Yes or no?

I think that all dints should remain untouched as they all have a story to tell,I also belive that all old planes should look old.A few years ago a vintage motorcycle came up for sale.It was a M20 ex M.O.D.brand new unassembeled in a forgotton crate.Surprise,price was very low as it had no history.I am not saying for one moment that you should add dints with a hammer,but by fillers etc.you are attempting to erase a little bit of history!

When you look at aircraft you will be suprised at the amount of filler in fliers, I spent a week faying in ever seam and skin joint on a RN Jetstream with Thycol as it is called up in the book, you often use high build primers to that work like fillers.

We used fairly large amounts of it on the nose Seahawk XE489 at Southend to fill dents in the sides of the nose. In the car world at that time large quantities of filler were regarded as a bodge for repairing dents and filling holes on old bangers so it didn’t seem right to use it. I got the job of rubbing it down which seemed to take forever because it was spread over a large area.
From other posts here it seems to be much more acceptable now so you just have to go with whatever suits your pocket and skills. The main thing is to produce a presentable end result.

Hi all I would be interested to canvas opinion on wether it is approiate to use Isopon or similar car body filler to smooth out lumps and bumps collected by aircraft during their working life in an attempt to make them look pretty for static display.

http://www.easycomposites.co.uk/products/resin-gel-silicone/fillers-and-additives/glass-bubbles-microballoons-microspheres.aspx

I have used this product to great effect when re-profiling wing sections. easy to work with, sticks well to original materials once cleaned down, easy to profile
and takes paint well

you dont really see it being used much on live aircraft due to the gradual build up of weight, especialy if more was used on one side of the aircraft than the other as it upsets the trim.

with filler on statics i dont see a problem. panel beating if it is done correctly is an art and is not advisable to start thrashing away on a skin that you may end up making worse.. the trouble lies in the memory of the metal, when it is sharply dinged the elements its made of have been stretched beyond its normal flat state. so when you come to flatten it the metal wrinkles and creases unless your real carefull during the process. during flattening you may have got rid of the dent but have ended up moving the pressure from the dent to another part of the skin creating wrinkles or creases.

its best done with a heavy block of something on one side of the ding to absorb the (gentle taps) blows from the hammer on the other..

its very rewarding when its done though

I think just about every large aircraft I’ve seen resprayed has had filler used on the smaller dents (airliners and cargo aircraft), usually applied after the initial primer coat then DA’d smooth.

Knocking dents out can be done for the smaller ones, but often the deeper dents are out of limits for the SRM and often won’t come back out fully as the metal has stretched and you end up with the skin ‘panting’ (oilcaning for our American friends). You end up having to repair it.
I don’t see anything wrong with filling a static aircraft as long as you don’t loose lots of rivet lines.

Fillers

Used it on the rear cupola of our(UAS) turret, check out the pics. It’s not always possible to hammer out any dings, especially if you can’t access both sides, but the important thing to remember is that the metal must be totally clean before applying the filler, and preferably roughen up the surface to be filled to give it a ‘key’. Also, once filler is applied, try to pull it out using a spreading knife-if it comes out and leaves the dent hole clean, then it hasn’t adhered, if it stretches out, then it’s taken to it OK.

Fillers were used on WW2 aircraft during construction, if I’m not mistaken it’s on a Crown film called ‘Getting the job done’, an extremely good instructional film, quite funny in places too!

Cheers
John

Body filler

Also if you use too much hardener it goes off like lightning, i guess thats why they call it p-38?

Body filler on aeroplanes

I understand that when the AEW Shackleton fleet were operational the radomes were regularly filled with car body filler after bird strikes and weather damage with no real detriment to the radar, Also there are a number of exhibits at the Royal Air Force museum with plenty of the stuff in them, The Pembroke nose and the Gentian Violet missile spring readily to mind and i think the comet had a fair amount of the stuff when its nose was damaged so yeh i would say its fairly commom place.

All Spitfire wings, after August 1942, were ordered to be filled with a primer (though it was better referred to as a “filler” or “stopper,) with the stores no. 33B/213; this filling included rivet “divots,” and all panel lines back to, and including, the main spar line. According to I.C.I., by the end of 1944 this had been extended to include the tailplane and fin.
Post-war instructions, for Seafires, called for the use of I.C.I. putty 147-524, rubbed down with Hydro-Durexsil paper, oversprayed by 1 or 2 coats of ICI grey filler 148-8.

Biggest problem with filler on A/C is you are never far from a rivet line, and filling over part of a line looks naff, that said I have and do use the stuff; everything has its place.

you dont really see it being used much on live aircraft due to the gradual build up of weight, especialy if more was used on one side of the aircraft than the other as it upsets the trim.

with filler on statics i dont see a problem. panel beating if it is done correctly is an art and is not advisable to start thrashing away on a skin that you may end up making worse.. the trouble lies in the memory of the metal, when it is sharply dinged the elements its made of have been stretched beyond its normal flat state. so when you come to flatten it the metal wrinkles and creases unless your real carefull during the process. during flattening you may have got rid of the dent but have ended up moving the pressure from the dent to another part of the skin creating wrinkles or creases.

its best done with a heavy block of something on one side of the ding to absorb the (gentle taps) blows from the hammer on the other..

its very rewarding when its done though

Like a lot of things, if it’s done well, you wouldn’t know it’s there, if it’s done badly, it’s the worst thing ever.

My Mondeo pays testiment to that 😉

When I took the several layers of paint off my Hunter cockpit, it was apparent that one of the previous owners (read RAE Farnborough) had put filler in several places where the skin had rippled after it’s final ‘landing’. This stuff was weird and came out like old putty. After spending several hours beating the hell out of the dents (that I could reach) from the inside, and making absolutely zero progress (and judging by the witness marks already there, someone else had tried it too, many years ago) I decided to use P40.

It made the repair much nicer than the original filler, and was pretty easy to work with no damage to the surrounding good metal. So I see no issue with it for a static. Hell, they even used filler on the hole in the leading edge of Concorde OF at Filton IIRC :rolleyes:

When repainting the Jetsream cockpit for last years Cockpitfest, I took the decision to fill only the dents which looked like they had appeared after the cockpit was cut from the aircraft. The idea was to leave a few ripples and light dings here and there as service aircraft tend to have.

A month after the ‘fest, I came by way of a photograph of the aircraft whilst in service executing a graceful banked turn on a sunny day. This clearly showed a particularly unpleasant ding on the side of the cockpit that I had dilligently repaired.

However, as I only used filler the dent is still ‘there’ whereas if I had stripped out the double skinned area affected and properly beaten out the dent (which I am entirely capable of, but the ‘fest was 2 weeks away when I decided to paint it!) then all evidence would be lost. Accidental conservation I like to call it.

Ultimately though, it’s your cockpit. I rather doubt the RAF/Serco etc would paint easily filled dents, so beat it or fill it depending on available access and your own skills, and it will look great.

Oh bails!

regards,

kev35

Depends if the dents are cricket stump-shaped or not!

Short answer – no……….Fibreglass on Vampire cockpits annoys me too……….

When we originally restored Vampire F.1, VF301, I remember being suprised at the amount of filler that had been applied to the wings – obviously during construction – lbs and lbs of it.

Roger Smith.

There’s no real black and white answer ~ just different shades of grey ……

I did the excellent Conservation of Large Objects course at West Dean College this year and there are many things to consider 🙂

Here’s some examples to maybe think about.

With research it’s possible that a ding or dent has played a significant part in that specific aircraft’s history. For example ~ a big dent in the leading edge was what grounded it in the first place and that was how it ended up being preserved rather than scrapped with the rest when the type’s service career was over. We also now have a story for the caption board that’s “personal” to this specific aircraft.

Will it be exhibited as “New” ~ the dings and dents will have to go.

If it’s to portray the end of it’s working life ~ you might want to leave the service related ones in place and just work on any patches of “hangar rash”

🙂

For me, it isn’t the filling, it’s the sanding back you have to do. What damage are you doing to the soft alloy?

Richard

Short answer – no.

Learn to use the hand skills required to repair it. Its all part of restoring the aircraft.

Fibreglass on Vampire cockpits annoys me too……….