What do you guys think of the DA42. It is a twin-engined, four-seater aircraft made from carbon composite material with two turbo diesel engines. With the standard tank (52 US gal) and a remarkably low fuel consumption. I know the FF is in the singel digit range. But, it fly at about 150 kts. The range is 780 NM (1,445 km) to 1,700 NM (3,148 km), depending on the power setting. With the optional 74 US gal tank, the range values are accordingly higher.


A co-worker of mine has flown one. He said its awesome, but he’s also a glider pilot and loves the long winged(slow) Diamond’s.

Also, the diesel engines should have lower maintenance costs.


Also, Jet A is A LOT cheaper than 100LL.


I’m going to wait for the Cirrus Jet



MAN, the new fad is to design a cheap jet. I think I start on this too! :unamused:


Most people in this thread are turbocharged prop or turboprop fans. I don’t blame them since it takes a lot to fly jets. Jets are nice for 1,500nm+ stuff. 500nm, why waste $$$.

edited at 23:12 UTC on June 3, 2006 for cifjames.


You’re still confusing turbocharged prop with turboprop. As was said before, they are very different. A turbocharger pumps extra air into an otherwise normal piston engine, allowing the engine to produce more power, especially important in aircraft as it allows them to produce more power at higher altitudes. A turboprop is a turbine (jet) engine linked to a propeller, usually through a reduction gearbox (newer KingAirs, Pilatus, TBM etc.), but somtimes directly (MU-2 and others).



Several of the new VLJs are expected to operate for less overall than comparable piston or even turbo-prop aircraft for a given trip length.

This is primarily due to the fact that they can make the trip in half the time or less of almost all piston aircraft, turbocharged or not.


Time is money. Most jet operators I know of fly under 1,000nm on routine. Look up the Gulfstreams on here, although they do go international occasionally, most of their use is regional.

Check this out: