Diamond DA 20 Katana

[New Light 0]

Hey Folks! I'm low & slow simmer, and I have been eye-balling the Diamond DA 20 Katana for a couple of weeks now. I have no doubt that it's a fine, quality product. It's been out for a while now and has good reviews. My concern is, is it Acceleration/SP2/DX10 ready? Is anybody "flying" this aircraft on newer equipment? What's your experience been like with the aircraft on this newer equipment? If it's not compatible, will there be an updated version coming out fairly soon? Any thoughts, findings or opinions are welcomed Thanx!

Semper Fi, Dave

[helialpin 47]

Hi Dave!

Unfortunately the DA-20 isn´t SP2 DX10 compatible (I miss mine really but I´m DX10 only flyer) and it doesn´t seem that the designers have an interest to change this. So no good Katana for FSX SP2 DX10 out there. Im even not sure if it works with FSX SP2 DX9 fine.

[Astradan 0]

Hi Dave!

Unfortunately the DA-20 isn´t SP2 DX10 compatible (I miss mine really but I´m DX10 only flyer) and it doesn´t seem that the designers have an interest to change this. So no good Katana for FSX SP2 DX10 out there. Im even not sure if it works with FSX SP2 DX9 fine.

Wow, I've never come across a "DX10 only" flyer! .... No disrespect but I can't understand why you'd limit yourself to DX10 only aircraft - DX10 ain't that special in my opinion but each to their own!

Anyway, the purpose of my post was to say to the original poster, yes the Katana works perfectly in FSX (DX9) .... in fact it's one of my favourite all time add-ons (for either of the FS versions).

It is a must have for any GA fan!

David.

[darem 106]

The DA-20 doesn't behave well in FSX at all. Expect framerates to be inferior from the VC - worse than with complex airliners. I can't recommend this plane, even with my machine it's pretty unflyable...

[Snave 466]

The DA-20 doesn't behave well in FSX at all. Expect framerates to be inferior from the VC - worse than with complex airliners. I can't recommend this plane, even with my machine it's pretty unflyable...

I'm with Darem on this one. Its seconds per frame on my system as well, and although it flies fabulously well in FS9, I can't recommend it for FSX.

[New Light 0]

Thanx for the honest findings and opinions Gents. I think I'll pass for now. It's a shame, it seems like a nice aircraft.

Semper Fi, Dave

[New Light 0]

Well Gents, after reading many mixed, "love-hate" reviews about the Katana, I figured I'd shell out the cash and check it out for myself. The aircraft really has interested me since I found out about it recently.

First, there is one thing I did notice while I read up on the program and shopped around for it. Normally, I would have bought the DVD version of the aircraft, just so I wouldn't have download restrictions and time limits and such. The bewildering problem was, that everywhere I shopped for it, they either only offered a download, or, if they had the DVD, it was $20 extra . Seems like a plastic box with a paper sleeve should be cheaper than that!?!?! So I went ahead with the download...

Now, for the program negatives and the problems faced/solved. Initially, I was a bit disappointed because I could not get the aircraft labels edited in the aircraft.cfg file like I like them to be. I knew I wasn't going to "fly" the 80hp model so that got deleted immediately. After several un/reinstalls I took a closer look at the whole package. I figured out that both, the panel and sound for the 100hp models were aliased to the 80hp panel and sound folders, which solved the majority of the problems I was having. After getting all of the panel and sound items copied into the 100hp models respective folders, I finally had a DA 20 100 Katana on deck. Upon choosing the one U.S. registered Diamond available, I found that the engine sound was very low. In fact, I didn't realize that I had the volume all the up on my speakers when I decided to check ATIS Umm... ATIS came in very loud and very clear unlike the engine sound level. I opened the sound.cfg and found that most of the engine sound volumes were set at about 1/2 - 2/3 levels. I changed all of the volumes to 10,000 (max level). Now all the sounds were at their appropriate levels. I also tweaked the flight charecteristics a bit, initially, because the aircraft was running at 1500 rpm on taxi, which is contrary to what I've read about the real Diamond kinda learching forward at engine start (light plane/powerful engine). If my understanding is correct, the real Diamond has break steering also. I'm a bit set in my ways of rudder steering, which was set to a very acute level. So, breaking from reality in that charecteristic, that got tweaked to a more comfortable setting for rudder steering.

Now, I have a very, very nice aircraft that "flies" like a dream. The cockpit looks good, performs well and properly. With my system, I have no hit on frame rates. Everything is very smooth inside and outside of the cockpit. I've recently switched from exclusively using 2D panels to exclusively using the VC cockpit - and the VC is very nice. The fact that the Garmin 296 is propped up on the dash like it is, has been listed as a negative. It blocks a portion of the view, but in VC mode it's not a problem. I, personally, like it exactly where it is. Take offs are fairly standard along with all the basic manuevers, but because the DA 20 is part glider, full flaps are necessary for a smooth easy landing. If you use less than full flaps, the aircraft will bounce back into the air - my understanding is that, that is a true flight charecteristic of the real aircraft. Full flaps @ 40 - 50 KIAS max will give you a very nice smooth landing. I'm enjoying the hell outta mine...

I can see why some folks would be upset about the product, with the price difference between download and DVD, and basically climbing "under the hood" and fixing/tweaking quite a few items, even for the cheaper price. Like I said, I'm happy with the aircraft now, but for the price and tweaking, I'll think twice before I consider buying an aircraft that I'm not as passionate or interested in.

Semper Fi, Dave

[Snave 466]

Thanks for the report Dave, and glad it works for you! There are numerous reports of problems with this aircraft in FSX - not entirely surprising when you realise that it was released in 2004, when FSX wasn't even a twinkle on Mathijs' VDU. It was ported to FSX, not redesigned for it using the SDK, and based on the somewhat barbed comment about one of the developers on the DA forums, it is sage to assume if it HAD caused a problem, you ain't gonna fix it.

I have flown the real DA20-80 and -100 horse versions and the interior noise levels are actually pretty close to what you hear through a decent headset - the Rotax motor spins at about double the prop rpm, unlike the clunky old warhorses found in most GA, so it's a very different experience after startup, less `cough, clunk` meaty four, more motor mower `whirr fizz`! The only real issue on the sound front is the over-loud fuel pump, but you can find a fix for this - or just modify the offending wav!

[New Light 0]

Very cool! It would seem that 100hp engine would be a bit louder, but I know the newer in-line motorcycle engines sound like sewing machines, real quiet and unassuming, so I can appreciate the fact that a newer aircraft with a newer engine could be that quiet. I'm just a simmer nowadays, but I'm still used to the Piper J 3 Cub's "pit-pat-rattle-spit-pop". I did notice that fuel pump seemed overly loud, also. The Cessna 150 M that I trained in, it's just a low "whirring" sound. The DA 20s sounded like rocks tumbling in dryer

Unfortunately, I'm medically disqualified from being a pilot now. The funny thing is, in the U.S. the FAA rules over all airborne operations including skydiving. The same FAA that has disqualified me from flying the aircraft says it's absolutely fine if I walk off the aircraft at FL250+ with an oxygen bottle Between the skydiving and simming, this is as close as I get now. Every once in a while I go down to the airport to help wash and wax an aircraft, but most of time it's aggrevating because I know that I can't just climb in and go for spin.

Have you ever jumped? If so, is the DA 20 a comparable flight as far as the sound volume once under canopy? If they are comparable I can imagine the Katana being a real peaceful ride

Oh, nevermind the crap on the "Cessna 172 N" thread. I had you all wrong - I guess it's one of those nights... I've been trying to delete the posts but maybe I can't. Either way, hopefully we're good on both sides of the pond.

Cheers

Semper Fi, Dave

[Snave 466]

The mistake you make is in thinking any of this is personal. It isn't, and because of the disparate nature of the community the problem of perception is often the biggest barrier to understanding. No harm, no foul. The Moderator can remove the posts from `over there` for you.

The 100 hp motor isn't any louder - in fact one of the quirks of the Rotaxes is that they are time-limited at full output to around five minutes, (especially the turbo versions which aren't used in the DA20 but are often found elsewhere, such as in the Europa I used to fly) thereafter you pull back to the same levels as the 80, max continuous being 5,500 (engine) rpm for both - so you end up pretty much at the same power levels and the same rpm's anyway. 4,900 to 5,350 engine rpm at cruise for either. Density altitude and greater heft capability are the main benefits of the 100 over the 80, not cruise. The 100 uses about 1gph more than the 80, but x-country consumption is pretty much the same for flightplanning purposes as you might push the 80 a couple hundred rpm more for the extra 5 knots.

You can grab a tech sheet from http://www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com/a_engine_912.htm

Rotax's are popular in Europe because they use Mogas as first choice (Avgas and Leaded fuels are not recommended) but they have a lower TBO than the equivalent angle-iron aviation engines, and because of the differences in the European and American flying experience the Rotax is not particularly popular in the US. But fundamentally the success of the Rotax is that it is available in both certified and non-certified formats, so it's perfect for the home-build.

As for noise, it's noticeably quieter than the older generation of big iron motors but a lot of that is perception because of the higher-revving nature of the engine - there is less vibration and low-frequency noise, so the attenuation of even non-ANR headsets is particularly good, and the DA version actually quite closely mimics the `fading away` of the engine note as you pull back from t/o to cruise settings.

Try

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHpEmlmaIxw

for the Continental engine classic aircraft motor sound, (except for the music!)

versus

for the Rotax

the Rotax sounds much more `car like`(take off at 2:30)

Can't make a comparison with skydiving as I come from the `never leave a perfectly serviceable aircraft while it's flying` school!

[New Light 0]

Hey Snave! I posted an apology to you, the mods and the rest the folks that had to put up with my antics on the other thread. I was out of line and, again I apologize for all that.

Anyway, onto a more favorable conversation. I'm in a bit of a time-crunch right now, but I appreciate the links and will check them out.

I'll also re-tweak some of the sound settings to more realistic levels.

I also, noticed what you mentioned about really having to come off of the throttle to let the plane settle in, but I didn't realize that you could wear the engine out that quickly at a continous full throttle setting. But it does make sense to come off the throttle sooner than later, especially with a CSP.

Well, the wifey's calling. I'll check out sites and continue the chat later Cheers!

Semper Fi, Dave

[Snave 466]

No probs Dave, like I said.

What we used to do in the 80-horse Kat was use the flaps up after take-off as a trigger to reduce power slightly, then adopt a flatter climb profile. Pretty much what you'd do in a Cessna 172, anyway, but with the bonus of a c/s prop so you can also reduce the noise footprint for good neighbourliness. There's actually not much of a problem running the 80hp motor flat out for longer periods as it was designed as a 80 horse motor, then bored-out to become the 100-horse motor (same stroke) - so the 912S is slightly more fragile than the 80hp 912A/F version - allegedly. For all that both engines are approved for five minutes flat out, and that's usually more than enough to get out of a field and clear any obstacles. The 100 simply gives a hefty dose more `umph` when `hot & high` when the 80 can be, er, a little asthmatic. Really all you have to do is imagine the Rotax is a car engine and `drive` it accordingly - you wouldn't sit on the motorway or freeway flat out in your car, and the Kat is the same. Throttle it back and watch the fuel bill drop! One of the main reasons for full-throttle climb in angle-iron engines is to over-fuel for cooling anyway, so you save the cost of using fuel to cool instead of air or water!

The Kat also has a wonderful glide ratio, about double the typical GA so there's a lot of lift on those high aspect ratio wings. Chop it back to cruise and 1900rpm and waft along at 95 knots at about 3gph. It's absolutely brilliant for a sight-seeing flight as you have little need for rudder for most banking and there's a wind noise that acts like an aural airspeed indicator so you can spend a lot of time `eyes out`. It's a great wing.

And that's where the landing so-called `problem` comes from - but the motor can also help there too, as it is most unusual to get any carb icing in this airplane and with water-cooling shock-cooling simply isn't an issue - so when abeam the numbers at pattern/circuit height chop the throttle to idle, then simply stage the flaps to the airspeed: Full flap approaches and 55-57 knots on final after 60 over the fence = happy landings. 7 knots more and you can expect to be flying 200 yards/metres further down the runway. It's not a IGE float, it's simply the wing is either flying, or it isn't. And the DA model catches that that bit really well.

Downsides are that it isn't an aircraft that you trim and forget in cruise. Direct pushrod controls and a lively gust response means you fly it all the time, well `think` it actually - not much input required, just pressure. Non-adjustable seats have a rake that is a pleasure to some, back-achingly uncomfortable for others, particularly if you make the mistake of trying to crane forward to see the instruments better. not a problem in the sim, obviously! It's bloody hot inside, even in a British summer, and like a glider you need a hat that has an all-round brim, not just a peaked baseball cap or golfers visor - the sun gets on the neck and back of the head. One of the guys uses a motorcycle neck brace for x-country. Kills two birds with one stone. You can't crack the hood while taxiing (I think you can in the C1 Continental version) and they really should have staggered the seating slightly as two-up you can be rubbing shoulders with whoevers next to you, particularly when rubber-necking. It gets a bit lively in gusts and while you can sideslip, it will lose you height but not much airspeed (tadpole fuselage, no side area!).

[New Light 0]

Sorry for the delay, life "kicked in" for quite a few days here...

Thanks for excellent explainations on the aircraft. I set the sound settings back to their quieter levels and I'm going "fly" it with the knowledge as you have explained. I'm hoping to rack up some serious hours in this little bird in the coming weeks. Many thanks...

Semper Fi, Dave