If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
I have read very good critics about Diana-2
but as well very bad news about it. The good news are from the people who seem to have flown the first two Prototypes. The bad rumors I heard about number-3 of Diana-2. Obviously the main difference is, that the wing position was shifted some centimeters to the front. The glider appeared in Australia last November, flew with experimental permit, but never got the airworthiness approval from the Australian Airworthiness Authorities. The gossip mentions problems like: - airbrake movements being asynchronous - flap handle unlocking in flight and shifting to full positive - too high flap handling forces (more than JAR22 limits) - weak aileron control at take off until tail wheel is off the ground - glider is stalling while thermaling over inner wing at speeds CLmax with - aileron control not good enough to keep bank when circling 30deg - glider was in general instable to fly in yaw and pitch Did anyone fly serial planes of Diana-2 with manufacturing numbers 3? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
- flap handle unlocking in flight and shifting to full positive
I'm curious. How can flaps self-deploy to full positive given in- flight airflow? Are they somehow balanced? - too high flap handling forces (more than JAR22 limits) This one seems to contradict the first one. If it takes a lot of force to deploy the flaps, how can they self-deploy to full positive? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
it is not contradictory
- it needs much force to push the flaps to negative position - when you fly fast through a thermal or turbulence the handle unhooked and comes fully back into positive position, unless you hold it permanently in your hand. - a former world champion who flew the glider said: The plane unfortunately can not be flown to its full performance, because as long as it behaves so badly. many modern gliders even accept the flaps to be in intermediate positions without being in a locked position and the flaps will not move. wrote in message ups.com... - flap handle unlocking in flight and shifting to full positive I'm curious. How can flaps self-deploy to full positive given in- flight airflow? Are they somehow balanced? - too high flap handling forces (more than JAR22 limits) This one seems to contradict the first one. If it takes a lot of force to deploy the flaps, how can they self-deploy to full positive? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
On Jun 16, 3:44 pm, "BlueCumulus" wrote:
it is not contradictory - it needs much force to push the flaps to negative position - when you fly fast through a thermal or turbulence the handle unhooked and comes fully back into positive position, unless you hold it permanently in your hand. - a former world champion who flew the glider said: The plane unfortunately can not be flown to its full performance, because as long as it behaves so badly. many modern gliders even accept the flaps to be in intermediate positions without being in a locked position and the flaps will not move. wrote in message ups.com... - flap handle unlocking in flight and shifting to full positive I'm curious. How can flaps self-deploy to full positive given in- flight airflow? Are they somehow balanced? - too high flap handling forces (more than JAR22 limits) This one seems to contradict the first one. If it takes a lot of force to deploy the flaps, how can they self-deploy to full positive? - Strangely enough Mr.Johnosn did not publish these "revelations". |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
- Strangely enough Mr.Johnosn did not publish these 'revelations'. I am not taking any sides in the Dianna 2 debate, as it seems like a hot ship, with a not too shabby track record to back that up and I do not have rounded enough info to pass judgment on it. I do want to point out however, that this thread is about s/n 3 or higher; Johnson tested s/n 2, the personal Dianna 2 of the US dealer. I am curious to hear more, both good or bad (hopefully good though). One can never be too cautious about believing hype on any product, especially sailplanes, but I do want to point out that the Poles have a very good track record when it comes to their ship's performances and their claims about them. In general they tend to be very objective, scientific, and accurately stated, as confirmed by many other Johnson (and other's) tests, including s/n 2 Dianna II. But lets not stifle further discussion on the subject. Paul Hanson "Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
On Jun 16, 5:24 am, wrote:
- flap handle unlocking in flight and shifting to full positive I'm curious. How can flaps self-deploy to full positive given in- flight airflow? Are they somehow balanced? - too high flap handling forces (more than JAR22 limits) This one seems to contradict the first one. If it takes a lot of force to deploy the flaps, how can they self-deploy to full positive? Yeah, I'm curious too. I have an old Speed Astir, and had some trouble with the flap lock becoming disengaged. It usually happened turning base to final, and went from full positive to full negative in blink of an eye. There is considerable force at all airspeeds and conditions (except a negative "G" push) exerted on the flap control toward the negative flap setting. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
" this thread is about s/n 3 or higher;"
There is a very good report on another ship in the US, which I assume is SN3 or higher and reports nothing of rumors that you are passing on. From Bill Liscomb's report on his ship: Off tow the fun really begins! It is easy to fly and the roll rate is downright snappy. As with most flapped ships, as the flaps go farther down, the adverse yaw goes up. But at normal climb/cruise settings it is not noticeable and control harmony is good. I haven't flown with other ships very much, so I can't claim any kind of remarkable thermalling performance. I do know this thing has climbed out of situations where my previous glider, a 304CZ, would have had problems. The flying weight of the Diana 2 (without water ballast) is about 25 pounds heavier than the empty weight of the 304CZ! Empty weight of my Diana 2 with instruments, battery, oxygen, etc., is 433 lbs. Then, there is the glide. Unreal! I'm still having trust issues with the glide computer. It seems impossible that a 15m ship has legs like this! The factory provides a nice sheet of linear graphs showing flap settings for speeds at different wing loading. The idea with the flap charts is you cut them out and stack them together with a glue stick. As you dump water, simply peel off charts until you get to your current wing loading. The correct flap setting is mandatory to get the best performance from this ship. In March of 2007, I did get to see what a load of bugs does. I checked out my black, fuzzy leading edges, then set the glide computer to 20% bugs and did a 30 mile final glide. I got back to Warner very high, dialed the bugs back to zero, and it showed my actual arrival altitude. I've done one flight with water ballast. I put in 43gallons (344 lbs) plus another 12lbs in the tail, which put me at just under 1,000lbs (1102 lbs is the maximum). This gave a wing loading of 10.6 lbs sq ft. (the dry wingloading is about 6.7 lbs sq ft). Once off tow, the water transforms the glider into a rocket. I felt like I was strapped inside a runaway locomotive. I flew on August 29th, 2006, a great day in So- Cal, and SeeYou showed two segments over 170 miles with no turns and average speeds 113 and 116mph. Landings are easy. I use the +21 flap setting rather than the +28 because of the wind we usually have at Warner Springs. This setting also increases aileron effectiveness while dealing with the normal crosswind shear, thermals and turbulence on final. Wheel landings are the norm - touch down, add full spoilers, put flaps full negative, hold the tail off, roll to a stop. The Diana 2 is small and light, both in the air and on the ground. It is a total blast to fly. Soaring in Southern California is unique in that a pilot can encounter several different air masses in one flight. Without water ballast, the Diana 2 is very capable of handling these conditions. It does very well in small, weak thermals as well as the big rowdy stuff, and has an amazing glide over a wide speed range. When it gets good, simply add water. Lots and lots of water... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
Thanks for the report.
I do not know were people pick up those ideas. I did fly a few times with and against the Diana and I was very much impressed. I also did sit in the cockpit and I was not able to get comfortable.Other then that I was very much tempted. Instead I got an other glider. Udo On Jun 17, 4:00 pm, tommytoyz wrote: " this thread is about s/n 3 or higher;" There is a very good report on another ship in the US, which I assume is SN3 or higher and reports nothing of rumors that you are passing on. From Bill Liscomb's report on his ship: Off tow the fun really begins! It is easy to fly and the roll rate is downright snappy. As with most flapped ships, as the flaps go farther down, the adverse yaw goes up. But at normal climb/cruise settings it is not noticeable and control harmony is good. I haven't flown with other ships very much, so I can't claim any kind of remarkable thermalling performance. I do know this thing has climbed out of situations where my previous glider, a 304CZ, would have had problems. The flying weight of the Diana 2 (without water ballast) is about 25 pounds heavier than the empty weight of the 304CZ! Empty weight of my Diana 2 with instruments, battery, oxygen, etc., is 433 lbs. Then, there is the glide. Unreal! I'm still having trust issues with the glide computer. It seems impossible that a 15m ship has legs like this! The factory provides a nice sheet of linear graphs showing flap settings for speeds at different wing loading. The idea with the flap charts is you cut them out and stack them together with a glue stick. As you dump water, simply peel off charts until you get to your current wing loading. The correct flap setting is mandatory to get the best performance from this ship. In March of 2007, I did get to see what a load of bugs does. I checked out my black, fuzzy leading edges, then set the glide computer to 20% bugs and did a 30 mile final glide. I got back to Warner very high, dialed the bugs back to zero, and it showed my actual arrival altitude. I've done one flight with water ballast. I put in 43gallons (344 lbs) plus another 12lbs in the tail, which put me at just under 1,000lbs (1102 lbs is the maximum). This gave a wing loading of 10.6 lbs sq ft. (the dry wingloading is about 6.7 lbs sq ft). Once off tow, the water transforms the glider into a rocket. I felt like I was strapped inside a runaway locomotive. I flew on August 29th, 2006, a great day in So- Cal, and SeeYou showed two segments over 170 miles with no turns and average speeds 113 and 116mph. Landings are easy. I use the +21 flap setting rather than the +28 because of the wind we usually have at Warner Springs. This setting also increases aileron effectiveness while dealing with the normal crosswind shear, thermals and turbulence on final. Wheel landings are the norm - touch down, add full spoilers, put flaps full negative, hold the tail off, roll to a stop. The Diana 2 is small and light, both in the air and on the ground. It is a total blast to fly. Soaring in Southern California is unique in that a pilot can encounter several different air masses in one flight. Without water ballast, the Diana 2 is very capable of handling these conditions. It does very well in small, weak thermals as well as the big rowdy stuff, and has an amazing glide over a wide speed range. When it gets good, simply add water. Lots and lots of water... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?
Maciek wrote: If one of your ailerons pins out, or your flaps aren't
locked at their position - they will all deploy up. It is impossible that the flaps are balanced that much .... I do not agree with that. It depends on the aerodynamic and kinematics design of the flap system. The ASW27 does not show any tendency to change flap settings between +2 and -1 which covers a speed range of 80-180km/h. The same I was told to be the case for the ASW26. You can have the flaps in any inter- mediate position and it will stay there. you can move the flaps to any setting with two fingers (except -2 and Landing position). As said before the prototypes of the Diana-2 have the wing position about 5cm (2") more tailward than this first "Serial Machine". Why the wing- position was moved forward is not clear but confirmed. After such a significant change I would rather call it a prototype as well. The handbook as well did not show the new drawings and figures for the CG calculations. The glider was month too late in production and delivered in a hurry after just one test flight. This Diana-2 with production number 3 seems to be a different plane in regards of flying behavior than the prototypes. That's why I was wondering if anyone might have flown number 4. __________________________________________________ ______ "Maciek" wrote in message ... wrote: Yeah, I'm curious too. I have an old Speed Astir, and had some trouble with the flap lock becoming disengaged. It usually happened turning base to final, and went from full positive to full negative in blink of an eye. There is considerable force at all airspeeds and conditions (except a negative "G" push) exerted on the flap control toward the negative flap setting. finally someone imaginative... There is a pressure difference betweene the upper and the bottom surface of the wing, thanks to whitch our gliders can fly (if there is enyone who doesn't know that...). If one of your ailerons pins out, or your flaps aren't locked at their position - they will all deploy up. It is impossible that the flaps are balanced that much, to overcome the pressure difference and deploy to positive - especially in a glider weighting 185 kg. Mat |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
master warning | Kevin | Simulators | 1 | July 27th 06 07:28 PM |
unported flop tube | jasonlee | Aerobatics | 1 | June 1st 06 03:23 PM |
Master Buss Bar? | ccwillwerth | Home Built | 18 | January 20th 06 02:32 AM |
Master Switch | Lakeview Bill | Piloting | 23 | July 20th 05 01:46 AM |
Master Jet Base | MICHAEL OLEARY | Naval Aviation | 24 | April 22nd 05 07:00 AM |