Libelle for low time pilot?
Graham & Janaki
competition). Information about this glider is not easy to come by and I
would appreciate the experience of this newsgroup.
I am reasonably confident and can soar OK after many years of hang
gliding but have only about 50hrs in gliders to date. I currently fly
(solo) a Blanik L-23. I would also like my wife to be able to fly the
ship comfortably when she has more experience. She is close to soloing
at this time with no prior flying experience.
The sort of things I would like to hear about are handling
characteristics, spin behavior and landing issues such as ease of
outlanding, plus anything else that might help us make an informed
decision.
Any other sources of information would also be appreciated.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Graham
Hans L. Trautenberg
I had no problems and remember the St. Libelle as an easy to fly glider
that need hardly any attention when thermaling. It had dive brakes at
the upper surface of the wing as well as at the lower surface of the
wing, so the glide angle could be varied considerably.
Al
the best way to describe it is "you wear a libelle"
its very light and very sensitive, the plane will scream at you lift when
you are flying it.
The main problem with the Libellle is dropping a wing on launch, there are
tricks that help this, but the plane sits at a high angle of attack so
doesnt have any bite in the ailerons until its moving at 20knots +.
The problem is that the prop wash from the tow plane hits it before it gets
to that speed.
Out landing I never landed it out so cant comment. The airbrakes are not as
powerfull as later designs, this means that you have to plan your patterns
better than other planes that if you are too high you pull more brake. In
the Libelle full brake equates to 2/3 in a Grob 102/103
So be aware of this and its not a problem.
On landing it will float and float once in ground effect, do not force it on
or it will bounce like you would'nt believe!!
Now the good stuff,
The Libelle is very senesitive to air movement around it will indicate to
you were the lightest of thermals are. It will outclimb anything pretty
much however.... On a long glide inter thermal you will be tempted to fly
it fast, dont...
After about 80knots you are standing on the rudder pedals looking down at
the ground. It is not a Discus fly inter thermal at 70 as a max and it will
do just fine anymore and you are loosing too much.
Value, Libelles can be had for as little as $12,000 which is amazing value
just make sure they have had the AD's all taken care of which can be found
on the FAA website.
Sum up..
A must buy for first time owner looking for a great little machine on a
budget.
I have some photo's of mine on my website plus a brief write up and the
spec's
you can find theses at www.silentflight.com
Good luck
Al
Graham & Janaki wrote in message <36C44862...@sprynet.com>...
Graham & Janaki
Thanks for the input. Could you (or someone) please expand on this a
little as that is not a book I have available.
Graham
Jim Kellett wrote:
> Graham & Janaki wrote:
>
>> I am considering buying into a Libelle for club flying . . . and I
>> would appreciate the experience of this newsgroup.
>
> See "Gliding Safety" by Derek Piggott, A&C Black (1991) page 109.
> Libelle not recommended for "inexperienced pilots", e.g., unless
> you've already made a few field landings and are an "above average"
> pilot. Possible exception for the "Club Libelle" (op cit, page 106)
>
> --
> Jim Kellett
> Skyline Soaring Club http://www.ssl.umd.edu/Skyline/
> "If Flying Were the Language of Man, Soaring would be its Poetry"
>
marc silverman
glass ship,it isn't.It's not that the glider is dangerous,but it's a
little slippery and touchy and more difficult to fly accurately .Many of
the current generation of standard class gliders are more docile.You
should have glass time in a grob G-102,and some training in other
two-place glass ships before transitioning to any glass ship. I assumed
you were looking at a 201 libelle not the 301 which has flaps.Libelle201B
was my first ship that I owned.Had 500 hours in it.
Marc Silverman WV
Christopher H Thorpe
Piggott)
The Libelle
The beauty of the Libelle is the light weight of the wings and the ease of
rigging and derigging. However, it is not for you unless you have already
made a few field landings and are an above-average pilot. Although it is
nice and easy to fly, the airbrakes are ineffective compared with those on
most other machines-an extra 5 knots on the approach and you will be in the
far hedge or the next field! Because of these airbrakes, you must be able to
side-slip quickly and accurately while using full airbrake on the final
approach. With less experienced pilots, it is inevitable that the occasional
approach will end up a little high or fast, and only a quick side-slip can
prevent an overshoot and an expensive accident.
The Libelle suffers a serious loss of performance and buffets badly unless
it is flown accurately. This is probably due to the sharply pointed top of
the fuselage which causes a breakaway of the airflow if the glider is flown
with the slightest slip or skid. Having a short, stubby fin and rudder, the
Libelle is also not as directionally stable as later machines, and this
makes it more difficult to fly accurately than most other types.
In the air it is docile and pleasant to fly, but the poor airbrakes make it
unsuitable for an inexperienced pilot. Larger pilots may find the cockpit a
very snug fit, as the top is rather narrow."
---------------------------------------------
Graham & Janaki wrote in message <36C4EDC7...@sprynet.com>...
marc silverman
flaps\brakes.There are not many of these around and not typically what pilot's
purchase.Usually 201,and 301 models not 201club libelles are what you see around.
Marc Silverman WV
Robert Herndon wrote:
> Christopher H Thorpe <cth...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> > "Not recommended for inexperienced pilots (from Gliding Safety - by Derek
> > Piggott)
>
> > The Libelle
> > The beauty of the Libelle is the light weight of the wings and the ease of
> > rigging and derigging. However, it is not for you unless you have already
> > made a few field landings and are an above-average pilot. Although it is
> > nice and easy to fly, the airbrakes are ineffective compared with those on
> > most other machines-an extra 5 knots on the approach and you will be in the
> > far hedge or the next field! Because of these airbrakes, you must be able to
> > side-slip quickly and accurately while using full airbrake on the final
> > approach. With less experienced pilots, it is inevitable that the occasional
> > approach will end up a little high or fast, and only a quick side-slip can
> > prevent an overshoot and an expensive accident.
>
> > The Libelle suffers a serious loss of performance and buffets badly unless
> > it is flown accurately. This is probably due to the sharply pointed top of
> > the fuselage which causes a breakaway of the airflow if the glider is flown
> > with the slightest slip or skid. Having a short, stubby fin and rudder, the
> > Libelle is also not as directionally stable as later machines, and this
> > makes it more difficult to fly accurately than most other types.
>
> > In the air it is docile and pleasant to fly, but the poor airbrakes make it
> > unsuitable for an inexperienced pilot. Larger pilots may find the cockpit a
> > very snug fit, as the top is rather narrow."
> > ---------------------------------------------
>
> Curious. The libelle was the first glass retract I ever soloed (last
> year). I had no trouble with the airbrakes at all, and indeed found
> them effective and easy to modulate. Speed control was a moderately
> important issue; with the trailing-edge style flap/brake, they
> become somewhat less effective in ground effect. I did not find
> this to be an issue. (My experience to that point was with varied
> metal ships (Schweizers and Blaniks) and PW-5s.)
>
> The ship, like the Glasflugel Hornet I've flown since, is a delight
> to fly.
>
> I would definitely second the idea that it's not the ship you want if
> you're anything much over average size, esp. breadth. Later glasflugel
> ships (Hornet, Mosquito) seem to be better in this regard.
>
> Robert Herndon (Jr.)
Robert Herndon
Albin O. Schreiter
>
>Curious. The libelle was the first glass retract I ever soloed (last
>year). I had no trouble with the airbrakes at all, and indeed found
>them effective and easy to modulate. Speed control was a moderately
>important issue; with the trailing-edge style flap/brake, they
>become somewhat less effective in ground effect. I did not find
>this to be an issue. (My experience to that point was with varied
>metal ships (Schweizers and Blaniks) and PW-5s.)
>
>snip
Looks like you are talking about the Club Libelle, when all the others
are talking the 201. There is quite a difference.
Remove NOSPAM from return address before replying
Lars Peder Hansen
worried when people describe the Libelle as a "perfect beginners glass
ship". It is not, period.
I second Marc's views:
Marc Silverman wrote:
>Although the Libelle seemed to have the reputation of being a beginners
>glass ship,it isn't. It's not that the glider is dangerous,but it's a
bruns...@my-dejanews.com
Graham & Janaki <graham...@sprynet.com> wrote:
> I am considering buying into a Libelle for club flying (probably not
> would appreciate the experience of this newsgroup.
>
> gliding but have only about 50hrs in gliders to date. I currently fly
> (solo) a Blanik L-23. I would also like my wife to be able to fly the
> ship comfortably when she has more experience. She is close to soloing
> at this time with no prior flying experience.
>
While finding the Libelle a great ship (otherwise I wouldn't own one :-), as
long as we're talking about the 201-model (the nonflapped thingy - I haven't
flown the 301 or club version) I'll agree with Lars Peders post - it is simply
not a beginner's ship.
The trouble with the Libelle in this respect is that it tends to be fairly
cheap to come by. Quite a lot of them were built (601 in fact) and with the
great success of the Std. Cirrus they soon became cheap. This has made them
fairly attractive for people starting out in gliding, but it's not a ship to
start in.
Some of the good things. It is very easy ro rig and derig. It climbs like a
homesick angel even in weak thermals. It is extremly responsive to any
movement in the surrounding airmass - you can feel even the slightest lift.
It is a lot of fun to fly: it is not a hands-off ship so it's a very
rewarding experience to master it.
It is not a ship that you fly fast between thermals. I've very rarely found
any reason to fly above 150 km/h and even that calls for pretty good
thermals. Above 150 km/h it'll sink like a dropped grand piano, and it's very
senitive to dirty wings (insects etc will do ugly things to your L/D). Oh,
and don't believe the claimed L/D of 38. It has been measured to 34.5, but
then again the Std. Cirrus, which claims 38.5, has been measured at 36, so
don't ever believe advertising.
There are a number of reasons why its not a beginners ship.
Takeoff requires a bit of care. Normally I winch-launch it and it has a marked
tendency to do a sudden upwards break early in the launch which you have to
watch out for. You have to take care not to pull it too hard at any point
during the launch - it is quite sensitive. Also, on cable breaks one should be
a bit aware as the ineffecient airbrakes means that landing straight ahead can
be a bit tricky from heights where it would have presented no problem on most
other gliders.
Aerotowing is not too bad once you're airborne. But, as Al pointed out,
during the first part of the ground run, aileron response is very sluggish
and keeping the wingtips off the ground requires a lot of stick work
(sometimes a bit of loud swearing too). If you get caught out by prop wash
from the tug during the ground run, its very very difficult to avoid dropping
a wing, and a quick release should be your best option.
Landing requires quite a bit of care, not least if you are doing
fieldlandings in short fields. The airbrakes are not terribly effective (as
someone said: they are mostly there for political reasons) and very precise
speed control is essential. Above 100 km/h the effect of the airbrakes drops
rapidly. This leaves you with a very narrow speed margin between keeping
enough speed to deal with sudden gusts, turbulence etc and keeping the speed
down to prevent an overshoot. I've landed the Libelle in very short fields,
but it's not something that I do because I like to! If you see someone who is
very current in doing precise sideslipping odds are that it is a Libelle
pilot.
Thermalling is fairly easy as the glider is very responsive to anything that
goes on in the air around it. However, to fully exploit this, you need a bit
of experience. It is not as forgiving to imprecise speed control, imprecise
coordination etc. as many later ships. It can be thermalled fairly slow but
there is a very fine line between this and the point where you all of a
sudden find yourself with hardly any control response at all.
Spin and spin recovery is fairly straight forward. Only, as control response
gets rather nonexistent near stall, once you get to the brink of spinning it
can be a problem to prevent the spin, but once the spin is in progress,
recovery tends to be easy.
All in all, the 201 Libelle is a nice ship and a lot of fun to fly. I like my
Libelle a lot, but with 50 hours: don't.
My personal idea about a glider at this stage instead would probably be the
Astir C/S. It is in the same price bracket (could even be a bit cheaper). It
has viceless handling, is easy to launch, and has good landing
characteristics. The cross country performance is (I hate to admit it) just
as good as the Libelle, and in strong conditions probably a bit better.
I can find only two drawbacks to the Astir. It is a bit of a hassle to rig
(derigging is not quite as bad). And, for some studid reason, it has earned a
reputation as a "boring" ship - punishment battalion glider, concrete swan,
whatever. But, in fact, its quite a good glider.
Bo Brunsgaard
Std. Libelle OY-XKB
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Hans L. Trautenberg
>
> "Not recommended for inexperienced pilots (from Gliding Safety - by Derek
> Piggott)
>
> The Libelle
> The beauty of the Libelle is the light weight of the wings and the ease of
> rigging and derigging. However, it is not for you unless you have already
> made a few field landings and are an above-average pilot. Although it is
> nice and easy to fly, the airbrakes are ineffective compared with those on
> most other machines-an extra 5 knots on the approach and you will be in the
> far hedge or the next field! Because of these airbrakes, you must be able to
> side-slip quickly and accurately while using full airbrake on the final
> approach. With less experienced pilots, it is inevitable that the occasional
> approach will end up a little high or fast, and only a quick side-slip can
> prevent an overshoot and an expensive accident.
>
The St. Libelle H 201 comes with two different setups for the air
brakes. The
first few had air brakes at the upper and at the lower side of the wing,
and you
will not experience the above problems. The ships with higher serial
numbers have
air brakes only at the upper side of the wind, and the statement on the
poor
performance on the air brakes is valid for these ships.
The air brakes at the lower side f the wings were omitted at the higher
serial
numbers, because the air brakes at the lower side of the wing were quite
often
damaged when landing in high vegetation.
My second glass ship (after 5 hours in an ASW 15) was a St. Libelle with
air brakes
at both sides of the wing and I never experienced a problem. After two
seasons I
switched to a St. Cirrus because it has much more space for the pilot.
The control
of the approach requires much more skills with the St. Cirrus (without
Ritter air brakes)
than with the St. Libelle.
Al
bruns...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<7a8kog$usn$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <36C44862...@sprynet.com>,
> Graham & Janaki <graham...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>> I am considering buying into a Libelle for club flying (probably not
>> competition). Information about this glider is not easy to come by and I
>> would appreciate the experience of this newsgroup.
>>
>
>All in all, the 201 Libelle is a nice ship and a lot of fun to fly. I like
my
>Libelle a lot, but with 50 hours: don't.
>
>My personal idea about a glider at this stage instead would probably be the
>Astir C/S. It is in the same price bracket (could even be a bit cheaper).
It
>has viceless handling, is easy to launch, and has good landing
>characteristics. The cross country performance is (I hate to admit it) just
>as good as the Libelle, and in strong conditions probably a bit better.
>
>I can find only two drawbacks to the Astir. It is a bit of a hassle to rig
>(derigging is not quite as bad). And, for some studid reason, it has earned
a
>reputation as a "boring" ship - punishment battalion glider, concrete swan,
>whatever. But, in fact, its quite a good glider.
>
>Bo Brunsgaard
>Std. Libelle OY-XKB
>
Graham I think we should reverse the question...
How current are you?
How many hours in Glass two seat or single seat?
Then we can make an informed recommendation wether the Libelle is the ship
for you.
I got into mine after..(reaches for log book) 43 aerotows and around 25
hours total time.
So you be the judge.
I flew my old one last weekend, Its just like going out with an old
girlfriend!!
Great old bird loved my hour of sinking out of non existant wave after a
stratospheric tow.
Regards
Al
Graham & Janaki
Thanks again
Graham
PS. Based on the feedback we are going to continue to use club gliders for a while (L33 and L23's) and then perhaps look into sharing a PW5. Despite the apparent limitations of penetration some have voiced, the ex hang glider pilot in me cherishes a short landing more than any other characteristic (anyway I'm used to really lousy penetration! The PW5 looks good from my Moyes XS <g>).
G
bruns...@my-dejanews.com
"Al" <c...@sierra.net> wrote:
>
> I flew my old one last weekend, Its just like going out with an old
> girlfriend!!
Except that your present glider isn't waiting fuming with the rolling pin at
the ready when you get back :-)
Bo Brunsgaard
Faithfully sticking to Std. Libelle OY-XKB
Scott Lennon
Now one to defend the wonderful Libelle.
I had about 25 hrs Total dual and solo before I was encouraged/ not talked
out of buying a share of a 201B. The only single I had flown was an Astir
CS about 6 hrs. After careful briefing on the potential wing drop on
ground roll and less effective brakes I was let loose in my own Libelle. I
had no trouble converting and found the light weight and lively performance
wonderful.
At about 300hrs I have progressed through C badge to full diamond badge in
this aircraft and now twice competed in the National Sports class comps. I
have had one out landing in every comp I have flown and have had no
difficulty with the spoiler power. The ease of derigging helped on these
occasions! It is very satisfying to have acheived these things in my own
glider.
I would not recommend sideslipping with full spoilers on finals as this
gives a brick like decent rates. I regularly slidslip with about 1/4 brake
when I am high just for fun because the Libelle does it so well. I have not
noticed any major loss of performance with inacurate turns despite being
quite proficient at them. The Libelle does seem to buffet alot because it
is so light and respondes to every thing. As far as stalling and spinning
the Libelle has no peculiar properties. I once spent 20 minutes with the
stick mostly full back experimenting. Each incipient recovered even with
coordiated rudder and aileron. The pre buffets screamed out that a stall
was coming.
Nett result is that unless the pilot in question was particularly low
skilled in approach control or got put off if they have to drag a wing
occasionally on take off (thats why they put a little wheel out there), I
would, like my instructors, not discourage a competent early solo pilot
from flying a Libelle within a club structure or owning privately. From
any point of view their operation (rigging, flying, maintaining, ground
handling) is simple and potential traps well known and predictable.
Heres one that I found out before anyone told me though. We fly at a wave
site and potential 30-40 knot winds and turbulence during circuit. If you
are approaching at 60 kts full brake and the airspeed creeps over 65kts,
the airbrakes suddenly are 1/2 as effective. Slow down or side slip to fix.
Not exactly a big problem but I do not want to be accused of being a biased
owner and hiding potential faults.
One happy owner
Scott Lennon
VH-GZK
Canberra, Australia
marc silverman
your flying.But it seems that you're ability might be above average and you at
least have prior training in a Astir CS, which is a great first glass ship. The
person asking for opinions had no glass experience. Marc Silverman WV
E. R. Beers Jr.
>
> Now one to defend the wonderful Libelle.
>
> I had about 25 hrs Total dual and solo before I was encouraged/ not talked
> out of buying a share of a 201B. The only single I had flown was an Astir
> CS about 6 hrs. After careful briefing on the potential wing drop on
> ground roll and less effective brakes I was let loose in my own Libelle. I
> had no trouble converting and found the light weight and lively performance
> wonderful.
>
> At about 300hrs I have progressed through C badge to full diamond badge in
> this aircraft and now twice competed in the National Sports class comps. I
> have had one out landing in every comp I have flown and have had no
> difficulty with the spoiler power. The ease of derigging helped on these
> occasions! It is very satisfying to have acheived these things in my own
> glider.
>
> If you
> are approaching at 60 kts full brake and the airspeed creeps over 65kts,
> the airbrakes suddenly are 1/2 as effective. Slow down or side slip to fix.
Can anyone explain the theory behind this? I have heard or read this
several times but, leaving out wind wind effects, intuitively, deploying
drag inducing devices should have a greater effect on L/D as the
airspeed
increases.
Ed
bruns...@my-dejanews.com
"Scott Lennon" <lib...@dynamite.com.au> wrote:
>
> At about 300hrs I have progressed through C badge to full diamond badge in
> this aircraft and now twice competed in the National Sports class comps. I
> have had one out landing in every comp I have flown and have had no
> difficulty with the spoiler power.
Hi Scott.
Just being curious: what's the buildno of your Libelle? It sounds a bit to me
like you're flying one of the early buildnos with both top- and bottom
airbrakes, but am I making a wrong gues here?
I haven't had the pleasure of flying in Australia (yet!) but one (among
several) of the reasons why I as an instructor wouldn't allow a low time
pilot to fly the Libelle here in Denmark is that fields up here tend to be
rather small, and the low effect of the spoilers can be quite critical.
> One happy owner
>
> Scott Lennon
Another happy owner
Bo Brunsgaard
Std Libelle OY-XKB
Eric Greenwell
says...
> > If you
> > are approaching at 60 kts full brake and the airspeed creeps over 65kts,
> > the airbrakes suddenly are 1/2 as effective. Slow down or side slip to fix.
>
> Can anyone explain the theory behind this? I have heard or read this
> several times but, leaving out wind wind effects, intuitively, deploying
> drag inducing devices should have a greater effect on L/D as the
> airspeed
> increases.
I've never heard of this before - it's a surprise to me. Every glider
I've flown (K-13, Blanik, Ka-6e, 301 Libelle, Std. Cirrus, ASW 20 C, ASH
26 E) went down quicker and steeper as the airspeed increased. Perhaps
we are misunderstanding the "1/2 as effective"?
--
>>Delete the "REMOVE" from my e-mail address to reply by e-mail<<
Eric Greenwell
John Cochrane
> > > If you
> > > are approaching at 60 kts full brake and the airspeed creeps over 65kts,
> > > the airbrakes suddenly are 1/2 as effective. Slow down or side slip to fix.
> >
> > Can anyone explain the theory behind this?
...
> deploying drag inducing devices should have a greater effect on L/D as the
airspeed increases.
..
> .Perhaps we are misunderstanding the "1/2 as effective"?
Spoilers act in part by adding profile drag, but also in large part by adding
induced drag. By removing the lift in a section in the middle of the wing, now
there are extra "wingtip" vortices where the spoiler starts and stops. It's as if
you have 3 5 meter wings not 1 15 meter wing. Small spoilers (libelle) rely on this
effect for a large part of their action. Since induced drag is a larger fraction
of drag at lower speeds, the relative drag increase is higher at lower speeds.
Yes, the glide angle is worse at higher speeds -- spoiler in or spoiler out. But at
a given speed, small spoilers have a larger effect on glide angle near best L/D,
where induced drag is an important component of total drag.
John Cochrane
Richard Brisbourne
gliders, the Libelle included is that getting into a small field isn't
just about L/D. It's not just height you have to get rid of, it's
energy. And lower the nose, even with full brake and you'll accelerate.
If you just clip over the hedge at 65 knots in a Libelle (or a Phoebus,
or a Kestrel, or a number of other late 60's designs) you'll find that
you'll just burn up the rest of the field at high speed and low altitude
until you slam into the far end. Anyone old enough to remember John
Willy coining the phrase H.E.L.P (high energy landing problems)?
Anyone who has flown enough in one of these beasts will tell you precise
speed control near the slow end of what's safe is essential for short
landings.
--
Richard Brisbourne
(Kestrel owner)
Emilis Prelgauskas
turbulent but attached boundary layer to the wing surface, reducing drag
values compared to the fully disturbed airflow and separated airt layer
created by spoilers at 'correct' speed 1.3 to 1.5Vs
This is even more noticeable on older spoiler only glider as well as on
top surface only braker types like Libelle, Std. Ciurrus, etc.
Emilis
Eric Greenwell
says...
My experience with the Std. Cirrus was that increased drag always
resulted with increased speed; i.e., using full spoilers at a higher
speed always resulted in a steeper glide path. Diving off energy is a
useful technique while high (say, 500+ feet AGL).
The Std. Cirrus spoilers are weak at a "normal" 50 knot approach speed
but improved with more speed; fortunately, it would slide slip well,
which is a better technique when lower.