LET Blanik L-13 OE-0935 History Details?

Does anyone have a source for the flight history of Blanik L-13
OE-0935 that was involved in the wing failure? Total hours, take-off/
landings, aerobatics, and winch launch history?

On Aug 30, 12:48*pm, Tim Taylor wrote:
Does anyone have a source for the flight history of Blanik L-13
OE-0935 that was involved in the wing failure? *Total hours, take-off/
landings, aerobatics, and winch launch history?

If you're going that route you'll probably need all accident and
repair history as well.

Andy

It would be interesting to know this information for curiosity sake.

But, I'm not sure if this historical data can conclusively say fatigue
was the root cause of the failure. The failure might have been caused by
flying the glider out of it's design limits.

This would not be hard to do if a pilot screwed up an aerobatic manevour.
If things go wrong, Vne and G limits can be easily exceeded in a hurry.

Our friends that had the last flight may done a normal basic training
flight. But, a previous flight might have damaged the glider.
Unfortunately, no one said anything about over stressing the glider and
someone else paid the price.

Andrew


At 20:12 30 August 2010, Andy wrote:
On Aug 30, 12:48=A0pm, Tim Taylor wrote:
Does anyone have a source for the flight history of Blanik L-13
OE-0935 that was involved in the wing failure? =A0Total hours,
take-off/
landings, aerobatics, and winch launch history?

If you're going that route you'll probably need all accident and
repair history as well.

Andy

"Andrew Corrigan" wrote in message
...
Our friends that had the last flight may done a normal basic training
flight. But, a previous flight might have damaged the glider.
Unfortunately, no one said anything about over stressing the glider and
someone else paid the price.

I think that accident investigators can fairly positively tell the difference
between a structure that has failed from overstressing and one that has failed
from fatigue. The AD says "The preliminary investigation has revealed that the
fracture may have been due to fatigue". So there seems to be little reason to
suspect this accident resulted from prior overstress damage; particularly damage
from a recent flight.

Vaughn

..

On Aug 30, 2:42*pm, "vaughn" wrote:
I think that accident investigators can fairly positively tell the difference
between a structure that has failed from overstressing and one that has failed
from fatigue. *The AD says "The preliminary investigation has revealed that the
fracture may have been due to fatigue". *So there seems to be little reason to
suspect this accident resulted from prior overstress damage; particularly damage
from a recent flight.

If a glider is routinely overstressed by, say, 20%, I would not expect
it to fail. I would, however, expect its fatigue life to be
significantly decreased. Years later, the wing could fail when under
"normal" load, and the fracture would look like a fatigue fracture. I
may be wrong... am I?

Bart

If a glider is routinely overstressed by, say, 20%...

I would like to add that the scenario above is purely theoretical and
I am not trying to suggest that the accident in Austria was caused by
anyone who has flown the glider in question in the past.

B.