AirVenture 2021 Diamond's New DA50RG Debuts at Oshkosh

[@noonedude101]

At 1.5 Million, I'll go pick up a Piper Malibu and cruise above the weather, on less fuel, going 50kts faster, with a cheaper engine overhaul and a longer interval.

[@AClark-gs5gl]

Piper is also American made, not a CCP owned organization.

[@cf41]

@@AClark-gs5gl American made, yes. American owned? Not so much anymore. Brunei Ministry of Finance owns it these days.

[@davidwright873]

Yeah....There are so many alternatives avail. You can either ride a Lexus which is a nice Toyota or buy a Lamborghini...both getting you to the mall on time....I'd take the Lexus....

[@Optimus-Prime-Rib]

💯 malibu over this

[@JETZcorp]

@@davidwright873 If all you're looking for is transportation then yeah a Lamborghini doesn't make much sense. You buy a Lamborghini because it turns an ordinary drive into a Six Flags adventure and turns the inside of your garage into a pornographic display. Likewise, if you're doing general aviation at all, it's probably not because you wanted a practical way to get to work or drop the kids off at school. People who actually want to get somewhere buy a ticket on Southwest. I don't begrudge anybody for wanting to fly a Diamond (at least it's not a Cirrus). I do begrudge all the lawyers and bureaucracy that made everything in aviation cost 10x what it should. This Diamond should cost what a new 172 does, and a new 172 should be the kind of thing an Arby's manager can get approved financing for.

[@rustusandroid]

I love Diamond. They have the right idea on aesthetics' and performance, handling. They are great aircraft, but as always, a little pricey :) I too would just go with the DA62 given the similar cost.

[@Dounis_Doneks]

100%!!! for an extra 60kor so, the DA62 no questions asked. The DA50RG should of been around the 800k mark

[@firewavemtl]

Sure, but it's nearly 2 times the maintenance cost too.

[@rustusandroid]

@@firewavemtl if you can afford a 1.2 million dollar small airplane, you are not worried about the extra $2000 a year maintenance for the extra engine.

[@semiprofessional8470]

@@rustusandroid I thought it was 2000 just for the gearbox inspection

[@rustusandroid]

@@abel4776 Obviously not, or Cirrus, Diamond and Mooney, etc. would go not be selling airplanes.

[@andrewvaldez6658]

If you could afford a DA50... why wouldn't you buy a DA62? Extra engine in the 62 equals some much added peace of mind.

[@AMoose454]

Diamond priced this aircraft like a bunch of HS seniors running the school store

[@rjhornsby]

took a few minutes until they got to that question but lol, yikes. you weren’t kidding.

[@papaupstashe]

“If the price is high enough, you only have to sell one.”

[@docflyer4001]

My gosh you could buy a brand new Piper M 350 and cruise in pressurized comfort at 25,000 feet at 213 knots. More range, more people, and faster. Makes no sense.

[@PointBlank65]

From what I have read , DA's main gole is low fuel burn with cheap JetA/diesel and simple controls. How does the Piper compare?

[@MrZrryan2]

@@PointBlank65 Put both airplanes at their optimum cruise altitude, and both airplanes would burn a VERY similar amount of fuel to get from Point A to Point B.... very close. And, the fact that one is pressurized is a no brainer.

[@ctykckcktyvc7558]

As if running costs are a primary consideration if you can buy this

[@bikersoncall]

@@ctykckcktyvc7558 The wealthiest people in the world are interested in economy, not because they can't afford something, they want efficiency and range.

[@bikersoncall]

@@ctykckcktyvc7558 No offence Jack, but this is in the same camp as the statement: ''if you have to ask you can't afford it'', which of course is total blsht, everyone wants to know they are being dealt a square deal.

[@StephaneDemers]

Beautiful, crazy expensive, only market will be very long endurance missions. As always great report from Paul, great B roll as well, well done AVWeb.

[@nathanashley2693]

its range is crap

[@robertobeltramelli4138]

Scott was so nice to the girls and i on Friday at Airventure! Thanks Paul for giving me more info on the DA-50RG, i wanted to make sure it fit in my Hangar! How long is it from prop tip to tail, you forgot to mention that and i did not see it on any of the panels. Scott will remember teasing my daughter with a Diamond Canada T Shirt to get her to climb out of the back seat! Very Clever! You both do a great job! The guys at my Airport keep asking what i am getting for my New Hangar? My Hangar is 48 wide so the DA 62 won’t fit!

[@ramezqubain8177]

Great question Paul about choosing between the da50 and the da62. I think diamond needs to address and differentiate between the target market and positioning of each model

[@bikersoncall]

What tickles me is that with the DA62, they go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on....you get the idea lol, about how safe safe safe safe safe safe it is to have that second engine, then they offer and promote a single engine as the 'bees knees' , Idk, just smh about these kinds of (marketing?) issues. 🤪😲😅

[@DakodaNeilson]

This price point seems ridiculous. That puts them nearly 300K more then an SR22T G6 while being slower, that also puts them 350K more then a Bonanza with one less seat. On top of that, the mission that the DA50 can do is the same mission a Mooney M20J can do with similar fuel burns and useful loads, you can get a mid-90s J for under 100K. With a 50K price difference between the DA50 and DA62, I think you would be stupid not to just get a DA62 which has 2 more seats.

[@Gry101]

Exactly what I was thinking. My 85 M20J is 160KIAS on 9.0-9.5gph. Take 50 gallons instead of 64 and I can get four FAA standard pax with a small amount of baggage for each for a weekend.

[@sheldonholy5047]

Agree it’s expensive but are you really comparing it to an M20? A tiny Mooney cabin with one door vs this huge luxurious cabin? Not comparable

[@bw162]

I thought maybe that was a price for two.

[@bw162]

@@antoncarmoducchi6057 Yes when comparing piston vs Turbine but not here. And JetA shortage will be over before the first of these sell, however few do.

[@dandv5837]

Seems a bit crazy to go with this over the DA 62. You are giving up speed, range, engine redundancy, and two seats for a 5% price difference. My guess is they are just trying to get a few bucks for all their R&D work until they get the turboprop version worked out. Though this plane does look amazing and that should sell a few units all on it's now.

[@peterderidder6549]

Incredible high price. For that money better buy a second-hand radar-equipped pressurised single.

[@MYOB990]

Nice and all, but maybe they should try building something that cost about as much as a midrange car instead of something that less than 1% of America can afford. Aircraft manufacturing is still a primitive, custom operation.

[@MYOB990]

@@antoncarmoducchi6057 If you have a $1.5 million.

[@JETZcorp]

@@MYOB990 The price if a midrange car covers about 1/4 of the liability cost that a manufacturer takes on just by making "an airplane". If Cessna could make 172s for free they'd still need to charge something like 150k just to pay off the lawyers. When someone hits ice in their car, they don't sue GM about it. In aviation, apparently all the golf-playing, ascot-wearing, falcon-owning buyers of new airplanes do exactly that when they hit the trees. If you want an affordable airplane, unfortunately it's either got to be something vintage or an experimental. Sonex is as close as we're going to get unless someone goes and lays waste to the regs and legal precedents.

[@Kaipeternicolas]

I can't believe they don't differentiate this thing more from the DA62. If I had the money I'd always take a DA62 over it just for the added safety aspect and because flying a twin just feels a bit more serious. In reality I'd buy a 1985-1995 bonanza and upgrade the avionics and be a very happy pilot.

[@caca121112]

agreed

[@nunyabidness3075]

I’d go Mooney for the leg room, but I agree on the twin. They should have waited for a better engine if they knew the price would be so similar.

[@deingewissen_official]

Mighty Bonanza FTW

[@Kaipeternicolas]

@@nunyabidness3075 Totally agree!

[@elcidS15]

Cool. I’ll never fly one unless it’s 60 years old. But cool.

[@sakumisan]

Exactly. GA is just too damn expensive. Old or experimental seems to be the only way someone that isn't rich can own a plane.

[@elcidS15]

@@sakumisan Lawyers ruin everything.

[@TheJacobshapiro]

@@elcidS15 it’s not lawyers anymore, it’s low volume. There’s still such a glut of planes from the 1960s-1980s that most pilots will just buy those, so there’s not much demand for new airplanes, and thus volume is low. With the volume being low, the costs of tooling and development have to be recouped with way fewer sales, meaning planes are super expensive. If they were still selling by the thousands this wouldn’t be the case.

[@elcidS15]

@@TheJacobshapiro It’s all baked into the cake. Too many aviation businesses annihilated by lawsuits, which drives down innovation and willingness to invest and participate. Lawsuits leave devastation in their wake that have long term consequences. Businesses adjust to either avoid or overcompensate for them. Like when someone has a relative that gets shot by a cop. They basically try and place the whole city’s budget into their bank account, not caring about everyone it’ll effect. Lawyers are a scourge to aviation, as well as everyone else in this country. They’re middlemen who get a far bigger cut of the pie than they deserve.

[@JETZcorp]

@@abel4776 The dollar affects everything though. If the dollar was driving what's happened in aviation, a new Mitsubishi Mirage would cost $85,000 and add 7k if you want it in blue. It used to be that a middle class family could buy 2 cars or stretch a little bit and get a new Bonanza. Today a middle class family can still afford 2 cars, but you need to work at Goldman Sachs to get the new Bonanza (which is just an old Bonanza with an iPad in the dash).

[@publicmail2]

There's one reason a plane doesn't sell, it's priced too high.

[@GonzoT38]

Bingo. As a sole owner of a piston airplane (cheap Arrow with crappy paint and faded interior, but gets me from point A to point B), I have given up on the factory built side of this hobby. Experimental is the only way going forward for those of us with 30 years of medical able flying left to have a shot at staying in the air affordably. The FAA is just not going to let this sector of aviation have any meaningful cost reprieve, the way they allow experimental.

[@publicmail2]

@@GonzoT38 Very true, I believe the inefficient FAA or European Regs is another reason GA costs are ridiculous.

[@bigc208]

Price is not an issue for most folks sniffing around in this price segment. The big question is why would you buy this over the DA62? The sales guy didn’t really know the answer either. It might end up selling more DA62’s in the end. A twin rating is pretty easy to get in the US and there are no regulatory hurdles. Europe could be different and maybe there the DA50 makes more sense. I foresee very few sales in the US.

[@mason9483]

Got to sit in that plane today as well, it is a truly stunning aircraft in person and in the cockpit. Video and pictures do not do the Da50 justice. The interior is much more elegant than an SR22T.

[@davedoe6445]

it better be for that price!

[@hernanposnansky4830]

Back up instruments?

[@nextlaunch1]

Seems like an SR22 for even richer people

[@mason9483]

@@hernanposnansky4830 They are in the middle of the cockpit positioned between the two center screens at eye level. Two back up screens are present.

[@mason9483]

@@nextlaunch1 It likely performs similar to the SR22, except being able to have better consistent climb rate and high altitude performance thanks to the twin turbochargers. The SR22T likely outpaces the Da50 by a bit. The Da50 is more roomy in the interior, so I guess a trade off to be considered.

[@jbl7092]

1.5 milliion? Seriously? If you have that kind of money, you can buy a Cirrus jet for 1.96 million.

[@naughtyUphillboy]

1.15 mil

[@2Greenlid]

Jet closer to 3 million, but 22 T can be had for a little over 1 m

[@naughtyUphillboy]

@@2Greenlid Your point being ?????

[@docflyer4001]

If they priced it just below a Cirrus it would probably sell like hot cakes and they wouldn’t be competing with their own product. Maybe in the $800,s.

[@bigc208]

It’s much bigger than the Cirrus. With four people you can bring a huge load of luggage and still go 700nm. This thing ain’t competing with Cirrus. It’s competing with the DA62. Both these aircraft are serious aerial SUV’s. The Cirrus is a small sedan in comparison.

[@charlesatrealeyesimaging8543]

Paul, the tipping point will be in the useful load…

[@guyincognito-1]

1:49; the metal segment highlighted by the arrow is not the electric de-ice. The de-ice element is the black "rubber" material on the inboard.

[@imkindofabigdeal4308]

Nope. Diamond uses a weeping deice system - fluid pumped through a titanium plate with a zillion little holes in it.

[@austinmaness8339]

Arguably the safest plane in it's class but the DA50 is gonna crash and burn in real world GA. They should be pricing this aircraft competitively with SR22T which is still priced astronomically high but this seems to be the norm now.

[@FFL3001]

Wow! That price!

[@Joseph_Gibson]

If I could afford a $1mil + plane, I would be able to afford a few hours to get my multi-engine rating. The only advantage I see is less maintenance cost due to one engine versus two. But the safety of two engines is hard to ignore.

[@nxfedlt1]

There is not even a TBO. It's TBR at 100k plus. Dumb. This plane had so much potential but again a reminder why. Diamond is always in the shadow.

[@williamtucker4980]

I agree with everything except saying that two engines on a multi engine piston is safer. Twin pistons are easier to crash for your weekend warriors (Vmc) than an engine failure on a single

[@Joseph_Gibson]

@@williamtucker4980 agreed, I was merely alluding to the redundancy of 2 engines. If 1 fails, you have a better chance of making it to the airport on the other engine.

[@bikersoncall]

@@abel4776 They have a video which indicates that at 13k ft +- one engine will maintain altitude and basically get you home, ck my numbers though...

[@Dudeisthere]

@@williamtucker4980 Saying that single engines are safer is ridiculous, at least i have a chance with the second engine.

[@CarlosEduardo-xz6gh]

The bigger brother will be its stronger contender.

[@MichaelOfRohan]

Notice all the cool intros are reserved for videos featuring paul

[@Ozgrade3]

I would like to see a DA72. 2 x 300hp V6 engines and presurised. I wonder if Diamnond have any plans to bump up the power of the DA 62 to 200 hp per side.

[@Ichibuns]

At that point, it might as well be a turbo prop. The cost to operate would probably be close if not favoring the turbo prop.. The only benefit I could imagine the twin V6 having is useful load

[@watermanveteran7198]

Did he just say 1.1 million. Oh my, have they gotten a little full of themselves!

[@monocogenit1]

This thing is awesome, love that engine.

[@dm12377]

Why would someone buy this over the DA62? I simply don't understand. I can't imagine picking up a multiengine rating and paying a bit more in insurance will matter to someone who can afford either of them.

[@exportedafrican]

Hourly costs and fuel prices. That’s what’s got me looking at it.

[@aileronsintowind6835]

Hourly costs, fuel prices and service charges. Compared to a DA62 every one service would cost you the same as two for the DA50. Parts, and labour charges plus inspections etc owning a twin is a somewhat costly experience. Me personally I would look more for a piper Comanche over this aircraft but hats off diamond.. you built a absolute beaut

[@mattym8]

Hourly and fuel is going to be so close that it makes no difference. 62 all the way.

[@elcidS15]

Ya. If maintenance costs are keeping you from getting the twin, I can’t imagine getting the single when you can get something “cheaper”

[@davedoe6445]

Saving on maintenance and fuel might make sense if the thing cost less than $500k, doesn't seem like there's much hope of recouping savings on 1.1 mil!

[@andrewsmactips]

Pedantic Alert: simple and simplistic are two very different things. Rant over. Thanks for your time.

[@ToyManFlyer1100]

Diamond Aircraft will debut and take orders for its DA50 RG high-performance, five-seat retractable piston-engine single at this year’s EAA AirVenture in Oshkosh... Deliveries are expected to begin in the second quarter of 2022 following FAA certification validation. Base price is expected to start at $1.15 million with well-optioned models in the $1.3 to $1.4 million range, according to a company spokesman.

[@robertg5393]

Beautiful, but way too expensive

[@leeCann]

At 44' wing span this bird won't fit in stock T hangers. 9' 10" height on the tail may also cause hanger issues. At 1.4 million I don't see many RG's crossing the pond. This plane at 100k over a cirrus 22t would sell I'm betting. Too bad Diamond, you build awesome aircraft

[@hepphepps8356]

If you want them to listen to your advice, at least learn how to spell "hangar";-).

[@mr.ginnationfunlifestyle3891]

Will see! I go and vote for Diamonds. Fuel Economy is way better. Better way of look and feel, better aerodynamics, modern engine, no overload issues that much, better gliding performance, ok the BRS is missing, compared to Cirrus. But better comfort and cabin size in the Diamonds. Identical cockpit in the Twin, when you want step up. Easy to feel quick save in the Twin. No Twin by Cirrus. Don’t get me wrong. Cirrus makes great airplanes, but Diamonds are one step further. I think.

[@Parker53151]

What is the TBO? And is it overhaul or total replacement?

[@PistonAvatarGuy]

TBR, and it's at 1,200 hours.

[@Parker53151]

@@PistonAvatarGuy Pricey!

[@Gry101]

Part 91, who cares what TBO is? OH only on condition. Unless it is part of the TCDS that requires OH.

[@Calvin-xp4qp]

What a wing! Nice work Diamond

[@Factory400]

I don't get this one. Why is the fuel capacity so small? It is not very fast. It is more expensive than typical competitors that are higher performing. It looks amazing and I don't doubt it is a great flying experience, but it is lacking in ways that have me looking elsewhere. Maybe I am missing something? Sure would like the option of adding more fuel and for the cost would hope to go faster, higher and farther. Range is not great and requires you to go C182 speeds to get it. I just flew home from Oshkosh in an SR22T non-stop 888nm with an average of about 175TAS. In this plane I would have been going slower and still needed a fuel stop. Meh. Good luck Diamond.

[@FlyingNDriving]

They built something more expensive than a sr22 that does even less

[@Christoph1888]

Exactly. Planes are taking the piss these days.

[@nevillecreativitymentor]

Hey Paul, Any updates on the 2022 situ of the 50 Vs 62 ? Cheers. (this plane has gone on my Vision Board .... Earlier it was the Vision Jet .... then moved to DA-62 ... NOW ...its the DA-50 ... NO NO NO its not a downgrade ... just better educated!)

[@bikersoncall]

Can you exit the plane if it flips during a mishap onto its top?

[@superchargedpetrolhead]

Maybe this might be a scapegoat or at least until they bring out the one with the turbine that they are working on. Just like what they do in movie theatre, price the medium size popcorn high and close to the large size which make the large seem much more value for money and sells more of that, likewise this might sell more da62. I for one would certainly buy the da62 over this when spending that kinda money...

[@DeltaAlphaAviation]

The price is set the way it is because its competing with cirrus sr22t, which is in the same price bracket and with no RG. Useful load is similar, cruise speed similar, etc.

[@edouble0325]

Great plane, priced like poncho in a hurricane 🌀

[@GonzoT38]

more like a poncho on a sunny day. Nobody needs that little performance for turbine prices. Their market research sucks.

[@anthonycyr9657]

1.5 million for a diesel single, wow, beautiful aircraft tho..

[@glalonde]

I don't understand the craze for Diamond aircraft powered by Continental engines. An aircraft manufacturer owned by Wanfeng Auto Holding Group (Xinchang, China) that use engines from a company owned, like Cirrus Aircraft, by Aviation Industry Corporation of China (Chinese state-owned).

[@pe66o]

DA42 has almost the same specs with more range and payload for less money. And it has weather radar.

[@dennisd7292]

No parachute and more money. Looks like the pricing may have gotten a little out of hand.

[@ericulrik6659]

Poignant questions Paul. Always a cut above…

[@ihyln1]

I own a da40 why would I get this over an a36??

[@branislavbabic4579]

2:39 52 or 50?

[@cypilotiowan4761]

They might sell one or two to tech zillionaires, but I’ll keep my cirrus.

[@davidteen14]

Believe it or not, it’s sold out until 2023.

[@ictpilot]

Wait about 15 years for the price to come down to about $300,000 like a Cirrus G3 turbo.

[@ictpilot]

@@antoncarmoducchi6057 Yes but I guarantee it won't be worth near that in 15-20 years.

[@CCitis]

Gotta be one of the best looking singles out there right now!

[@DanFrederiksen]

It looks well built and there is some honesty in pricing the two so close but it's a 1440kg empty bird which is 7 cast iron pianos. Where did they put all those pianos and why did they put them on a plane? sure the engine is 1 cast iron piano but where are the 6 others? and it's not pressurized. I know that many of the established makers of unsophisticated single prop planes have convinced themselves that a million is a nice round number but a tiny bit more ambition than that would be good. Not long ago the very light jets were aiming under a million dollars. Now indiana jones want in on the million dollar game. Imagine if instead of DA50/62 you had 4 seats in a carbon fiber pressurized body, weighing 400kg with twin jets, able to do twice the speed and have better fuel economy. And costing half. All of which is very possible.

[@galactictomato9168]

400kg? There's no way that's possible.

[@DanFrederiksen]

@@galactictomato9168 ok so let's make it 300. Better? :) of course it's possible. CF is strong and an aerodynamic monotonous compound curve hull is naturally rigid so it can be just a shell. Think carbon fiber balloon. 400kg is two cast iron pianos. 400kg is super heavy.

[@bikersoncall]

@@galactictomato9168 I don't think you half cost anything with carbon fiber, I don't think the DA50 is titanium , lol....

[@Aleksandar6ix]

YES! My favourite plane is finally coming to North America! Now.....what paint would I pick? This one's slick, but I love the blue

[@nikkitui]

How’s the reliability of this Continental CD300 engine?

[@patriotsfan1236]

not enough data to tell. enough to be certified.

[@sergeylipovetsky2216]

Being a diesel, what is a TBO on that electrically heated prop? Probably not a huge concern for anyone plunking 1.5 mil on the plane.

[@j.muckafignotti4226]

Good luck on that price point! WTF are you selling these to? Obviously I’ve missed something in the translation. $1.2 million dollars, for a single??? I already have formed an opinion, POUND SAND!

[@edsbloggingcom]

Nice plane but with that little difference money wise, I would go for the 62

[@peterandersson3812]

I saw an early DA-50 at the airfield outside the factory in Vienna already in 2008: really beautiful and very wide. Looked (and looks in this video) to be very comfortable. Having flown a diesel converted C172, I can confirm that the SLC and the FADEC are really convenient compared to fiddling about with three levers. However: I wouldn't pay that much. Also, while it may seat five average Europeans with fully loaded fuel tanks, I doubt it'll fit five average Americans. Having said that, I wish Diamond all the best: it looks like a really great airplane!

[@CyberSystemOverload]

If Mike Patey gets hold of one of these it will end up with a 1200shp 8-bladed turboprop on the front :D

[@zap2002]

$1.3 million. Good lord why.

[@tgmccoy1556]

A low time Piper Turbo Saratoga will go farther, you can load up on the avionics, and spend oh a million or so less.

[@freakfly23]

@@antoncarmoducchi6057 and buy 5 more to replace it.

[@CaffeineGeek]

So less performance than a Cirrus SR22T G6, higher price, and an extra seat so the mother-in-law will insist on coming along. Pass.

[@ictpilot]

And the Cirrus G6 has the snitch mode.

[@Heareaux]

Over a million dollars for a small single engine piston aircraft? Who's buying these?

[@paulslevinsky580]

Gawd. That colour choice applied to a composite aircraft is surprising. It must be extremely efficient at converting mid-day sunshine into molten heat.

[@ParadigmUnkn0wn]

Not a problem when you have an AC system that can knock 30 degrees off cabin temp in 5 minutes.

[@TheReadBaron91]

@@ParadigmUnkn0wn I’m sure since they painted it themselves it’s ok, but typically you keep composite aircraft in lighter colors to prevent damage to the resin/fiber integrity, not solely comfort

[@ParadigmUnkn0wn]

@@TheReadBaron91 I'm aware of that, but with advances in resins in recent years there have been companies producing composite planes with no paint color restrictions for a few years now. Black composite planes are technically possible now, although I'm not sure who would want to own one. In my mind, black or dark colored planes are just kind of a "f*** you, I have AC and can afford hangars wherever I go" to other pilots.

[@paulslevinsky580]

@@ParadigmUnkn0wn Thermal expansion and its associated stresses are independent factors from the effects of heat on the resins. Traversing from daytime temperatures in Arizona, to sub-zero temperatures at flight levels within minutes is bad enough already. Unnecessary abuse on the airframe.

[@FiveTwoSevenTHR]

That is one gorgeous aircraft

[@Direct_and_Honoust]

Beautifull plane, nice video, if i had the money i would for that price buy the panthera with enough money for a nice plot of land with a beautiful house on it.

[@galactictomato9168]

Something big must have gone wrong at Diamond with the DA50 project. This airplane is not competitive at it's price point. I can't imagine hardly anyone buying one over an SR22 or the DA62. It's a real shame because it's nice seeing another Diesel/FADEC offering on the market. Shame nobody will buy it.

[@iflystuff1]

Just here for all the salty comments as always with any new plane

[@unclefreddy2009]

Volume is very low

[@ashokgtm]

its better to get multi engine rating than buying this one. this product may fail due to pricing, less seating, speed and similar cost and fuel range with da62. I definitely will do for da62.

[@nightcrawleroriginal]

1.5 Mil for a 181 knot cruise speed at 20,000' and a 790 NM range? Seriously? Should a gone turbine and pressure for that amount of Denaro. Just my views on the subject. NC

[@phillip1115]

I want one. But then I want a DA-62 more, I think.

[@wcracing696]

So you can have a 180 knot plans or you know a 300 plus knot Tbm for a little more lol

[@robinmyman]

Simply put…a heavier engine, less reliable as a double sparked gas engine, better mpg, slower… Marketing department at the end of the business plan, rather than at the front end. Good luck! Keep it!

[@bikersoncall]

I can't get too excited about diesel engines in airplanes.

[@bikersoncall]

@@abel4776 Fuel? I said diesel engines, I like diesel engines in Semi Trucks.

[@friedclutch97]

Wow. A swing and a miss here in the U.S. 1100lbs useful? Even the sales guy couldn't keep a strait face. My official prediction is 18 total sold in the U.S. "I get to burn jet fuel" is the only geewhizz that might net a couple additional units sold. Pssst..... "the cirrus has a parachute". Even Diamond must know that this is a popped balloon even before they start delivering this airplane.

[@machinesandthings7121]

This makes sense in the parts of the world that have difficulty getting gasoline but in the states, makes little sense.

[@alanbrassard5927]

Is it smaller or bigger than a SR-22 or say a bonanza

[@mikecournoyer]

Nice looking plane. But here are two issues with the Diamond. 1. Single engine plane that doesn’t fit into a single T Hanger. 2. Hope nothing breaks because they don’t have a service center in the states that has any parts. If you have to get parts you are down for a few months waiting.

[@nunyabidness3075]

That’s funny. When did that start? My experience with an early DA40 which had an exhaust issue was the part came within 24 hours and the A&P was floored by the service experience from the factory. Since then, I hear other makes have improved. What was your experience?

[@xystere]

i don't see how this will be a successful airplane. for starters, anyone in the market for a diamond at this price will almost certainly end up going with the twin version. secondly, for around 850k you can buy a 2020 g36 bonanza which in my opinion is a way better airplane. This is obviously also more expensive that a gen 6 sr22. maybe i'm missing something but 1.15 and realistically 1.3 million for this airplane is too much.

[@yacahumax1431]

I dont get this plane. Add a pt6 and pressurization and then I could understand this plane. Otherwise give me the DA62.

[@spacebeyond1833]

Imma gonna buy for this money more efficient and innovative 2x Pipistrel Panthera guys

[@bigc208]

They should increase the wingspan, pressurize this thing and hang a 450shp Rolls-Royce 250-b17f turbine on it. Now you got something to get excited about. As is, people will just buy the DA62. Cost about the same with twin reliability. I honestly see no future for this aircraft in it’s current configuration.

[@gigiservola142]

How many Diesel engines Continental has build to date? This CD300 is a brand new engine, modern concept no doubt about it. Why Diamond haven't selected a proven, trouble free, simple, modern and reliable engine, like an HONDA power plant ?? Several hundred thousand of them were build to date, excellent base for an aero Diesel engine. I wouldn't be a fool to spender a million $$ for a unproven Diesel engine, even if it's an Continental! By the way, is this CD300 engine is build in USA?

[@andrewvaldez6658]

Also, isn't Diamond owned by China now?

[@lorendjones]

Nice airplane but it would be silly to not spend the small amount of extra $$ to get a faster airplane with the redundancy of the twin systems.

[@jeffswartwood7316]

Good launch timing. Lots of people increasing their wealth considerably in the past two years who can’t afford a private jet but don’t want to fly the airlines either.

[@brianb5594]

Good grief! $1.1 million? Yikes! GA is dead to your average person who wants to own. The only thing most could afford with average income is something older. Who is the market for this? Rhetorical question I guess. It’s not your average Joe. I would take a Barron over this thing. Yeah,it does not burn Jet A and opex is a lot more, but you can get a nice Barron for $200k. Use the difference for fuel and maintenance, and you could buy a lot of fuel and maintenance for $900K.

[@andik2329]

For 1.15 I get a used Piper M500.

[@av8tor261]

It's pretty...............expensive.

[@nathanashley2693]

1.5million! thats taking the piss

[@JustaPilot1]

There are those that will buy this but as others and said I nice used Malibu will fly higher, faster, and pressurized at a fraction of the cost.

[@berndl]

Why buy a single engine airplane, if it‘s brother has 2 engines and costs only 5% more? That makes no sense

[@AClark-gs5gl]

2 issues...1 very valid: CCP owned and no side stick or yoke option. Regardless, as usual, a very nicely done video! 🙏🇺🇲👍

[@Rico11b]

I LOVE LOVE LOVE, that someone is building a low wing plane that has the pilot setting on the front edge of the wings!!!!!!!!!! I really dislike low wing planes that have the pilot sitting behind the leading edge, or nearer the rear of the wing. To me it blocks SO MUCH of the view when flying. If ya want to see something on the ground below you, you'll have to fly in a tight spiral to get the low wing out of the way. There's really no excuse for it really. It's just being lazy and not wanting to solve any W&B issues that come up. In a high wing the view upward is blocked and in a low wing the lower view is blocked. I hate that! Figure out how to get the front seats in front of the leading edge and you're golden.

[@hernanposnansky4830]

Sweep the wings forward and move them back. Improves the stall characteristics too. No need for the vortex generators. How do the vortex generators build up ice in icing conditions? With the disappointing ceiling of this airplane you cannot discount this in IMC.

[@hernanposnansky4830]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/goDQp6WhaLGDfcU

[@hansschonig2472]

as usual they forgot to add a gas tank ...

[@seoceancrosser]

They think highly of their products.

[@msz51214]

Big machine

[@Q_Channel1]

Did he really just pitch their pricing model as a human experiment? Lol, what kind of marketing is that??

[@paulslevinsky580]

How much is it? How much ya got?

[@stuartmidgley1]

That's sales-person code for 'Head Office stuck us with this turkey and I can't say what I really think about the insanely high price or I'll get fired, but of course I know we're going to be lucky if we sell three of these overpriced suckers. Now, how can I make sure my bonus this year doesn't go down the tube along with the career of the manager back in Austria who green-lighted this plane."

[@elcidS15]

They must think people will buy them just so they can go up to other people and say they bought one.

[@bhi7165]

Beautiful

[@Stubby0266]

Can I pay with moths?

[@nish224104]

With this insane high price for a single engine piston and not close to a single engine cabin class, the DA50 is heading straight to sales FAILURE!!! Pathetic Diamond!!!!