DA 42 accident

Hi.

Here in Germany we had an accident with a brand new DA 42 in Speyer
(EDRY) on 3-4-07 during take off.

It seems, that the battery was down and both engine were started with
remote power.
After take off when retracting the gear, the props feathered and both
engines stopped.

You can read about that accident in German (sorry) in
www.pilotundflugzeug.de

First hearing about that accident and the background, I could not
believe it.

Karl

Interesting! I have been a vocal proponent of the diesel movement for
years, but I'm also troubled by the real lack of technical discussion and
analysis of the Thielert and SMA products available here (USA). This past
Tues and Wed at Sun N Fun, I made several trips back and forth between the
Miami based Thielert retrofitters (near the SAAB tent) and the Superior
tent, hoping to chat with the Thielert technical expert. Each time I was
told that he (the only expert there) was at the other tent. I was hoping to
get the details of what problems they were experiencing with the 1.7 block;
to make them retool to the 2.0 block with no performance increase. Left to
my own imagination, I would not want to be flying behind the 1.7 at this
point forward.

Also, the Thielert boys seem to have committed to very modern electronic
control systems to manage their engine (lots of MB three pointed star
emblems on the electrical connectors). I asked last year at the AOPA Tampa
show if the engine had a Limp Home Mode for a major electrical system
failure. I got a quizical look and a promise of a call to my cell number
once "the only expert at that show" returned to the booth,... still waiting.

Too bad,... looks to me like they have a good product, but if they keep
hiding from the flying public they'll lose the trust factor fast.

Lastly, to speak to this DA-42 problem directly, I recall reading in the
early (post certification) period of the 1.7 in the euro version DA-40, they
experienced two documented in-flight electric control module failures which
resulted in engine shutdowns with unsuccesful restart. Just speculating
he Looks like if the battery was dead and the LG motor surge was too much
for the alternators..., well, lets not speculate....


"Karl-Heinz Kuenzel" wrote ...
Here in Germany we had an accident with a brand new DA 42 in Speyer
(EDRY) on 3-4-07 during take off.

It seems, that the battery was down and both engine were started
with remote power.
After take off when retracting the gear, the props feathered and both
engines stopped.

"Mike Isaksen" wrote in message newsHRWh.10911$bZ2.2688@trndny01...
: Interesting! I have been a vocal proponent of the diesel movement for
: years, but I'm also troubled by the real lack of technical discussion and
: analysis of the Thielert and SMA products available here (USA). This past
: Tues and Wed at Sun N Fun, I made several trips back and forth between the
: Miami based Thielert retrofitters (near the SAAB tent) and the Superior
: tent, hoping to chat with the Thielert technical expert. Each time I was
: told that he (the only expert there) was at the other tent. I was hoping to
: get the details of what problems they were experiencing with the 1.7 block;
: to make them retool to the 2.0 block with no performance increase. Left to
: my own imagination, I would not want to be flying behind the 1.7 at this
: point forward.
:
:

Doesn't the 1.7 have a throw away TBO-like limitation that is very low?

"Blueskies" wrote ...

"Mike Isaksen" wrote...
: I was hoping to
: get the details of what problems they were experiencing with the 1.7
block;
: to make them retool to the 2.0 block with no performance increase. Left
to
: my own imagination, I would not want to be flying behind the 1.7 at this
: point forward.

The main reason, according to Thielert, was that DaimlerChrysler stopped
producing the 1.7 in favor of the 2.0. Keeping the performance specs the
same avoids the need to modify type certificates and aircraft installations.

Doesn't the 1.7 have a throw away TBO-like limitation that is very low?

Yep, the TBR is around 2,400 hours IIRC. This also means all the 1.7 blocks
will eventually be replaced.

Blueskies,

Doesn't the 1.7 have a throw away TBO-like limitation that is very low?


No. it has a TBR (r for replacement) of 2400 hours, guaranteed by
Thielert. When you buy the engine, that price buys you 2400 hours. Can
you say that of any Lycosaurus or TCM?

yes, they currently do replace the engines sooner than that - but you
don't pay for it. They're working up to final TBR.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Blueskies,


Doesn't the 1.7 have a throw away TBO-like limitation that is very low?



No. it has a TBR (r for replacement) of 2400 hours, guaranteed by
Thielert. When you buy the engine, that price buys you 2400 hours. Can
you say that of any Lycosaurus or TCM?

yes, they currently do replace the engines sooner than that - but you
don't pay for it. They're working up to final TBR.


What does it cost the owner at 2400 hours?

"Newps" wrote in message . ..
:
:
: Thomas Borchert wrote:
:
: Blueskies,
:
:
: Doesn't the 1.7 have a throw away TBO-like limitation that is very low?
:
:
:
: No. it has a TBR (r for replacement) of 2400 hours, guaranteed by
: Thielert. When you buy the engine, that price buys you 2400 hours. Can
: you say that of any Lycosaurus or TCM?
:
: yes, they currently do replace the engines sooner than that - but you
: don't pay for it. They're working up to final TBR.
:
:
: What does it cost the owner at 2400 hours?


A new engine...

Newps,

What does it cost the owner at 2400 hours?


I seem to recall it's something like 20k for a new engine.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Karl-Heinz Kuenzel wrote:
Hi.

Here in Germany we had an accident with a brand new DA 42 in Speyer
(EDRY) on 3-4-07 during take off.

It seems, that the battery was down and both engine were started with
remote power.
After take off when retracting the gear, the props feathered and both
engines stopped.

You can read about that accident in German (sorry) in
www.pilotundflugzeug.de

First hearing about that accident and the background, I could not
believe it.

I don't even know where to start. How can an aircraft, that depends on
electrical power for the operation of it's engines, be airworthy without
fully redundant electrical systems? While in this particular case the pilot
might have noticed the problem, had he meticuously follow procedures and
started the second engine at the plane's own power, it is quite easy to find
failure modes that would go unnoticed inflight, yet cause double engine
failure at the instant the gear is lowered on final. Lead batteries are
known to occasionally go flat suddenly, once the buildup of oxide makes
contact between the lead elements. Happened to me in the car once. The
engine (a diesel with mechanical injection pump) ran happily without me even
noticing the failure until I shut it down. When I turned the power back on
again, not even the lights in the dashboard would light up, it was
completely and utterly dead.

I would never have thought that they cut corners like that at Diamond. I
Hope this will not create a lot of mistrust in aerodiesels, as it is not a
diesel issue. I guess you could call it a FADEC issue if you wanted, however
it really is an issue of redundancy of essential systems, and easily
solveable as such.

regards,
Friedrich

Friedrich Ostertag schrieb:
Karl-Heinz Kuenzel wrote:
Hi.

Here in Germany we had an accident with a brand new DA 42 in Speyer
(EDRY) on 3-4-07 during take off.

It seems, that the battery was down and both engine were started with
remote power.
After take off when retracting the gear, the props feathered and both
engines stopped.

You can read about that accident in German (sorry) in
www.pilotundflugzeug.de

First hearing about that accident and the background, I could not
believe it.

I don't even know where to start. How can an aircraft, that depends on
electrical power for the operation of it's engines, be airworthy without
fully redundant electrical systems? While in this particular case the pilot
might have noticed the problem, had he meticuously follow procedures and
started the second engine at the plane's own power, it is quite easy to find
failure modes that would go unnoticed inflight, yet cause double engine
failure at the instant the gear is lowered on final. Lead batteries are
known to occasionally go flat suddenly, once the buildup of oxide makes
contact between the lead elements. Happened to me in the car once. The
engine (a diesel with mechanical injection pump) ran happily without me even
noticing the failure until I shut it down. When I turned the power back on
again, not even the lights in the dashboard would light up, it was
completely and utterly dead.

I would never have thought that they cut corners like that at Diamond. I
Hope this will not create a lot of mistrust in aerodiesels, as it is not a
diesel issue. I guess you could call it a FADEC issue if you wanted, however
it really is an issue of redundancy of essential systems, and easily
solveable as such.

regards,
Friedrich


Friedrich,

I did not believe it either. Maybe I am getting to old. For me a diesel
would run forever until you cut the fuel.

What those people did. They just started #1 and #2 (which was NOT ok) on
external power. And everything looked ok. Until they retracted the
landing gear....

I posted that story in our German newsgroup and nobody seemed to be
interested in that issue. I was just curious, if someone here is interested.

regards Karl