Cotton or Linen

…. should be listed! 😉

One it’s all painted etc just how is the CAA drone going to know the difference?

You look in the log books and workpacks, if recovered all the materials and their release numbers will be listed.

Hmm – visually, there is a world of difference between Linen and Ceconite. Unless the weave is completely filled, you can spot it a mile away!…..

😉 I’d better not name the individual concerned then – even though he’s no longer in post!

Who are you calling a dope!

Them’s fighting words where he comes from……
:p

Hmm – visually, there is a world of difference between Linen and Ceconite. Unless the weave is completely filled, you can spot it a mile away!

If its a Hurricane or similarly accesible fuselage, just pull off a panel and you will see the reverse side of the fabric – if its linen covered there will be the distinctive appearance of a red hue – dope!

Hmm – visually, there is a world of difference between Linen and Ceconite. Unless the weave is completely filled, you can spot it a mile away!

I’m not going to get into the argument about what is better!

Bruce

Ceconite 102 on a P-51 just wont do it but 101 will do

One it’s all painted etc just how is the CAA drone going to know the difference?

The “drone” wont, but the pilot will when he goes faster than 102 can cope with, & the AAIB may or may not be able to tell him about it afterwards.

…I doubt anyone can tell the difference from 30ft away

About 17 years ago the RAFM Team that came to collect the Oxford at the end of its 3 year loan period, complimented NAM’s Restoration Co-Ordinator on the quality of his “linen-work” on the then recently completed Anson re-build. They were very surprised to be told that it was Ceconite and proceeded to undertake a more detailed examination of the work. 🙂

No problem whatsoever using different fabrics on old or new aircraft, provided they meet the original design requirements. For example, Ceconite 102 on a P-51 just wont do it but 101 will do & is already approved.

If you’re going to change the original fabric type get the TC holder (if still available) to raise a SB, or otherwise raise a modification and get it approved BEFORE doing the job, otherwise you wont be flying for a bit while you dig yourself out of the hole you just found yourself in.

One it’s all painted etc just how is the CAA drone going to know the difference?

18 years ago we used linen on a Spit which has been parked behind ropes etc ever since & isn’t capable of flight (the Merlin is *empty*).. But linen was insisted upon for authenticity when Stitz etc would have been fine…I doubt anyone can tell the difference from 30ft away

Cotton Or Linen

…which reminds me, throwing in my tuppenceworth : I hate it when (in various) films and documentaries, ill-advised commentators speak of aircraft being “made of wood and covered with canvas“

Sad to relate one of the current BoB aircrew, who flies the Hurricane, and who shall be nameless, but should know better, thus described the fabric on the Hurricane in the recent programme on the Macgregor brothers’ flights in the Spitfire. Canvas, ideal for the ‘Cutty Sark’ and the like, but not for Moths or Hurricanes I fancy. There, rant over, back to obscurity…;)

All

With a certified aeroplane I wonder what the legality of using different fabrics/finishes are?

cheers

G’Day Ross,

Please be aware that here in Oz you can only cover Type Certificated aircraft with polyester fabric, if it is listed on the fabric manufacturers’ STC. Now, the trap for players like you and me :), is our trusty Austers, Proctors, Avians, etc are not. However, obtaining an Engineering Order to cover your machine of choice is easy and for the Auster, basically states that the aircraft be covered in accordance with the manufcturer’s scheme, which, lo and behold, is almost exactly the way you would use one of the polyester fabrics anyway, ie blanket method, glue all the edges down, tauten, lace and tape, etc. Note, the EO for the fabric you buy will also state the doping system to be used with that particular fabric.
The EO I obtained for my Auster was about 200 bucks – not too bad, but you have to remember that you will have to get an EO for each aircraft you cover, which between us, is going to add up to a bit…. 😀

Best regards,

Paul

Thats not clamping down, thats reminding people of the process that already exists, and has done for many years. Clamping down happens when the process is not followed.

Bit like speeding really – the rules exist for the benefit & safety of all (like it or not), some people choose to break them and then whinge when they get caught out.

Tell that to was it Stephen Grey?…… The problem with it is that even if an aircraft has been rebuilt in say the USA and imported into the UK you have to now prove everything has been rebuilt with the correct materials etc and approved CAA wise. And that is going back to the year it was originally built, something that is a nigh on impossible task on aircraft that have probably gone through the rebuild process several times in several countries and several airforces, you might find the XYZ airforce changed a material spec on something for a modern equivalent due to the original material simply no longer being available, but you will be screwed trying to find out the information or prove it.

Oh, Rules is rules, I know, and when aviating there’s no other way. However, sometimes beaurocracy can lose sight of common sense when framing these rules – for example, polyester is simply a better material for the job.

What is wrong with a ‘blanket’ acceptance of the use of an approved grade – say Ceconite 101 and certified equivalents? Or is there an example of an instance in which natural fabric is safe to use where polyester might be dangerous? I would be more concerned about the safety of cotton or linen, as it requires more skill to apply properly and is prone to degradation.

Thats not clamping down, thats reminding people of the process that already exists, and has done for many years. Clamping down happens when the process is not followed.

Bit like speeding really – the rules exist for the benefit & safety of all (like it or not), some people choose to break them and then whinge when they get caught out.

Gooday

With a name like that guy that signed that document, you would have to say “Sir, YES SIR!” What a great name.

The actual document as you say makes interesting reading. thanks for the link.

cheers

Gooday All

I never think about non-flyers, not interested in them. However saying that, non-flyers I imagine should be as close to the original spec as possible, no good reason to do anything else.

Interested in the comment “it seems that in the UK, Ceconite is legally no longer an option for flying aircraft where natural fibres were originally used.”

In general terms, could someone elaborate further (appart from the comments that have already been made).

I would have thought that an engineering order could be obtained if necessary to use another fabric.

cheers

Here you go Proctor, they are clamping down and as you say, if a MOD has been put in place and accepted to use a different spec material that is ok, if not…..

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/20100607Draft4.pdf

TC Holder approved modifications are available for Tiger Moth and Chipmunk to permit the use of Ceconite or Polyfiber. No doubt there are approved modifications for other (British) types as well.

Gooday All

I never think about non-flyers, not interested in them. However saying that, non-flyers I imagine should be as close to the original spec as possible, no good reason to do anything else.

Interested in the comment “it seems that in the UK, Ceconite is legally no longer an option for flying aircraft where natural fibres were originally used.”

In general terms, could someone elaborate further (appart from the comments that have already been made).

I would have thought that an engineering order could be obtained if necessary to use another fabric.

cheers

Re cotton/linen/polyester.
if the aircraft is going to fly use polyester..no contest…
Why?
1 weight saving
2 much less skill reqd and less likely to damage structure due over taughtening
3 availability and cost
4 who can tell the difference? unless up very close or look inside at back of a panel..
5 use the lightest spec that will meet or exceed the origional..
6 needs far less dope to finish …again weight!! WEIGHT!!

I could go on and on but for now rgds to all and hope i havent offended the purists…
V34

Not half as daft as the CAA morons who carry bulls**t to the nth degree.

It’s a sheer fluke that aircraft are allowed to be built of anything other than cast
iron! Modern materials just don’t cut it [or, perhaps, the NIH syndrome?:rolleyes:]

G’day 😉