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.

"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.