Diamona DA-20 Katana Review (not for the tall!)

[noah]

Hi,
So I didn't find many reviews of the Katana prior to my 'checkout'
flight 'attempt' in one. This afternoon I took a 1.2 hr checkout
flight with a CFI from Diamond Air (www.ksql.com) at San Carlos
airport (KSQL).

Summing up my opinion: If you're over 5'8", or have a long torso,
forget about the Katana. I'm 5'11" and it wasn't too good.

Specific gripes:

My back is killing me! - my head was partially tilted to the
center, and this was using a loaned headset (my lightspeed wouldn't
let us close the canopy!

The rudder pedals are of poor design - making it difficult to
differentiate between 'rudder' and 'rudder+brake' - without enough
space above the pedals for a normal size 10 shoe to effectively
modulate the brake/rudder seperately.

The stick forces required for 'the maneuvers' were much higher
than I expected at speed (around 100kts). At low speeds this wasn't an
issue.

Slips don't help nearly as much as in a C172/152 for losing
altitude (due to small cross section fuse.)

The big round ball of fire called The Sun. It was blinding just
going anywhere near West - even at our 2:30pm departure from SQL.
There are no sunvisors - so you find yourself leaning back beneath the
painted section of canopy.

Space - my standard kneeboard (student vfr style) barely allowed
for full control movement - and blocked easy access to the throttle
and prop controls. This is *not* an xc machine, and definitely not a
machine for light travel for two... for that I think you'll need
something else.

Good stuff:

The canopy and excellent view. I really liked the low wing
visibility for scanning for traffic. I can't say (haven't flown yet)
about the pipers, but I think having the wing a good few feet below
your eyes allows for a much smaller blindspot - had an easy time
spotting traffic.

The view, view, and more view.

Constant speed prop - this was the first time I flew a plane with
a CS prop - and it was nice. I think this contributed to the smooth
and quiet experience, although this could also be the transition from
25 year old cessnas to a 5yr old composite plane :)



Overall - I'm glad soo many people on these newsgroups recommended
'try before you buy' - or in my case: 'try before day dreaming!' I'll
go and try a Piper low wing in a week or so and think I'll like it
much more than the Cessna fleet.

blue skies...
Noah

[john smith]

noah wrote:
> Summing up my opinion: If you're over 5'8", or have a long torso,
> forget about the Katana. I'm 5'11" and it wasn't too good.

I disagree, I am 6'3". Yes, it is tight, but not uncomfortable. Of
course, I weigh 185, so I am not very wide.

> Specific gripes:
> My back is killing me! - my head was partially tilted to the
> center, and this was using a loaned headset (my lightspeed wouldn't
> let us close the canopy!

I don't have a problem with my DC's.

> The rudder pedals are of poor design - making it difficult to
> differentiate between 'rudder' and 'rudder+brake' - without enough
> space above the pedals for a normal size 10 shoe to effectively
> modulate the brake/rudder seperately.

I will grant you that the area in the "tunnel" is tight, but I fly a
Champ with heel brakes, so I am used to sliding my heels rearward to
drop the balls of my feet onto the rudder.

> The stick forces required for 'the maneuvers' were much higher
> than I expected at speed (around 100kts). At low speeds this wasn't an
> issue.

Again, I fly a Champ, stick forces in the DA-20 are not high nor excessive.

> Slips don't help nearly as much as in a C172/152 for losing
> altitude (due to small cross section fuse.)

Airspeed control will solve your too-high, in-close problem. Slow down
before you get to the pattern. I haven't tried slips, I will try them
next week. Approach speed is 65, stall is below 40 (flaps, power off).

> The big round ball of fire called The Sun. It was blinding just
> going anywhere near West - even at our 2:30pm departure from SQL.
> There are no sunvisors - so you find yourself leaning back beneath the
> painted section of canopy.

This is why you carry slap-on green vinyl glareshields in your flight kit.

> Space - my standard kneeboard (student vfr style) barely allowed
> for full control movement - and blocked easy access to the throttle
> and prop controls. This is *not* an xc machine, and definitely not a
> machine for light travel for two... for that I think you'll need
> something else.

When not writing on the kneeboard, it can be rotated about your leg
anywhere from 0- to 180-degrees, getting it out of the way.

> Good stuff:
> The canopy and excellent view. I really liked the low wing
> visibility for scanning for traffic. I can't say (haven't flown yet)
> about the pipers, but I think having the wing a good few feet below
> your eyes allows for a much smaller blindspot - had an easy time
> spotting traffic

> Constant speed prop - this was the first time I flew a plane with
> a CS prop - and it was nice. I think this contributed to the smooth
> and quiet experience, although this could also be the transition from
> 25 year old cessnas to a 5yr old composite plane :)

More like a "semi-constant speed" prop. Not much range adjustment, but
it works.

My complaint is cold-weather starting. Without pre-heat (be carefull, do
not overheat the cowling), the engine may not start. The Rotax must
reach a minimum RPM to light off. If it doesn't reach the critical RPM,
it will not start.

[Don Tuite]

FWIW, I'm 6'1" and have no trouble with the DA20s at San Carlos.

Don

On 16 Oct 2003 17:53:30 -0700, (noah) wrote:

>Hi,
> So I didn't find many reviews of the Katana prior to my 'checkout'
>flight 'attempt' in one. This afternoon I took a 1.2 hr checkout
>flight with a CFI from Diamond Air (www.ksql.com) at San Carlos
>airport (KSQL).
>
> Summing up my opinion: If you're over 5'8", or have a long torso,
>forget about the Katana. I'm 5'11" and it wasn't too good.
>
> Specific gripes:
>
> My back is killing me! - my head was partially tilted to the
>center, and this was using a loaned headset (my lightspeed wouldn't
>let us close the canopy!
>
> The rudder pedals are of poor design - making it difficult to
>differentiate between 'rudder' and 'rudder+brake' - without enough
>space above the pedals for a normal size 10 shoe to effectively
>modulate the brake/rudder seperately.
>
> The stick forces required for 'the maneuvers' were much higher
>than I expected at speed (around 100kts). At low speeds this wasn't an
>issue.
>
> Slips don't help nearly as much as in a C172/152 for losing
>altitude (due to small cross section fuse.)
>
> The big round ball of fire called The Sun. It was blinding just
>going anywhere near West - even at our 2:30pm departure from SQL.
>There are no sunvisors - so you find yourself leaning back beneath the
>painted section of canopy.
>
> Space - my standard kneeboard (student vfr style) barely allowed
>for full control movement - and blocked easy access to the throttle
>and prop controls. This is *not* an xc machine, and definitely not a
>machine for light travel for two... for that I think you'll need
>something else.
>
> Good stuff:
>
> The canopy and excellent view. I really liked the low wing
>visibility for scanning for traffic. I can't say (haven't flown yet)
>about the pipers, but I think having the wing a good few feet below
>your eyes allows for a much smaller blindspot - had an easy time
>spotting traffic.
>
> The view, view, and more view.
>
> Constant speed prop - this was the first time I flew a plane with
>a CS prop - and it was nice. I think this contributed to the smooth
>and quiet experience, although this could also be the transition from
>25 year old cessnas to a 5yr old composite plane :)
>
>
>
> Overall - I'm glad soo many people on these newsgroups recommended
>'try before you buy' - or in my case: 'try before day dreaming!' I'll
>go and try a Piper low wing in a week or so and think I'll like it
>much more than the Cessna fleet.
>
> blue skies...
> Noah

[Thomas Borchert]

Noah,

once you have flown a Katana, you will not like the visibility in a
Piper (or Mooney, or Beech, for that matter). In fact, you'll hate it.
Little comes close. A Tobago/Trinidad does. Why don't you try the DA-40
at San Carlos for a little more space?

Also, the "slipping doesn't work well" will come with most less-draggy
airframes out there.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Malcolm Teas]

(noah) wrote in message >...
> Hi,
> So I didn't find many reviews of the Katana prior to my 'checkout'
> flight 'attempt' in one. This afternoon I took a 1.2 hr checkout
> flight with a CFI from Diamond Air (www.ksql.com) at San Carlos
> airport (KSQL).
>
> Summing up my opinion: If you're over 5'8", or have a long torso,
> forget about the Katana. I'm 5'11" and it wasn't too good.

Thanks for the review. One question though, was this a Katana? Or
the newer Eclipse/Evolution model? The latter two are close to
identical I think, but there was a reasonable amount of change from
Katana to E* models I hear.

-Malcolm

[noah]

hey All,
This was *my* review - as I found few of them online... no sense
in disagreeing with an opinion IMHO.

> I disagree, I am 6'3". Yes, it is tight, but not uncomfortable. Of
> course, I weigh 185, so I am not very wide.

Different people have different geometry - I have a very tall
torso and shorter legs... the instructor was very surprised, but with
my lightspeeds on and slouching, we literally couldn't shut the
canopy. Disagree all you want - that's what happened.

> I don't have a problem with my DC's.

I (sincerely) am thinking of trying out a pair of DCs - my
lightspeeds are tall enough to make me lower the seat in C172s all the
way...

> I will grant you that the area in the "tunnel" is tight, but I fly a
> Champ with heel brakes, so I am used to sliding my heels rearward to
> drop the balls of my feet onto the rudder.

I don't like the brakes - the lower part of the brake pedal is
simply a metal bar oval protruding from the cylinder - not a pedal
like I've seen before, and you have to align your feet perfectly to
strike the bar and effectively use the brake.

> Again, I fly a Champ, stick forces in the DA-20 are not high nor excessive.

I didn't say they are excessive - simply more than I expected...
it was *really* fun to fly and easy to put thru the maneuvers :)

> Airspeed control will solve your too-high, in-close problem. Slow down
> before you get to the pattern. I haven't tried slips, I will try them
> next week. Approach speed is 65, stall is below 40 (flaps, power off).

Maybe I need to qualify everything I say on usenet - I didn't say
I couldn't land the plane - I said that slips weren't very
effective... The flip side to this was that the fuse didn't sway much
in the crosswind - making for easy landings. Each approach went fine
with great airspeed control - and only the first - a power off short
approach from 1200' over midfield took a major slip to get on
glidepath.

> This is why you carry slap-on green vinyl glareshields in your flight kit.

Great idea - had I fit and been comfortable, I would surely take
out the Katana again - and the recommendation makes perfect sense...

For those of you who fit in the Katana - I'm jealous!!! Enjoy :)
Noah

[Thomas Borchert]

Noah,

> I (sincerely) am thinking of trying out a pair of DCs - my
> lightspeeds are tall enough to make me lower the seat in C172s all the
> way...
>

Try the QFR series from Lightspeed.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Peter Duniho]

"noah" > wrote in message
om...
> Different people have different geometry - I have a very tall
> torso and shorter legs... the instructor was very surprised, but with
> my lightspeeds on and slouching, we literally couldn't shut the
> canopy. Disagree all you want - that's what happened.

Your subject reads "not for the tall!" In your post, you wrote "If you're
over 5'8"...forget about the Katana".

Those are (incorrect) statements of fact, not opinion. John's disagreement
was with those statements of fact. No reason for you to get offended by his
disagreement since, after all, you were incorrect to make those statements.

Funny thing is, you even explained in your "take offense" post why it is
your original statements of fact were not correct, in spite of your own
personal experience (that some tall people have short torsos and vice a
versa).

Pete

[noah]

Thanks for clarifying my own post and being *really* picky about the
wording... I guess I did it to the other guy so I'll just throw a
marshmellow on the fire:

I really liked the Katana - except for the rudder pedals, and wish I
had fit better!

These are the problems with USENET - when you're talking in person
with somebody, it's easy to clarify... when reading their text, it's
easy to take out of context. You're 100% correct - my title wasn't
perfect, and I still stand by my last suggestion to anyone: Try the
Katana, if you fit, you'll probably like it.

Blue Skies,
Noah

> > Different people have different geometry - I have a very tall
> > torso and shorter legs... the instructor was very surprised, but with
> > my lightspeeds on and slouching, we literally couldn't shut the
> > canopy. Disagree all you want - that's what happened.
>
> Your subject reads "not for the tall!" In your post, you wrote "If you're
> over 5'8"...forget about the Katana".
>
> Those are (incorrect) statements of fact, not opinion. John's disagreement
> was with those statements of fact. No reason for you to get offended by his
> disagreement since, after all, you were incorrect to make those statements.
>
> Funny thing is, you even explained in your "take offense" post why it is
> your original statements of fact were not correct, in spite of your own
> personal experience (that some tall people have short torsos and vice a
> versa).
>
> Pete

[noah]

Hi,
It was the DA-20 Katana with the (approx) 80hp engine. Starting
'er up was easy, and while not as enthusiastic as a 160hp c172, I was
quite satisfied with climb starting at sea level...

cheers,
Noah

(Malcolm Teas) wrote in message >...
> (noah) wrote in message >...
> > Hi,
> > So I didn't find many reviews of the Katana prior to my 'checkout'
> > flight 'attempt' in one. This afternoon I took a 1.2 hr checkout
> > flight with a CFI from Diamond Air (www.ksql.com) at San Carlos
> > airport (KSQL).
> >
> > Summing up my opinion: If you're over 5'8", or have a long torso,
> > forget about the Katana. I'm 5'11" and it wasn't too good.
>
> Thanks for the review. One question though, was this a Katana? Or
> the newer Eclipse/Evolution model? The latter two are close to
> identical I think, but there was a reasonable amount of change from
> Katana to E* models I hear.
>
> -Malcolm

[Capt. Doug]

>noah wrote in message> I really liked the Katana - except for the rudder
pedals, and >wish I had fit better!

To give me a better understanding, how about comparing your fit in the
Katana to your fit in a Cessna 150? I can relate to the C-150 because I've
sat in it. What about the effectiveness of air vents for keeping cool?

Thanks,
D.

[noah]

> >noah wrote in message> I really liked the Katana - except for the rudder
> pedals, and >wish I had fit better!
>
> To give me a better understanding, how about comparing your fit in the
> Katana to your fit in a Cessna 150? I can relate to the C-150 because I've
> sat in it. What about the effectiveness of air vents for keeping cool?

Very good questions - I thought about the vents after posting, but
forgot to include them in my original post... We were *Baking* in
there... and this was on a sunny but approx 75 degree day (give or
take 5deg F). Taxiing, the CFI had well practiced keeping most of his
arm outside/thru the pax side air vent - a technique that I quickly
adopted as the rest of the interior was extremely hot.

As for space vs a 150/152 - While a snug fit, I can fit into 152s and
have flown many hours in both normal 152s and a 152 aerobat (doing
acro). I found that in a 152 it is much easier to wear a kneeboard,
and still easy to access all the controls (unlike the Katana, where
you may partially block the throttle area adjacent to your right knee.

-Noah

[[email protected]]

All of the DA20s at SQL are the Rotax-powered ones. The C1/etc.
Continental models have a redesigned instrument panel which provides a
*little* bit more kneeroom, which was my biggest problem (I'm 6"4").
However, I haven't actually flown the aircraft, I just sat in one of
each type and closed the bubble.

It's the same deal with the Euro- and Canado- DA40s. The Canadian ones
have more room.

Dave Blevins

On 16 Oct 2003 17:53:30 -0700, (noah) wrote:

>Hi,
> So I didn't find many reviews of the Katana prior to my 'checkout'
>flight 'attempt' in one. This afternoon I took a 1.2 hr checkout
>flight with a CFI from Diamond Air (www.ksql.com) at San Carlos
>airport (KSQL).
>
> Summing up my opinion: If you're over 5'8", or have a long torso,
>forget about the Katana. I'm 5'11" and it wasn't too good.