Libelle suitability for beginners

[Nick Kennedy[_3_]]

On W&W for sale recently there have been several Libelles listed, some look very nice.
And affordable.
Are these ships suitable for very low time beginners?
I've heard they are "lightly" built.
I've also never heard of them having any structural problems.
Thought's?

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 07:59:06 -0800, Nick Kennedy wrote:

> On W&W for sale recently there have been several Libelles listed, some
> look very nice.
> And affordable.
> Are these ships suitable for very low time beginners?
>
Its probably a good idea to have a few hours on a similar single seater
before getting into a Std Libelle. If you fit the cockpit, then they're
comfortable and easy to fly and with remarkably few gotchas: there's lots
of feel for thermals and if it doesn't like the way you're flying it, you
can feel that too.

The main issue for a low-time pilot is probably the weak air brakes.

Getting a good descent rate isn't the issue because they slip really well
and controllably, brakes in or out. Doing wheeler landings on a big field
isn't a big deal either, but the brakes are an issue if you're trying for
a fully held-off two point landing because speed isn't shed all that
fast, even with brakes fully out, so its very easy to balloon right at
the end of the float if you misjudge raising the nose to put main and
tail wheel down at the same time.

You might find this helpful:

https://www.gregorie.org/gliding/libelle/h201_notes.html


> I've heard they are "lightly" built.
> I've also never heard of them having any structural problems.
> Thought's?
>
Yes, they're light - mine was 216kg last time we weighed it,
counterbalanced by a small wing for the era (9.8 m^2).

Mine has now done 3245 hours, a lot of it winched, and shows little more
than fair wear and tear despite its share of field landings.

Glasfaser holds the type certficate and is an excellent source of spares
and support: no subscription needed and willing to supply documentation
to help with any unusual or difficult repairs or mods.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:59:08 AM UTC-5, Nick Kennedy wrote:
> On W&W for sale recently there have been several Libelles listed, some look very nice.
> And affordable.
> Are these ships suitable for very low time beginners?
> I've heard they are "lightly" built.
> I've also never heard of them having any structural problems.
> Thought's?

I own a 201B that I provide to our club juniors so they have their own glass ship.
I require them to have completed their PP certificate and get some 1-34 time, and usually a bit of ASK-21 time before flying it. Most have 50-60 hours and 150 flights or so, with lots of 1-26 time when they get in.
They do fine with no issues. The girls like the light wings.
It is not as durable and tough as the modern ships but is a good glider for relatively low time pilots, provided they are prepared right.
Contest number is JRs.
Good Luck
UH

[son_of_flubber]

Another 'Club Class' glider to consider is the SZD 51-1. The Junior is benign, built to sustain hard landings, has very effective airbrakes, it slips, PU painted at the factory (no gel coat liability), fun to fly well-harmonized controls, and designed from the ground up to be a single seat trainer. Limited aerobatics permitted.

Things that may or may not matter are 1)it has a somewhat upright seating position, so pilots with long trunks may not have enough head height. 2)a wing dolly is recommended.

Of the 261 built, there are only 7 Juniors in the USA, and 4 are club owned.. So Juniors are rarely offered for sale.

[Stephen Struthers]

At 17:37 15 February 2020, wrote:
>On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:59:08 AM UTC-5, Nick
Kennedy wrote:
>> On W&W for sale recently there have been several Libelles listed,
some
>look very nice.
>> And affordable.
>> Are these ships suitable for very low time beginners?
>> I've heard they are "lightly" built.
>> I've also never heard of them having any structural problems.
>> Thought's?
>
>I own a 201B that I provide to our club juniors so they have their
own
>glass ship.
>I require them to have completed their PP certificate and get some
1-34
>time, and usually a bit of ASK-21 time before flying it. Most have
50-60
>hours and 150 flights or so, with lots of 1-26 time when they get
in.
>They do fine with no issues. The girls like the light wings.
>It is not as durable and tough as the modern ships but is a good
glider for
>relatively low time pilots, provided they are prepared right.
>Contest number is JRs.
>Good Luck
UH


AS above I bought a IS29D as my first glider (loads of folk said it
was not suitable as it spun easily) and I was a low hours pilot but
had it flown by my CFI who then gave me a comprehensive briefing
and I never had any issues, so as said above get prepared with a
comprehensive brief from someone current on type

happy and safe flying

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 11:44:54 -0800, son_of_flubber wrote:

> Another 'Club Class' glider to consider is the SZD 51-1. The Junior is
> benign, built to sustain hard landings, has very effective airbrakes,
> it slips, PU painted at the factory (no gel coat liability), fun to fly
> well-harmonized controls, and designed from the ground up to be a single
> seat trainer. Limited aerobatics permitted.
>
Yes, my club owns two Juniors, which are used as the next step after the
ASK-21 for our newly soloed pilots. I agree with all the things you said
about them and have a lot of time on them too: I got my Bronze and did
all legs of the Silver C in our Juniors, so I flew them fore about a year
before converting to our high performance fleet (Pegase 90 and Discus).

The only thing I'd add is that you MUST read the Junior's POH before
spinning one: Juniors have three slightly different spin behaviours
depending on pilot weight and it helps to know which to expect.

Another good glider for low-time pilots is the 205 Club Libelle - there's
one in our club and its owners really love it. Big cockpit, but there
were only 171 made, so they're even rarer than SZD Juniors.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[JS[_5_]]

The others have made good points, but also consider...
There is something really special about flying the Libelle. It really feels great to fly.
And you can't beat the ventilation with the canopy partly open in flight.
The feel does change a bit when full of water ballast, more like other gliders.
Airbrakes and elevator are auto hook up. Ailerons are manual, but nice hardware - not L'Hotelliers.
Below, my second favourite flight of 2013 (first was the declared 1000km):
A 500km FAI triangle in H201B.
https://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-3.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?dsId=2968146
Jim

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 13:05:39 -0800, JS wrote:

> A 500km FAI triangle in H201B.
> https://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-3.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?
dsId=2968146
> Jim
>
Nice flight!

And a seldom mentioned benefit of the Libelle - its got the best all-
round field of view of any glider I've flown. I don't know any other
glider which lets you can check your own rudder waggle visually, even
when strapped in tight.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[Neiman Walker]

Agreeing with everything UH, JS, and Martin have said,

I made this jump in 2018 as a low-time glider pilot and junior who had been gradually transitioning from powered flying over a couple of years. When I took my first tow in the 201, I had about 30 hours and 50 landings in gliders, exclusively in our club’s training fleet of 2-33s and a 1-26. With a couple of hours of stick time (no landings) in a Duo Discus, I had some concept of the demands associated with a slippery ship, but was lacking formal training.

Beyond that, I solicited advice from the previous owner as well as a local instructor with some Libelle experience, and read everything I could find here on RAS and elsewhere about the type, including Martin’s helpful notes.

I knew at the time it would be a good idea to get some dual time in a K21 or Grob 103, but this would’ve been pretty financially taxing for me as a student at commercial rates and involve a minimum of 5 hours on the road.

Fortunately, taking that risk paid off with a first flight only notable for the giant grin I couldn’t seem to shake. Since then, Libelle ownership has opened the door to quite a few fulfilling XC experiences both from the home ‘drome and elsewhere which wouldn’t have been feasible in club hardware, and, with some luck, many more to come.

Now that I’m a bit older and hopefully a bit wiser, I couldn’t recommend in good conscience that someone make the same decisions I made, notwithstanding the outcome. I’m sharing my single data point mainly to emphasize that pilots with a level of experience approaching what UH asks reasonably before loaning out his glider shouldn’t stress out about moving up to a Libelle as long as they prepare for it.

(As an aside, the whole prospect of ownership was made much less intimidating by going in with a partner with broadly similar goals and experience.)

Practically, the main obstacle for most is the cockpit dimensions, particularly at the shoulders. At 6’ 1” with narrow-ish shoulders for my height, I manage to fit comfortably with the back rest at the aft limit with a regular, backpack-style softie parachute. Of course, the only way to know for sure is to try.

With regards to the “light” construction, you’ll see it written that Libelles are more prone to tail boom breaks in a ground loop than contemporary and newer glass ships. Of course, crashworthiness was not a primary concern at the time they were designed either. Neither the 201 nor 301 are certified for spins or any aerobatics, and you won’t find the limiting g loads in the manual, or anywhere for that matter, although I haven’t yet found a copy of the standards the gliders were certified under. The good news is that the structural design seems to have endured well over 100,000 hours across the fleet with no failures in flight. (If I’ve missed one, I’d be interested to hear about it.)

In short, the Libelle offers great value for money to those who fit comfortably, and transitioning from lower performance gliders with limited experience shouldn’t be too risky with some preparation.

Neiman
H201 #81 ‘WE’

[[email protected]]

The Libelle makes a fine first glass ship in my opinion. The one Hank is talking about (JR) was owned near me years ago and was my first glass flying.. In my opinion the handling differences between glass and everything else is over played.
You'll be fine! I'd stick with the 201 for a first glider for a low time pilot. You dont need the flaps of the 301 just yet. It's been a while but if I recall correctly the 301s had a balsa core and the 201 foam? Not a big deal, but something to consider during a pre-buy inspection.

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 15:24:20 -0800, dtarmichael wrote:

> You'll be fine! I'd stick with the 201 for a first glider for a low time
> pilot. You dont need the flaps of the 301 just yet.
>
One of these days, if I'm lucky, I'll get to see a 301. It seems that
most of them are in the US: there aren't more than 5 or 6 in the UK and
none live anywhere I've been.

> BEEN It's been a while but if I recall correctly the 301s had a balsa
> core and the 201 foam? Not a big deal, but something to consider during
> a pre-buy inspection.

Not quite: 201s were entirely balsa until s/n 110 (mine is 82). The
transition from the all-balsa 201 with no water and both-surface airbrakes
to the 201B with all-foam surfaces, top-surface airbrakes and water bags
as standard started with s/n 111 and was complete at s/n 182.

FWIW, the first few 201s had fixed undercarriages too (Standard Class
rules!) but I believe they were all converted to retracts when the rules
changed. I've seen s/n 5, which was converted, but never an unconverted
one.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[[email protected]]

I bought a Libelle 201b before soloing and left it in storage until I got my PPG certificate. The next week I flew the Libelle with no prior single seat experience. I trained in a Blanik and had only one or two training flights in a Duo Discus. I had no problems and found the Libelle very sweet, particularly as a climber. Rudder pedal pressure is extremely light, I preferred to fly with thin soled shoes. On landing, don't touch down too fast or it will bounce. Very easy and light to rig. The detachable canopy can be a negative. Make sure nobody steps on it when you are rigging.

[Nick Kennedy[_3_]]

Thanks so much for all the positive responses!
I have a soon to be 14 year old son who has been grilling me about soaring.
This summer I'm going to get him started, and see if he takes to it.

[son_of_flubber]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 9:54:38 AM UTC+13, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 11:44:54 -0800, son_of_flubber wrote:
>
> > Another 'Club Class' glider to consider is the SZD 51-1. The Junior is
> > benign, built to sustain hard landings, has very effective airbrakes,
> > it slips, PU painted at the factory (no gel coat liability), fun to fly
> > well-harmonized controls, and designed from the ground up to be a single
> > seat trainer. Limited aerobatics permitted.
> >
> Yes, my club owns two Juniors, which are used as the next step after the
> ASK-21 for our newly soloed pilots. I agree with all the things you said
> about them and have a lot of time on them too: I got my Bronze and did
> all legs of the Silver C in our Juniors, so I flew them fore about a year
> before converting to our high performance fleet (Pegase 90 and Discus).
>
> The only thing I'd add is that you MUST read the Junior's POH before
> spinning one: Juniors have three slightly different spin behaviours
> depending on pilot weight and it helps to know which to expect.
>
> Another good glider for low-time pilots is the 205 Club Libelle - there's
> one in our club and its owners really love it. Big cockpit, but there
> were only 171 made, so they're even rarer than SZD Juniors.
>
>
> --
> Martin | martin at
> Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Another strong point is that all of the Juniors that I've flown also have 'automatic' hookups and two Tost releases, one for aerotow and one for winch.. The only con that I know of is that best glide is at 43 knots and the polar drops off fast, and that makes 'buddy flying' with higher performance ships more complicated. That said, the Junior will outclimb high performance ships especially if you're a lighter weight pilot, and suitable for weak lift local flights on days when the high performance ships don't even bother to assemble.

[George Haeh]

I enjoyed flying the Junior, did my first 3 landouts in Juniors and appreciated the spoiler effectiveness.

But there's some gotchas:

1. The manual softpedals how much forward trim you need for takeoff. I ballooned behind a Pawnee, had one bounce correcting. Then discovered not long later the spoilers had come open.

2. There's a pitch down moment pulling spoilers. A definite change for pilots transitioning from an L-23 which has a mild pitch up.

3. Short pilots with the setback forward pulling full spoilers must watch against twisting their shoulders and inadvertently pushing the stick forward..

I lost a friend who got caught by 2 & 3 close to the ground. She reacted to the unexpected pitch down at 50' by first closing spoilers and subsequently finding herself at 80+ kt. running out of runway and ideas. She yanked full spoilers at ~20' and inadvertently pushed the stick forward.

Do get a proper briefing from somebody who has actually flown the Junior.

Do identify how far back the handle has to go to crack the spoilers open – it's about 1/3.

After release, pull full spoilers to see how it behaves.

Fiddling with spoilers low down makes for interesting landings until you sort out the pitch moment changes.

All that said, the Junior remains my favorite fixed gear single seater, others being PW-5 and L-33, both of which I've landed out in.

[Gary Wayland]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:59:08 AM UTC-5, Nick Kennedy wrote:
> On W&W for sale recently there have been several Libelles listed, some look very nice.
> And affordable.
> Are these ships suitable for very low time beginners?
> I've heard they are "lightly" built.
> I've also never heard of them having any structural problems.
> Thought's?

My first glider was a 201B. She's a homesick angel. Loves to thermal and out-climb your friends. I bought mine for 15K and sold it for 15K after two years. Twenty years later, you see them for, 15 K.

You cannot go wrong with a Libelle...

For beginners, I would say the Airbrakes are not as effective as I would like. You need to make sure you have your speed right in the pattern or you will go floating down the strip if too much speed at final.

[son_of_flubber]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 4:51:41 PM UTC+13, George Haeh wrote:

> 1. The manual softpedals how much forward trim you need for takeoff. I ballooned behind a Pawnee, had one bounce correcting. Then discovered not long later the spoilers had come open.

At 170 pounds with chute, I've never had any bouncing or kiting problems with the Junior trimmed for 60 knots during takeoff. In the Junior I fly that is notch 4/10, with 1/10 being full aft trim. YMMV, but I don't think that it is at all fair to suggest that the Junior is prone to PIO on takeoff.


> 2. There's a pitch down moment pulling spoilers. A definite change for pilots transitioning from an L-23 which has a mild pitch up.

Huh. I mostly trained in L-23 (which I agree has a distinct pitch up when opening spoilers), then took 3 flights in ASK-21 and one in a PW-6. Then I hopped in the Junior and never noticed any pitching problem. Perhaps I had learned from the L-23 the merits of gradually opening spoilers. I don't understand why top of the wing spoilers would cause a pitch down.

>
> 3. Short pilots with the setback forward pulling full spoilers must watch against twisting their shoulders and inadvertently pushing the stick forward.
>

It's easy to get that final aftward movement of the spoiler lever by bending the wrist and pushing with finger tips on the front of the handle from above (without any body twist). Once you learn that, the difficulty of fully opening the spoilers becomes a feature, not a bug. This is because the spoilers are ridiculously effective, maybe twice as effective as the ASK-21 (this might be partly due to the higher sink rate of the Junior at the same pattern speed), so you don't want to accidentally open them full, and there is rarely any need to open full.

One of few times I've opened the spoilers full (for a few seconds) on a Junior was on the same flight that I set the altimeter 1000 low, such that I entered the pattern at 2000. I noticed the problem immediately on downwind and started correcting, but I flew a very steep final. I did not know exactly how high I was, so I snap decided to ignore the 'broken altimeter', and eyeball the landing.

Even though Best Glide in the Junior is at 43 knots (slower than the ASK-21) it has the same handicap as the ASK-21. I guess that is because it climbs so much better than the ASK-21.

[Paul T[_4_]]

"Gliding Safety" by Derek Piggott, A&C Black (1991) page 109.
> Std Libelle not recommended for "inexperienced pilots", e.g., unless
> you've already made a few field landings and are an "above average"
> pilot.

[Paul T[_4_]]

"Not recommended for inexperienced pilots (from Gliding Safety - by
Derek Piggott)
The Libelle
The beauty of the Libelle is the light weight of the wings and the ease of

rigging and derigging. However, it is not for you unless you have
already made a few field landings and are an above-average pilot.
Although it is nice and easy to fly, the airbrakes are ineffective
compared with those on most other machines-an extra 5 knots on the
approach and you will be in the far hedge or the next field! Because of
these airbrakes, you must be able to side-slip quickly and accurately
while using full airbrake on the final approach. With less experienced
pilots, it is inevitable that the occasional approach will end up a little

high or fast, and only a quick side-slip can prevent an overshoot and an
expensive accident.

The Libelle suffers a serious loss of performance and buffets badly
unless it is flown accurately. This is probably due to the sharply pointed

top of the fuselage which causes a breakaway of the airflow if the glider
is flown with the slightest slip or skid. Having a short, stubby fin and
rudder, the Libelle is also not as directionally stable as later machines,

and this makes it more difficult to fly accurately than most other types.

In the air it is docile and pleasant to fly, but the poor airbrakes make
it
unsuitable for an inexperienced pilot. Larger pilots may find the cockpit
avery snug fit, as the top is rather narrow."

[Paul T[_4_]]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/eIBf9rqE
n9A

[Paul T[_4_]]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/eIBf9rqE
n9A

[Paul T[_4_]]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/eIBf9rqE
n9A

[Paul T[_4_]]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/eIBf9rqE
n9A

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 00:00:27 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:

> Not quite: 201s were entirely balsa until s/n 110 (mine is 82). The
> transition from the all-balsa 201 with no water and both-surface
> airbrakes to the 201B with all-foam surfaces, top-surface airbrakes and
> water bags as standard started with s/n 111 and was complete at s/n 182.
>
I should have added a warning I was given about 201s with double surface
brakes: If you're forced to land out on long, thick grass or crop, try to
put the brakes away just before dropping into the long stuff or you may
find the lower brakes severely bent, though I suspect that remembering to
do this may be a stretch and this may make getting it into the trailer
'interesting'.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 01:13:34 -0800, son_of_flubber wrote:

> At 170 pounds with chute, I've never had any bouncing or kiting problems
> with the Junior trimmed for 60 knots during takeoff. In the Junior I fly
> that is notch 4/10, with 1/10 being full aft trim. YMMV, but I don't
> think that it is at all fair to suggest that the Junior is prone to PIO
> on takeoff.
>
I'm 56kg without a 'chute and use notch 7/10 for both take-off and
landing - thats 55 kts - in calm conditions. Works for both aero tow and
winch. We're taught "55kts + half windspeed for approach" and, yes I have
used a 70kt approach in a Junior on a rather lively day - and had the
base leg quite close to the threshhold!

Its also worth noticing the fixed trim tabs on the elevator. AFAICT they
don't do anything much under 70 kts, but are there to 'hint' to a new
solo pilot that he maybe doesn't want to fly as fast as he's going - by
the time you get to 90kts in a Junior the stick is pushing back at you
quite hard. Vne is 116kts.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 2:44:57 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> Another 'Club Class' glider to consider is the SZD 51-1. The Junior is benign, built to sustain hard landings, has very effective airbrakes, it slips, PU painted at the factory (no gel coat liability), fun to fly well-harmonized controls, and designed from the ground up to be a single seat trainer. Limited aerobatics permitted.
>
> Things that may or may not matter are 1)it has a somewhat upright seating position, so pilots with long trunks may not have enough head height. 2)a wing dolly is recommended.
>
> Of the 261 built, there are only 7 Juniors in the USA, and 4 are club owned. So Juniors are rarely offered for sale.

Why are you discussing the Junior when the topic is specifically about the Std Libelle?
UH

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 3:30:06 AM UTC-7, Paul T wrote:
> "Not recommended for inexperienced pilots (from Gliding Safety - by
> Derek Piggott)
> The Libelle
> The beauty of the Libelle is the light weight of the wings and the ease of
>
> rigging and derigging. However, it is not for you unless you have
> already made a few field landings and are an above-average pilot.
> Although it is nice and easy to fly, the airbrakes are ineffective
> compared with those on most other machines-an extra 5 knots on the
> approach and you will be in the far hedge or the next field! Because of
> these airbrakes, you must be able to side-slip quickly and accurately
> while using full airbrake on the final approach. With less experienced
> pilots, it is inevitable that the occasional approach will end up a little
>
> high or fast, and only a quick side-slip can prevent an overshoot and an
> expensive accident.
>
> The Libelle suffers a serious loss of performance and buffets badly
> unless it is flown accurately. This is probably due to the sharply pointed
>
> top of the fuselage which causes a breakaway of the airflow if the glider
> is flown with the slightest slip or skid. Having a short, stubby fin and
> rudder, the Libelle is also not as directionally stable as later machines,
>
> and this makes it more difficult to fly accurately than most other types.
>
> In the air it is docile and pleasant to fly, but the poor airbrakes make
> it
> unsuitable for an inexperienced pilot. Larger pilots may find the cockpit
> avery snug fit, as the top is rather narrow."

Many years ago there was a Libelle 201(b?) at the RAFGSA Centre when it was located at RAF Bicester. It was purchased by the Nuffield Trust and also had a plaque stating 150hrs P1 required.

Just an observation.

Frank Whiteley

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 04:08:09 -0800, Frank Whiteley wrote:

> Many years ago there was a Libelle 201(b?) at the RAFGSA Centre when it
> was located at RAF Bicester. It was purchased by the Nuffield Trust and
> also had a plaque stating 150hrs P1 required.
>
The GSA bought two 201s, built in 1969, arrived in UK 1970. One was flown
in the Marfa WGC. I own the other one.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[krasw]

On Sunday, 16 February 2020 12:30:04 UTC+2, Paul T wrote:
> "Gliding Safety" by Derek Piggott, A&C Black (1991) page 109.
> > Std Libelle not recommended for "inexperienced pilots", e.g., unless
> > you've already made a few field landings and are an "above average"
> > pilot.

I would recommend Std.Libelle to any inexperienced pilot. Just fly it close to the airfield for few dozen hours, practice side slip and short landings.. Then you are not inexperienced anymore. The glider itself is pleasant to fly and not dangerous at all. Most glass ship from 60's had weak airbrakes, you learn to adjust your landing pattern accordingly after few flights. I dont understand what's the deal with avoiding some types because you can not do anything you want right away without any training or practise.

[John DeRosa OHM Ω http://aviation.derosaweb.net]

The Libelle is a true "classic" glider.

The only negative I was told is a weak boom subseptible to damage during off field landings if the glider drags a wingtip and gets sideways. Had that happen to one at our field.

Any truth to that?

[[email protected]]

On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 10:03:52 AM UTC-5, John DeRosa OHM Ω http://aviation.derosaweb.net wrote:
> The Libelle is a true "classic" glider.
>
> The only negative I was told is a weak boom subseptible to damage during off field landings if the glider drags a wingtip and gets sideways. Had that happen to one at our field.
>
> Any truth to that?

Yep
It is not as rugged as modern gliders.
JRS described above is the glider you reference
Not a reason to avoid the Libelle.
UH

[6PK]

I owned a 210b for several years and never noticed the lack of airbrakes.
And yes, I never been in the habit of shallow approaches...

[Paul T[_4_]]

At 13:54 17 February 2020, krasw wrote:
>On Sunday, 16 February 2020 12:30:04 UTC+2, Paul T wrote:
>> "Gliding Safety" by Derek Piggott, A&C Black (1991) page 109.
>> > Std Libelle not recommended for "inexperienced pilots", e.g.,
unless
>> > you've already made a few field landings and are an "above
average"
>> > pilot.
>
>I would recommend Std.Libelle to any inexperienced pilot. Just fly it
>close=
> to the airfield for few dozen hours, practice side slip and short
>landings=
>.. Then you are not inexperienced anymore. The glider itself is
pleasant to
>=
>fly and not dangerous at all. Most glass ship from 60's had weak
>airbrakes,=
> you learn to adjust your landing pattern accordingly after few flights.
I
>=
>dont understand what's the deal with avoiding some types because
you can
>no=
>t do anything you want right away without any training or practise.
>

Well I just wonder just how many types you have flown compared to
what Derrick had, and how many ex-students you have seen go
through the far hedge in one.....

[Gary Wayland]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:59:08 AM UTC-5, Nick Kennedy wrote:
> On W&W for sale recently there have been several Libelles listed, some look very nice.
> And affordable.
> Are these ships suitable for very low time beginners?
> I've heard they are "lightly" built.
> I've also never heard of them having any structural problems.
> Thought's?

If enough pilots here rag the Libelle against buying for inexperienced pilots, I can pick one up at a great value!

Buy a Libelle. You cannot go wrong! I came out of a 2-33 to a Libelle. No problems...

Gary
ASW27b
"SQ"

[Nick Gilbert[_2_]]

Nobody ever regretted buying a Libelle. Easy thing to fly (while taking attention to fly well), excellent factory support from Streifeneder with parts, mods (winglets, fillets, etc) and one day you'll be able to slap an electric self-lauch setup on it.

Cheers,
Nick.

[Dave Nadler]

On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 8:41:12 PM UTC-5, Nick Gilbert wrote:
> ...one day you'll be able to slap an electric self-lauch setup on it.

Don't hold your breath, or you'll turn blue...

[krasw]

On Monday, 17 February 2020 21:30:05 UTC+2, Paul T wrote:
>
> Well I just wonder just how many types you have flown compared to
> what Derrick had, and how many ex-students you have seen go
> through the far hedge in one.....

Argumentum ab auctoritate.

[Wyll Surf Air]

In my opinion the air breaks are a non-issue. I bought a half share in a Libelle and started flying it with maybe 8 landings in a 1-26 and 2 in a junior. Other then that all my training was done in 2-33. As long as you are aware that it doesn't come down as fast as a 2-33 then landing isn't to bad. It may not have as strong air breaks as more modern gliders but as long as you do your first few landings in big airport so you can get a feel for the glide slope it's not bad at all.

[Wyll Surf Air]

In my opinion the air brakes are a non-issue. I bought a half share in a Libelle and started flying it with maybe 8 landings in a 1-26 and 2 in a junior. Other then that all my training was done in 2-33. As long as you are aware that it doesn't come down as fast as a 2-33 then landing isn't to bad. It may not have as strong air brakes as more modern gliders but as long as you do your first few landings in big airport so you can get a feel for the glide slope it's not bad at all.

[Eric Munk]

I would not recommend a Standard Libelle for inexperienced pilots
if the launch method is winching. Has a tendency to stall at
relatively high speeds, and viciously if one does not pay attention.
Otherwise great glider.

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 19:18:48 +0000, Eric Munk wrote:

> I would not recommend a Standard Libelle for inexperienced pilots if the
> launch method is winching. Has a tendency to stall at relatively high
> speeds, and viciously if one does not pay attention.
> Otherwise great glider.

If you're signed off on winching then launching a Libelle that way is
benign PROVIDED THAT you've been carefully briefed by somebody that's
current on type and, preferably, also on that winch.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[Gary Wayland]

On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 11:51:06 AM UTC-5, Wyll Surf Air wrote:
> In my opinion the air brakes are a non-issue. I bought a half share in a Libelle and started flying it with maybe 8 landings in a 1-26 and 2 in a junior. Other then that all my training was done in 2-33. As long as you are aware that it doesn't come down as fast as a 2-33 then landing isn't to bad. It may not have as strong air brakes as more modern gliders but as long as you do your first few landings in big airport so you can get a feel for the glide slope it's not bad at all.

Good Point...

[[email protected]]

I had no trouble transitioning to a Libelle 201 from a 1-26. Back then (1970) there were no fiberglass two-seaters but I had a few flights in a K13 along the way. I had been flying our 1-26 for about three years, however, with a few (OK, a lot of) off-field landings.

Everyone has mentioned the smaller divebrakes, which makes the ability to slip on landing attractive if not necessary at times. It does slip beautifully.

One item that hasn't been mentioned is the offset stick, which means when your hand is bounced up/down, it feeds in forward/aft stick. Experienced Libelle drivers keep their forearms braced on their thighs in turbulent conditions or at high speed.

The buffet that was mentioned I experienced numerous times, especially when carrying water, in our 201 with balsa wings, upper/lower surface brakes, and (importantly) the smaller horizontal tail. I always thought it was the tail in the wake of the fuselage or possibly the tail itself separating. It was very benign on ours and made it easy to thermal up inside most other gliders with the stick in my lap and the tail buffeting on and off. :) IIRC, the later 201s I flew with the larger tail didn't provide the same tactile feedback.

FWIW, I was 6'3" and thin. I fit perfectly with an old Navy backpack chute and the tall canopy (there are two sizes).

I loved our 201 and still think it doesn't get the respect it deserves. At the TSA Standard Nats a few years ago, a young man in a 201 seemed to be able to keep up with almost everyone. We all got used to looking down and seeing that ##### Libelle still there at the next thermal.

Yes, the tail boom is not as robust as those of modern gliders. I knew multiple guys who broke theirs in ground loops. I ground looped ours in tall grass once with no damage, fortunately, but I looked back very quickly when the glider came to rest to make sure it was still attached.

Neiman, check your logbook. My father, Joe Bearden, flew a 201 we owned briefly at the 1977 Standard Class Nats with "WE" as the contest ID. I don't know the serial number but it would be fun to know if it's the same glider. We drove him crazy referring to WE as "War Eagle", the battle cry of Auburn University's sports teams. My father was an Alabama grad so he took these things seriously. :)

Chip Bearden
JB

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 2:24:32 PM UTC-8, Neiman Walker wrote:
> Agreeing with everything UH, JS, and Martin have said,
>
> I made this jump in 2018 as a low-time glider pilot and junior who had been gradually transitioning from powered flying over a couple of years. When I took my first tow in the 201, I had about 30 hours and 50 landings in gliders, exclusively in our club’s training fleet of 2-33s and a 1-26.. With a couple of hours of stick time (no landings) in a Duo Discus, I had some concept of the demands associated with a slippery ship, but was lacking formal training.
>
> Beyond that, I solicited advice from the previous owner as well as a local instructor with some Libelle experience, and read everything I could find here on RAS and elsewhere about the type, including Martin’s helpful notes.
>
> I knew at the time it would be a good idea to get some dual time in a K21 or Grob 103, but this would’ve been pretty financially taxing for me as a student at commercial rates and involve a minimum of 5 hours on the road.
>
> Fortunately, taking that risk paid off with a first flight only notable for the giant grin I couldn’t seem to shake. Since then, Libelle ownership has opened the door to quite a few fulfilling XC experiences both from the home ‘drome and elsewhere which wouldn’t have been feasible in club hardware, and, with some luck, many more to come.
>
> Now that I’m a bit older and hopefully a bit wiser, I couldn’t recommend in good conscience that someone make the same decisions I made, notwithstanding the outcome. I’m sharing my single data point mainly to emphasize that pilots with a level of experience approaching what UH asks reasonably before loaning out his glider shouldn’t stress out about moving up to a Libelle as long as they prepare for it.
>
> (As an aside, the whole prospect of ownership was made much less intimidating by going in with a partner with broadly similar goals and experience.)
>
> Practically, the main obstacle for most is the cockpit dimensions, particularly at the shoulders. At 6’ 1” with narrow-ish shoulders for my height, I manage to fit comfortably with the back rest at the aft limit with a regular, backpack-style softie parachute. Of course, the only way to know for sure is to try.
>
> With regards to the “light” construction, you’ll see it written that Libelles are more prone to tail boom breaks in a ground loop than contemporary and newer glass ships. Of course, crashworthiness was not a primary concern at the time they were designed either. Neither the 201 nor 301 are certified for spins or any aerobatics, and you won’t find the limiting g loads in the manual, or anywhere for that matter, although I haven’t yet found a copy of the standards the gliders were certified under. The good news is that the structural design seems to have endured well over 100,000 hours across the fleet with no failures in flight. (If I’ve missed one, I’d be interested to hear about it.)
>
> In short, the Libelle offers great value for money to those who fit comfortably, and transitioning from lower performance gliders with limited experience shouldn’t be too risky with some preparation.
>

> Neiman
> H201 #81 ‘WE’

Here's a video of Nieman's first take off in the 201 Libelle. Not bad at all!
https://youtu.be/jNKdrL8QfZM
Also got a video of Nieman's first landing in the 201 Libelle. Also not bad!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVPt2wi86QE

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 8:51:06 AM UTC-8, Wyll Surf Air wrote:
> In my opinion the air brakes are a non-issue. I bought a half share in a Libelle and started flying it with maybe 8 landings in a 1-26 and 2 in a junior. Other then that all my training was done in 2-33. As long as you are aware that it doesn't come down as fast as a 2-33 then landing isn't to bad. It may not have as strong air brakes as more modern gliders but as long as you do your first few landings in big airport so you can get a feel for the glide slope it's not bad at all.

Here's Wyll's first landing in the 201 Libelle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsjU2hrgApo

[[email protected]]

That's the glider! My father flew it in the 1977 Standard Nats at Ionia, MI and the Cordele regionals in August. I had a few flights in it that fall at the Chilhowee, TN Oktoberfest gathering. We had a number of practice flights together with me flying our first 201 (ca. 1970). Great memories! Thanks for posting the links. She still looks good 43 years later!

Chip Bearden
JB