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

Blanik L-23



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 19th 04, 05:34 AM
Duane Eisenbeiss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Blanik L-23

There is a new Service Bulletin on the Blanik L-23 that requires
Magnafluxing the "U" shape bracket that connects the two elevator halves.
The bracket on our ship had 3 cracks. If you have a Blanik L-23 and have
not had it checked would suggest you do so. Losing half an elevator you
might still have control. Losing both halves would probably be parachute
time.

For those that have had the check, are cracks being found?

Duane



  #2  
Old April 20th 04, 07:39 AM
fw.unt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Duane Eisenbeiss" wrote in message news:HFIgc.24675$0b4.31395@attbi_s51...
There is a new Service Bulletin on the Blanik L-23 that requires
Magnafluxing the "U" shape bracket that connects the two elevator halves.
The bracket on our ship had 3 cracks. If you have a Blanik L-23 and have
not had it checked would suggest you do so. Losing half an elevator you
might still have control. Losing both halves would probably be parachute
time.

For those that have had the check, are cracks being found?

Duane



Hi

We use the L-23 since 1992 for 'building pilots'! For this job it is
the best thing you can have - cheap, handy on the ground to push back.
Right, the sits are horrible, but if you take one of those nice
special cushions under you buttom you can fly 5 hours (I made it
once). I have about 400 landings as an instructor - but really folks
if you want to fly long time and long distance there are better stuff
around - ASK-21 or DuoDiscus or the big size Nimbus 3 etc. are more
comfortable and with good performance.
We had an L-13 for 30 years before and as I see the L-23 wouldn't
receive this age. Maybe the T-tail is one reason. We also had to
invest more work in this plane like mentioned above; it's not that
robust like the L-13.
But I think that we would do it again to buy a L-23 for instruction.

Regards.
  #3  
Old April 23rd 04, 03:12 PM
Burt Compton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I have two L-23 Blaniks at Marfa, Texas. No cracks in the elevator rockers.
Mine were built in 1991 and 1993. Maybe the guy welding back then was an
old-timer who knew how to run a a good bead. For those who find cracks, Blanik
America will replace the part for free. Vitek can give you all the details.
All owners should have received his mailing of themandatory factory bulletin by
now. This might become an AD in the USA, I understand it is already is an AD
in Czech and Canada.

Labor was less than two hours. The test cost $70. each part. Had to drive 3
hours to El Paso for a NDT facility, but that's where our nearest Wal-mart is
located so it was not a wasted trip!

PLEASE NOTE: YOU CAN PUT THE ELEVATORS ROCKERS BACK ON THE GLIDER UPSIDE DOWN
- THEY WILL FIT BOTH WAYS! THE ELEVATOR WILL WORK, BUT NOT ENOUGH "UP" IF
INSTALLED UPSIDE DOWN. IT IS EASY TO DO, SO MAKE A NOTE: "ROUND SIDE UP".
IF YOU FLIP THE ELEVATOR / STAB OVER TO WORK ON IT, REMEMBER WHICH SIDE IS
REALLY "UP". UP IS THE TOP OF THE GLIDER. YOU CANNOT MARK THE PART AS YOU
MUST STRIP AND CLEAN IT THOROUGHLY BEFORE THE MAGNAFLUX TESTING.

SORRY TO YELL IN ALL CAPS HERE, BUT THIS POSSIBILITY OF INSTALLING THE PART
UPSIDE DOWN IS VERY REAL. ASK ME SOMEDAY HOW I KNOW.

REMEMBER: "ROUND SIDE UP" - YOU'LL SEE WHAT I MEAN WHEN YOU REMOVE THE PART.
  #4  
Old April 23rd 04, 05:35 PM
ZASoars
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Check the ras for an update by Burt Compton,

ZA.
  #6  
Old April 24th 04, 03:39 PM
Burt Compton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bruce, To clarify, the Blanik L-23 has a different tail design than the L-13.
The T-Tail elevator rocker arm easily reinstalls either way. "Round Up" is
the key to make it right. The maintenance manual doesn't show it clearly, so
consider it a 50/50 chance that the part (if no notes are made at disassembly)
will be reinstalled incorrectly after the magnaflux testing for cracks. You
cannot mark the part as it must be stripped of all paint and cleaned before the
magnaflux testing process. The easy way is to know that the round side, not
the flat side of the arm installs to the top of the glider. So "round up"!
If the arm is reinstalled upside down, everything fits and looks fine, nothing
rubs or interferes, but not enough "up" elevator. I hope this reassembly
situation doesn't cause more accidents that the bad welds themselves!

Just got word that FAA in USA is considering an Airworthiness Directive on the
elevator rocker arms in L-23's. If it follows the factory bulletin, testing
will be required before the next flight.

Vitek at Blanik America will have all the details and replacement arms.

Burt Compton
Marfa Gliders, west Texas
www.flygliders.com

  #7  
Old April 24th 04, 04:05 PM
F.L. Whiteley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Duane Eisenbeiss" wrote in message
news:HFIgc.24675$0b4.31395@attbi_s51...
There is a new Service Bulletin on the Blanik L-23 that requires
Magnafluxing the "U" shape bracket that connects the two elevator halves.
The bracket on our ship had 3 cracks. If you have a Blanik L-23 and have
not had it checked would suggest you do so. Losing half an elevator you
might still have control. Losing both halves would probably be parachute
time.

For those that have had the check, are cracks being found?

Duane

No cracks on our L-23 (tested a couple of weeks ago) but it's relatively low
time and not aerobatted. It's not clear at this point whether this may
become a repetitive check. The reporting requirements of the SB will
hopefully pinpoint any pattern of problems. I got a second hand report that
something like 35% of the fleet in the Czech Republic had cracks (at least
one you could see daylight through). There was a fatal last year there
during an aerobatic flight. Possibly the part was contracted for or made in
batches and that there are some bad welds.

Frank Whiteley


  #8  
Old April 25th 04, 05:16 AM
Duane Eisenbeiss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Possibly the part was contracted for or made in
batches and that there are some bad welds.

Frank Whiteley


With many cracked and many not cracked this sounds like a possibility,
especially the made in batches part.
As reported in my first post, ours had cracks but had never been submitted
to aerobatic flight (at least not any that someone would admit to).

Duane


  #9  
Old April 27th 04, 05:53 AM
nowhere
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Overall not quite as good as the L13. The stall/spin isn't quite as
good as the L13, both of our L23's would drop one wing consistently
and needed a bit of into spin aileron to hold the spin, wheras both
our old beat up L13's didn't favour either wing at the stall and would
hold the spin with neutral aileron. The L23 tailwheels looked stronger
than the L13's but actually gave us more trouble (cracked bulkhead,
bent tail fairing). I didn't find the control harmony as nice as the
L13. Maybe the T-tail was a mistake. I notice that when they wanted to
build an aerobatic glider (the L13AC) they returned to the
conventional tail. Visibility, especially with the newer one piece
canopy is superior to the L13. Ventilation? well nothing beats the
windscreen scoop on the L13. The airbrakes are lighter to operate on
the L23 thanks to the differentially sized upper and lower panels. We
have had parachutes custom made for the L13 and L23 seats and these go
a long way to alleviating the pain-in-the-back seats on them. We just
got a new one with tip extensions to replace one destroyed in a storm
but we haven't flown it yet. According to a graph in the maintenance
manual the 6000hr. airframe life is reduced to 3500hrs. if the glider
is always flown with the tip extensions in place. LET was selling us
life extensions on the L13's but have recently stopped. If someone can
explain to me exactly what structural problem results in these
aircraft becoming unserviceable at a certain number of hours please
tell me. At the moment I'm starting to think that LET just compared
the revenue from a life time extension (a few hundred dollars) to that
from selling a new glider.
 




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
Wanted, used Blanik L-13 Parts. JC Soaring 0 February 3rd 04 07:38 PM
Blanik L33 Solo For Sale - Chicago, IL USA Curtl33 Soaring 0 October 17th 03 02:25 AM
Blanik L-13 polar BTIZ Soaring 4 August 14th 03 06:51 AM
WTB Blanik L13 mike fadden Soaring 2 August 8th 03 04:30 AM
Wanted: Left wing for Blanik L 13 Rich Chesser Soaring 1 July 19th 03 05:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:02 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.