Libelle suitability for beginners

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

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...

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

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

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

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