Some wing progress

[Guest]

Re: Some wing progress

Take a look at a wing tank installation and see how much wire spread they have there.

Tanks are usually near the root where the wire tension is the greatest.

Tanks often have two aluminum tubes that go thru it, one for each wire to provide a path for the wire.

I bet that spreads the wire quite a bit.

Dave R

[Guest]

Re: Some wing progress

I was wrong about that, the cross over is outside of the tank.

Dave R

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Some wing progress

Drude, you are remembering a different plane. I have seen several wing tanks that the wires cross through like the Taylorcraft main (so don't worry, you are not joining me in Old Timers Disease). The difference in those is the wire ENDS are raised and lowered to provide the clearance.

Hank

[Mark Julicher]

Re: Some wing progress

No, it will spread the wires, just wrap each wire with 1-2 wraps of cloth tape and tie together with nomex string. The tape is where they have electrical tape at ace hardware. That is what they used originally and is pliable enough to not deform or chaff the drag/antidrag wires. tim

Cotton Friction Tape -- 3M product number 1755

[cbcfly]

Re: Some wing progress

Now that is some useful information. Thanks Mark. Amazon - 20 yards of it, to my house in two days, $8.96.

btw.. should be wrapping up my Bonanza annual shortly. My shipment of new spar blanks from Spruce is scheduled to arrive this Friday. Hopefully progress is right around the corner.

[danglandt]

Re: Some wing progress

I am interested in buying some stick ribs. How do I get in touch?

Dan Glandt

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Some wing progress

We need to get all of us together who need them (or will) and build a fixture to make them and the "T" sections they are made from. They are just not available in the numbers that are needed for all the planes being restored. We WILL run out, and soon.

Hank

[astjp2]

Re: Some wing progress

I have a wall of cub ones that I rob for repair material....I was planning on making a jig to build them from extruded aluminum. The extruded ones are much stronger and they would be built like a Dakota cub rib. That is why I bought the CP-450 riveter. 28,000 pounds of squeeze. Foot controlled and it takes both the .250 and .187 sets. I also have been working on coming up with the tooling to mill the extrusion. The riveter pictured below was rebuilt by me at work before they auctioned it off. Tim

[astjp2]

Re: Some wing progress

Original piper/Taylorcraft on top, Dakota cub in the middle, stamped rib on bottom....

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Some wing progress

The shape and size of the "T" section on an original Taylorcraft rib is different than the Cub as well as the airfoil section. I have seen pre war ribs repaired with Cub "T" section but what is really needed is a repair cross section customized for the Taylorcraft size as well as "T" stock that matches the original.

[astjp2]

Re: Some wing progress

Hank, WHY? if it works, it really does not matter...original just costs more and is so low of volume that it is not cost effective for something that is not value added.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Some wing progress

It is the same old "Does it work and is it safe" vs "Is it legal" problem. The ribs made from Cub stock do not meet the "Conforms to the original design" sniff test. Not that there are 3 IAs in the nation who would spot the difference. My point isn't that it won't work (it WILL and the Cub stock looks like it might even be BETTER than the Taylorcraft stock) but that if we are going to go to all the trouble to make material to build ribs, lets conform to the specifications. It will be less expensive to conform than to get an STC to use the better stuff.
I don't like it either, but when we start to cheat on the specification in the TC we loose our credibility with the FAA and they have every chance they will come down on us.....HARD. I don't want a FISDO guy looking inside my wing who has NO IDEA what he is looking at and deciding if I am out of conformance (or just MAY be). We already have dealt with unqualified FAA people getting into our wing struts and causing all sorts of chaos for us. I don't want it on wing ribs where someone may demand I tear covering off to prove my ribs are in conformance.
NOT a good idea to be making unauthorized design changes. They DO NOT CARE if you improved the design or your repair is "just as good", they are bureaucrats who will simply ground your plane to be on the "safe side".

Hank

Lots of good FAA folks, but I am not willing to roll the dice.

[Bigdog]

Re: Some wing progress

I agree with Hank, it needs to legal. Conceptually it shouldn't be that hard. Dakota Cub must have already proven their extrusion is as good as the Cub T-stock. Someone would have to get it blessed that it's as good or better than the Taylorcraft T-stock. Then you get it blessed as a replacement. It would probably take a DER like Terry and, of course, some $$$.

I've got a worse problem with my YO-57 which has metal wings. The truss ribs are similar to the SBS but the attachment at the metal spar is totally different. I don't want to go down the extrusion route because I want to maintain the authenticity. I don't really want to modify SBS ribs either, which is approved but again not authentic. I also want to minimize splice repairs. I really want new T-stock so I can remanufacture the ribs like new. It doesn't appear hard to find someone who can roll-form the "T", even in small quantities. My problem has been finding the .012 aluminum. So far I have not found any thinner than .016 thru normal sources. I'm not plugged into specialty sources. I think it takes about a 1"x.012" strip to form the "T", probably 2024 or 6062. I'll have to check the drawing. If anyone knows a source for the aluminum, I'll pursue getting some formed to the L-2 drawing.

[stearman3]

Re: Some wing progress

I've got multiple sheets of.012 if any one is interested...............

[astjp2]

Re: Some wing progress

Show me anywhere in the tcds where it says that the rib material is a type design issue. The type design is based on the TCDS! which is right out of the IA handbook. The FAA has no idea nor drawing to show them what was original and they dont want the drawings. Not everything in the airplane must conform to original. The PA22 has listed an "automotive type" generator, that means that the FORD, Chrysler and GM aviation generators are approved. If it came with a Motorcraft, and its not available, then you are LEGAL to put in a Chrysler as long as it has the corresponding and associated equipment swapped out (over current/voltage Regulator, wiring etc). There is an AC in the tech part of the forum that talks about substitution of materials.

The rib material was "key word WAS" a standard material which is no longer manufactured therefor eligible for substitution. AC43.13 also talks about repairs and specifications of truss type ribs, it does not differentiate between brands, there is nothing about Piper vs. Taylorcraft in AC43, just a general material spec. They also call out using AN470-AD rivets in AC43 but the originals were AN450 series steel tublar rivets...The FAA has to prove that it is not in compliance, if you do a 337 for the repairs IAW ac43, you are covered because it can be used as APPROVED data or acceptable data depending on application, which is the IA's responsibility to determine.

It is the same old "Does it work and is it safe" vs "Is it legal" problem. The ribs made from Cub stock do not meet the "Conforms to the original design" sniff test. Not that there are 3 IAs in the nation who would spot the difference. My point isn't that it won't work (it WILL and the Cub stock looks like it might even be BETTER than the Taylorcraft stock) but that if we are going to go to all the trouble to make material to build ribs, lets conform to the specifications. It will be less expensive to conform than to get an STC to use the better stuff.
I don't like it either, but when we start to cheat on the specification in the TC we loose our credibility with the FAA and they have every chance they will come down on us.....HARD. I don't want a FISDO guy looking inside my wing who has NO IDEA what he is looking at and deciding if I am out of conformance (or just MAY be). We already have dealt with unqualified FAA people getting into our wing struts and causing all sorts of chaos for us. I don't want it on wing ribs where someone may demand I tear covering off to prove my ribs are in conformance.
NOT a good idea to be making unauthorized design changes. They DO NOT CARE if you improved the design or your repair is "just as good", they are bureaucrats who will simply ground your plane to be on the "safe side".

Hank

Lots of good FAA folks, but I am not willing to roll the dice.