Diamond Katana vs Ximango - want to buy a touring motorglider
Catherine Conway
anyone have an opinion about these motorgliders? I've heard that the
Ximango has a faster TAS and retractable gear and more glide points but has
an older wing section.
-Cath
ADP
The Katana with the Rotax 914 (Turbo) is fast, miserly on fuel and soars
well. The tri-gear makes it very easy to land and operate in cross wind
conditions.
I have outclimbed Grob 103s in the same air and been outclimbed by 2-33s in
similar air. 27:1 seems about right for max L/D. The visibility from the
cockpit is about the best I have ever seen in a glider and you get to sit
upright. I regularly got 115 kts GS at about 4.7 gph, including climb. I
always flew cross country at 16,500' or 17,500' with O2. At 17,999 feet it
is still climbing at 400 fpm at max power. I have gone from 9000' to
26,000' with the engine off in wave and under power can climb from 5000' to
17,999' in 14 minutes. The engine has never failed to start in the air and,
if you set the plugs right, will never fail to start on the ground. Annuals
are very inexpensive. Very few Katana MGs have the folding wing kit and it
is not possible to fold the wings with one person even with the kit. The
folding mechanism is not well designed.
The Ximango is a tail wheel MG. You sit extremely low in the cockpit and a
person of average height can hardly see out while taxiing. The controls are
heavier than the Katana and it seems to act more like an airplane in flight,
even with the engine off. The retractable gear is a nightmare. It requires
a very unnatural and powerful movement of your right hand and arm and, in my
view, the slight gain in max L/D vs the Katana is not worth it. The cross
wind limits are severe. DO NOT take off in a quartering left cross wind of
over 10 kts. Unless you are a real tailwheel pro, leave it on the ground
with gusty winds. The spoiler handle is in a non-standard place and very
easy to forget and leave extended on take off or go-around. The wings fold,
which is good and the Ximango can fit in a standard T-hangar. The folding
mechanism is an excellent design.
Having evaluated both, I would vote for the Katana with out hesitation.
Your opinion may vary!
Good luck,
Allan
"Catherine Conway" <con...@agile.com.au> wrote in message
news:3edb06b0$1...@duster.adelaide.on.net...
John Morgan
"ADP" <adp...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vdr42s6...@corp.supernews.com...
> Having flown both:
>
I have gone from 9000' to
> 26,000' with the engine off in wave and under power can climb from 5000'
to
> 17,999' in 14 minutes
That's an altitude gain of 13K, or averaging just over 900 fpm . . . if
you're climbing with power alone (not in wave), could this be correct? My
Stemme S10-VT, with the same 914 but with the addition of intercooling,
doesn't climb that well, maybe 800 fpm at sea level and dropping off to less
than 600 fpm up high.
--
bumper <bum...@ten.tta>
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/31/2003
ADP
I timed this many times at Sedona, AZ
The best time I ever recorded was on a cool day at 14:03. On warmer days it
would vary from about 14:30 to 15:30 because I often had to reduce power due
to the yellow overheat light coming on. Sedona is at 4827' There was no
help from wave or any other lift source.
I was always alone and my fuel varied from about half (10.4 gal) to 3/4 on a
20.9 gal tank.
At sea level my initial climb rate would often be 1200 fpm. In fact, it got
to the point that I took off with max continuous power rather than full
power because it was not needed - even at Sedona or Truckee in the summer.
I believe that your Stemme is heavier than my Katana by a little.
It's also possible that my Rotax was stronger than some.
On the other hand, you could glide a lot farther than I!
Cheers,
Allan
"John Morgan" <bum...@ten.tta> wrote in message
news:JMpDa.186748$ja4.9...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Colin
>
>"ADP" <adp...@charter.net> wrote in message
>news:vdr42s6...@corp.supernews.com...
>> Having flown both:
>>
>I have gone from 9000' to
>> 26,000' with the engine off in wave and under power can climb from 5000'
>to
>> 17,999' in 14 minutes
>
>
>That's an altitude gain of 13K, or averaging just over 900 fpm . . . if
>you're climbing with power alone (not in wave), could this be correct? My
>Stemme S10-VT, with the same 914 but with the addition of intercooling,
>doesn't climb that well, maybe 800 fpm at sea level and dropping off to less
>than 600 fpm up high.
Yes but the Stemme with a Limbach could hardly get off the ground
two-up and full of fuel, whereas the old Limbach Dimona mg. has an
excellent t/o performance. Of course when it comes to soaring the
position is reversed.
- Colin
Catherine Conway
and are now looking for a secondhand Stemme S10-VT
-Cath
John Morgan
The Stemme is in a whole 'nuther league, a real thoroughbred when it comes
to motorgliders. The ship has lots of advantages . . . and a few weaknesses.
Advantages:
Great performance under power and soaring . . . really, no other two place
motorglider comes close if you consider the whole picture.
Quick engine deployment with low drag penalty while starting and shutting
down.
Good ground handling compared to single main gear self-launchers. This ease
of ground handling allows operations out of towered airports with multiple
taxiway turns . . . even in strong gusty wind conditions. (4 Stemmes taxied
out and launched from Cedar City, UT last year with winds at 30 knots
gusting over 35 . . . cheeks were tight, I was the first one off and the
ride up was almost vertical!).
Since the wings are mounted high and the gear legs long (compared to most
gliders), there's good ground clearance. Folding the wings after landing for
taxi obstructions is a seldom needed but an easy option.
Rigging from a trailer is doable but more of a chore than with smaller
gliders. Very few Stemme owners have trailers.
Folding wings and putting the ship in a T-hangar is quick and easy. Actual
wing folding/unfolding takes less than 10 minutes, even if your slow, and
that includes tape!
Disadvantages:
There have been numerous SB's and a few AD's. The majority of the SB's have
been from Rotax and many of these for small things. The big AD was for the
propeller - - it's done now and the fix is working well. Another is upcoming
and entails replacing a gear in the front gearbox. THAT will hopefully be
the end of the heartache. All the teething pains should be resolved and
we'll enjoy our reliable Stemmes.
Landing gear looks robust, and it IS for normal front and down loads.
Sideload strength (or lack thereof) is another issue and you best not be
drifting sideways at a high rate on touchdown. (Note, most US owners have
never had a problem with this, but a few in the UK have. Stemme responded by
beefing up the lower trailing links.)
Limited luggage space when two-up as compared to some touring motorgliders.
hope this helps.
--
bumper <bum...@ten.tta> (S10-VT 50ZZ, ASH26E 52ZZ)
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003
Colin
Hope springs eternal, but these things have been going on steadily
since inception, so why would it stop now ?
>Landing gear looks robust, and it IS for normal front and down loads.
>Sideload strength (or lack thereof) is another issue and you best not be
>drifting sideways at a high rate on touchdown. (Note, most US owners have
>never had a problem with this, but a few in the UK have. Stemme responded by
>beefing up the lower trailing links.)
>
>Limited luggage space when two-up as compared to some touring motorgliders.
The tailwheel castors only 30 degrees, so ground handling is
definitely a problem. The pilots cannot see the wingtips, so taxying
is a bit frought - maybe the wing fold is more frequent, particularly
since airfields (at least in Europe) do not allow for large span a/c.
- Colin.
John Morgan
"Colin" <co...@greench.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3eef721a...@supernews.nildram.co.uk...
All the teething pains should be resolved and
> >we'll enjoy our reliable Stemmes.
>
> Hope springs eternal, but these things have been going on steadily
> since inception, so why would it stop now ?
Well, duh . . . they've run out of things to fix!
>
> The tailwheel castors only 30 degrees, so ground handling is
> definitely a problem. The pilots cannot see the wingtips, so taxying
> is a bit frought - maybe the wing fold is more frequent, particularly
> since airfields (at least in Europe) do not allow for large span a/c.
> - Colin.
I have to wonder if you own a Stemme or have just listened to hangar talk.
True, on the few earlier ships, without winglets, the pilot couldn't see the
wingtips and this made taxiing in tight quarters dicey. With winglets (and
almost all the S10-VTs were shipped with winglets) the pilot can see the
wingtips just fine. Judging clearance is no problem once you're used to the
wide span.
The tailwheel pivots 30 degrees to each side. When turning "hard", the
inside wing tip stays almost stationary, in other words the ship rotates
about the tip. Yes, it has a relatively wide turning radius compared to a
Mooney or Aeronca Champ, but it's certainly no problem to taxi and maneuver
around any of the dozens of airports I've visited. The Stemme is more
maneuverable than my ASH26E with its steerable tailwheel and a wingtip wheel
down.
--
bumper <bum...@ten.tta>
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/11/2003
Martin Hellman
(SD) back then -- 1995-98) and a Stemme S10VT. Earlier posts have
covered most of the issues, but I have this to add:
1. The easier handling of the Katana compared to the Xhimango only
applies to the nose wheel version. Mine was the tail wheel version and
it was a handful for the first couple of months. After I got used to
it, it was no problem, but for that early time, I wondered whether I'd
bought the wrong ship. I thought my early problems might have been due
to my being a low time (250 hour) pilot when I got it, even though my
MG transition in a Grob 109B had been easy, but turned out not to be
the case. The advice I got from a CFIG who taught in one at a flying
club in Colorado sums it up well: "The ship is not a problem IF you
don't pretend that you know how to fly it, no matter how much time you
have. I don't care if you're an ATP, when you first get in, pretend
you're learning to fly all over again." When I sold it, after taking
delivery of my S10VT, I would not sell it to a club or FBO. I felt it
was too dangerous if only flown occasionally. Flown frequently, it was
wonderful. I wonder if the issues mentioned by an earlier poster
hinting of similar squirriliness in the SX might be due to similar
handling characteristics and disappear after a couple of months of
flying it regularly.
2. When I bought my SD, I also looked into the SX, and decided against
it for several reasons. One of the main ones was its poorer climb
rate. This was before the turbocharged 914 was available on either,
and that may change my conclusion. One SX owner told me that, on a hot
day, even at sea level, fully loaded, it had anemic climb. In
contrast, my SD seemed to meet the company's claim of over 800 fpm.
Both were then powered by the 912.
3. John Morgan questioned a poster who claimed 1,200 fpm in his turbo
Katana Xtreme since our Stemmes can't do that well. There may be an
explanation. I was told the KX wing was optimized for lift, and its
great climb rate seemed to bear that out. In contrast, we've been told
that the Stemme wing has been optimized for high speed cruise. Could
that account for it?
Martin
abcd...@gmail.com
abcd...@gmail.com
gotovkotzepkoi
abcd...@gmail.com;883378 Wrote:
> when a reading the comment is it possibele that we in europ e new
> generation motor gliders develloping.
--
gotovkotzepkoi