Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep

C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

Actually, there is one fatal for the DA 20.


NTSB Identification: NYC02FA131.
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact
Public Inquiries
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, July 06, 2002 in Leesburg, VA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 5/1/2003
Aircraft: Diamond Aircraft Industries DA 20C-1, registration: N960CT
Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious.
The passenger reported that the pilot departed the airport, completed a
touch-and go, and flew to a practice area. The passenger then flew two
clearing turns at 2,500 feet msl, and the pilot subsequently retook control
of the airplane and climbed to 3,000 feet msl. After the pilot leveled the
airplane about 2,900 feet msl, the engine lost all power. The pilot
completed emergency checklist items, but was unable to restart the engine.
The pilot then attempted a forced landing to a field. The airplane impacted
in residential area; left wing low, nose down, and slid about 100 feet.
Aside from a sooty number two cylinder, examination of the wreckage did not
reveal any discrepancies. After the initial examination, the engine was then
disassembled, and no discrepancies were observed. The fuel control unit,
injector lines, nozzles, manifold, magnetos, number two cylinder and piston,
and connecting rod, were all tested at the engine manufacturer's facility.
The fuel components and magnetos flowed and tested within specifications
respectively. The cause of the black sooty deposit within the number two
cylinder could not be determined; however, the deposit appeared to be over
normal combustion deposit.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of
this accident as follows:

A loss of engine power for undetermined reasons.

C,

I sit corrected. Thanks for looking it up!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

Actually, there is one fatal for the DA 20.

That was a DA20 Katana with the Rotax engine. I fly out of Leesburg,
and based on informal discussions there and when I was taking
ultralight lessons, it seems that the Rotax has a tendency to carb ice
easily. That might be the unexplained reason.

I fly a DA20 Eclipse (rent), it has a Continental and is very nice,
albeit a little snug for 6' 3" pilot.

-Malcolm Teas

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

Actually, there is one fatal for the DA 20.

That was a DA20 Katana with the Rotax engine. I fly out of Leesburg,
and based on informal discussions there and when I was taking
ultralight lessons, it seems that the Rotax has a tendency to carb ice
easily. That might be the unexplained reason.

I fly a DA20 Eclipse (rent), it has a Continental and is very nice,
albeit a little snug for 6' 3" pilot.

-Malcolm Teas

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

Actually, there is one fatal for the DA 20.

That was a DA20 Katana with the Rotax engine. I fly out of Leesburg,
and based on informal discussions there and when I was taking
ultralight lessons, it seems that the Rotax has a tendency to carb ice
easily. That might be the unexplained reason.

I fly a DA20 Eclipse (rent), it has a Continental and is very nice,
albeit a little snug for 6' 3" pilot.

-Malcolm Teas

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

There are only two accidents involving the DA 40. One is a botched landing
that ran off the runway, the other a mid-air where the Diamond was hit from
behind and above while on very short final.

The Diamond's behavior during the mid-air was impressive, all right:

"During a telephone interview conducted by the IIC, the pilot of the DA-40
reported that he entered a left downwind for landing on runway 18, and
announced his intentions for landing on the CTAF. The pilot also stated that
he announced position reports on CTAF upon entering a base leg for the
runway, one-mile final, and 1/2-mile final. At an altitude of approximately
50 feet, another airplane impacted the left wing. The pilot recalled cart
wheeling three times before the airplane came to rest in an upright
position.

Examination of the DA-40 by an Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
inspector, who responded to the accident site, revealed the outboard section
of the left wing was torn open. The engine remained attached to the
fuselage, and was compressed aft against the firewall. Examination of the
Giles 202 revealed the engine was partially separated from the fuselage.
Both main landing gear were separated from the fuselage. The rudder was
separated from the vertical stabilizer, and was located approximately 150
feet from the wreckage."

The cockpit shell is designed to withstand 26g's. It is tougher than a rock.
You might end up splattered all over the inside, but that shell is going to
be intact. Reading the accident reports is amazing. Pilots have literally
flown Diamonds into the ground and walked away without injuries. Consider
this one:

"Realizing he couldn't make it to the airport, he set up to make a forced
landing on an Interstate Highway. He made a right turn to set up for the
landing. The airplane struck a set of power lines at a 30-degree angle, and
in a 20-degree right turn, knocked down two power poles, impacted a ditch,
and came to a stop next to the highway. The pilot noticed the power lines
lying across the airplane, he saw sparks, and a fire near the left wing. He
unbuckled himself and his passenger and they both climbed out and walked up
to the road. The wire strike, ground impact, post impact fire, and
subsequent electrical power surge, destroyed the airplane."

Here a pilot stalled and hit the ground: "Injuries: 2 Minor.
According to the pilot, he was maneuvering over the sand dunes between
Eureka and Delta. The temperature was rising and it started getting "bumpy"
so he elected to return to Provo. While flying over the mountains west of
Eureka, approximately 1000 feet above ground level, his "controls became
mush." The airplane began descending rapidly, at which time the pilot "put
in full prop[eller] and power, pitch[ing] for 75 kts." It was apparent that
the airplane would not clear the rising terrain, so the pilot reversed
course towards the "canyon." The pilot stated the airspeed was "right above
stall speed." Subsequently, the aircraft collided with the trees. The
airplane's empennage was separated from the fuselage."

This accident could easily have been fatal. Here the pilot flew into a
mountain when he went VFR into IMC, but he and his passenger walked away
with minor injuries:

NTSB Identification: DEN99LA060 .
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact
Public Inquiries
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Friday, March 26, 1999 in COYOTE, NM
Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/25/2001
Aircraft: Diamond Aircraft Industries DA 20-A1, registration: N528SS
Injuries: 2 Minor.
The pilot and his pilot-rated passenger were flying cross-country for the
purpose of building flight time. The pilot assumed the role of PIC for the
leg from Durango to their intended destination of Santa Fe. During a stop
earlier in the day in Las Vegas, the passenger checked the weather using a
computer located in the terminal, which called for low clouds and a narrow
temperature/dew point spread at the airport in Santa Fe. He did not obtain
SIGMETS. While in cruise flight, he and his passenger began to encounter
snow, fog and rain. While attempting to climb, he entered instrument
meteorological conditions. The aircraft then impacted the trees in a 90
right bank and at a 45 degree downward pitch. The aircraft came to rest in
an inverted position along a 45 degree inclining mountainous slope covered
by several feet of snow. The aircraft was not IFR equipped.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of
this accident as follows:

The pilot-in-command's inadvertent flight into adverse weather, and his
continued flight into instrument meteorological conditions. Factors were his
failure to obtain an updated recorded weather briefing, the existing weather
conditions which included snow, fog and rain, and the aircraft not being IFR
equipped.



There has been only one accident in Diamond's entire history in which there
was a post crash fire, and that was one of the fuel exhaustion ones. The
fire was apparently caused by downed power lines. I have to say that I am
impressed.

One of the accidents does show that the bozos are still very much with us;
here a landing Diamond was hit by a Piper pilot that just did not give a
dead rat. Even though Mr. Jones had his license taken away, you have to
wonder if he is still flying somewhe

DEN99LA048A
On March 6, 1999, approximately 1330 mountain standard time, a Piper
PA-28-235, N4312A, and a Diamond DA 20-A1, N189DA, were destroyed when they
collided on the ground at the Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah. N4312A
was on takeoff roll on runway 18, and N189DA was on landing rollout on
runway 31. The private pilot and two passengers aboard N4312A escaped
injury. The flight instructor aboard N189DA was seriously injured, and his
student pilot received minor injuries. Visual meteorological conditions
prevailed at the time, and flight plans had not been filed by either pilot.
Both flights were being conducted under Title 14 CFR Part 91. The flight of
N4312A was for business and was originating at the time of the accident. The
flight of N189DA was for instruction and had originated at Provo
approximately 30 minutes before the accident.

The following is based on the accident report submitted by the pilot of
N4312A, Larry M. Jones, and a telephone conversation he had with this
investigator a few days after the accident. Mr. Jones wrote that he
conducted his pre-takeoff check with the radio on (but told this
investigator that it was after he had completed his pre-takeoff check that
he put his earphones on). There were two airplanes in the traffic pattern.
He heard the first pilot advise he was turning onto base leg for runway 31.
The second pilot said he was going to follow the first airplane in for
landing. With both airplanes in sight, Mr. Jones radioed that he would be
taxiing onto runway 18 for departure because he had "plenty of time to
depart before either of the two aircraft were in position to land." As he
approached the intersection, his brother called his attention to a third
airplane, N189DA. Mr. Jones said he closed the throttle, pulled the hand
brake (locking the brakes), applied left rudder (in an attempt to go behind
N189DA), then applied back elevator pressure and full left aileron (in an
attempt to raise the right wing over the top of N189DA). N4312A collided
with N189DA and caught fire. All three occupants of N4312A evacuated the
airplane. The two occupants of N189DA were extricated by CFR personnel and
taken to a local hospital.

Stan Jones, the right front seat passenger and brother of the pilot,
submitted a statement which corroborated Larry Jones' report. He made no
reference, however, to the near midair collision that had occurred earlier
that morning as they were landing at Provo.

In his accident report, the flight instructor aboard N189DA, Steven Hill,
said he and his student were landing on runway 31. "There was another
airplane close in behind [us] on base, and there was another airplane also
behind him," he said. He said they intentionally landed long to give the
trailing traffic additional landing clearance. He could not remember
anything else.

The student aboard N189DA, Derek Hansen, said that after practicing flight
maneuvers, he made several touch and go landings. "The airport was busy,"
Mr. Hansen wrote. "I don't recall a time from the time we entered the
traffic pattern until the time of the accident when there was not at least
one other airplane in the pattern. Transmissions were brief, pertinent, and
frequent. . ." Mr. Hansen landed the airplane under the supervision of Mr.
Hill. As he started to turn the airplane off the runway, Mr. Hill yelled and
kicked hard left rudder. Mr. Hansen said he caught a glimpse of an airplane
just before the collision.

The Provo Police Department also investigated the accident and collected 12
witness statements (attached). The witnesses corroborated reports that
runway 31 was the active runway, that N189DA had landed long on runway 31,
that N4312A was taking off on runway 18, and that the collision occurred at
the intersection of the two runways (two witnesses mistakenly thought N189DA
was taking off and N4312A was landing).

During the course of this investigation, it was learned that the pilot of
N4312A had another near collision earlier in the day as he approached Provo
Airport for landing after a flight from Richfield, Utah. In a written
statement, Christopher Harger said he had been giving flight instruction to
a student, and they were returning to Provo for landing. At an altitude of
5,500 feet, they made a 45 degree entry into the traffic pattern, then
turned onto a left downwind leg for runway 13 and announced their position
on the radio. He heard the pilot of N4312A announce over the radio that he
was "over the lake" and downwind for runway 18. When he heard the pilot say
he was "over the numbers for three one," Mr. Harger made an immediate 360
degree turn to the right because he was in the general area. Nearing
completion of the turn, he found himself on a collision course with the
Cherokee (N4312A). He pulled up and the Cherokee passed 200 to 300 feet
below him.

According to a written statement submitted by Heather Heslington, the
airport Unicom operator, N4312A had also nearly collided with an airplane
piloted by Mr. Stan Shaw, a flight instructor at Advantage Aviation
(attempts to contact Mr. Shaw to obtain a statement were unsuccessful).

Flight Instructor Gerald Maass submitted a written statement about a near
midair collision he had with N4312A three months earlier, on December 21,
1998. He was administering a private pilot practical examination to an
applicant, and they were doing touch and go landings on runway 18. He heard
the pilot of N4312A announce that he was downwind for runway 18. After
takeoff and while climbing out, Mr. Maass observed N4312A pass him off to
the right. The airplane was about 10 feet above him, and its left wing was
over his right wing 3 to 4 feet. N4312A then turned abruptly to the left and
passed in front and over the top "by not more than 20 feet." Mr. Jones later
explained that he had been going through the "Before Landing" checklist in
preparation for landing, and he inadvertently moved the fuel selector to the
OFF position. The engine lost power and he immediately turned towards runway
18 (he made no announcement over the radio). When he observed Mr. Maass'
airplane on the runway, he moved the fuel selector switch to a tank and
regained engine power. The remedial action brought the two airplanes in
close proximity to each other.

Brian Wortham, a flight instructor with Great Western Aviation in West
Bountiful, Utah, said he gave Mr. Jones Class B (airspace) flight
instruction shortly after the near collision. "I found his ability to
maneuver the aircraft within the standards of the private pilot
certificate," Mr. Wortham wrote. "I did express to him some concerns that I
had about his decisions and judgments even with me in the aircraft. . .I was
concerned about the ambivalence or lack of understanding of the seriousness
of his situation. . ."

Mr. Jones' attitude was variously described as "flippant" by Ms. Heslington,
"very nonchalant" by Mr. Maass, and "cavalier" by Mr. Wortham.

The wind, recorded 25 minutes after the accident, was from 280 degrees at 6
knots.

On April 22, 1999, Mr. Jones appeared at FAA's Flight Standards District
Office in Salt Lake City to have his competency as a private pilot
reexamined in accordance with Section 44709 of the U.S. Code, Title 49. He
failed the oral portion of the reexamination. Because of the failure, no
flight test was administered.

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

Yes, but you will find at least three -20 accidents in the database that
would never have happened without that rear-hinged canopy. Nice as it is,
the -20 is an airplane with an accident built into it, just waiting for an
inattentive pilot (which is all of us occasionally) to screw up. Don't get me
wrong, all three of them are likely caused by pilot error, but it is a trap
engineered into airframe that is familiar to any glider pilot.

As a CFI(gliders), no new student gets into my trainer without first
hearing "the canopy lecture".

They fixed the problem in the 4-seater.

Vaughn

I have consistently noted that statistics of actual history are more
importatant than subjective analysis. It appears that the C1 is much safer
than about anything else in the single engine arena by the statistics.

While the rear hinged canopy may not be ideal, perhaps the trade off was
even less ideal. At any rate, while your point is valid, I believe that in
total the design must be a good one.



"Vaughn" wrote in message
news

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
C,

I suppose the NTSB site would be worth investigating.


IIRC, you'd find zero fatal accidents. Zero, zip, nada. Same for the
DA20. Pretty impressive.

Yes, but you will find at least three -20 accidents in the database
that
would never have happened without that rear-hinged canopy. Nice as it is,
the -20 is an airplane with an accident built into it, just waiting for an
inattentive pilot (which is all of us occasionally) to screw up. Don't
get me
wrong, all three of them are likely caused by pilot error, but it is a
trap
engineered into airframe that is familiar to any glider pilot.

As a CFI(gliders), no new student gets into my trainer without first
hearing "the canopy lecture".

They fixed the problem in the 4-seater.

Vaughn

C J Campbell wrote:


G-1000. I had a difficult time maintaining my altitude; the altitude and
airspeed tapes just didn't seem to be in the right place for my scan. A
little practice would be necessary to get proficient.

Airline pilots that transitioned from "steam gauge" to the tape altimeters and
V/S often had problems at first. But, those folks are type rated and restricted
to type.

That's the problem with this new "gee wiz" Light A/C G/A stuff. No
standardization and no type requirements.