If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The A&P and I were doing a pre-purchase. He looked at the tubing and stated that 'red oxide primer was a plus'.
Can anyone elaborate? - Mike
I haven't heard that one since 1981.
Ask the A&P to explain it. I think it's nonsense.
But I am biased by the experiences I had with the guy who told me that, they were not good. I had to blast and repaint the airframe he coated with that stuff. I think he thought that no or little prep was required before using it. So look at the records and see if they blasted the frame before using it just in case those folks may have had similar thoughts.
Also it's not mentioned in my A&P mechanic's Handbooks.
Perhaps my opinion (and the handbook's) is wrong and it is a superior primer hopefully though there are more plus's than that.
Also it's not a legal coating for use with the latest ceconite STC. Not everyone use that STC though. The later STC requires epoxy primer, that says something too. Dave
Hello: I used to use red oxide based primer on bare metal surfaces in the late 1960s when I was building up the frames of 100 ton boxcars for US Railway Equipment Company in Blue Island, IL...pretty basic stuff and NOT used on the airframes that were being recovered in the Chicagoland area at that time. As you know, 2 part expoxy is THE standard Anyway, you will have an opportunity to see the base metal after you remove all of the vermillion. Doc
Doc TF #680 Assend Dragon Aviation FAA Senior AME #20969 EAA TC #5453 / FA #1905
CAF Life Member #2782
NC43306 Feb/1946 BC12-D Deluxe
"Leben ohne Reue"
I am an A&P and have NEVER heard of anyone using the stuff...... stick to the two part epoxy, it's the best stuff going....
At one time it was used frequently on automobiles for filler to take out small imperfections and supposedly make paint adhere better.If you used it to cover bare metal and did not paint over it, it acted like a sponge. If you put it on in the fall and thought you would paint it in the spring, whenspring came you had a rusted piece of steel. Marv
What about "Powdercoating" the airframe, any downsides to that? IMHO 2-part epoxy is the way to go, then a polyurethane like "Imron" over that, but then maybe that's overkill for some.
The FAA has a problem with powder coating. It seems that the powder coating will hide some cracks. At least that is what the GRR FSDO told me. I want to powder coat a few parts. They told me I had to get approval for each part from them. The airframe was a big NO.
Years ago, a guy brought a Super Cub in to me for an annual that had the tube frame powder coated. I crawled all around, inside and out and was getting ready to sign it off, when I happened to lean on the rear part of the fuselage, and heard a scraping sort of noise. I got a friend to come over and move the tail side to side while I was inside, and I found a tube that was broken and was scraping, but the powder coating was still looking just fine, and keeping me from seeing/hearing the problem! Needless to say, I didn't sign it off and from that moment on, will not let anything that's powder coated in the shop!!
We also had trouble with brake parts on a Goose that were powder coated. The powder coating will hide LOTS of corrosion (as well as other problems) before you see it, and then it's too late.
It's a great coating, but not for aircraft in my opinion. The FAA seems to agree with this as well.
John H.
Comment