K13 Opinions

[Mike125]

Our club is considering purchasing a second 2-33 (hold the flames
please) as a primary trainer. Our main reasons for these are 1) we are
small and have limited budget and 2) the cost of maintaining a 2-33 is
minimal thanks to their tank-like construction. I've seen a couple of
K13s on the market lately and was wondering what y'all think of them,
particularly when is comes to robustness and cost of repair/parts
availability etc. I flew one for a flight review a few years ago and
really liked it. Thanks.

Mike

[Tim Mara[_2_]]

K-13's are pretty rare here in the USA but still very active and popular in
Europe. Having owned and flown K2, K4, K7 and K13 two seaters, owned or
flown 2-22's 2-33's, Blanik L-13's, Grobs, Schiebe BFII, BFIII, SF34 and
K21's I can see why the K-13 is still so popular there......wish we had more
of them here...IMHO the K-13 is still one of the best basic trainers (again
IMO the best of all of them).. We still currently use a K7 for training and
aside from the lack of comfort it too still does a good job, handles well
(more like a sailplane and less like a "glider" than the Schweizers and most
early K4's) The K7's and K13's soar well, climb well but do it at a slower
(more student friendly) speeds than later glass ships.....they weigh less so
energy management is more student friendly....control harmony is excellent
for a training glider as well. As for durability.Our current K7 was built in
1961....they do have wood wings (you can trust a tree!) so they are flexible
and can take a good bit of flexing without bending likem a metal wing but
also do need to be cared for and stored out of the weather, consequently,
most have had at least above average care and remain airworthy and in
relative decent shape where metal gliders usually have been tied out and
show it...
If you can buy a good K13 and have a place to keep it out of the weather I
think you'll find it's quite comfortable, fairly roomy and a real joy to
fly. I can think of few trainers I would rather have for the job.
tim

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

"Mike125" > wrote in message
...
> Our club is considering purchasing a second 2-33 (hold the flames
> please) as a primary trainer. Our main reasons for these are 1) we are
> small and have limited budget and 2) the cost of maintaining a 2-33 is
> minimal thanks to their tank-like construction. I've seen a couple of
> K13s on the market lately and was wondering what y'all think of them,
> particularly when is comes to robustness and cost of repair/parts
> availability etc. I flew one for a flight review a few years ago and
> really liked it. Thanks.
>
> Mike

[JJ Sinclair]

The K-13 is a joy to fly compared to Schweizer's tank (2-33), but it
needs to be put away at night or the wood and fabric will go all too
fast. Its robust enough with steel tube fuselage, great visibility!
JJ

Mike125 wrote:
> Our club is considering purchasing a second 2-33 (hold the flames
> please) as a primary trainer. Our main reasons for these are 1) we are
> small and have limited budget and 2) the cost of maintaining a 2-33 is
> minimal thanks to their tank-like construction. I've seen a couple of
> K13s on the market lately and was wondering what y'all think of them,
> particularly when is comes to robustness and cost of repair/parts
> availability etc. I flew one for a flight review a few years ago and
> really liked it. Thanks.
>
> Mike

[noel.wade]

I'm still a fairly low-time glider pilot, but I've flown 14 types over
the last year and IMHO the ASK-13 and Blanik L-13 & L-23 are far Far
FAR better trainers than the 2-33!

As others have noted, the wood & fabric of the '13 means that it
requires a bit more care, but of course the Blaniks - while durable -
are slightly more expensive. The price delta between 2-33 ($8k -
$10k) and one of these other types ($15k - $18k) isn't that big
anymore. If your group can stretch and make the purchase, I think its
probably money well-spent.

Any of these 3 models (ASK-13, L-13, L-23) will give the student a
MUCH better feel for soaring than the 2-33, and I believe that a
better primary-trainer experience makes it easier (and more fun) for
students to transition to single-place ships and eventually to high-
performance craft. The 2-33 is a "dump truck" for throwing a lot of
people in the air; but it does little to teach them fine control or
good technique. And the performance & handling of these other
trainers doesn't make them harder to work in the pattern or on landing
- so its not like there's a down-side...

--Noel

[Doug Hoffman]

noel.wade wrote:
> I'm still a fairly low-time glider pilot, but I've flown 14 types over
> the last year and IMHO the ASK-13 and Blanik L-13 & L-23 are far Far
> FAR better trainers than the 2-33!
>
> As others have noted, the wood & fabric of the '13 means that it
> requires a bit more care, but of course the Blaniks - while durable -
> are slightly more expensive. The price delta between 2-33 ($8k -
> $10k) and one of these other types ($15k - $18k) isn't that big
> anymore. If your group can stretch and make the purchase, I think its
> probably money well-spent.

You are neglecting the costs of hangarage for the ASK-13. No hangarage
required for the 2-33 during soaring season. This may be a significant
added cost for a lot of clubs and FBOs.

I was trained in a 2-33. Also using training time in a 1-26 I easily
achieved private license (US) using just those two gliders. I don't
feel I was damaged by that experience. Before flying my RS-15 I clocked
about 2 hours dual training in a Grob 103. First flight in my "high
performance" RS-15 occurred without a hitch (only about 20 hours of
flying anything other than radio-controlled models). I think the 2-33
still has a place in the training process, if used properly. It is
certainly *very* cost effective if purchase/maintenance *and* hangarage
costs are considered.

Nothing against the ASK-13. If you have the space to store it or are
willing to assemble each day it is a fine glider for training. But
there are noticeable extra costs.

> Any of these 3 models (ASK-13, L-13, L-23) will give the student a
> MUCH better feel for soaring than the 2-33, and I believe that a
> better primary-trainer experience makes it easier (and more fun) for
> students to transition to single-place ships and eventually to high-
> performance craft. The 2-33 is a "dump truck" for throwing a lot of
> people in the air; but it does little to teach them fine control or
> good technique.

Coming from a radio-controlled glider background I knew that the 2-33
aileron response was poor. No problem. When I flew the 1-26 and the
G-103 they reacted more like I expected and the adjustment was quick and
easy.

Regards,

-Doug

[noel.wade]

Agreed, hangar costs on an ASK-13 could be an added expense. Just
FYI, our Blanik L-13's and L-23's spend the entire year tied down on
an asphalt ramp in "rainy" Seattle weather. The paint would last
longer if they were hangared, but mechanically they do just fine.

Take care,

--Noel

[Frank Whiteley]

On Oct 28, 9:22*pm, "noel.wade" > wrote:
> Agreed, hangar costs on an ASK-13 could be an added expense. *Just
> FYI, our Blanik L-13's and L-23's spend the entire year tied down on
> an asphalt ramp in "rainy" Seattle weather. *The paint would last
> longer if they were hangared, but mechanically they do just fine.
>
> Take care,
>
> --Noel

K-2, K-7, and K-13 are much easier to rig/derig than most two-seaters,
other than K-21 or PW-6.

They stacked in a small hangar quite nicely. At my first club we
rigged and de-rigged all three daily.

Another club I belonged to had a K-7/10, lowered wing. On recovering
the wing, the trailing edge wood was needing replacement and some
frames and gussets needed regluing. It's good to look inside the
wings every 25 years or so.

They are very nice for training and spinning and remain popular in
Europe. Watch segelflug.de classifieds for current asking prices
(none currently listed, but there have been several in the past few
months). Someone beat me to the one in NV:^( JJ recovered it several
years ago according to the seller.

Frank Whiteley

[noel.wade]

Frank -

Good point! Whether your group rigs and de-rigs the two-seaters often
is another important consideration.

This, of course, depends not only on your hangar/trailer/tie-down
situation and your local weather patterns, but ALSO in how you run
your operations and what kind of flying you intend to do with your 2-
seat ships (for example, XC training entails a slightly higher risk of
a 2-seater landout and the resulting de-rig to trailer it home).

Take care,

--Noel

[Derek Copeland[_2_]]

My club in the UK has 9 of the things that have all made many tens of
thousands of launches, mostly by winch. They are tough, easy to repair and
relatively cheap to buy compared with modern glass. They are a good, safe,
all round trainer, but are rather slow and have low performance by modern
standards. Unlike its successor the K21, it can be persuaded to spin and
doesn't quickly loose vast amounts of height doing so, unlike some other
modern glass trainers. We are starting to replace them with K21s and
DG1000s.

Derek Copeland

At 04:54 29 October 2008, noel.wade wrote:
>Frank -
>
>Good point! Whether your group rigs and de-rigs the two-seaters often
>is another important consideration.
>
>This, of course, depends not only on your hangar/trailer/tie-down
>situation and your local weather patterns, but ALSO in how you run
>your operations and what kind of flying you intend to do with your 2-
>seat ships (for example, XC training entails a slightly higher risk of
>a 2-seater landout and the resulting de-rig to trailer it home).
>
>Take care,
>
>--Noel
>
>

[stephanevdv]

The ASK-13 is much appreciated as a trainer. There is one serious
catch however: a very limited maximum cockpit load. We have two 13's,
one with 168 kg max. weight for two pilots. This means problems with
your load and balance...

[Mike125]

Thanks for all the replies. I overlooked the obvious need for hanger
space. This pretty much rules out a 13 for our club. Dang.

MIke

[Derek Copeland[_2_]]

At 09:46 29 October 2008, stephanevdv wrote:
>The ASK-13 is much appreciated as a trainer. There is one serious
>catch however: a very limited maximum cockpit load. We have two 13's,
>one with 168 kg max. weight for two pilots. This means problems with
>your load and balance...
>

The Yanks should eat less burgers and fries and do a bit more walking.
Then there wouldn't be a problem!

The UK K13s have a BGA approved MAUW increase that makes them non
aerobatic , but normally allows two 200lb middle aged males to fly them.
We are just hoping that EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency, otherwise
known as Europe Against Soaring Anything) wouldn't re-impose the original
limits.

Derek Copeland