Diana 2 does well at Grand Prix

At 11:06 12 September 2005, Charles Yeates wrote:
I think Sebastian Kawa had something to do with winning
{:))

GK wrote:
And Diana 2 wins French Grand Prix.


--
Charles Yeates

Swidnik PW-6U & PW-5
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html


Yes indeed(ski) - one suspect that this brilliant pilot
would win on an SZD 2005-bis 'Broomstick'.
However, the aircraft does have some input into the
proceedings.

Bully for Bogumil Beres and his design team.

The beautiful bird clearly motors !

sta13nski.

At 15:00 12 September 2005, Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:
On 12 Sep 2005 11:29:40 GMT, Stanford Korwin
wrote:

The beautiful bird clearly motors !

Well, the people who's actually seen it at the WGC
in Finland seems to
disagree. For instance, talk to them about starting
the thing when
it's full of water... (It takes at two runners and
a lot of courage).

-A
--
The Usenet Sect -- Resistance is futile. You will assimilate
ò-|


I don't doubt it Asbjorn.

I have never flown the Diana but I have seen one of
the (two - I think) prototypes (this one was for sale
- and maybe still is) in Poland.

It hardly surprises me that this aircraft tends to
drop a wing when heavily loaded - a number of these
skittish race horses do - but it does go like the wind
when it can coaxed into the air !

I also think that it is a beautiful looking aircraft.

The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Second in Finland and first in France.

Both pilots (Centka and Kawa) are, unquestionably,
world class - but none-the-less, one has to have a
competitive ship in which to compete effectively.

If you want further details on the Diana, I can probably
get them for you.

I used to represent the manufacturer at one time -
but have now fully retired.
None-the-less, I am sure that Mr. Beres would be willing
to send me an update on the latest version.

Dick Johnson has written a very comprehensive report
on the prototype - and rated it highly (via a personal
communication as well).

Definitely an expert's machine though.

Let me know (privately) if you need further details
- I am sure that the Beres group would be delighted
to make you one !

Best regards,

sta13.

At 20:30 12 September 2005, Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:
On 12 Sep 2005 16:25:18 GMT, Stanford Korwin
wrote:

It hardly surprises me that this aircraft tends to
drop a wing when
heavily loaded - a number of these skittish race horses
do - but it
does go like the wind when it can coaxed into the
air !

It's not that it has a tendency to drop a wing...

Apparently, the wings bend down so much that the tips
almost touch the
ground (or at least leave *very* little margin of error
for even the
best pilot, such as Centka), and the two (sic!) runners
have to lift
the tips, run very long and fast, and then let go at
precisely the
same time. Not a great thing about a competition-class
ship, IMO.

But of cause, it's just a prototype. It could (and
should!) change in
the production run.

I also think that it is a beautiful looking aircraft.

I actually think it's ugly. (I'm kind of old-fashioned
and love a
classical glider such as the ASW20 on http://www.hojmark.org/oy-xk
w/).

And when you see the cockpit of the Diana-2... Oh boy,
what were they
thinking? http://www.egc2005.fi/pictures/kai/1...5/image23.html


But looks, of cause, aren't everything.

-A
--
The Usenet Sect -- Resistance is futile. You will assimilate
ò-|


I didn't know that the wings bend to this degree when
full of water - not good as you say - and presumably
due to the fact that the Diana has no spar.
This tendency might not be easy to fix.

Beauty is, I suppose, a subjective thing.

The PDA mounting in the photograph is, clearly, a temporary
lash-up - presumably the owner would not allow holes
to be drilled all over the place.

I don't know how the side-mounted joy stick handles
- but those that have flown the glider seem to find
it OK.

It will be interesting to see what interest is generated
as regards demand for this glider - if it keeps winning
competitions it may well become a must-have.
It already holds a few world records.
Being entirely made of carbon fibre - with the addition
of other, strengthening, exotica - it will not be cheap.

Neither are matters helped very much by the fact that
the glider has two carbon sparlets which permanently
stick out of the side of the fuselage (onto which the
wings thread on).
This requires a special, oval, trailer - which only
the manufacturer of the sailplane makes.

There were problems with accomodating tall pilots in
the early prototype - but this may well have been sorted
out on Diana-2.

We shall see how things pan out.

I, for one, will not be buying one !

sta13.

Yeah, if the name on the glider was changed to Ventus 3 or ASW 31 made
in Germany there would be a long line in order to get one. However
because the Diana is made in Poland, it was designed by Poles and it
kicks ass therefore is not getting the best reviews and opinions. Are
you guy(s) old fashioned or just simply put prejudice ?

Here we go again...

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


a écrit dans le message de news:
...
Yeah, if the name on the glider was changed to Ventus 3 or ASW 31 made
in Germany there would be a long line in order to get one. However
because the Diana is made in Poland, it was designed by Poles and it
kicks ass therefore is not getting the best reviews and opinions. Are
you guy(s) old fashioned or just simply put prejudice ?

With that attitude towards constructive comments and useful information it's
beyond me why anyone should want to be assimilated by Usenet :-(

Go fly instead,
Lars Peder


"Asbjorn Hojmark" wrote in message
city.dk...
On 13 Sep 2005 08:48:19 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, if the name on the glider was changed to Ventus 3 or ASW 31 made
in Germany there would be a long line in order to get one.

Yawn.

-A
--
The Usenet Sect -- Resistance is futile. You will assimilate ò-|

I had heard that the company manufacturing the Diana (PZL?) was very
secretive about its construction, so I asked the dealer at the
convention in Atlanta who was certified to repair the Diana. His reply:
no one! Worse, he didn't seem to think that this was a very big issue.
Well, it's a HUGE issue to me!

Personally, I would not be the first to buy a glider with such a
radical departure (no spar) for normal sailplane design. I prefer to
let someone else bear the brunt of those lessons learned. Sure enough,
at the same convention Dick Johnson reported on how a Diana (used to
win a U.S. national, I believe) needed complete re-profiling of its
wings after just a few years.

Caveat emptor!

Tom

First remark: the company manufacturing Diana is the BPB, not PZL.

Secondly, the solution with no spar is certainly radical, but it's not
new at all!
The first model of Diana, the SZD-56-1, from which 6 planes were
produced, is flying already for over 10 years. Its wing was made
exactly with the same no-spar-technology, and if they have been some
problems, we would know it already since years !

It's even more : this construction grows old much better than classical
wing with a spar. I've recently seen a... X glider (it doesn't matter
whiche is the name ), 8 years old : its wing is just good to be
refurbished completely. Wings of first Dianas have pratically the same
surface, as when they were build.
You can check it he http://www.dianasailplanes.com/pictures.html

If you did NOT wrote your post ad captandum only, you would rather say:
Caveat lector!

RAS is looking up. Now I can use the Latin I studied years ago. Like
it. Of course the Romans were a lot shorter than we are today.

Andy

Andy wrote:
RAS is looking up. Now I can use the Latin I studied years ago. Like
it. Of course the Romans were a lot shorter than we are today.

Andy

Quid quid latine dictum sit, altum videtur...

Dan'l