Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for a club?

[jeff rothman]

Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33 but I have heard a
few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged if a tail first landing
is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that own an L-33 could
give me guidance.

Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?

Does the paint last?

Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13 are difficult to
service.

Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available? Is it expensive to
fix?

On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club use?

Thank you for any information.

-Jeff

[Slick]

We had one, the tail got broke off twice. The first was a tail-first
landing. The second was from "loss of lift" after trying to hop the wires.

From our experience with out L-13, it is very easy to maintenance ourselves.
That is key, we can work on it and not have to pay $K's to have the glass
cut open to make a repair. On the other hand glass doesn't require
maintenance as often, but when it does, it costs. Contact with the factory
has been excellent, though slow due to a language barrier. If not for the
wire hop I believe we would still have the L-33 today.
"jeff rothman" > wrote in message
.net...
> Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33 but I have heard a
> few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged if a tail first landing
> is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that own an L-33 could
> give me guidance.
>
> Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?
>
> Does the paint last?
>
> Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13 are difficult to
> service.
>
> Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available? Is it expensive
to
> fix?
>
> On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club use?
>
> Thank you for any information.
>
> -Jeff
>
>




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Ray Lovinggood]

Jeff,

Our club is into its second year of owning an L-33,
so our experiences won't be as valuable as operators
with longer times of working with the Solo.

We have not incurred any damages due to the pilot,
but last year, a thunderstorm did damage the aircraft.
It was tied down outside, with the tail resting on
the ground rather than on a stand, when the storm hit.
Since the aircraft has no tie down points, it is secured
by sliding steel collars or sleeves or whatever they
are called over the wings and connecting the tie-down
to this collar. The collar wedges to the wing and
acts not only as a tie-down anchor, but also as an
aileron lock. Well, the winds were strong enough to
get the glider jumping up and down. How is that possible?
We used chains vertically from the collar to a steel
cable that ran along the ground parallel with the wings.
This cable, while tight along the ground, still had
enough slack to allow vertical movement. With the
ship's tail on the ground, the angle of attack of the
wings permitted 'flying speed' with the winds of the
thunderstorm. So, the ship must have been jumping
up and down, vertically. The result is the mild steel
collars on the wings deformed! The bottom section
was pulled down towards the ground, thus effectively
shortening the 'chord' of the collar. This shortened
chord had to have some relief of the aircraft's wings
to match and the 'slack' was created in the ailerons.
Yep, they got crunched.

We had to order new ailerons from the factory. They
had to build them. In all, I think we lost four or
five months of flying time.

Now, we have the tail tied down on a stand. We also
bought new 'collars' from Blanik and then took them
to a metal shop where a vertical web was welded to
the lower section and runs the entire length, from
leading to trailing edge. Also, fabric tie-down straps
go straight down to ground anchors augered into the
ground and topped with about 4 or 5 inches of concrete.

Otherwise, we are happy with it. Club members are
getting their first taste of cross country flying with
it and one recently earned his Silver Distance by flying
90 km to Ball Field in Louisburg, North Carolina.

I think it is fine for club use. Being all metal gives
you the chance to tie it down outside which, for us,
is the biggest reason we chose it for a single seat
glider.

And, althougth I've flown it only once, I was amazed
at how easily it flew and how quiet it was. I've never
flown another metal ship that was that quiet. It is
more quiet than my LS-1d which has some leaks around
the canopy.

I think it is a nice ship.

That's my two-cents worth.

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA





At 01:12 07 May 2004, Jeff Rothman wrote:
>Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33
>but I have heard a
>few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged
>if a tail first landing
>is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that
>own an L-33 could
>give me guidance.
>
>Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?
>
>Does the paint last?
>
>Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13
>are difficult to
>service.
>
>Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available?
>Is it expensive to
>fix?
>
>On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club
>use?
>
>Thank you for any information.
>
>-Jeff
>
>
>

[Paul Lynch]

Our club has had one for at least 3 years. We have had no problems with the
tail, but we only let licensed pilots fly it who have had a checkout in the
L-23 and can demonstrate good landings to an instructor.

We did have an incident where a pilot did an intentional spin. He did not
realize a battery charger was in the cockpit. It jammed the controls
momentarily. After freeing the controls, he over-reacted and overstressed
the wings. They were permanently deformed. Our local aero engineers who
work at NASA estimated the pilot snap loaded to about 8g for just a moment.
We ordered new wings and the glider is flying again.

Paul

"jeff rothman" > wrote in message
.net...
> Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33 but I have heard a
> few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged if a tail first landing
> is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that own an L-33 could
> give me guidance.
>
> Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?
>
> Does the paint last?
>
> Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13 are difficult to
> service.
>
> Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available? Is it expensive
to
> fix?
>
> On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club use?
>
> Thank you for any information.
>
> -Jeff
>
>

[Tony Verhulst]

> Does the paint last?

In a word, "no". Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can get a pic this weekend.

Ray is right, though. It handles wonderfully - light and well balanced
controls. Almost no effort to take off and tow. On the down side, do not
get slow in this glider close to the ground. That's good advice for any
glider but more so for the L33.

Tony V.

[303pilot]

The club I'm in has had one for several years. No problems other than that
the paint job was lousy--came off in big sheets. We repainted the ship and
Blanik covered some/most of that expense.

Brent
"jeff rothman" > wrote in message
.net...
> Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33 but I have heard a
> few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged if a tail first landing
> is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that own an L-33 could
> give me guidance.
>
> Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?
>
> Does the paint last?
>
> Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13 are difficult to
> service.
>
> Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available? Is it expensive
to
> fix?
>
> On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club use?
>
> Thank you for any information.
>
> -Jeff
>
>

[Tony Verhulst]

Tony Verhulst wrote:
>
>
>> Does the paint last?
>
> In a word, "no". Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can get a pic this
> weekend.

Here are the L-33 pics. This glider has spent a lot of time outdoors -
but, so have the Cessnas and Pipers a few yards away and THEY don't look
like this. We have a painted L-23 that doesn't look so hot either.
Cessna, Piper, and others have figured out how to paint aluminum. LET,
apparently, has not.

Tony V

http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2165.JPG
http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2166.JPG
http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2167.JPG

[Ray Lovinggood]

Tony, that is awful!

The original poster did ask about paint and I forgot
to mention in my earlier post that our L-33 had been
repainted by the previous owner. I don't know if he
used Imron or what, but the paint is still looking
pretty good. We've had the glider for about 2 years
and it stays tied down outside. I don't know how old
the paint is, but I'll ask the previous owner for details
and let you know.

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

At 15:42 10 May 2004, Tony Verhulst wrote:
>Tony Verhulst wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Does the paint last?
>>
>> In a word, 'no'. Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can
>>get a pic this
>> weekend.
>
>Here are the L-33 pics. This glider has spent a lot
>of time outdoors -
>but, so have the Cessnas and Pipers a few yards away
>and THEY don't look
>like this. We have a painted L-23 that doesn't look
>so hot either.
>Cessna, Piper, and others have figured out how to paint
>aluminum. LET,
>apparently, has not.
>
>Tony V
>
>http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2165.JPG
>http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2166.JPG
>http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2167.JPG
>
>

[JC]

Tony Verhulst > wrote:

>Tony Verhulst wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Does the paint last?
>>
>> In a word, "no". Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can get a pic this
>> weekend.
>
>Here are the L-33 pics. This glider has spent a lot of time outdoors -
>but, so have the Cessnas and Pipers a few yards away and THEY don't look
>like this. We have a painted L-23 that doesn't look so hot either.
>Cessna, Piper, and others have figured out how to paint aluminum. LET,
>apparently, has not.
>
>Tony V
>
>http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2165.JPG
>http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2166.JPG
>http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2167.JPG

Is sure looks like they painted bare aluminum. There certainly is not
zinc chromate primer and it does not appear there is any allodine
either. Maybe there are some other methods to prepare the bare
aluminum prior to painting, but given the way the paint is
disappearing, it does not appear any was used.

[Bruce Greeff]

Tony Verhulst wrote:
> Tony Verhulst wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> Does the paint last?
>>
>>
>> In a word, "no". Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can get a pic this
>> weekend.
>
>
> Here are the L-33 pics. This glider has spent a lot of time outdoors -
> but, so have the Cessnas and Pipers a few yards away and THEY don't look
> like this. We have a painted L-23 that doesn't look so hot either.
> Cessna, Piper, and others have figured out how to paint aluminum. LET,
> apparently, has not.
>
> Tony V
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2165.JPG
> http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2166.JPG
> http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2167.JPG
>
I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors, particularly in
the Northern winter. This is what hangars were invented for.

LET L13s that I have seen all appear to have shabby paint - even when kept, as
we do, inside hangars except when flying... Never seen a L23 or 33 in the metal.

I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.

[Tony Verhulst]

> I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors,
> particularly in the Northern winter. This is what hangars were invented
> for.

The airport (3B3) is privately owned and we do not have a lease. We are
"tennants at will" and could be "asked" to leave at any time. A
permanent structure at our expense is out of the question.

> I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.

There are only about 12 T hangers on the field. There are several dozen
more powered aircraft - all left outside all year. THEY don't look like
the L-33.

Tony V.

BTW: at a nearby airport (KASH) where I fly the Skylane that I own a
(small) piece out of, T hangars are renting for $600/month.

[303pilot]

Our L33 was hangared and paint began coming off almost immediately. It came
off in sheets. If the aluminum was treated with anything before painting,
it was ineffective.
To Blanik America's credit, they did pay a significant amount of the
repainting expense.

Brent

"Bruce Greeff" > wrote in message
...
> Tony Verhulst wrote:
> > Tony Verhulst wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> Does the paint last?
> >>
> >>
> >> In a word, "no". Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can get a pic this
> >> weekend.
> >
> >
> > Here are the L-33 pics. This glider has spent a lot of time outdoors -
> > but, so have the Cessnas and Pipers a few yards away and THEY don't look
> > like this. We have a painted L-23 that doesn't look so hot either.
> > Cessna, Piper, and others have figured out how to paint aluminum. LET,
> > apparently, has not.
> >
> > Tony V
> >
> > http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2165.JPG
> > http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2166.JPG
> > http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhulst/PICS/Misc/DSCN2167.JPG
> >
> I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors,
particularly in
> the Northern winter. This is what hangars were invented for.
>
> LET L13s that I have seen all appear to have shabby paint - even when
kept, as
> we do, inside hangars except when flying... Never seen a L23 or 33 in the
metal.
>
> I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.
>
>

[Bruce Greeff]

Tony Verhulst wrote:
>
>> I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors,
>> particularly in the Northern winter. This is what hangars were
>> invented for.
>
>
> The airport (3B3) is privately owned and we do not have a lease. We are
> "tennants at will" and could be "asked" to leave at any time. A
> permanent structure at our expense is out of the question.
>
>> I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.
>
>
> There are only about 12 T hangers on the field. There are several dozen
> more powered aircraft - all left outside all year. THEY don't look like
> the L-33.
>
> Tony V.
>
> BTW: at a nearby airport (KASH) where I fly the Skylane that I own a
> (small) piece out of, T hangars are renting for $600/month.
>
Hi Tony

My point is not how expensive hangarage is - It costs a lot here too. It is just
the proportion that sounds wrong to me.

Sterling Massachusets has 49 Properties listed on Realtor.com. They start at
$250K+ for a decent house and end in the $690K+ for a mansion. Surely the folk
who live here can afford to put up a hangar? A Canadian operation has a canvas
roofed hangar that handles Ontario weather. Presumably this does not count as a
permanent structure, so you can take it with you if you move.

Around here a hangar costs about the same as a 30+ year old first generation
glass single seater. We get a 19m Kestrel and a 15m Std Cirrus into one. The
difference in maintenance alone makes it worth it. OK we get a lot of sun, and
hail, and the local population would steal or destroy it if we left it out so we
have LOTS of motivation to put it in a nice steel shed...

[Tony Verhulst]

> Sterling Massachusets has 49 Properties listed on Realtor.com. They
> start at $250K+ for a decent house and end in the $690K+ for a mansion.
> Surely the folk who live here can afford to put up a hangar?

Being able to afford one and being willing to build one appear to be 2
different things - at least that's my cut at it. The town would love to
have the property to build a school or something. The airport is close
to a major reservoir and we're talking septic tanks and so there would
be an environmental problem. In any case, the property owner is unlikely
to spend money on a new hangar.


> A Canadian
> operation has a canvas roofed hangar that handles Ontario weather.
> Presumably this does not count as a permanent structure, so you can take
> it with you if you move.

Yes, we're looking into this.

Thanks for the info.

Tony

[Gordon Schubert]

I owned an L-33 for about a year. It was tied down
outside from mid-April thru November in WI. The only
problem I had with the paint was on the rivets on the
trailing edge. It seemed like the rivets were not cleaned
well enough and probably had some oil on them when
they were painted.

This ship was 3 years old when I sold it and only had
54 hours on it when I bought it the year before. It
was stored in the trailer during the winter.
GORDY

[OscarCVox]

Why not keep it in a trailer?
1000s of gliders in europe are kept that way and rigged when needed for flying.
Thats what the wings come off for.

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
(OscarCVox) wrote:

> Why not keep it in a trailer?
> 1000s of gliders in europe are kept that way and rigged when needed for
> flying.
> Thats what the wings come off for.

I know people who keep their DG1000 in the trailer and rig/derig it
every day. I'm sure it would be nice to have a hangar, but rigging
doesn't seem to be too much of a deterrent, even with such a big two
seat glider. I think it can be done with two people, but three makes it
easier.

-- Bruce

[Ben Flewett]

Ask not whether a Blanik is rugged enough for your
club. Instead, ask whether your club is rugged enough
for a Blanik.



At 01:36 12 May 2004, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>In article ,
> (OscarCVox) wrote:
>
>> Why not keep it in a trailer?
>> 1000s of gliders in europe are kept that way and rigged
>>when needed for
>> flying.
>> Thats what the wings come off for.
>
>I know people who keep their DG1000 in the trailer
>and rig/derig it
>every day. I'm sure it would be nice to have a hangar,
>but rigging
>doesn't seem to be too much of a deterrent, even with
>such a big two
>seat glider. I think it can be done with two people,
>but three makes it
>easier.
>
>-- Bruce
>

[Stuart Grant]

Hi Jeff,

I owned a 1993 L-33 from for about 2 years. It lived outside in the South
Florida sun and rain. It rains everyday in summer. I had wing covers and a
durable canopy cover made and I would remove the horizontal stabilizer and slide
a Sunbrella "sock" over the fin to protect the fabric rudder. I waxed it with
Nufinish car wax 2-3 times a year. It held up very well. Had red trim that faded
a little in the sun but the ship kept its shine. I did have some small paint
blisters where the felt padding on the tie-down sleeves stayed wet and loosened
the paint. I believe it would hold up very well in most climates.

I heard lots of talk about fragile tails. The L-33 was the first single-place
glider I ever flew after training in L-23's. I never had any trouble landing it.
My instructor (Burt Compton) taught us to land gliders level - not tail first. A
bunch of other pilots with less than 100 hours time flew it without problem.
Everyone seemed to like it.

I now have a Discus with gelcoat starting to go. I would much rather repaint
than refinish gelcoat. I would imagine that the pieces of an L-33 would fit many
automotive or truck spray booths and the ship could be repainted for a couple of
thousand dollars instead of 15-20 thousand for gelcoat.

My 2 cents: Its a great club glider.

Stuart



jeff rothman wrote:

> Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33 but I have heard a
> few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged if a tail first landing
> is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that own an L-33 could
> give me guidance.
>
> Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?
>
> Does the paint last?
>
> Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13 are difficult to
> service.
>
> Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available? Is it expensive to
> fix?
>
> On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club use?
>
> Thank you for any information.
>
> -Jeff

[nowhere]

We've had one for several years now and despite some rather shall we
say "authoritative" landings and a groundloop nothing's actually
broken on it. The ship is tied down outside April to October. The
paint has deteriorated quite a bit. Mostly it has just lost all its
gloss but in a few areas (on the skin joint on the wings at the
inboard edge of the airbrake box and at the wing root where the tape
is placed to seal the wing root/fuselage junction) it has started to
crack and peel off. As far as I can tell the LET aircraft are all made
of anodized aluminium. I have a brochure our club got at the time we
started shopping for the L33 which says you could choose either silver
or gold anodizing or a paint finish. Maybe we should have taken the
unpainted option. My familiy's business is paint, many of our
customers being in the aviation field, and I know that getting paint
to stick to anodized aluminium is not particularly easy. The first two
L23's we bought and all but one of our L13's had no paint on them
except for the stripes, fabric, and registration markings and their
finishes held up well. One of our L13's was painted years ago after a
hailstorm with a two part polyurethane by a very capable aircraft
painter and it still looks beautiful. The painter still says that
there was some luck involved in it working so well.

All in all a good ship. It looks a little ugly now but still flys
nice.