| Notify me of new responses |
Hello Phil (and everyone else!)
I've been a passive participant of this site for years and I finally
have a question! :) (needless to say, I've learned a lot)
Is anyone familiar with groups that offer managed fractional
ownerships of DA40s? Similar to Cirrus' cirrus share? I stumbled upon
this company
http://www.usaeroplex.com/fractional/Planes.aspx but they are in TX
and Im in the NW.(OR).
I've also searched for similar groups for cessnas, but no joy there
either (which is surprising considering how many cessnas there are)to be honest, I am still trying to decide between the DA40, C182,
C172(180hp). Mission profile: 2 adults (we're both on the small size),
and a kid(in the near future), but would occasionally like to take a
couple/friends up for the obligatory burger/sightseeing, so reasonable
4 place payload is nice from time to time (did this get fixed in the
diamond?). Majority of trips would be under 300nm, but maybe once a
year, one trip twice as long. Anyone familiar with the NW knows we've
got big hills all around us, and have to go over (or through them) to
get anywhere.
any thoughts?
thanks in advance!
-- Ernest Meshack-Hart, July 11, 2008
I think that the payload of the DA40 has been getting worse over time. The switch to a big heavy metal prop did not help. The Garmin G1000 upgrade added quite a bit to empty weight. The plane probably will still carry four adults and 2 hours of fuel, but I haven't done the arithmetic.If you're looking for great payload I think that you might find the old Skyhawk XP from the late 1970s a good choice. It has the 6-cylinder engine that comes in the Cirrus SR20 and is good for 210 hp, I think, with an STC.
The management companies provide good service, but they aren't cheap so putting together your own partnership in a DA40 or modern Cessna would probably save plenty of money. If you want management, add a local CFI to the operation and let him fly for the cost of gas in exchange for keeping track of maintenance, cleaning the airplane, etc.
-- Philip Greenspun, July 14, 2008
Responding to the follow-up underneath...Redoing the panel in an old 172xp shouldn't cost more than $20,000 (but usually better/cheaper to have let the previous owner spend the money and time). Sandel and Aspen Avionics both have fairly good-sized retrofit glass. What do you really need? A reliable source of attitude information. A GPS. Satellite weather link. If you're going to do a lot of actual IMC flying the G700 autopilot in the latest airplanes that come with the G1000 is worth a lot. If you're going to be mostly VFR I would say that a panel-mount kit for the Garmin 496 and you're done (about $3000).
-- Philip Greenspun, July 14, 2008
Thanks for your response Phil. Yeah, i think at its posted fuel burn rates, the DA40 can still get at least 2 hrs flight time (useful load XLS=860, CS=900). The reason I was leaning towards the DA40 is it has a higher wing loading than the 172xp, but cheaper to operate than the 182. plus, Im sure my wife would be happier in a new(er) type plane. but then, the cost difference is pretty great bw the 40 and 172, which is what got me looking into fractional ownership pgms. but maybe i can get an older 172 and refurbish it as best as I can? i looked briefly on aso.com and 76-79 177xps seem to be going in the 70-90K range. I dont know how much it would cost to redo interiors and panels.thanks again1
-- Ernest Meshack-Hart, July 14, 2008
WRT the fractional firms I would suggest you watch out for the "remarketing" fee they tack on when they sell the plane. I had a post in this a while back for AirShares. In the end it was just not worth it, per hour.good luck with this, Fabio
-- fabio savoldelli, July 14, 2008
another thing about the 172xp, since its a 6cyl, doesnt that mean the ownership costs are similar to a 182? seems like u're getting one pro (payload), and several cons (costs, less space), compared to the 182regarding the panel, while i dont plan on spending most of my time IMC (what fun is that?), i would probably file IFR mostly. and I definitely want the GFC700 AP. (it can be installed sep from the G1000 right?) thanks
-- Ernest Meshack-Hart, July 14, 2008
Hello All, Just got a chance to fly the DA40 XLS with Synthetic Vision. Certainly a very capable aircraft and fun to fly. And, as mentioned above, the useful load is a concern. In the weight and balance section of the Flight Manual, a figure of 860 lbs is used in the example problem. However, for the particular airplane I flew, it was 816 lbs.Michael J. Bangert
-- Michael Bangert, July 21, 2008
I and my partner purchased a new DA40XLS in May. I had flown the FBO 2004 DA40 and was familiar and liked it. I am a first time owner and did a fair amount of research and actual flying of other aircraft before I made the purchase. Salient points to consider: You can get the same avionics on pretty much any plane now, including the Synthetic (which we have). So that is a wash. I regularly fly with a cruise GPD of 9.8-10.2. When I flew the 182 it was 12.5-13.0 AND I consistently get 10-12 knots more airspeed in the DA40. Economics makes a difference here. Useful load of the DA40 has been increased through a service bulletin kit and is installed in all new airplanes. I dont know the exact number but is is about 50 lbs? If you dont need or want to fly 700 miles you can takeoff with less fuel and go as far as you normally need and have more then enough useful load. I have regularly flown with 4 pax (minimal baggage) or 3 pax lots of bags in the summer and had no problem. If I was flying in and out of turf or unimproved airstrips, I might opt for the 182 but I honestly think the DA40XLS is hands down a superior choice for most. And.........the visibility is INCREDIBLE. I am happy to provide more feedback if you have any questions. marknreston at yahoo
-- mark brightman, October 7, 2008
Hi Mark, and thanks for ur response. where are u based out of? I ask to just get a feel for the kind of environment ur regularly flying in. Do fly IFR w/ the DA40? I hear the DA40 can be a bear to handle in IFR, (gets quite bumpy w/ a very waggy tail) is this true. the listed wing loading doesnt seem to be that much different than a 182, but I keep hearing that the 182 is ALOT more stable. unfortunately, there are no DA40s in my neck of the woods to try out, otherwise i would've loved to fly and see, not to mention possibly buy into one. i did fly the DA20 when i was back in MI, but now i have things like mountains (and a wife!) to contend with, so stability in flight is important. although, ur right, that view is to die for! thanks again
-- Ernest Meshack-Hart, October 7, 2008
hot
-- vampire2070@gmail.com vampire20@gmail.com, July 6, 2012