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

What to do with L-13?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 4th 12, 09:32 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Hagbard Celine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default What to do with L-13?

The Aircraft Design And Certification modification is applicable in
Canada (I'm surprised that it's not approved in the U.S. yet as
usually a method approved by the agency which controls the original
type approval for compliance with an A.D. issued by the same agency is
accepted by other governments as a matter of course) but so far as I
have been able to determine no one has had it done. Possibly if you
had an L-13 with no more than 2000 hours and which was otherwise in
very good shape and well equipped it might be worth doing. In Canada
the factory life limits and life limit extensions were applied as an
A.D. so my club sold it's last two L-13's several years ago for around
$4000 with trailers when they reached 4250 hours. At that point it
seemed that the cost and work involved in pursuing one last extension
wasn't really worth it. It hurt to sell them but we had been
depreciating them based on zero residual value at 3750 hours so at
least we were ready for it.
  #22  
Old May 4th 12, 12:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Gilbert Smith[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default What to do with L-13?


ASM wrote:

On Thursday, May 3, 2012 6:16:51 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Our club (NJ - USA) has folded and we still have an L-13 taking up space. Before I call the local scrap yard I thought I'd ask if anyone might be interested in buying it at scrap value with the dreams of getting airworthy again. We also have an open trailer for it that will be available separately if the bird goes to the junk yard. mikefaddenathotmail.com.


Possibility: http://soaringcafe.com/2012/04/world...ilplanes-dead/


The lack of funds in the US soaring movement, compared to UK, always
surprises me. Admittedly I live in the circuit of one of the UK's
largest clubs, where ASK21s are the standard training ship and a Duo
Discus is used for advanced tuition, but I doubt there are many clubs
using anything less than an ASK13.
I owned a share in an L13 many years ago. Fine for local soaring and
no doubt good for basic training, but its performance fell way behind
that of an ASK13, and possibly even the ASK7.
If you really need a cheap trainer, especially if you value struts
like the 2-33, how about a Slingsby T21 ? They are virtually giving
them away here.
  #23  
Old May 4th 12, 05:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bill D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 746
Default What to do with L-13?

On May 4, 5:44*am, Gilbert Smith wrote:
ASM wrote:
On Thursday, May 3, 2012 6:16:51 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Our club (NJ - USA) has folded and we still have an L-13 taking up space. Before I call the local scrap yard I thought I'd ask if anyone might be interested in buying it at scrap value with the dreams of getting airworthy again. We also have an open trailer for it that will be available separately if the bird goes to the junk yard. mikefaddenathotmail.com.


Possibility:http://soaringcafe.com/2012/04/world...ilplanes-dead/


The lack of funds in the US soaring movement, compared to UK, always
surprises me.


Actually, there's no lack of funds but there is a widespread lack of
understanding of the effects of inflation. If 1960's prices for
gliders are inflated into today's funds, the prices are seen to be
about the same - but today, you get a much better glider for those
funds.

To someone who remembers spending less than $10,000 for a new trainer
in the 1960's, $115,000 seems like a lot of money when, in fact, the
two prices represent about the same value.

  #24  
Old May 4th 12, 10:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tim Mara
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 375
Default What to do with L-13?


"Bill D" wrote in message
...

The L-13 wasn't grounded because of some bureaucratic bungling. There
are very real and serious structural problems with the wing. These
problems require an engineering solution proven to be safe. The L-13
has a standard airworthiness certificate and any fix must completely
restore the aircraft to that standard. Simply splicing in some more
metal and hope it works isn't an option. That's what you get with a
standard airworthiness certificate.

Not completely correct. ...yes "A" Blanik failed but it was also a poorly
documented glider with a questionable record and questionable condition and
being flown likely outside the limitations when came apart during some form
of aerobatic flight. The Blaniks had several overhaul inspections at
intervals to extend the life limits at each occasion based on the overhaul
done at that time.I know few Blaniks here ever got these overhauls done and
clubs and operators in the USA do have very poor record keeping not just on
Blaniks but on all other types as well. and most owners had Blaniks because
they assumed being metal they could be tied out (bad idea for any glider or
airplane IMHO) but there should be a reasonable inspection for well
documented Blaniks that would allow them to be operated safely even if they
limited the use to non-aerobatic as it is my understanding unless I am
completely wrong they can be operated in the Czech Republic having passed
this inspection. A reasonably good inspection conducted by an A&I (who has
proven to the FAA that he knows already what he's doing to get his
certificate) should be sufficient...
What we have done is effectively put most clubs and operators in a fix and
not the Blaniks that make up the largest training glider fleet . Now to
operate a club we go back into the past and drum up more 222's, 233's K7's
and Berfalkes that no one wanted 2 years ago and sell them for gold....and
if anyone thinks these don't have a greater risk of failing than many of the
"well cared for" Blaniks they probably need to more inspecting of these
gliders before they sign them off the next time too.
tim


  #25  
Old May 4th 12, 11:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bill D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 746
Default What to do with L-13?

On May 4, 3:03*pm, "Tim Mara" wrote:
"Bill D" wrote in message

...

The L-13 wasn't grounded because of some bureaucratic bungling. *There
are very real and serious structural problems with the wing. *These
problems require an engineering solution proven to be safe. *The L-13
has a standard airworthiness certificate and any fix must completely
restore the aircraft to that standard. *Simply splicing in some more
metal and hope it works isn't an option. *That's what you get with a
standard airworthiness certificate.

Not completely correct. ...yes "A" Blanik failed but it was also a poorly
documented glider with a questionable record and questionable condition and
being flown likely outside the limitations when came apart during some form
of aerobatic flight. The Blaniks had several overhaul inspections at
intervals to extend the life limits at each occasion based on the overhaul
done at that time.I know few Blaniks here ever got these overhauls done and
clubs and operators in the USA do have very poor record keeping not just on
Blaniks but on all other types as well. and most owners had Blaniks because
they assumed being metal they could be tied out (bad idea for any glider or
airplane IMHO) but there should be a reasonable inspection for well
documented Blaniks that would allow them to be operated safely even if they
limited the use to non-aerobatic as it is my understanding unless I am
completely wrong they can be operated in the Czech Republic having passed
this inspection. A reasonably good inspection conducted by an A&I (who has
proven to the FAA that he knows already what he's doing to get his
certificate) should be sufficient...
What we have done is effectively put most clubs and operators in a fix and
not the Blaniks that make up the largest training glider fleet . Now to
operate a club we go back into the past and drum up more 222's, *233's K7's
and Berfalkes that no one wanted 2 years ago and sell them for gold....and
if anyone thinks these don't have a greater risk of failing than many of the
"well cared for" Blaniks they probably need to more inspecting of these
gliders before they sign them off the next time too.
tim


Could you provide some references on the condition of the failed
glider, Tim?

My understanding was it was a fairly low time glider with good records
showing it had all the required overhaul/inspections which is why the
accident was treated so seriously by EASA.
  #26  
Old May 5th 12, 01:35 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Hagbard Celine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default What to do with L-13?

"I owned a share in an L13 many years ago. Fine for local soaring and
no doubt good for basic training, but its performance fell way behind
that of an ASK13, and possibly even the ASK7"

Huh? The book polars for both the ASK-13 and L-13 are nearly
identical. Does that mean that one of them is incorrect? Given that
the Johnson tests of the L-23 and L-33 were very close to the book
polars I would think that the L-13 factory data would be fairly
accurate too. Does that mean that the Schleicher book polar
significantly understates the performance of the ASK-13?

I also note that the DAeC handicap used by the OLC is 79 for the
ASK-13 and 78 for the L-13, short wing L-23 and Ka-7.
 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:37 PM.


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