Diamond DA40 vs Cessna 172

R

Renesh Kumaresan

Pre-Flight
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
59
Display Name
Display name:
Turb0123
If anyone has seen my previous posts over the past two and a half years they would know I’ve been learning in a 172. After this journey I’m nearing the end. Checkride is in about a month and almost all requirements except the long solo cross country and 2 more hours of instrument time are complete. I recently took a discovery flight in a Diamond DA40-180 with a G1000 (not nxi) and was impressed with how easy it was to fly. I barely had to touch it, and even though I pulled back a little too much on landing. It felt like a pillow compared to a good landing executed on the C172P I train in. I like the Diamond because it’s a low wing and the only I flew is available for 140$ an hour. It even has the gfc700 autopilot. I’m wondering whether when renting is it worth to go with it. I like my 172, but it’s also 140$ an hour. Once I get ppl I will rent from another school that has a G1000 C172SP. Has anyone gone this route?
 
Yup, do it. The extra 15-20kts come in handy on long trips. Plus, if you can navigate a G1000 in a DA40, you can navigate a G1000 in a Cessna.
 
Once you complete your training consider other options outside of renting. Either a partnership or a club or sole ownership. The club I’m in has four aircraft. The 172 and the Tiger are about $80-90 wet.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Once you get your PPL, a whole world of great airplanes opens to you. I spent part of the first three months after getting my Private checking out in three additional airplane types. I've barely stopped since, with time in over 30 make/models of singles.
Click to expand...

^^^This.

Go get checked out and fly as many different airplanes as are available to you. Every one of them will have some unique characteristic(s) compared to what you have flown before.
 
The Diamond is a nice cross-country machine. I have several hundred hours instructing in them. I don't think it's very good for primary training though. The plane handles like crap in turbulence and is very hard for a new pilot to control in hot conditions with thermals. Not to mention the cockpit heats up like an oven in direct sunlight...
 
I’d stick with c172 for training. If for no other reason as already being familiar with one. Diamond Star is a really nice plane. Better than Cessna in most aspects. I have lots of hours in one and like it a lot. But, as said above, they do not handle turbulence well. They can also float if not careful with speed, though it’s not difficult to learn to work with.
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
If anyone has seen my previous posts over the past two and a half years they would know I’ve been learning in a 172. After this journey I’m nearing the end. Checkride is in about a month and almost all requirements except the long solo cross country and 2 more hours of instrument time are complete. I recently took a discovery flight in a Diamond DA40-180 with a G1000 (not nxi) and was impressed with how easy it was to fly. I barely had to touch it, and even though I pulled back a little too much on landing. It felt like a pillow compared to a good landing executed on the C172P I train in. I like the Diamond because it’s a low wing and the only I flew is available for 140$ an hour. It even has the gfc700 autopilot. I’m wondering whether when renting is it worth to go with it. I like my 172, but it’s also 140$ an hour. Once I get ppl I will rent from another school that has a G1000 C172SP. Has anyone gone this route?
Click to expand...

The key is to take these transitions one step at a time. Your checkride is a major transition. You need some time to adjust to this new environment, so I would not recommend simultaneously making major changes in the type of airplanes you fly. If possible fly off about 5 or 10 hours in a similar 172 after the checkride before transitioning to a different airplanes. Your mileage may vary, but personally I am not a big fan of paying lots of extra $ to rent an airplane that has a G1000 or autopilot. Sure, these are nice, but I like to focus more on aircraft performance... I am happy to fly a complex high performance with steam gauges, rather than a 172 with G1000 and fancy displays.
 
Got my PPL Jan1, and I just got back from getting checked out by a CFI in the schools Tiger. When they get their Diamonds in a few months I'll get checked out in that as well.

Now I can do local flights in the SkyHawk, and when I go cross country take the Tiger. So yes, get checked out in a many as possible to see what you like for the different types of flying you'll be doing.
 
Always good to be checked out in more than one model. Availability becomes limited.
 
alexgeo said:
I don't think it's very good for primary training though.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. I’ve got a fair amount of time in both the DA20 and 40 and feel that of the airplanes commonly used for training they would be the best, next to a PA18. The Diamonds require more stick and rudder skill and some finesse not required in the typical Piper and Cessna type trainers.

The Diamond is a good all around airplane. Want to go on a local sightseeing flight? It will do that. Want to go on a trip? It will do that too. Want to learn how to fly? It is good for that as well.

In the current market the fit and finish on Diamonds is the best I’ve seen. If I were the OP and given the choice of a Diamond or 172 for the same money I’d take the diamond every time unless egress is a concern.
 
It seems the Diamond is bit different in landing. The angle I set the DA40 at for flare would have hit the nosewheel on the 172. But in the air the plane might have just been easy due to G1000’s whole screen attitude indicator.
 
I learned in a DA-20 and loved by brief time in a DA-40. Getting used to a 172 with 40 degrees of flaps was initially a challenge. The DA-40 is off my list of planes I would currently buy because:

1) The G1000-WASS-GFC 700 autopilot versions are above my price point
2) The G1000-non WASS KAP140 auto pilot versions make me wary about long term support from Diamond & Garmin
3) The steam gauge ones (up to 2003) don't have any modern autopilot options and while the G3X can be installed the G5 is currently not STC'd for any IFR DA-40.

Good info here:

https://www.diamondaviators.net
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
I’m wondering whether when renting is it worth to go with it.
Click to expand...
What's your goal? Are you looking to put on an airline uniform and go fly shiny jets eventually? Or are you just looking to fly around for $300 lunches?
 
Renesh Kumaresan said:
I’m just looking to go cross country with friends and family.
Click to expand...

the one bad thing about da40 for carrying passengers is if it’s a long range version, you have a very small CG window. Really easy to take it past limit aft.
 
Well if you primary goal is to rent for long cross country, DA40 is quicker, but you will bake from the unobstructed sun. Wear long sleeves and a ball cap. I only have a few dozen hours in DA40s but all of that was x country over the deserts of the west. I much prefer a Cessna for that, one the is as fast or faster. But finish your training and once past the check ride, then consider switching to the Diamond.
 
I would fly a steam gauge Cessna 172 for the primary and instrument training, even commercial training as it will make you a better pilot, Glass makes pilots lazy having a computer think for you, what happens when all that crap fails and you don’t have navigation skills to fall back on? Computers fail, steam is cheaper and more reliable, and makes you a better pilot, if you have 2 candidates with equilibrium flying time, one with steam gauge experience, and the other with all glass experience, the steam gauge pilot gets the job.
 
Yes I definitely agree. This is what I was planning to do for my instrument training. The scan taught for a steam gauge is invaluable. But the g1000 is different and makes you slack off if you haven’t learned on steam.
 
Profileclimb said:
I would fly a steam gauge Cessna 172 for the primary and instrument training, even commercial training as it will make you a better pilot, Glass makes pilots lazy having a computer think for you, what happens when all that crap fails and you don’t have navigation skills to fall back on? Computers fail, steam is cheaper and more reliable, and makes you a better pilot, if you have 2 candidates with equilibrium flying time, one with steam gauge experience, and the other with all glass experience, the steam gauge pilot gets the job.
Click to expand...
Is this all conjecture based on assumption and a handful of flights and preconceived notions, or do you actually have a source for any of this? Since when is a vacuum gyro "more reliable" than a G5 or other similar glass gauge? I've had 3 different vacuum failures in <300.. never had any kind of "computer failure" in any G5 / Aspen / Avidyne / G1000 etc. product. If airlines prefer steam gauge pilots, and steam gauge pilots are "better" pilots.. then why are millions spent on updating and modernizing fleets, and moving to glass, both in private aviation and commercial aviation. In the razor thing margin world of commercial air operations people don't upgrade fleets and buy new planes because "the glass looks cool"

Renesh Kumaresan said:
Yes I definitely agree. This is what I was planning to do for my instrument training. The scan taught for a steam gauge is invaluable. But the g1000 is different and makes you slack off if you haven’t learned on steam.
Click to expand...
Slacking off or not is up to the pilot's proficiency. When I safety from the right I find the planes with G5 or some other glass the pilots are much more "on the money" when it comes to maintaining heading and altitude.., as it's much more crisply evident if you're even 10-20 feet off or 1-2 degrees off on course. In a steam gauge plane people are 5-10 degrees off on heading and a few hundred feet off and they just state "oh I'll get back there eventually" .. not to mention that the "more reliable :confused:" steam gauge DG is probably gyroprecessing like crazy..
 
No I’m not against glass cockpits. I definitely prefer them. But in terms of training purposes it is easier to go to glass from steam rather than the other way around. I never meant anything in terms of reliability. The instrument scan I learned with the standard six pack steam gauges was super easy to apply to the g1000. The whole thing is an attitude indicator and altitude, heading, as well as airspeed are all in reach. But someone who trained only on a glass cockpit and were to rent a steam gauge aircraft would have some trouble adjusting to it. It could be disorienting. Either way it’s always best to learn both.
 
Tantalum said:
Golly! What happened?
Click to expand...

Therein lies the rub. Nobody knows. It came back after about five minutes. After FAR we continued to BIS on the next leg and had the shop there download all the data and they never found a cause, let alone any data showing it even happening....?

Tantalum said:
I still feel like you're more likely to lose vacuum or have an unreliable gyro..
Click to expand...

Agreed. Got my instrument ticket in DA40s behind a G500 and my AMEL Commercial and MEI in DA42s with G1000s and the only problem I ever saw with any of them was on the ground in the DA42 while doing the FADEC runup. Nothing with the glass panels. Love the glass but it is not infallible...
 
smv said:
Therein lies the rub. Nobody knows. It came back after about five minutes. After FAR we continued to BIS on the next leg and had the shop there download all the data and they never found a cause, let alone any data showing it even happening....?



Agreed. Got my instrument ticket in DA40s behind a G500 and my AMEL Commercial and MEI in DA42s with G1000s and the only problem I ever saw with any of them was on the ground in the DA42 while doing the FADEC runup. Nothing with the glass panels. Love the glass but it is not infallible...
Click to expand...
Assuming you have a backup AI.. that's bizarre that nobody knows what happened, was that system fed by one or two AHRS?

Magenta lines can certainly get you killed, but the notion that 60 year old vacuum pumps and gyros and ADF / VOR needles are safer/more reliable than what Garmin offers is absolutely ridiculous, or that commercial airlines prefer hiring steam gauge pilots
 
Tantalum said:
Assuming you have a backup AI.. that's bizarre that nobody knows what happened, was that system fed by one or two AHRS?
Click to expand...

Backup was another glass. Do not remember what it was. G5 maybe? I think it had only the one AHRS feeding the primary display.

20200119_152414.jpg


Tantalum said:
Magenta lines can certainly get you killed, but the notion that 60 year old vacuum pumps and gyros and ADF / VOR needles are safer/more reliable than what Garmin offers is absolutely ridiculous, or that commercial airlines prefer hiring steam gauge pilots
Click to expand...

Wonder how much they will pay if you can navigate A-N range? ;)

It is distresing how many flight review clients cannot navigate using a VOR. One even referred to himself as a "Child of the Magenta Line". Apparently that was all his 141 school used... o_O
 
smv said:
Backup was another glass. Do not remember what it was. G5 maybe? I think it had only the one AHRS feeding the primary display.

View attachment 82354




Wonder how much they will pay if you can navigate A-N range? ;)

It is distresing how many flight review clients cannot navigate using a VOR. One even referred to himself as a "Child of the Magenta Line". Apparently that was all his 141 school used... o_O
Click to expand...
That looks like a G5

that's horrifying, VOR is honestly not that difficult to use or to picture radials in your head, etc. Is fundamental concepts are certainly important even if you choose a solid state component vs steam
 
WDD said:
Got my PPL Jan1, and I just got back from getting checked out by a CFI in the schools Tiger. When they get their Diamonds in a few months I'll get checked out in that as well.

Now I can do local flights in the SkyHawk, and when I go cross country take the Tiger. So yes, get checked out in a many as possible to see what you like for the different types of flying you'll be doing.
Click to expand...
How was the transition from the Cessna to the Tiger? I already intend to get checked out in my schools Cessna's once I get my PPL and my instructor seems to think I'll only need an hour long flight to get the appropriate signoff. We don't have any Diamonds here at my airport but if its not great for turbulence I can understand their lack of interest right now. My home airport typically has some factor of crosswind and gusting conditions aren't uncommon either. One day I was at the airport and an instructor from a school across the water landed and asked how they taught people in those conditions. Kinda made me feel like I'm slightly better prepared for real world flying. I only say slightly as I understand time at the controls is a big factor so I'll still need to keep practicing and flying to various locations once I get my PPL to stay current and safe.
 
Will Kumley said:
We don't have any Diamonds here at my airport but if its not great for turbulence
Click to expand...

One of the flights I will never forget is flying with a student in a DA-20. We were north of KBZN and ridge soaring with the engine at idle. Even with both of us pushing 200 lbs we were still able to climb at 700-1000 fpm on ridge lift alone. The glider time at HDH prepared me well for that. ;)
 
smv said:
One of the flights I will never forget is flying with a student in a DA-20. We were north of KBZN and ridge soaring with the engine at idle. Even with both of us pushing 200 lbs we were still able to climb at 700-1000 fpm on ridge lift alone. The glider time at HDH prepared me well for that. ;)
Click to expand...
I remember reading a story somewhere about a transitioning glider pilot and an instructor practicing stalls in a C150. The student pulled power to idle and the throttle mechanism detached and came out of the panel. He tossed it in the instructors lap and instinctively started turning toward the nearby ridge. The CFI started talking the student through the procedure for an off airport landing. By the this time the student had found a thermal and pointed out that they were climbing at 200ft/min. They climbed several thousand feet and made it back to the airport 10 miles away.
 
I learned in a DA-20, got checked out in a 172, and then bought in to a 177. The transition is easy. Finish the PPL in what you started first. Don't switch back and forth before then.

I really liked the Diamond. They are very hot on the ground, but fine at altitude, at least here in the midwest in the summer time. It's also nice on sunny days in the winter. If your are in the desert southwest, that might be a different story. I love the visability of bubble canopy. If you and your passengers can climb up into the cockpit ok, (it will be a bit of a trick for older folks, or those with mobility issues) then enjoy the DA-40. They have a great safety record.

The main thing with the Diamond is you have to nail your airspeed on short final. If you go too fast, those glider wings will cause the plane to float and float down the runway. I actually think the DA-20 is a great trainer aircraft for exactly that reason.
 
I got some time in a DA 40 since I was considering buying one. Overall, I really liked it, but, it had some quirks to it. I don't particularly like castering nosewheels, and the rudder authority wasn't enough to steer it on the ground unless you taxi really fast. It was an older model. Newer models have a bigger rudder. Also, I don't know if was just the one I was flying, but the engine didn't like to run at idle, particularly in hot weather.
 
A G 1000 a quick death aircraft is twice as expensive as a steam gauge a Aircraft to rent. I still would be skeptical of the reliability of the G1000 avionics I would think when the pretty glass fails you’re really up a creek,But it is really pretty to look at though.
 
Profileclimb said:
A G 1000 a quick death aircraft is twice as expensive as a steam gauge a Aircraft to rent. I still would be skeptical of the reliability of the G1000 avionics I would think when the pretty glass fails you’re really up a creek,But it is really pretty to look at though.
Click to expand...

Counterpoint: Gimli Glider

o_O
 
Profileclimb said:
A G 1000 a quick death aircraft is twice as expensive as a steam gauge a Aircraft to rent. I still would be skeptical of the reliability of the G1000 avionics I would think when the pretty glass fails you’re really up a creek,But it is really pretty to look at though.
Click to expand...

G1000 equipped planes have backup instruments and the G1000 itself is two separate systems that can work independently if one fails.

You are much, much more likely to suffer a vacuum failure that leads to spacial disorientation than a glass failure that does so.
 
Last edited:
Bonchie said:
and the G1000 itself is two separate systems that can work independently if one fails.
Click to expand...

Please quantify what you mean. Not all G1000 system installations are the same, some have more redundancy than others.
 
The only similar route I went was to get checked out IFR in a DA40 w/ G1000 after I passed my IR checkride. The transition to glass IFR was interesting. Other than that, the things to get used to are the seating position and having that stick between your legs. The controls are nice and responsive and the DA40 is a good X/C machine being faster. I find that the DA40 is much easier to grease the landings. Just hold a bit of throttle into the flare and then pull it back and it's smooth every time.
 
I promise you , a Piper Cherokee isn't a cold airplane on the ground in the summer. I actually got a small battery powered clip on fan when I started training as the Cherokee was a sauna. Everyone seems thankful that I thought of a simple solution to ease the heat. It doesn't get rid of it, but in those temps, anything helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top