is possible to run. A typical 182 owner
can expect to save 2 gph, that's how bad we are mismanaging our engines
now. You will also be able to use lower compression or lower octane
fuel as the computer will retard timing if the engine wants to detonate.
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
>
> Which FADEC? Where can I buy one?

Newps has provided the description. Check http://www.fadec.com/availability.html for
your engine.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Don Hammer]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:47:30 -0500, Chris W > wrote:

>Paul Sengupta wrote:
>> http://ukga.com/news/view.cfm?contentId=2197
>>
>>
>
>This article claims that it is 1,300 nautical miles from London to
>St.John's. Is this accurate? Two different mapping programs I have
>give the distance to be more like 2,000 nautical miles. Which one is
>right, and if my software is wrong, does anyone know of any good
>software that will give me accurate measures of distance between any 2
>points on the globe?


Try http://gc.kls2.com/ for a great circle program
Cheers

[Thomas Borchert]

Newps,

Thanks, but I knew what FADEC is. What I tried to point out is that it
isn't available for the TCM or Lyc engines that get so much praise here
- except for the one engine in the Liberty.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Richard Herring]

In article >, Thomas Borchert
> wrote
>Peter,
>
>> but a particular product needs more years to prove itself than it has
>> had to date.
>
>And how would that happen if everybody thought like you do?
>
The manufacturers would have to invest more in proving it themselves.
Their profit: their risk.

--
Richard Herring >