Fabric life.

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Tom-D
England and several other EU countries have a 10 life on fabric, they don't care if it is ceconite or not, it comes off every 10 years for wing structure inspection.

you you believe that is a prudent idea/requirement?
 
It is stupid and completely ignores our field experience with fabric.
 
Although I am not aware of this rule in the EU, it seems ridiculous. Do they require the skins of aluminum covered planes to be pulled off every 10 years too?
 
If that is the case there should be an outstanding market to export cheap airplanes 9.5 years since last fabric re-cover from the UK et al to the USA. Labour costs and taxes in the UK are significantly higher than in the USA.

I don't sense that's actually happening, so I am wondering why not.
 
Much of the regulation in a socialist society is driven by PC thought regulation and just plain because I can, power and control fanatics.

Look at the recent Brexit driven mostly by disgust with grind you down EU/socialist regulations - bananas can only have a certain amount of curve and be of certain size and cucumbers must be straight or they cannot be sold anywhere in the EU, and on, and on, and on - culminating with the edict that Britain did not have anything to say about the jihadis and fanatics straight out of the 7th Century flooding into their country.

So the strip and recover every ten years is just because they might find one in a thousand planes with hidden corrosion of the tubing and thus promote safety. The cost be damned. The grind you down and make you miserable be damned. We are in charge and we are smarter than you are so do as you are told and no back talk, or else.
Many of our politicians, more in the liberal/socialist side but also in the conservative side, find this attractive as it validates their feelings of superiority.. The Founders understood this all the way into their bones, thus the Second Amendment.
 
For wing structure inspection? Don't they know what inspection panels, flashlights, mirrors or even scopes are for?
 
Dr. O said:
Much of the regulation in a socialist society is driven by PC thought regulation and just plain because I can, power and control fanatics.

Look at the recent Brexit driven mostly by disgust with grind you down EU/socialist regulations - bananas can only have a certain amount of curve and be of certain size and cucumbers must be straight or they cannot be sold anywhere in the EU, and on, and on, and on - culminating with the edict that Britain did not have anything to say about the jihadis and fanatics straight out of the 7th Century flooding into their country.

So the strip and recover every ten years is just because they might find one in a thousand planes with hidden corrosion of the tubing and thus promote safety. The cost be damned. The grind you down and make you miserable be damned. We are in charge and we are smarter than you are so do as you are told and no back talk, or else.
Many of our politicians, more in the liberal/socialist side but also in the conservative side, find this attractive as it validates their feelings of superiority.. The Founders understood this all the way into their bones, thus the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

^ THAT RIGHT THERE
 
SkyDog58 said:
For wing structure inspection? Don't they know what inspection panels, flashlights, mirrors or even scopes are for?
Click to expand...
Yes they know, bureaucratic organizations have no borders their everywhere and thrive on the premises in the name of safety. They can install fear in the public that without what they want the public (you) are in danger without their expertise.
 
The Cub my dad covered in 1969 with Razorback Fiberglass is still flying and in great shape. We inspected the wings with mirrors and scope a few years back and they looked great. I gopher hole in the runway caused a bent lower longeron near the tail. While repairing, we removed fabric from tail post forward 2 bays and found no evidence of corrosion on the epoxy primed tubing. Inside of bent longeron looked new inside due to oiling in 1969. Planes was disassembled, tail was recovered, entire plane wet sanded and repainted, reassembled. Our biggest concern was the ribstitch cord condition. He had an aileron which had been damaged and removed a few years earlier we opened and we couldn't break the cord.

The Cub is happily flying today with no problems. It has always been hangared since the 1969 restoration and has also been flown regularly as well.


This space intentionally left blank for future sarcasm.
 
Before I went chasing this thread too far, I'd ask for a legitimate citation (IE a link to a regulation).
 
The European Aviation Safety Agency is much like the Civil Aviation Safety Authority of Australia in that they seem to put maintenance and inspection requirements firmly in the hands of aircraft manufacturers. If a manufacturer says the seatbelts, engine hoses, batteries, bladders, wing bolts must be replaced on a calendar schedule it must be done. The supplemental inspection documents issued by Cessna were mandatory as soon as they were released in those countries.

Here is a copy & paste from EASA FAQ that may raise an eyebrow:

How does EASA deal with aircraft without a Type Certificate holder?

An aircraft becomes orphan when:


  1. the legal person holding the Type Certificate (TC) has ceased to exist. The TC automatically becomes invalid by law because there is no one to be in compliance with the TC holders responsibilities (21A.51 (a) 1 and 21A.44); or
  2. The TC holder no longer complies with his regulatory obligations. A typical case is when the TC holder loses his DOA, or fails to comply with 21.A.14 before 28.09.05. This makes the TC invalid (21A.51 (a) 1)
  3. The TC holder has surrendered the TC. This also makes the TC invalid (21A.51(a)2).
Under the current Part 21, orphan aircraft cannot be issued a Certificate of Airworthiness, which requires that a TC holder takes responsibility for the continued oversight of the design. They can therefore only continue to be operated if they hold a restricted certificate of airworthiness or a permit to fly. These documents can only be issued on the basis of a design approved by the Agency.
 
How many planes have fallen out of the sky due to old (not poorly installed) fabric or for that matter underlying other issues?
 
DFH65 said:
How many planes have fallen out of the sky due to old (not poorly installed) fabric or for that matter underlying other issues?
Click to expand...

EASA member counties and Australia don't care. If the holder of an approved aircraft design says the fabric must be replaced every 10 years its basically law.
 
bnt83 said:
EASA member counties and Australia don't care. If the holder of an approved aircraft design says the fabric must be replaced every 10 years its basically law.
Click to expand...

The question was should we do that here? So without any evidence to prove that it is necessary why would we?
 
SkyDog58 said:
For wing structure inspection? Don't they know what inspection panels, flashlights, mirrors or even scopes are for?
Click to expand...
If you have ever been involved in recovering a tube and fabric aircraft, ( I have several times) you learn that wooden spar damage like cracks are very hard to determine unless the fabric is removed. Some can be seen with mirrors,many can not. Many ceconite and other modern fabrics are not prepped correctly regarding the silver coat applied initially and UVs get thru which is very bad for any fabric regardless of age. Then there's the problem of lies told or info withheld from log books. My Stearman had been ground looped, unreported and found only after a sharp buddy, an AI , suspected there was damage to the right lower wing. We stripped it and behold, a cracked spar! this was 6 months after the sellers AI had passed it. A fabric aircraft not hangared is something to inspect very carefully.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top