Preservation as is?

While it would be great to be able to preserve as is, it’s seldom that simple, but then what is?

The only way to ensure that the aeroplane does not rot from within is to completely strip, remove all signs of corrosion, treat and re-assemble. Within the structural joints and between the skin and structure I can almost guarantee that substantial areas of corrosion will be present, and if left un-checked will ultimately cause far more damage than any professionally conducted restoration.

We’ve stripped a number of structures for restoration, many of which were new old stock (unused) items which had been stored inside all of their life. That did not prevent the majority of these items from having corrosion issues to one degree or the other. Not an issue if you strip and treat, but blindly ignore and blunder on regardless and you’re storing up a much bigger problem down the line.

Now, add years of submersion into the mix allowing water and sediment between the joints, not to mention the effect water (even fresh water) will have on accelerating the effects of dissimilar metal corrosion wherever a steel structural part, bolt or screw comes into contact with un-protected aluminium.

It’s a lovely utopian notion that these old birds can be left as they are for years to come, but in most cases that will only ensure their ultimate destruction from within. But I guess that depends upon your definition of long term preservation.

G

Fiat

Out of interest, does anyone happen to know how come the Fiat happened to be at Southend? It would be great to hear about her acquisition and (initial) importation to the UK.

Thanks,

G

Nord

Sorry to say that there isn’t actually that much that will swap over between the Nord and a 109. It is true to say that the structural design of the rear fuselage is the same, i.e. integral frames and skin, however the geometry is entirely different. The stringer material is, however the same profile, although I couldn’t confirm the same gauge or material spec.

There are a few minor parts which are common to both – some small parts in the aileron control system for example, but the undercarriage and structural parts of the wings are different.

The 208 and the 109 (as does the 108) do share a large number of common features and techniques, but not parts.

We had a look at a nice example last year with an eye to adding it to the collection, but with the Fiat requiring so much work and various other things going on it was decided to give it a miss.

This is not the former Biggin Hill/Peter Smith aeroplane.

George

Malcolm Hood

On the subject of Malcolm hoods, if anyone knows of one which may be available please let me know.

Thanks,

G

Storage

We can offer covered, secure hangarage for aircraft, or sections thereof, in Norfolk. We can accommodate aircraft up to the size of a twin Beech being flown in, and roaded in, well, there’s no size limit. If we can help, drop me a PM.

G