Hello Paul.

I found some documentation and details on web:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_aircraft
page 9

http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/c/...ro/eu_prod.pdf
page 22

http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/c/...o/easa_apo.pdf
page 72

http://www.easa.eu.int/ws_prod/c/doc...planes_EUR.pdf
page 1


Here is the Diana 1 EASA Certificate.
http://easa.europa.eu/certification/...1-28032007.pdf


Talk about this Diana 2 VH-VHZ s/n 3 case in 2008 year...
http://www.szybowce.com/news/article...p=ava.szybowce

In Polish on the top is written answer to somebody on Gorpol's forum
via Gorpol, who is friend of Beres.. He explained the Diana 2 case by
way, that faults did Australian engineer. Here what they found at
Bielsko aftere handover. Hope you are a bit experienced technical and
everyone can imagine what about it was...

http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forum....a-2-in-service

Any question to this welcome

I found this as well http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arch.../msg00313.html

The talk was originally about Diana 2 and difference between position
of wings was in case Diana 2 s/n 000 factory prototype “BB” (which
gave me to fly Beres with 15 kg of ballast under seat) in 2005 and
others production numbers as my s/n 003.

It means not confirmation between wing position of Diana 1 and Diana 2
wings. Of course, they are different... but the some fuselage.

Thanks to all of you for your interest and internal posting.

Cheers, Hana

Wayne Paul wrote:
HZ,

Being an owner of an "Experimental - Homebuilt" I'm not totally competent with the exact differences; however, here are a few things I do know.

In the "Homebuilt" category, if you built it, you are granted the authority to perform the annual inspections. If you are a subsequent owner the yearly condition inspection must be performed by a FAA licensed airframe mechanic.

The "Experimental - Racing/Exhibition" are similar in the requirement to have an airframe mechanic perform the yearly condition inspection. A airframe mechanic must also verify that the aircraft in compliance with all factory safety bulletins.

The "Experimental - Racing/Exhibition" classification is quite common in the USA. Our field has two ASW-27A, a PIK-20 (Serial number 2) with this type of airworthiness certificate. In the past our field has been home to several other "Racing/Exhibition" sailplanes including a ASW-20A and Diana.




"HZ" wrote in message ...
On Aug 10, 3:53 pm, "Wayne Paul" wrote:
Just a small correction. The USA Experimental category of a Diana is "Racing/Exhibition" not "Homebuilt." There is a difference.

To be considered "Homebuilt" at least fifty percent of the construction must be completed by an amateur builder. Normally this means the aircraft is delivered as a "kit" and assembled and flown by the builder. However, many have been built directly from a set of plans. (Woodstock, Duster, Tern, BG series, etc.)

The most popular US "Homebuilt" series of sailplanes were designed by Dick Schreder.http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder. I fly one; however, I am its' third owner and wasn't involved in its' construction.

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"http://tinyurl.com/N990-6F

"HZ" wrote in ...

On Aug 10, 2:29 am, Martin wrote:
If the glider is without EASA Certification it is general rule. But I
think in USA it should be different. What I know all Diana's are there
flying in Experimental category. It means as "home build" gliders and
the responsibility is on the pilot.

Thank you for correction. They informed me as this in factory..

Please, how it is with this "Racin/Exhibition" Category? Who is
responsible for glider? Also and "Operator" or only pilot, means
needn't a operator.

Thx, Hana