Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for a club?

I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors,
particularly in the Northern winter. This is what hangars were invented
for.

The airport (3B3) is privately owned and we do not have a lease. We are
"tennants at will" and could be "asked" to leave at any time. A
permanent structure at our expense is out of the question.

I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.

There are only about 12 T hangers on the field. There are several dozen
more powered aircraft - all left outside all year. THEY don't look like
the L-33.

Tony V.

BTW: at a nearby airport (KASH) where I fly the Skylane that I own a
(small) piece out of, T hangars are renting for $600/month.

Our L33 was hangared and paint began coming off almost immediately. It came
off in sheets. If the aluminum was treated with anything before painting,
it was ineffective.
To Blanik America's credit, they did pay a significant amount of the
repainting expense.

Brent

"Bruce Greeff" wrote in message
...
Tony Verhulst wrote:
Tony Verhulst wrote:



Does the paint last?


In a word, "no". Ours looks awful. I'll see it I can get a pic this
weekend.


Here are the L-33 pics. This glider has spent a lot of time outdoors -
but, so have the Cessnas and Pipers a few yards away and THEY don't look
like this. We have a painted L-23 that doesn't look so hot either.
Cessna, Piper, and others have figured out how to paint aluminum. LET,
apparently, has not.

Tony V

http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhul...c/DSCN2165.JPG
http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhul...c/DSCN2166.JPG
http://home.comcast.net/~tony.verhul...c/DSCN2167.JPG

I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors,
particularly in
the Northern winter. This is what hangars were invented for.

LET L13s that I have seen all appear to have shabby paint - even when
kept, as
we do, inside hangars except when flying... Never seen a L23 or 33 in the
metal.

I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.

Tony Verhulst wrote:

I fail to see why anyone would leave a glider rigged - outdoors,
particularly in the Northern winter. This is what hangars were
invented for.


The airport (3B3) is privately owned and we do not have a lease. We are
"tennants at will" and could be "asked" to leave at any time. A
permanent structure at our expense is out of the question.

I suppose the caption is that it will look like what you treat it like.


There are only about 12 T hangers on the field. There are several dozen
more powered aircraft - all left outside all year. THEY don't look like
the L-33.

Tony V.

BTW: at a nearby airport (KASH) where I fly the Skylane that I own a
(small) piece out of, T hangars are renting for $600/month.

Hi Tony

My point is not how expensive hangarage is - It costs a lot here too. It is just
the proportion that sounds wrong to me.

Sterling Massachusets has 49 Properties listed on Realtor.com. They start at
$250K+ for a decent house and end in the $690K+ for a mansion. Surely the folk
who live here can afford to put up a hangar? A Canadian operation has a canvas
roofed hangar that handles Ontario weather. Presumably this does not count as a
permanent structure, so you can take it with you if you move.

Around here a hangar costs about the same as a 30+ year old first generation
glass single seater. We get a 19m Kestrel and a 15m Std Cirrus into one. The
difference in maintenance alone makes it worth it. OK we get a lot of sun, and
hail, and the local population would steal or destroy it if we left it out so we
have LOTS of motivation to put it in a nice steel shed...

Sterling Massachusets has 49 Properties listed on Realtor.com. They
start at $250K+ for a decent house and end in the $690K+ for a mansion.
Surely the folk who live here can afford to put up a hangar?

Being able to afford one and being willing to build one appear to be 2
different things - at least that's my cut at it. The town would love to
have the property to build a school or something. The airport is close
to a major reservoir and we're talking septic tanks and so there would
be an environmental problem. In any case, the property owner is unlikely
to spend money on a new hangar.


A Canadian
operation has a canvas roofed hangar that handles Ontario weather.
Presumably this does not count as a permanent structure, so you can take
it with you if you move.

Yes, we're looking into this.

Thanks for the info.

Tony

I owned an L-33 for about a year. It was tied down
outside from mid-April thru November in WI. The only
problem I had with the paint was on the rivets on the
trailing edge. It seemed like the rivets were not cleaned
well enough and probably had some oil on them when
they were painted.

This ship was 3 years old when I sold it and only had
54 hours on it when I bought it the year before. It
was stored in the trailer during the winter.
GORDY

Why not keep it in a trailer?
1000s of gliders in europe are kept that way and rigged when needed for flying.
Thats what the wings come off for.

In article ,
(OscarCVox) wrote:

Why not keep it in a trailer?
1000s of gliders in europe are kept that way and rigged when needed for
flying.
Thats what the wings come off for.

I know people who keep their DG1000 in the trailer and rig/derig it
every day. I'm sure it would be nice to have a hangar, but rigging
doesn't seem to be too much of a deterrent, even with such a big two
seat glider. I think it can be done with two people, but three makes it
easier.

-- Bruce

Ask not whether a Blanik is rugged enough for your
club. Instead, ask whether your club is rugged enough
for a Blanik.



At 01:36 12 May 2004, Bruce Hoult wrote:
In article ,
(OscarCVox) wrote:

Why not keep it in a trailer?
1000s of gliders in europe are kept that way and rigged
when needed for
flying.
Thats what the wings come off for.

I know people who keep their DG1000 in the trailer
and rig/derig it
every day. I'm sure it would be nice to have a hangar,
but rigging
doesn't seem to be too much of a deterrent, even with
such a big two
seat glider. I think it can be done with two people,
but three makes it
easier.

-- Bruce

Hi Jeff,

I owned a 1993 L-33 from for about 2 years. It lived outside in the South
Florida sun and rain. It rains everyday in summer. I had wing covers and a
durable canopy cover made and I would remove the horizontal stabilizer and slide
a Sunbrella "sock" over the fin to protect the fabric rudder. I waxed it with
Nufinish car wax 2-3 times a year. It held up very well. Had red trim that faded
a little in the sun but the ship kept its shine. I did have some small paint
blisters where the felt padding on the tie-down sleeves stayed wet and loosened
the paint. I believe it would hold up very well in most climates.

I heard lots of talk about fragile tails. The L-33 was the first single-place
glider I ever flew after training in L-23's. I never had any trouble landing it.
My instructor (Burt Compton) taught us to land gliders level - not tail first. A
bunch of other pilots with less than 100 hours time flew it without problem.
Everyone seemed to like it.

I now have a Discus with gelcoat starting to go. I would much rather repaint
than refinish gelcoat. I would imagine that the pieces of an L-33 would fit many
automotive or truck spray booths and the ship could be repainted for a couple of
thousand dollars instead of 15-20 thousand for gelcoat.

My 2 cents: Its a great club glider.

Stuart



jeff rothman wrote:

Our club is seriously considering buying a Blanik L-33 but I have heard a
few reports that the fuselage can be easily damged if a tail first landing
is made. I would appreciate it very much if clubs that own an L-33 could
give me guidance.

Is a Blanik L-33 rugged enough for club use?

Does the paint last?

Is it easy to work on? I know that the L-23 and L-13 are difficult to
service.

Does Blanik support it well? Are parts readily available? Is it expensive to
fix?

On the balance would you recommend an L-33 for club use?

Thank you for any information.

-Jeff

We've had one for several years now and despite some rather shall we
say "authoritative" landings and a groundloop nothing's actually
broken on it. The ship is tied down outside April to October. The
paint has deteriorated quite a bit. Mostly it has just lost all its
gloss but in a few areas (on the skin joint on the wings at the
inboard edge of the airbrake box and at the wing root where the tape
is placed to seal the wing root/fuselage junction) it has started to
crack and peel off. As far as I can tell the LET aircraft are all made
of anodized aluminium. I have a brochure our club got at the time we
started shopping for the L33 which says you could choose either silver
or gold anodizing or a paint finish. Maybe we should have taken the
unpainted option. My familiy's business is paint, many of our
customers being in the aviation field, and I know that getting paint
to stick to anodized aluminium is not particularly easy. The first two
L23's we bought and all but one of our L13's had no paint on them
except for the stripes, fabric, and registration markings and their
finishes held up well. One of our L13's was painted years ago after a
hailstorm with a two part polyurethane by a very capable aircraft
painter and it still looks beautiful. The painter still says that
there was some luck involved in it working so well.

All in all a good ship. It looks a little ugly now but still flys
nice.