Trash Blue River covering system

[taylorcraftbc65]

Here are four photos of my taylorcraft after I got everything else patched up. I mentioned all the hairline cracks on the fabric cover chemicals of this Blue River system. This plane has been hangered EVERY DAY from the day that it was recovered 18 years ago. I have seen Stits and Randolf systems go longer and look great, this is TRASH. My question, is can I fly this like this, or does it require ANOTHER several grand thrown at it?

[Ragwing nut]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

Did you recover it or is that was is stated in the log books when you bought it? That looks like very old dope finish that had tons of cracks, was rejuvenated, and then top coated. If you have ever seen a dope finish that had hail damage, that was rejuvenated and repainted will look just like that after a few years. Or has it cracked since you have had and had it top coated?

[taylorcraftbc65]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

Seven years before I bought the plane, it was completely taken down to the bare airframe and rebuilt. I have a stack of paperwork on the rebuild job about three inches thick. In that stack are the receipts for the fabric, and the Blur River dopes. colors, and everything. The man that rebuilt the plane was the future father-in-law of the A&P of T-27 when I got there in 2003. When I arrived, the aircraft was in it's hanger, with about a half inch of dust on every surface that would hold it. That plane had never been outside, except to fly, and was put up by the guy that I bought it from two years before I bought it, because he bought an L-5, ans a Starduster, and put each of them in their own hanger. I bought it in 2004, and at that time, the finish was flawless. It didn't start doing this until about three years ago, and I swear that that plane has never been outside in the sun, except when I was flying it. Two years ago, I started having minor issues with it, and as soon as I fixed one issue another would pop up. As a result, for the last year and a half, I have not flown it at all. I finally got all the issues taken care of, and now I wonder if it can be flown, because of these hairline cracks, that have slowly covered more and more of the plane till now it is completely covered, top, sides, and bottom with them.

[Guest]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

Here are four photos of my taylorcraft after I got everything else patched up. I mentioned all the hairline cracks on the fabric cover chemicals of this Blue River system. This plane has been hangered EVERY DAY from the day that it was recovered 18 years ago. I have seen Stits and Randolf systems go longer and look great, this is TRASH. My question, is can I fly this like this, or does it require ANOTHER several grand thrown at it?

Does it have a current annual inspection?

Does the finish (albeit crappy) adhere to the fabric?

Does the fabric become water logged thru these cracks?

Is there anything else about this finish that you can think of that makes it unsafe for operation?

If the answers are Y,Y,N,N then I would expect it to be flyable.

Dave

p.s. I made an assumption that may be incorrect, that is that the fabric passes a strength test as part of the annual inspection however it would be better to do that test now again even if the annual is current.

[taylorcraftbc65]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

It's next annual is due in July, so yes, It is all stuck to the fabric, so yes, It never has, but it has always been hangered, and I won't fly it in any rain, and I live 80 miles east of El Paso, Texas, it is usually very dry here, so no, I don't think so, I just wanted to brainstorm with others, and see what you thought. I don't think that it will make it through the next annual, this inspector likes to err way on the side of caution. That's OK, I finally got all the small stuff taken care of, and I hoped that I could fly her the 35 miles round trip to the nearest airport, 2E5, and home twice for breakfast before I recover her with Randolf. That's the only stuff I have ever used, I know how to work with it, and if that A&P couldn't get a proper job with the Blue River, I'll stay with the old school stuff that I know.

[N96337]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

That looks like the old "Hydrogloss" paint that they used in the Blue River system to me. We called it "Hydrocrack". It's crap, but it does stick to the fabric, so I wouldn't sweat it unless the fabric starts to deteriorate, and it will in all those cracks. The good news is, that will take years....especially if you keep it hangared. The only enemy that polyester fabric has is UV rays.
I do want to stress that the Blue River system is NOT the Stewart's system...although theirs grew out of the BR system. I know that for a fact as I used to be a part owner of the system they now have. It's nothing like the old Blue River system!!! I think if you'd try the Stewart's you love it...but it's nothing like Randolph either. You'll have to learn new techniques....nothing hard, just different. Nothing wrong with Randolph products, other than the very obvious health hazards....believe me I know...and I wish I'd have been smarter long ago, but it's hard to be young and bullet proof.
John

[taylorcraftbc65]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

THANKS John, for giving me the straight scoop on the covering dope. I was really headed for a "funk" outlook on getting the old girl back up in the sky for a few flights, before I got up the money to recover her. Your information put a smile back on my face.

[PA1195]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

I have no personal experience with either recovering method...BR or Stewart...but it's been noted to me that some locals that have used the latter method are experiencing some cracking and delimitation as well soon after recover. I have no personal issue with either.

Even Randolph had problems with certain dopes cracking the top color but not the silver, and my thin Stits Polytone surface cracked along all the tubing and in some areas subject to vibration within three years.

My planes have been kept outdoors and flown in the winter down to -30F, so that's tough on any fabric and covering except perhaps the latest 2-part coverings like Stits Aerothane. In my experience Stits Polytone is a dirt and air pollutant magnet (like smoke from forest fires), so none except urethane may be durable and low maintenance in my environment.

Gary

[Robert Lees]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

so none except urethane may be durable and low maintenance in my environment.

Gary

I politely disagree wholeheartedly. I will only recover a fabric-covered aircraft in two-pack with a disclaimer signed by the owner, that I am not responsible for the longevity of the finish.

All fabric finishes deteriorate, crack, craze etc with time. The likes of dope & polytone do so after a much longer time than two-pack finishes. And my fee for fixing damage to two-pack finishes is X 8 that of dope or polytone coverings.

Rob

[taylorcraftbc65]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

Why I'm planning on recovering with Randolf. (SAFELY, of course, with a respirator, not just a mask). I don't think that the IA will let me fly the plane with the crazed topcoats, so I have two more months, that's all, and I will have to recover the plane, even though the FABRIC is FINE.

[PA1195]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

I politely disagree wholeheartedly. I will only recover a fabric-covered aircraft in two-pack with a disclaimer signed by the owner, that I am not responsible for the longevity of the finish.

All fabric finishes deteriorate, crack, craze etc with time. The likes of dope & polytone do so after a much longer time than two-pack finishes. And my fee for fixing damage to two-pack finishes is X 8 that of dope or polytone coverings.

Rob

Hi Rob. Please disagree away as your results have varied from my experience over 40 years of owning fabric airplanes. But all - every aircraft that I've seen properly covered with Stits process Aerothane has far outlasted any other covering topcoat, including Randolph and Stits Polytone in an extreme weather environment. Even older aircraft that were originally covered in Randoph dope, then cleaned, sanded, and shot with Aerothane (but not an automotive two-part like Imron or Centari even with their flex additive) have locally endured Arctic cold and summer sun to some degree better than the original coating.

It takes compatible materials from the start of the finish job to make it happen of course. I'd never pay anyone to re-do a plane of mine based and parked outdoors in Alaska in Polytone or Randolph (even though my current T-Craft was done in Stits Polytone). My last plane (a PA-11) was professionally done in 2002 by an expert tech with proven skills and products. Like I noted above, within three years it cracked and attracted all manner of surface contamination. Stits' response was to clean it with petroleum naphtha (white gas/camp stove fuel) and then wax it annually to "protect" their Polytone finish from the elements. When asked about Aerothane, they said no maintenance besides periodic washing was required if desired.

Even inspection ring cutouts from my PA-11, that could be bent in half without cracking when new, cracked at room temperature within three years as the plasticizers blew off.

I do agree that if and when Aerothane requires maintenance (like from impact damage to the top coat) the job does involve a bit more work. Sanding off the damaged area, feathering the zone, then building it back is a tedious process requiring skill and experience. The selling point of Polytone is that it's easy to repair and offers a lightweight cover job. The problem is why does it need repair? Always parking indoors and never flying in the cold is the best way to protect the finish.

Edit: My PA-11 discussed above (done with Stits process and Polytone) was purposefully a light coat of yellow over a light coat of white for reflectance and to note when to re-spray. The fabric weave is visible throughout all surfaces. The cracking first occurred along the fuselage longerons, then along all areas adjacent to tubing. It's not cosmetically bad, does not penetrate the silver underlayment, and there's only a few ringworm spots on the covered gear where I touched it with my boots in winter. It's still quite nice actually and will last 10 or more years easily. The Taylorcraft I bought (2004 cover) is similar in appearance. Winters in Alaska are tough on fabric.

Gary

[Joe cooper]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

Why I'm planning on recovering with Randolf. (SAFELY, of course, with a respirator, not just a mask). I don't think that the IA will let me fly the plane with the crazed topcoats, so I have two more months, that's all, and I will have to recover the plane, even though the FABRIC is FINE.

Have you punch tested it? If it will pass 46-48 in a few places you should be able to cruise around for a while, especially if it's a light color and has been hangared and out of UV. However, I'm not an expert and did not sleep at a holiday inn. I'd be tempted to fly it for the summer months. ( and yes, I know, a maule test is not meant for ceconite, etc. But lots of people use this method. ) you might also call Bill Pancake in West Virginia. He is very savvy on tube and fabric , oshkosh winner, etc. Very helpful gentleman.

[N96337]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

I've got samples that we did from our system in 99 that you can still not only just fold in half, but can wad up in a small ball and flatten back out without a problem...I've got 5 year old Aerothane samples that will crack instantly when folded. The beauty of a dope finish is that it can be rejuvinated. None of the others can. Poly Fiber is a great system... I've used it since the 80's. I still do if a customer specifies...but there are better in my opinion. I have heard all about the people having problems with Stewarts... and I even used to "tech rep" that system when I owned part of it. In 99% of the time, when it got down to the nitty gritty, and the truth came out, it was a problem with the way it was applied. Like I said, it's not hard...just different, but most people wont follow directions to the letter and then wont accept responsibility for their actions or admit when they wont. I taught the classes for a couple years and I'd rather teach someone that had never covered or painted, than somebody that had done it, espeically someone that had done a few planes with other systems. Bad habits are really tough to break! I still screw it up occasionally, but all I have to do to see what went wrong is look in the mirror. One of the most common causes of cracks in a fabric finish is applying the topcoat too thick. I don't care what it is, if it's thick and you can't see the tapes, you're going to see cracks. Another common one in the past was when they applied automotive paint to fabric. It's not the same stuff as a paint that was formulated for fabric...it's gonna crack.

[PA1195]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

I've got samples that we did from our system in 99 that you can still not only just fold in half, but can wad up in a small ball and flatten back out without a problem...I've got 5 year old Aerothane samples that will crack instantly when folded. The beauty of a dope finish is that it can be rejuvinated. None of the others can. Poly Fiber is a great system... I've used it since the 80's. I still do if a customer specifies...but there are better in my opinion. I have heard all about the people having problems with Stewarts... and I even used to "tech rep" that system when I owned part of it. In 99% of the time, when it got down to the nitty gritty, and the truth came out, it was a problem with the way it was applied. Like I said, it's not hard...just different, but most people wont follow directions to the letter and then wont accept responsibility for their actions or admit when they wont. I taught the classes for a couple years and I'd rather teach someone that had never covered or painted, than somebody that had done it, espeically someone that had done a few planes with other systems. Bad habits are really tough to break! I still screw it up occasionally, but all I have to do to see what went wrong is look in the mirror. One of the most common causes of cracks in a fabric finish is applying the topcoat too thick. I don't care what it is, if it's thick and you can't see the tapes, you're going to see cracks. Another common one in the past was when they applied automotive paint to fabric. It's not the same stuff as a paint that was formulated for fabric...it's gonna crack.

Thank you for the post and info. I'm not an expert but just an observer and payee-payee-payee when it comes to aircraft.

The only local cover job I've seen that hasn't cracked is Aerothane. But maybe that means it's not being folded as we tend to do...expansion and shrinkage doesn't appear to affect a normal job.

Rejuvination? Yes, it's possible but why have to do it (at $10/hour ok; at $110 it's not acceptable), like with Butylsolve or others? The customer pays 10-20+K for a cover and then has to pay more to revitalize the deteriorating finish in a few years? I'd stick with durable Aerothane given the choice up front in my experience monitoring others that have done so.

Two local Stewart jobs are displaying silver/gray patching already within a few years. But I don't know why and how they were built.

It's either a non-cracking colored dope or a base silver finish if that's the finish method for me.

Gary

[Mark Julicher]

Re: Trash Blue River covering system

Naturally I can't put my fingers on a source document for this right this moment… However,

Once the aircraft has a good silver coat, it is airworthy. Everything on top of the silver coat is cosmetic. If the silver has not been broached, I would think the IA should let you fly it.