Telescope Reviews: Hypo/Dialyte testing discovery

I should probably clarify the differences between the Hypo and the Dialyte that are covered here. John's version can be made expeditiously with nothing more than surplus optics- a 6" lens, and achro(s) from S/S.
Mine is a bit different and more involved. You may want to have a good mirror or two under your belt in order to fabricate what the Dialyte requires.
The ultimate version of what I'm making requires a positive meniscus, a 'zero power' achro overcorrected for longitudinal color,(made with a heavy but readily obtainable smaller flint) a very low power eyepiece or possibly just an achro, to be used with a positive crown lens either in front of, or behind the eyepiece to get rid of lateral color. (some experimentation is required)
This Dialyte -should- work as good as any standard achro; or at least fairly close. I would estimate it could reach somewhere around 25-50x/inch. I could build it for a fraction of what a standard achro would be (I hope!) since only 1 piece of large glass is needed.
This differs from John's scope. His, if I recall, doesn't solve issues with color, but minimizes them; and by restricting the useage to around 15-30x, if I recall correctly. The Dialyte should bridge the gap between the std achro, and his scope. It should keep glass cost manageable, at least better than an achro. It differs from an achro; in that instead of correcting the color issues at the 2 main lenses all at once, it does so by solving first longitudinal first- and then for lateral at the eyepiece.
****
My 'swag' at this point- I think the Dialyte should give any achro of accepted good quality a run for the money. Everything at this point is proprietary; an exploration.
I have Daley's book. I've read it a few times Nice scope, though it seems to be characteristically a narrow field instrument. I sort of like to have a more wide field capability. I also have a lot of lensmaking under my belt, so have no real issues making what I might need for this project, which doesn't require anything to be coated, etc. Just polish, and try it out; which could be handy with tweaking. Another aspect, alignment. Nothing special, rather easy and straightforward. Spacings are also very liberal tolerance wise, and iterations are rather easily handled- though I wish OSLO would come with an extra surface or two. The Schupmann- a bit more involved???

And as Lightning says- it's fun! I'm an incurable glasspusher, so it gives me an interesting project that occupies my time during winter months.
Wouldn't it be something if it works as planned??!!
M.