A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Libelle



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 20th 18, 09:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ross[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 179
Default Libelle

I don’t see why it would be a deal breaker. If the fuse has been broken and repaired it is not an issue. I have fixed several fuses, that have been either completely separated or simply broken. It is one of the easiest things to repair

So which libelle did you buy?
  #22  
Old June 24th 18, 09:11 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default Libelle

Contacted the Lancaster Airport on the off chance they still had the Libelle. Said it was in Canada now. I was offered a price of 1,500 on a Libelle that had a damage history. The known damage is a shattered canopy and a crushed leading edge in one wing approximately 3 inches deep and 3 inches wide from striking a tree or fence post. Unknown if there is any other damage to fuselage such as landing gear damage or boom damage. The pilot reported hearing "cracking in the wings" when he was upset by turbulence and became inverted in flight causing his head to strike and crack the canopy is what was reported to have happened. I'd really like to own a Libelle sailplane and thought maybe if I registered it as experimental I could have it repaired for a resonable cost. If it wasn't repairable it could be cosmetically brought back and would make a museum piece. Biggest problem I have is logistic of transport. I live in California and the ship is on the East Coast. I told the guy that I was probably gonna have to pass. If any of you know a good reason why I should pick this Libelle up and or could help me with getting it to California let me know. Thanks.
  #23  
Old June 24th 18, 09:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default Libelle

Weird for me to specify the Libelle as sailplane? I'm making payments on a Viking Dragonfly and well... I thought maybe at 1,500 if the ship is damaged severely structurally I could remove all components such as water ballast system and control components selling those and the trailer donate the airframe as a static display model to an aircraft museum.
  #24  
Old June 24th 18, 09:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default Libelle

Found a Libelle 301 for an asking of 8,000 that needs work but no damage history. It's my understanding that the 201 is preferable to the 301 though because of an improved airfoil, debatably materials not that balsa is bad, and better air brakes? Am I off base in this info? The 301 has flaps though as well no? I've seen a retrofit kit that improved the air brakes on another ship. Is that not possible on the Libelle too? Anyway I know a bit on these but not everything. To be honest I'd like to pay the 1,500 to just take the thing apart and see how it was made. I've never even seen one of these in person. I welcome comments, advice, and support. Thanks!
  #25  
Old June 24th 18, 12:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default Libelle

301 had flaps and better performance than 201.
Several mods available, Google Schumann Libelle.
  #26  
Old June 25th 18, 01:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default Libelle

Mr. Quebec and Mike thank you. I had looked at both those pages. I had considered the Damaged Libelle I found a good candidate for the Schumman Mods being that extensive repairs would be needed anyhow and why not add those mods while I was at it. I would find it hard to modify a classic glass ship like the Libelle. I would want to keep it factory and do a restoration but not major external modifications. The Schumann mods the primary being the wing would be a moot point on the 201 as they have the Wortmann was it wing already correct? In respect to the turbulence Schumann claimed as being the entire undersurface of the wing perhaps a turbulator tape applied in the right place on the under surface would provide a better flow. Maybe the same tapes could be applied to the nose section with improved results for higher speed flight. I'm not concerned with owning a Libelle to fly fast in competition, I'd be happy with having such a beautiful ship to fly and accept it for what it is, limitations on speed being what they are. What I'm understanding is the 301s spoilers were half as effective as the 201s yet it had flaps which compensate and bring it to a similar ability as the 201 or allow slightly better landing performance? The 201 had a higher performance airfoil standard? Anything else I'm missing?
  #27  
Old June 25th 18, 03:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default Libelle

The 201 airfoil is not higher performance than the 301.
  #28  
Old June 25th 18, 07:13 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default Libelle

Wikipedia Libelle entry isn't necessarily correct. I read that the 201 had a Wortmann airfoil whereas the article written by Schumann stated that the 301 airfoil was a Heutter airfoil. Maybe the thing is the 201 has the Heutter airfoil that has been mistakenly called a Wortmann in the Wiki entry.
  #29  
Old June 25th 18, 07:43 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default Libelle

Maybe mistaken in the Wiki entry and otherwise? Glasfaser must be able to say what the true airfoil section is. From what I'm gathering the 201 and 301 have the same airfoil yet if Wil Schuemann is correct in his assertions the both mentioned Libelle have a Heutter airfoil and not a Wortmann as is seemingly commonly thought.
  #30  
Old June 25th 18, 08:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Libelle

If it's any help, I obtained a set of laser cut templates for the Libelle 201b from Streifeneder. They are all marked as FX 66-17AII for all wing stations. The FX series would be a Wortman airfoil.

Mark Guay
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Libelle 201 canopy [email protected] Soaring 0 July 4th 16 02:03 PM
Club Libelle H 205 POH James Anderson Soaring 1 August 1st 12 07:33 PM
Libelle Wings Steve Leonard Soaring 1 March 1st 07 08:27 PM
Libelle Wings Thermaler Soaring 3 March 1st 07 04:18 PM
Standard Libelle Pam Kurstjens Soaring 4 May 22nd 05 05:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.