Shock! Hana's Diana 2 in service

On Dec 5, 7:03 pm, Udo wrote:
Jacek,
I too think it is a very nice glider and I hope it will be successful
in the market place. Unfortunately the manufacture made a big public
relation error. As soon there was a hint of the customer not being
happy
they should have been more proactive, especially at this early in the
game. Pilot's with a new glider want to be happy and as group they are
very tolerant when it comes to there new toys. Look for example the
ASW 27 and it wing surface problem. It did not hurt the sale of the
glider or take DG and how it handled the 300 spar issue or Schempp
Hirth with the spar delaminating problem.

Anyone that is 12000 km away from the manufacture and just received
the glider wants it to work and nobody is looking for trouble,
consider how much other money and time has been invested aside from
the glider.

We will never hear the full story.
The pictures are not in context, hence useless to make a
determination. I hope it will work out for both parties.

Udo

On Dec 5, 7:14 pm, wrote:

On Dec 5, 6:25 am, wrote:

All this only shows again that a client of this Polish glider
manufacturer has no other possibility than being forced to "do it
himself" because he does not get the necessary service, not the
required instructions, nor papers when he needs this all urgently for
flying. He did not even get the right documentation for the glider
itself (and not for the trailer?). This was to read here somewhere in
the forum. As far as I remember the Australians did these
"modifications" after the problems occured and after they did not
receive help from the manufacturer, right? What else can a client (who
is not a mechanic or specialist) do, far away from the manufactuer,
then trying to help himself. By the way - what do these photos here
show? Nothing particular, only that finally the manufacturer is doing
something - that's all. Just the wrong exchange of a rediculous screw
is not a big problem. I have the impression that the fiercy reaction
of the Polish manufacturer only is an quite shamful attempt to save
his face.

You are another example of "smear tactics campaign" Your impression is
wrong dude, the manufacturer doesn't have to save his face. The
manufacturer released from the factory properly designed, built and
flight tested glider. The end user did "something" to the glider -
something that he (in this case she) is not telling. The end user is
the one who is trying to save her face. And most of users at this
forum jumped into conclusion that it was manufacturing "problem" even
though it wasn't. And then this guy hiding under the Blue Cumulus name
(I am not going to mentioned his name, simply because he is not worth
it) spread the rumors and lies about "how badly polish manufacturer
treated the customer" and that the Poles don't know how to built a
glider. And this is nothing more than a case of very obvious prejudice
against Poland and polish products. Furthermore, here in the US, and
I know that this same is going on in Australia, Canada and some other
countries (because I've seen it), where a A&P's are working on gliders
without having any experience with them. They were trained with sheet
metal, rivets, 4130 steel, etc. There are very few mechanics with a
knowledge of modern sailplanes. Owners of "experimental category"
gliders are also working on their gliders without having proper
knowledge, skill and know-how. In many cases they go to Home Depot to
buy a stupid bolt for $0.50 instead of paying the manufacturer $5.00.
Another very important thing that you are missing, is the fact that in
Poland, country of which you have no knowledge whatsoever and probably
don't even know were it is, they do things in such a high level of
bureaucracy that they simply cannot obtain a signature from civil
aviation inspector without jumping through the hoops. Here we have
IA's who will signed almost anything, because they are the authority.
Right. The best thing is to blame the manufacturer. That seems to be
easy way out.
Right here in the US there is a few Diana's, I am the owner of one of
them. There is nothing wrong with the glider, everything is very
clearly marked, the manual in English language is very thorough, and
it is a good glider. If you want to know about the glider simply ask
someone who knows.

Jacek
Pasco, WA

P.S. Anyone wants to attack me, go right on ahead, all of you hiding
back there while previously making all kind of derogatory comments;
shame on you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi Udo,

I absolutely agree with you. The manufacturer should handle this very
unpleasant situation with a bit more finesse. But most of the people
on this forum sided with the end user and before the factory had any
chance to respond to the accusations, they were "found guilty". I also
believe that there are facts of which we will never know. Both parties
are responsible for the problem. Both parties did not handle the
problem in a professional manner. Your statement about the ASW-27 and
DG-300 is right on the money. But again, I also believe that the
Design Bureau B should use a marketing company.

Jacek

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:18:09 -0800, tommytoyz wrote:

Too bad the reputation has been needlessly sullied. I wonder how
stupid some people can be to let a ham handed mechanic fiddle like
that with a brand new aircraft.

Nobody is going to start pulling off the Mylar seals on their brand new
glider unless they are desperate.

From what we read in the other reports on RAS, this desperation came about
from the lack of response from the factory on the purchaser's perceived
shortcomings with the product.

Reputations are built on perceptions. The facts, with respect to the
airworthiness of the aircraft, and the failure, or otherwise of the
factory to meet their contractual obligations are not known to us, and
probably never will be. So we make our decisions based on what we do know.

I know of other glider manufacturers who have found themselves with
un-happy customers and reacted by making qualified personal and spare
parts available. Their reputations are still intact...


Ian

An example is the profile warping of the ASW-27. Didn't really deter
anyone nor the reputation of Schleicher. Nor the spar delamination
problems of Schemp-Hirth sailplanes.

Or the incorrectly manufactured spars of the DG aircraft, resulting in
reduced operating ranges.

If these problems had occurred on the Diana-2 - people would have
screamed bloody murder. Instead, we had ONE customer who let an
unqalified person wreck their plane and then demanded the
manufacturere fix it all.

In the other cases involving the German manufacturers, it was a series
of discoveries on various aircraft that occurred due to manufacturing
problems, not due to a monkey mechanic wrecking the aircraft.

It's a shame for all involved.

Isn't is true also that the owner (warranty holder) was not the person
whom had possession of the sailplane. I recall reading that the owner
was very difficult to contact. This also added further complications.



adding to the On Dec 6, 1:15 pm, tommytoyz
wrote:
An example is the profile warping of the ASW-27. Didn't really deter
anyone nor the reputation of Schleicher. Nor the spar delamination
problems of Schemp-Hirth sailplanes.

Or the incorrectly manufactured spars of the DG aircraft, resulting in
reduced operating ranges.

If these problems had occurred on the Diana-2 - people would have
screamed bloody murder. Instead, we had ONE customer who let an
unqalified person wreck their plane and then demanded the
manufacturere fix it all.

In the other cases involving the German manufacturers, it was a series
of discoveries on various aircraft that occurred due to manufacturing
problems, not due to a monkey mechanic wrecking the aircraft.

It's a shame for all involved.

Sorry, might be a bit off subject.

This all got started by "Andy". Andy "who"???
As I also use same first name, also on this forum.
I tried to send a message to "Andy"...Guess what? His email address is
bogus...Links and glider damage is NOT, but...
Not nice!

Smielek


"Andrzej" wrote in message
...
You can see pictures of Hana's glider Diana 2 and her "modifications":

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2817

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2818

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2819

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2820

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2821

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2822

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2823

http://www.gorpol.pl/powiekszenie.php?id=2824

...and whole article from polish service in Bielsko-Biala:

http://www.gorpol.pl/?site=80&artykul=288

No comments needed.

Andy

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 12:15:21 -0800 (PST), tommytoyz
wrote:

It's a shame for all involved.

Question:
Would you rip-apart your brand-new glider that is working perfectly?



Bye
Andreas

No, I would not rip apart a new glider working perfectly.

Nor would I under any circumstances let an unqualified mechanic make
the matter worse - one who apparently thinks banging a square peg into
a round hole is a good thing. Looking at how the stabilizer cover is
torn and the bolts that were inserted are wrong - makes clear that
somebody hammed up the thing for some reason and want the manufacturer
to take the blame.

I would also not claim on a public forum that there is little
technical information in the manual when other owners have clearly
stated that is not the case.

People do stupid things in life. The glider is pretty banged up just
from the manhandling by the Aussies. Why we don't know. Maybe she
wanted the control forced to be made lighter and someone promised her
they could "fix" that.

There are a million reasons. But just because someone fiddles with
their new glider does not prove there was anything wrong with it.
People fiddle with their new gliders all the time. Only this time they
screwed it up.

As I also use same first name, also on this forum.
My parents name me Andy, ok?

I tried to send a message to "Andy"...Guess what? His email address is
bogus...Links and glider damage is NOT, but...
Check your news reader.

Not nice!
Why not?

Andy

I wouldn't worry about SZD's reputation in the light of few long and
convulated threads on this newsgroup. Only a small subset of glider
pilots read here, and even fewer will have bothered trawling though
all the ranting and raving and vacuum of facts in the Diana 2-related
threads.

If the Diana 2 is not a sales success it will have more to do with it
being entered in a dying class of glider than anything else. There's a
reason why all the newest gliders on sale recently are 18 m.


Dan

Has anyone actually said who performed the alterations?

The photo shows what seems to be fairly accurate turning on the pin, and a good quality bolt, from viewing just the photos available. The bolt has been sawn to facilitate tightening in a confined space, this should not be a problem to it either.

Why was the alteration needed in the first place? - just a question, not with blame.

As a fitter, if I needed to turn down a pin which had a bush on it, I am looking for more clearance. Next step, no bush.

As an observer, a lot is being said here in conjecture, with probably justified passion. The people involved are passionate about gliding too, Hana is a national champion, Diana a fantastic aircraft.

Please lets be careful about what we speculate apon, its a small industry and these things always take time.

bagger