1-35 or 201B

[Waduino]

So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying in northeastern US,
i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on paper and prices,
although they probably handle quite differently and I would guess the 1-35
penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle is the version (B)
with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.
Which would you pick and why?
Thanks.
Wad.

[Ray Lovinggood]

I would buy the one with the better trailer and the
better equipped instrument panel.

One 'plus' the Libelle has over the 1-35: a canopy
you can partially open for a blast of fresh air. The
canopy lock allows the front of the canopy to rise
up about an inch or so to let in the air.

One 'plus' SOME 1-35's have over the Libelle: Hinged
canopy.

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA


At 00:48 31 March 2006, Waduino wrote:
>So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying
>in northeastern US,
>i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
>These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on
>paper and prices,
>although they probably handle quite differently and
>I would guess the 1-35
>penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
>Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle
>is the version (B)
>with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.
>Which would you pick and why?
>Thanks.
>Wad.
>
>
>

[BTIZ]

I have not flown a 1-35, but I have flown the 1-34 and other Schweizers, I
have flown the Libelle

Understanding Ray's comments on trailers and instruments
Both are Classics
Libelle's go together easier
1-35s are metal and can stay out in the weather easier, any one can do sheet
metal work
Libelle's are fiberglass and gel coat and need more attention

Personally, if I fit in both, I'd pick the Libelle
BT

"Waduino" > wrote in message
.. .
> So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying in northeastern US,
> i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
> These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on paper and prices,
> although they probably handle quite differently and I would guess the 1-35
> penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
> Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle is the version (B)
> with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.
> Which would you pick and why?
> Thanks.
> Wad.
>

[Willie]

Waduino wrote:
> So you have a choice for a first glider.
> Which would you pick and why?
> Thanks.
> Wad.

I'd echo BT and say I'd pick the Libelle if
I could fit in it anymore. They are a little
tight around the shoulders these days.

1-35 has a bit larger cockpit.

Think about how you'll feel after 3 hours
in a cramped cockpit.

Willie G.

[Shawn]

Waduino wrote:
> So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying in northeastern US,
> i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
> These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on paper and prices,
> although they probably handle quite differently and I would guess the 1-35
> penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
> Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle is the version (B)
> with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.
> Which would you pick and why?
> Thanks.
> Wad.

Libelle. Choice strictly based on looks. :-)

Shawn

[Andy]

Check if the 1-35 you are considering has the flap aileron
interconnect. Early model without it had a low cruise flap limit
speed.

I've flown both and I prefered the Libelle. Delightful handling and
outclimbs almost anything.

Andy

[[email protected]]

Andy wrote:
> Check if the 1-35 you are considering has the flap aileron
> interconnect. Early model without it had a low cruise flap limit
> speed.
>
> I've flown both and I prefered the Libelle. Delightful handling and
> outclimbs almost anything.
>
> Andy

[no]

Waduino > wrote:
> So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying in northeastern US,
> i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
> These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on paper and prices,
> although they probably handle quite differently and I would guess the 1-35
> penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
> Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle is the version (B)
> with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.

It also has a larger horizontal stabalizer (I think) and the gear is more
reasonable than on the 301.

> Which would you pick and why?

I'll add that the Libelle assembles and disassembles *WAY* easier/faster
than a 1-35 (in the 301 all you have to do is push the wings in place,
insert a single wing pin, insert two readily accessible airleron pins,
and then push the horizontal stabalizer into place and tighten a bolt --
it also has all automatic hookups except airlerons which is nice, I
assume the 201 is similar) . The 1-35 however is hands down *WAY* better
at off-field landings. It's hard to imagine a ship I'd prefer to take
down into a tight field. The combo of the skid, strong brakes, a sheet
metal skin, and the vertical flaps make it capable of coming down at a
very steep angle, and coming to a stop exceptionally quickly and still
retain some ability to steer on the ground. Although the 1-35 is great at
off field landings it probably isn't what you are used to because of the
lack of air brakes so you'll have to practice. The 301, while having a
more conventional landing posture, is not an easy aircraft to land well
for a variety of reasons. I suspect the 201B is considerably easier
than the 301 though.

My guess is the Libelle handles better (I've never flown a 201, but I own
a 301B -- the 301 is rather twitchy at low speed, but I suspect the
201B is much less so), is more comfortable (A couple 1-35 drivers I've
talked to have complained the lack of compliance in the metal makes for a
very harsh ride in turbulent air) and has higher performance (although
this is probably marginally so). I suspect the 1-35 penetrates better,
but only marginally if at all. In the looks department, I guess its
technically subjective, but not to me. The Libelle is... a Libelle,
perhaps the most gorgeous glider ever made, whereas the 1-35 is a
Schweitzer, a nice looking Schweitzer, but still... a Schweitzer.

The Libelle canopy is a blessing and a curse. In flight its wonderful.
You can open it in the air (although only a good idea at low speed), which
gives much better ventilation than any vent system. My guess is it could
be jetisoned very easily if you need to egress (although I've never
tried). On the ground its a pain in the butt because it doesn't open up,
you have to remove it and install it (or rather get someone else to
install it) and although its not difficult, the person doing it needs to
have practiced a few times. Visibility in the 301 is marginal, maybe a
little better than a 2-33, but not much. Visibility on the ground is
bad. I suspect the 201 is noticably better however. I have no idea what
the 1-35 is like in terms of visibility,

Also pay attention to which 1-35 you are looking at, a few of them have
interconnected flaps and retractable gear, but I think most don't.
Without interconnected flaps it really hurts your high speed performance.

I'll reiterate what others have said... Trailer condition counts, between
a 1-35 and a 201, if the price is similar, a good versus bad trailer may
be a reasonable deciding factor.

dan

[Tim Mara]

Libelle! hands down!!
The 135 looks wizzy for a Schweizer but is only a marginal performance
glider.it also is an easy glider to fly, but isn't a "groovy" glider to
fly...the 1-35 takes a lot of attaention to really thermal well.it likes
some flaps for thermalling and is light enough that the added flaps are
draggy enough that they just don't allow any pushing or pulling to take
advantage of the strong bumps in the thermal without slowing the glider so
you end up flying in more or less octagons rather than circles...it's just
not as fun as it should be....
The Libelle also needs attention since it doesn't groove like some later and
heavier gliders but it's still delightful...it just leaves you feeling
"good"
The Libelle is of course much prettier :o) but assembles quick and easy,
just a well designed glider for the time...
Support for the Libelle remains very good with Hansjorg Streifeneder in
Germany keeping almost all parts readily available and since Sikorsky took
over Schweizer support for all Schweizer gliders today is nil.though this
might change as someone takes over at least some of the Schweizer parts...
But of the 2...no question.....Libelle! :o)
tim

Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at:
www.wingsandwheels.com




"Waduino" > wrote in message
.. .
> So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying in northeastern US,
> i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
> These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on paper and prices,
> although they probably handle quite differently and I would guess the 1-35
> penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
> Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle is the version (B)
> with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.
> Which would you pick and why?
> Thanks.
> Wad.
>

[Jack]

If you're looking at a 1-35 and a Libelle, I'd include a PIK-20B. It
has the best attributes of both in my opinion. Same 90-degree flaps for
short-field landings. Has -8 degree flaps interconnected with ailerons
for running. More importantly, has a 130 kt. rough-air redline, and no
gel-coat issues. They are built very robustly. I have 128 hours in a
1-35 and about 20 in my PIK. The PIK will run and hide from most
1-35's. At higher speeds will go away from a Standard Libelle. There's
a reason it has won a world championship... I was up to 9000 MSL today
in West Texas, and went about 70 miles... come on summer! In my
opinion, a PIK's the best value out there, and there are several for
sale...

Jack Womack
PIK-20B N77MA (TE)

[Waduino]

So tell me more about PIKs.
I know I can get support for a Libelle. Just about anything can be ordered
readily, though maybe not cheaply. I must admit that I know the name
Glasflugel, but PIK is a bit of an unknown.
Sort of related, if I move up or out after a few years I think I could
resell a Libelle quite easily, a PIK-20B I'm not so sure.
Enlighten me please. They do look nice.
Wad.
---
"Jack" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> If you're looking at a 1-35 and a Libelle, I'd include a PIK-20B. It
> has the best attributes of both in my opinion. Same 90-degree flaps for
> short-field landings. Has -8 degree flaps interconnected with ailerons
> for running. More importantly, has a 130 kt. rough-air redline, and no
> gel-coat issues. They are built very robustly. I have 128 hours in a
> 1-35 and about 20 in my PIK. The PIK will run and hide from most
> 1-35's. At higher speeds will go away from a Standard Libelle. There's
> a reason it has won a world championship... I was up to 9000 MSL today
> in West Texas, and went about 70 miles... come on summer! In my
> opinion, a PIK's the best value out there, and there are several for
> sale...
>
> Jack Womack
> PIK-20B N77MA (TE)
>

[Gary O'Neill]

One of the club members has a Pik 20A and has done a study of them.
The 1st 18 built are the best wing profiles ,the designer and company
were glider pilots and built them as a pilot dreams of having a glider
built.
Totally uneconomic,they went broke.
The molds were sold and another company started making them.
The profit motive was paramount and profile trueness deteriated from thereon
Spars are massively over built therefor the high speed strength.
The profile is identical/very close to Ventus profile apart from the tip
area,
this lets them down and makes their weak thermal ability marginal, winglets
are supposed to wipe or negate this weakness.
Generally if you live /fly in a stronger lift area the Pik is an excellent
choice ,
if you are in a weak to medium strength area winglets are required.
In the 75-95 knot range you should run with a ventus if you have an earlier
production number degrade this off as the serial number gets higher.
gary



"Tim Mara" > wrote in message
...
> Libelle! hands down!!
> The 135 looks wizzy for a Schweizer but is only a marginal performance
> glider.it also is an easy glider to fly, but isn't a "groovy" glider to
> fly...the 1-35 takes a lot of attaention to really thermal well.it likes
> some flaps for thermalling and is light enough that the added flaps are
> draggy enough that they just don't allow any pushing or pulling to take
> advantage of the strong bumps in the thermal without slowing the glider so
> you end up flying in more or less octagons rather than circles...it's just
> not as fun as it should be....
> The Libelle also needs attention since it doesn't groove like some later
> and heavier gliders but it's still delightful...it just leaves you feeling
> "good"
> The Libelle is of course much prettier :o) but assembles quick and easy,
> just a well designed glider for the time...
> Support for the Libelle remains very good with Hansjorg Streifeneder in
> Germany keeping almost all parts readily available and since Sikorsky took
> over Schweizer support for all Schweizer gliders today is nil.though this
> might change as someone takes over at least some of the Schweizer parts...
> But of the 2...no question.....Libelle! :o)
> tim
>
> Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at:
> www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>
>
>
> "Waduino" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> So you have a choice for a first glider. You're flying in northeastern
>> US, i.e. generally light conditions (when it's not snowing).
>> These 2 planes have roughly similar performance on paper and prices,
>> although they probably handle quite differently and I would guess the
>> 1-35 penetrates better. Maybe the Libelle climbs better.
>> Both are in excellent condition. The Standard Libelle is the version (B)
>> with larger air brakes and foam core, not balsa.
>> Which would you pick and why?
>> Thanks.
>> Wad.
>>
>
>