Libelle Canopy

[Tom Watson]

I have come across what appears to be a Libelle canopy, minus the
frame. It is in very good condition, with the only flaws being cracks
about 3/4" or less radiating from two frame mounting holes. My
question is, did the 301's and 201's use the same canopy? If not, how
do you tell them apart? Who might be an authority on this?

[Gary Patten]

At 18:13 27 February 2012, Tom Watson wrote:
>I have come across what appears to be a Libelle canopy, minus the
>frame. It is in very good condition, with the only flaws being cracks
>about 3/4" or less radiating from two frame mounting holes. My
>question is, did the 301's and 201's use the same canopy? If not, how
>do you tell them apart? Who might be an authority on this?
>

there basically the same glider, with the 301 having flapped wings.
http://www.sailplanedirectory.com/PlaneDetails.cfm?planeID=340

[Gary Patten]

At 18:13 27 February 2012, Tom Watson wrote:
>I have come across what appears to be a Libelle canopy, minus the
>frame. It is in very good condition, with the only flaws being cracks
>about 3/4" or less radiating from two frame mounting holes. My
>question is, did the 301's and 201's use the same canopy? If not, how
>do you tell them apart? Who might be an authority on this?
>

there basically the same, with the 301 having flapped wings

http://www.sailplanedirectory.com/PlaneDetails.cfm?planeID=340

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:13:41 -0800, Tom Watson wrote:

> I have come across what appears to be a Libelle canopy, minus the frame.
> It is in very good condition, with the only flaws being cracks about
> 3/4" or less radiating from two frame mounting holes. My question is,
> did the 301's and 201's use the same canopy? If not, how do you tell
> them apart? Who might be an authority on this?

There were alternative canopies for the H.301 - one that looks very
similar to the canopy used on all H.201s and a 'racing' canopy that does
not rise above the back rim of the cockpit, but I have no idea how the
similar canopies differ. An e-mail to Glasfaser should get a definitive
answer.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Steve Leonard[_2_]]

On Feb 27, 2:31*pm, Gary Patten > wrote:
> At 18:13 27 February 2012, Tom Watson wrote:
>
> >I have come across what appears to be a Libelle canopy, minus the
> >frame. *It is in very good condition, with the only flaws being cracks
> >about 3/4" or less radiating from two frame mounting holes. *My
> >question is, did the 301's and 201's use the same canopy? If not, how
> >do you tell them apart? *Who might be an authority on this?
>
Not claiming to be "the authority" on the subject, but here is what I
think I know. The glass is likely the same on both models. The 201
has a thicker wing, so it will use a little bit less of the glass.
The canopy front, sides, and back end shape should be the same. The
difference is the curved portion over the wing leading edge.

That said, and the question had been asked before, you could probably
easier adapt a 201 canopy frame for use on a 301 than you could adapt
a 301 frame for use on a 201. You could put the 201 frame on the 301
and fill the gap between canopy and wing with foam or something more
permanent. As to putting a 301 canopy frame on a 201, well you would
have to grind the frame down to be pretty thin in order for it to
clear the wing.

How do I think I know this? I have the FJ-1. What is that, you ask?
It is a Libelle hybrid. 201 forward fuselage (from the aft lift pins
forward), modified 301 wings. Low profile canopy on a 201 frame with
gaps above and below the wing filled in by large fairings and large
amounts of foam weatherstripping.

Steve Leonard