Diana-2 VH-VHZ, stranded in Australia (pic links only)

Diana-2, VH-VHZ, English
http://www.segelflug.de/cgi-bin/wwwt...vc=1#Post68917

Many good things have been written and read about Diana-2.... but there is a
Diana-2 with serial number 3 and the call-sign VH-VHZ
http://www.sportaviation.com.au/C01_S%20copy.jpg
which unfortunately stranded in Australia.

The manufacturer is proud that they delivered a plane to the multiple world
record pilot.
http://records.fai.org/pilot.asp?id=1320&from=gliding
http://www.beres.com.pl/index.php?op...d=8&Itemid =1
http://www.beres.com.pl/polish/index...=32&Itemi d=1

But unfortunately the plane which arrived in Tocumwal (Australia) limped and
never raced. It even did not receive the Australian airworthiness.
http://www.glidingmagazine.com/NewsArticle.asp?id=1605

This plane really must have been born sick. Even the wheel broke off the
tail dolly. But at least that was repairable.
Many emails were sent to the manufacturer from December 2006 on to solve the
various problems, but the factory stayed silent: no sign of cooperation or
customer care.

The same pilot had flown several world records with Diana-1. I wished I
could fly as good.
VH-VHZ only did test flights in Tocumwal - no cross country flights - no
records - frustration only for everybody involved.

After his flight with Diana-2 World Champion Ingo Renner commented: The
potential of this glider cannot be achieved, due to its bad handling
problems at the moment.

Still the manufacturer seems to be uncooperative and a negative comment in
the online guestbook of the manufacturer about the event was deleted a day
later.

It is unsure if this craw ever will morph into an eagle.
Obviously the manufacturer tries to cover up the whole story about the
existence of a Diana-2 with malicious flight characteristics.

Six month have now passed without any help for the customer to solve the
problems. That's why the grace period of public silence has run out.

Chris

On Jul 25, 9:29 pm, "BlueCumulus" wrote:
Diana-2, VH-VHZ, Englishhttp://www.segelflug.de/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showthreaded.pl?Cat=1,5&Bo...

Many good things have been written and read about Diana-2.... but there is a
Diana-2 with serial number 3 and the call-sign VH-VHZhttp://www.sportaviation.com.au/C01_S%20copy.jpg
which unfortunately stranded in Australia.

The manufacturer is proud that they delivered a plane to the multiple world
record pilot.http://records.fai.org/pilot.asp?id=...tent&task=view...

But unfortunately the plane which arrived in Tocumwal (Australia) limped and
never raced. It even did not receive the Australian airworthiness.http://www.glidingmagazine.com/NewsArticle.asp?id=1605

This plane really must have been born sick. Even the wheel broke off the
tail dolly. But at least that was repairable.
Many emails were sent to the manufacturer from December 2006 on to solve the
various problems, but the factory stayed silent: no sign of cooperation or
customer care.

The same pilot had flown several world records with Diana-1. I wished I
could fly as good.
VH-VHZ only did test flights in Tocumwal - no cross country flights - no
records - frustration only for everybody involved.

After his flight with Diana-2 World Champion Ingo Renner commented: The
potential of this glider cannot be achieved, due to its bad handling
problems at the moment.

Still the manufacturer seems to be uncooperative and a negative comment in
the online guestbook of the manufacturer about the event was deleted a day
later.

It is unsure if this craw ever will morph into an eagle.
Obviously the manufacturer tries to cover up the whole story about the
existence of a Diana-2 with malicious flight characteristics.

Six month have now passed without any help for the customer to solve the
problems. That's why the grace period of public silence has run out.

Chris



Chris, what you say is mean spirited, one sided, overblown and
sickening.
Who is your cover up sponsor? Segelflugzugenwundermachine accountant ?

wrote in message
ps.com...
Chris, what you say is mean spirited, one sided, overblown and sickening.
Who is your cover up sponsor? Segelflugzugenwundermachine accountant ?

many Australians saw it happen
if you can't accept facts
then believe in god
and leave space
for reality
Chris

arlier, wrote:

Chris, what you say is mean spirited, one sided, overblown and
sickening.
Who is your cover up sponsor? Segelflugzugenwundermachine
accountant ?

Reading all available accounts (not there are that many), I'm inclined
to believe that there is more than just a grain of truth to Mr.
Hostettler's accounting of the situation.

Developing a front-running competition sailplane of 15m span is an
incredibly difficult task. I find it very easy to believe that an
early production or pre-production unit would be behind schedule, over
budget, poorly trimmed, and in general not completely sorted-out to
the promised degree. I find it especially easy to believe that such
would be the product of a company with limited (that is, not Schempp-
Hirth or Schleicher class) development and production resources.

The important thing to understand is that sailplanes are specialty
products, not commodities. The are all hand-made. But some sailplanes
are more special than others. The Diana and Diana 2 sailplanes are
based on some very innovative design features, developed solely to
improve performance. These are lightweight, high-aspect-ratio (low
wing area) ships that push the envelope of what you can do and what
you can get away with. Doing that is expensive and risky - the kind of
venture shunned by the more conservative established firms and
embraced by the bold and the foolhardy. The real trick with getting
involved in such risky business is finding the measure of the boldness
and foolhardiness in yourself and in your partners.

Here's the key question in my mind: How is Mr. Hostettler's Internet
activity affecting the situation at hand? Is it helping or hurting Ms.
Zejdova's probability of achieving satisfaction from Design Office
Bogumil Beres? On the one hand, you could say that it is raising
awareness of unsavory business practices and prodding the company to
action. On the other hand, you can say that it is supressing demand
for Diana sailplanes, placing the manufacturer in such financial
straits as to make it unlikely that they could ever meet Ms. Zejdova's
legitimate demands. The answer to that question determines what kind
of friend Mr. Hostettler is to Ms. Zejdova.

Thanks, Bob K.

Wise words Bob - thanks.

Hana Zeidova is a good friend of mine.
She often flew my ASW-27 in Tocumwal and even if pushing the
glider to it's limits, she never made a scratch. Hana has a very good
risk management and she is a very good pilot. She is as well a good
professional photographer.

The manufacturer can solve the problem easily and he had already
six month to do so. Instead of blaming the pilot of having faked the
sent photographs, which were take to document all the problems
the factory could agree in fixing the problems in the factory and
agree to pay for the transports. I saw the problems personally and
the photos are not faked!! it would go as well against Hana's work
ethics and I understand her to be upset about these allegations.

The condition of the glider was so problematic, that only the owner
Hana and World Champion Ingo Renner got the permission to fly
it. Everybody knows that for example CG position is a very important
issue. Whenever I got a plane from the factory, I sat myself fully
equipped into the glider and we optimized CG position. I cannot
understand why this was not proposed.

It is understandable that harsh words might have been exchanged
about this issue. But I understand than the pilot of the plane is very
upset about what happened last year. The problem started because
the manufacturer refused to communicate and to cooperate. What
is so difficult to answer an email? to give some tips? to send some
needed technical data and information? I am sure both sides will
exchange apologies after a healthy business relationship has been
reestablished. But the first step has to be done by the Diana
factory.

Diana can get better publicity, as soon as the manufacturer says:
Sorry we messed it up, but we will now help to find out what
caused the problems and help to make this Diana-2 perfect for
your plans to fly further world records. Then it can be said that all
existing Diana's fly good. An apology to Hana's sponsor could
smoothen the second problem and hopefully get it's support back.
Nobody talks about lawyers when cooperation exists. Lawyers
are just bloody expensive and the money can be better for better
purposes.

I do not see how this should be so difficult.

I am happy also to report the positive issues about Hana's Diana
in futu That's nothing but fair. It only has to happen.

Chris
__________________________________________________ _

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Kuykendall"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.soaring
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 3:28 AM
Subject: Diana-2 VH-VHZ, stranded in Australia (pic links only)


Reading all available accounts (not there are that many), I'm inclined
to believe that there is more than just a grain of truth to Mr.
Hostettler's accounting of the situation.

Developing a front-running competition sailplane of 15m span is an
incredibly difficult task. I find it very easy to believe that an
early production or pre-production unit would be behind schedule, over
budget, poorly trimmed, and in general not completely sorted-out to
the promised degree. I find it especially easy to believe that such
would be the product of a company with limited (that is, not Schempp-
Hirth or Schleicher class) development and production resources.

The important thing to understand is that sailplanes are specialty
products, not commodities. The are all hand-made. But some sailplanes
are more special than others. The Diana and Diana 2 sailplanes are
based on some very innovative design features, developed solely to
improve performance. These are lightweight, high-aspect-ratio (low
wing area) ships that push the envelope of what you can do and what
you can get away with. Doing that is expensive and risky - the kind of
venture shunned by the more conservative established firms and
embraced by the bold and the foolhardy. The real trick with getting
involved in such risky business is finding the measure of the boldness
and foolhardiness in yourself and in your partners.

Here's the key question in my mind: How is Mr. Hostettler's Internet
activity affecting the situation at hand? Is it helping or hurting Ms.
Zejdova's probability of achieving satisfaction from Design Office
Bogumil Beres? On the one hand, you could say that it is raising
awareness of unsavory business practices and prodding the company to
action. On the other hand, you can say that it is supressing demand
for Diana sailplanes, placing the manufacturer in such financial
straits as to make it unlikely that they could ever meet Ms. Zejdova's
legitimate demands. The answer to that question determines what kind
of friend Mr. Hostettler is to Ms. Zejdova.

Thanks, Bob K.

U¿ytkownik "BlueCumulus" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Wise words Bob - thanks.

Hana Zeidova is a good friend of mine.
She often flew my ASW-27 in Tocumwal and even if pushing the
glider to it's limits, she never made a scratch. Hana has a very good
risk management and she is a very good pilot. She is as well a good
professional photographer.

The manufacturer can solve the problem easily and he had already
six month to do so. Instead of blaming the pilot of having faked the
sent photographs, which were take to document all the problems
the factory could agree in fixing the problems in the factory and
agree to pay for the transports. I saw the problems personally and
the photos are not faked!! it would go as well against Hana's work
ethics and I understand her to be upset about these allegations.

The condition of the glider was so problematic, that only the owner
Hana and World Champion Ingo Renner got the permission to fly
it. Everybody knows that for example CG position is a very important
issue. Whenever I got a plane from the factory, I sat myself fully
equipped into the glider and we optimized CG position. I cannot
understand why this was not proposed.

It is understandable that harsh words might have been exchanged
about this issue. But I understand than the pilot of the plane is very
upset about what happened last year. The problem started because
the manufacturer refused to communicate and to cooperate. What
is so difficult to answer an email? to give some tips? to send some
needed technical data and information? I am sure both sides will
exchange apologies after a healthy business relationship has been
reestablished. But the first step has to be done by the Diana
factory.

Diana can get better publicity, as soon as the manufacturer says:
Sorry we messed it up, but we will now help to find out what
caused the problems and help to make this Diana-2 perfect for
your plans to fly further world records. Then it can be said that all
existing Diana's fly good. An apology to Hana's sponsor could
smoothen the second problem and hopefully get it's support back.
Nobody talks about lawyers when cooperation exists. Lawyers
are just bloody expensive and the money can be better for better
purposes.

I do not see how this should be so difficult.

I am happy also to report the positive issues about Hana's Diana
in futu That's nothing but fair. It only has to happen.

Chris
__________________________________________________ _

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Kuykendall"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.soaring
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 3:28 AM
Subject: Diana-2 VH-VHZ, stranded in Australia (pic links only)


Reading all available accounts (not there are that many), I'm inclined
to believe that there is more than just a grain of truth to Mr.
Hostettler's accounting of the situation.

Developing a front-running competition sailplane of 15m span is an
incredibly difficult task. I find it very easy to believe that an
early production or pre-production unit would be behind schedule, over
budget, poorly trimmed, and in general not completely sorted-out to
the promised degree. I find it especially easy to believe that such
would be the product of a company with limited (that is, not Schempp-
Hirth or Schleicher class) development and production resources.

The important thing to understand is that sailplanes are specialty
products, not commodities. The are all hand-made. But some sailplanes
are more special than others. The Diana and Diana 2 sailplanes are
based on some very innovative design features, developed solely to
improve performance. These are lightweight, high-aspect-ratio (low
wing area) ships that push the envelope of what you can do and what
you can get away with. Doing that is expensive and risky - the kind of
venture shunned by the more conservative established firms and
embraced by the bold and the foolhardy. The real trick with getting
involved in such risky business is finding the measure of the boldness
and foolhardiness in yourself and in your partners.

Here's the key question in my mind: How is Mr. Hostettler's Internet
activity affecting the situation at hand? Is it helping or hurting Ms.
Zejdova's probability of achieving satisfaction from Design Office
Bogumil Beres? On the one hand, you could say that it is raising
awareness of unsavory business practices and prodding the company to
action. On the other hand, you can say that it is supressing demand
for Diana sailplanes, placing the manufacturer in such financial
straits as to make it unlikely that they could ever meet Ms. Zejdova's
legitimate demands. The answer to that question determines what kind
of friend Mr. Hostettler is to Ms. Zejdova.

Thanks, Bob K.




Hello,

However I am regular reader of group discussion, I take part to these rather
rarely. Called to the black-board with comment on my "rude and negative
manners in relation with customer" I feel obliged to offer some
explanations. Please arm yourselves with patience, this will not be a short
info.

My judgement based on aggressive mode of opinions presented here, as well as
precise details contained therein indicates the parson under "BluCumulus"
nick is Hana Zejdova or her close familiar. I do not understand why she does
not use her own name (but it is not my problem), any way in such case I
would respond to her, like I did to all former e-mail messages.

To explain the situation, I can say what follows:

1. The SZD-56-2 DIANA-2 model sailplane has successfully passed
complete flight test program, in accordance with JAR-22 requirements, and I
am in a final stage of process to gain the Type Certificate

2. "DIANA-2" is a single sailplane in its class, breaking the monopoly
of German sailplanes, while the sportive results achieved already on the
first built plane of this model confirm its quality beyond any doubts

3. I have at my disposal numerous press publications and opinions from
wide group of pilots (with various flying experience) who flown DIANA-2, and
confirmed afterwards the correct flying characteristics of this model

4. The phase of preparation for production (manufacturing of mould,
jigs etc) has been accomplished with care and in practice it is impossible
to produce 2 sailplanes different in significant way one from another. Zejda
family visited Bielsko many times and could personally inspect the process
of construction, to verify if everything is done in exact and repeatable
manner. Announcing now that the S/N 003 is different from other - they lie.
There is no chance for this from technical point of view.

5. After completion of the sailplane construction, this one for Zejdova
as it was a case with all other, has been subjected to acceptance inspection
of Polish CAA engineer and the test pilot (with I-st class rating) has
accomplished the factory test flight. Both verifications gave positive
result, which is confirmed also in the sailplane documents.

6. From the hitherto correspondence I know, in Australia an
unauthorised by my company adjustment to sailplane control systems have been
undertaken, which results in loss of warranty. DIANA is a sailplane with
unique design solutions, different from these popular on many other models.
Adjustment without previous introduction to these, even undertaken by an
experienced serviceman can result in improper operation of control systems.
Specially sensitive to adjustment is air-brake control system.

7. Striking is fact that all sailplanes both build before and after S/N
003 have good opinion among their owners/operators and only Zejdova has
reservations announced worldwide. I will not enclose here the links to
websites or magazines confirming high performance and very good piloting
characteristics. There is really large number of pilots who flown this
sailplane, with no negative opinions from whole this group.

8. Further: the sailplane has been sold to Czech Republic

9. Zejdova is not the owner, she was operator of this plane over
certain period of time/

10. Neither Zejdova nor other persons flying S/N 003 have no competency to
judge the piloting characteristics of the sailplane, to my opinion this is
within the competency of suitably trained & experienced test pilot

11. Owner of the concerned sailplane is a person financing Zejdova flying,
not from the aviation branch and I guess he is not conscious of the
situation aroused. The correspondence sent to him remains unanswered, while
he is a single partner for agreement on procedure to bring the sailplane to
the "factory" condition

12. In correspondence with Zejdova, I declared readiness to bring the
sailplane to the "factory" condition, free of charge (regardless from
warranty loss), provided the plane will be delivered to my company, or to
Czech Republic at minimum

13. Some time ago I undertook also an attempt to solve the problem in
direct discussion, inviting Hana with her father to Bielsko. Unfortunately,
the ribald row was all they were ready to offer - without chance for any
agreement. Artless term but these who had contact with these persons might
know what I am writing about.



To sum up, in my opinion the problem is not in technical condition of the
sailplane, at expedition from my company, but the later adjustment made
without my consent and also without necessary knowledge on the sailplane.

I estimate, the main problem is somewhere in the non-technical
circumstances.

I am pretty sure, the high performance and production quality of this
sailplane say for itself.



Bogumil Beres

First I like to say, that Hana Zejdova is not writing under the BlueCumulus
name.

Second - if this statement below from Bogumil Beres is true
4. The phase of preparation for production (manufacturing of mould,
jigs etc) has been accomplished with care and in practice it is impossible
to produce 2 sailplanes different in significant way one from another.

I wonder why not both sailplanes, the SP-3697 and the VH-VHZ look the same?

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisi...28314165188562

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisi...26948365588402

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisinfos/Diana_2

Isn't it strange, how both planes should come out of the same negative
mould?

It seems to be a cheap excuse to cancel the warranty.
The factory could have answered email requests for help and not forcing the
maintenance shop in Australia to try to fix problems on their own.

It seems that Diana pilots are only allowed to make positive statements
about the planes flight handling, because they are all incompetent with
exception of the official test pilot.

Chris

_______________________

"BB" wrote in message
...
Hello,

However I am regular reader of group discussion, I take part to these
rather
rarely. Called to the black-board with comment on my "rude and negative
manners in relation with customer" I feel obliged to offer some
explanations. Please arm yourselves with patience, this will not be a
short
info.

My judgement based on aggressive mode of opinions presented here, as well
as
precise details contained therein indicates the parson under "BluCumulus"
nick is Hana Zejdova or her close familiar. I do not understand why she
does
not use her own name (but it is not my problem), any way in such case I
would respond to her, like I did to all former e-mail messages.

To explain the situation, I can say what follows:

1. The SZD-56-2 DIANA-2 model sailplane has successfully passed
complete flight test program, in accordance with JAR-22 requirements, and
I
am in a final stage of process to gain the Type Certificate

2. "DIANA-2" is a single sailplane in its class, breaking the
monopoly
of German sailplanes, while the sportive results achieved already on the
first built plane of this model confirm its quality beyond any doubts

3. I have at my disposal numerous press publications and opinions
from
wide group of pilots (with various flying experience) who flown DIANA-2,
and
confirmed afterwards the correct flying characteristics of this model

4. The phase of preparation for production (manufacturing of mould,
jigs etc) has been accomplished with care and in practice it is impossible
to produce 2 sailplanes different in significant way one from another.
Zejda
family visited Bielsko many times and could personally inspect the process
of construction, to verify if everything is done in exact and repeatable
manner. Announcing now that the S/N 003 is different from other - they
lie.
There is no chance for this from technical point of view.

5. After completion of the sailplane construction, this one for
Zejdova
as it was a case with all other, has been subjected to acceptance
inspection
of Polish CAA engineer and the test pilot (with I-st class rating) has
accomplished the factory test flight. Both verifications gave positive
result, which is confirmed also in the sailplane documents.

6. From the hitherto correspondence I know, in Australia an
unauthorised by my company adjustment to sailplane control systems have
been
undertaken, which results in loss of warranty. DIANA is a sailplane with
unique design solutions, different from these popular on many other
models.
Adjustment without previous introduction to these, even undertaken by an
experienced serviceman can result in improper operation of control
systems.
Specially sensitive to adjustment is air-brake control system.

7. Striking is fact that all sailplanes both build before and after
S/N
003 have good opinion among their owners/operators and only Zejdova has
reservations announced worldwide. I will not enclose here the links to
websites or magazines confirming high performance and very good piloting
characteristics. There is really large number of pilots who flown this
sailplane, with no negative opinions from whole this group.

8. Further: the sailplane has been sold to Czech Republic

9. Zejdova is not the owner, she was operator of this plane over
certain period of time/

10. Neither Zejdova nor other persons flying S/N 003 have no competency
to
judge the piloting characteristics of the sailplane, to my opinion this is
within the competency of suitably trained & experienced test pilot

11. Owner of the concerned sailplane is a person financing Zejdova
flying,
not from the aviation branch and I guess he is not conscious of the
situation aroused. The correspondence sent to him remains unanswered,
while
he is a single partner for agreement on procedure to bring the sailplane
to
the "factory" condition

12. In correspondence with Zejdova, I declared readiness to bring the
sailplane to the "factory" condition, free of charge (regardless from
warranty loss), provided the plane will be delivered to my company, or to
Czech Republic at minimum

13. Some time ago I undertook also an attempt to solve the problem in
direct discussion, inviting Hana with her father to Bielsko.
Unfortunately,
the ribald row was all they were ready to offer - without chance for any
agreement. Artless term but these who had contact with these persons might
know what I am writing about.

To sum up, in my opinion the problem is not in technical condition of the
sailplane, at expedition from my company, but the later adjustment made
without my consent and also without necessary knowledge on the sailplane.

I estimate, the main problem is somewhere in the non-technical
circumstances.

I am pretty sure, the high performance and production quality of this
sailplane say for itself.

Bogumil Beres

WTF is your obsession with Diana????

"BlueCumulus" wrote in message
...
Diana-2, VH-VHZ, English
http://www.segelflug.de/cgi-bin/wwwt...vc=1#Post68917

Many good things have been written and read about Diana-2.... but there is
a
Diana-2 with serial number 3 and the call-sign VH-VHZ
http://www.sportaviation.com.au/C01_S%20copy.jpg
which unfortunately stranded in Australia.

The manufacturer is proud that they delivered a plane to the multiple
world
record pilot.
http://records.fai.org/pilot.asp?id=1320&from=gliding
http://www.beres.com.pl/index.php?op...d=8&Itemid =1
http://www.beres.com.pl/polish/index...=32&Itemi d=1

But unfortunately the plane which arrived in Tocumwal (Australia) limped
and
never raced. It even did not receive the Australian airworthiness.
http://www.glidingmagazine.com/NewsArticle.asp?id=1605

This plane really must have been born sick. Even the wheel broke off the
tail dolly. But at least that was repairable.
Many emails were sent to the manufacturer from December 2006 on to solve
the
various problems, but the factory stayed silent: no sign of cooperation or
customer care.

The same pilot had flown several world records with Diana-1. I wished I
could fly as good.
VH-VHZ only did test flights in Tocumwal - no cross country flights - no
records - frustration only for everybody involved.

After his flight with Diana-2 World Champion Ingo Renner commented: The
potential of this glider cannot be achieved, due to its bad handling
problems at the moment.

Still the manufacturer seems to be uncooperative and a negative comment in
the online guestbook of the manufacturer about the event was deleted a day
later.

It is unsure if this craw ever will morph into an eagle.
Obviously the manufacturer tries to cover up the whole story about the
existence of a Diana-2 with malicious flight characteristics.

Six month have now passed without any help for the customer to solve the
problems. That's why the grace period of public silence has run out.

Chris

I have nothing against Diana-2

But I would like to find out why serial number 3 is not looking and flying
like serial number 2.
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisi...28314165188562
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisi...26948365588402
while Boguminl Beres says
that they have to be the same
fly the same and look the same
because they come out of the same mould.
Chris


"W" wrote in message
news
WTF is your obsession with Diana????

BlueCumulus wrote:
I have nothing against Diana-2

But I would like to find out why serial number 3 is not looking and flying
like serial number 2.
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisi...28314165188562
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/chrisi...26948365588402
while Boguminl Beres says
that they have to be the same
fly the same and look the same
because they come out of the same mould.

Looks like they deepened the canopy cut out at the back to allow a bit
better view down. That's the sort of thing prototypes are used for. Is
that the best evidence you have of changes?