NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

[magman]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

There is no "Repairman Certificate" for certified aircraft.

You CAN log your time & qualify for an A or P or an A & P.

18 months for A OR P.

30 months for A & P.

All this per FAR 65.77.

You do NOT need a recommendation from an A & P.

You DO need "documentation satisfactory to the Administrator "

of the time though.

Anyone that works on aircraft & does NOT log their time is missing the boat.

You do not have to get the A & P but it's nice to have the option.

Someday folks may tire of shops charging $1.20 per MINUTE for someone to

run a vacuum cleaner or open panels.

[wmfife]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

[QUOTE=Hank Jarrett;76857]
Bill, for you with a 41 Deluxe you shouldn't get any arguments when you go back to original. That's what I did on my 41. When in doubt, I ripped it out and went back to original. I shamelessly stole information from Tom Baker whenever I could. Someday I would like to be able to actually have a plane closer to original than his (might never happen, his is a beauty). [End quote]

I agree. It definitely is. But I am also aware of the meaning of "original" and what the true depth of this term implies.

Example: I replaced the Maule 8" pneumatic TW that was on it (-listed on the standard TC) with the 6½" solid alternate Maule (also on the same TC) to save weight aft and better looks. (Besides the works inside the old one were all shot from the chronic violent shimmy which I also fixed..) (...and was charged for 100% of the labor I performed..)

OK. But- looking at factory pics it isn't 100% "original" as it's a single-fork and all those show a double. Some prewar owners have installed the *original* Health as it is identical to those in most of the photographs (not to mention lighter than just about anything else). There is just one problem with this in mine: It defeats the "Deluxe" concept as originally advertised by Taylorcraft because it isn't a full-swivel. My Maule solid single fork is a full-swivel. And the full-swivel advantage was a sales perk offered as a "Deluxe"-feature option in 1941..

Other items: Looking at original factory panel photos you'll see the U.S. Gage 0-160 ASI on the left. Mine is different. The "0" is not at the 12:00 position but a little to one side and I think it may be a different brand. But as it's still imbedded under the shock mount cover with no holes drilled or cuts made (as were with the retro-fitted sensitive altimeter and T&B in it now) I am deducing it to be "Period Original" and likely the one that left the factory with this aircraft. Possibly it's an early replacement but if that's the case it isn't in the logs and there is no evidence of that whatsoever.

Also as the engine gages it came with are both modern replacements and I have two working originals, I'll be going back to those soon enough. BUT one of these "originals" is in fact a NOS one (arrived in the plastic wrap sealed...) that was NEVER installed in any '41 I know of. Why? Maybe because in the interest of making it look "modern" and Taylorcraft-original, a white-faced pressure gage would be either too archaic or even (*gasp*) reminiscient of the infamous "Cub"! Ha. Well I am having fond visions of how it'll look installed on a faux woodgrained panel. So shoot me. Other than color it's 100% identical to the one that followed it into production. And if older means "more original", well then, ...

Indeed most of these "period-original" items were options to buyers THEN - so why not leave them as open to installation NOW? Then there's the Carwil Bubbleface I have with the dog ears still intact. It exactly fits a mounting can that once housed a Pioneer B-16. Should I cut the ears off to fit the other can (that I don't have)? Hey that wouldn't be original! But otherwise it's *identical* to the original Airguide/Airpath. And I can still add the Taylorcraft logo.

So really, what do we mean when we say "original"? Maybe honoring the original concept is just as important. I tend to think so.

...Just my 2c.

[wmfife]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Anyone that works on aircraft & does NOT log their time is missing the boat.

(Wow! NOW I find out I should have logged my time. . .)

You do not have to get the A & P but it's nice to have the option.

(I'm almost halfway there with my Navy time..)

Someday folks may tire of shops charging $1.20 per MINUTE for someone to

run a vacuum cleaner or open panels.

AMEN!! You're talking to one of them! And smoking on the job to boot! I've seen it all and could and have done far better than some of their "temp" hires that took it all apart then took off, never to be seen again. I have no choice but to back-engineer their work!

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

I love it. Just like the debates I have with myself. The things I "RIP OUT" are generally junk that was added over the years like all that useless (and wrong type) wire, the HUGE VOR antenna on the tail (THE PLANE NEVER EVEN HAD A VOR!! Somebody evidently thought it "looked cool"), the original panel that had been replaced by a "panel" that looked like it had been cut from a battleship hull. (I mean that sucker was HEAVY! You could STAND on it!!)

I replaced the whole panel (including RIPPING OUT the stupid manifold vacuum gauge). I went back with correct gauges but if I couldn't find the exact gauge I used a period replacement. I got pretty lucky and I think I have all the correct ones now, but the 6:00 sensitive altimeter was a real problem, and EXPENSIVE to have overhauled. I had several of the non sensitive ones, but the Deluxe had a sensitive.

All in all I think my plane is pretty accurate, but NOT perfect for the Smithsonian. There are compromises and perfection is a goal, not a promise.

Even the Baker Taylorcrafts are not perfect, (I'm not telling what isn't. They might fix it and I would NEVER have a chance to surpass them.) ;-)

Who is for Cotton and dope, unsealed struts, 4 ply tires, no drain hole landing gear struts and woven control cables? Some compromises are good and some are even MANDATED by the FAA.

Hank

OK, I admit it. If I could get good Grade A cotton I would use it in a minute! I LOVED cotton and dope, but then' I like to rib stitch too. Wish I could try un-bleached Linen some day just for fun.

[3Dreaming]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Hank, my BL was pretty close to original other than modern fabric. Dads Deluxe had some things that were off that he is fixing thist time around, but there will still be some that is not original.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

The trick is to keep it safe and have the Taylorcraft experts in the community be unable to find the changes. ;-)
Hank

I will throw a couple from mine,
Modern covering fabric (see prior opinions on Grade A Cotton)
Sealed struts
Modern fire proof carpet
Plexi windows instead of (that Acetate based stuff I can't remember the name of from pre-WW-II)
Used machine screws and nuts instead of rivets on the windshield (how long has it been since you saw a rivet squeezer with a 3' throat!)
Fake "Mohair" on seats since I don't have any angora goats available
Naugahyde instead of original "Leatherette" (Leatherette is evidently a trademark name and I just found out it is still made in Switzerland!)
No horsehair in seats

Chuck and Shannon got the award for finding something missing on my plane when they were here. The wire clips were missing from the brake adjuster and lock nuts were used in their place. I will be fixing that. Also the RH aileron push rod was also a little loose but I had overhauled them and figure the new grease moving let them loosen up a bit. Also getting fixed.

Safety first and then make it as good as possible! I will catch up with you guys yet! ;-)

[M Towsley]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Hank,

It was called cellulose acetate, I am disappointed that you didn't remember that.

Now you are making the Bakers mad at you, see if they help you anymore. Hahahahaha (I think that would be difficult to do as they still have a sense of humor after helping me many times)! Thanks Tom and Tom.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Nope, I have worked with Cellulose Acetate many times, this was another type of plastic and was really lousy stuff. I have some of it and it is shriveled up and dry as old potato chips. I will remember what it was as soon as i can't get to a computer. ;-)
The only advantage it has was it was easy to heat form at pretty low temperatures and didn't burn as fast as Cellulose Acetate.
Hank

The Bakers are good folks, I doubt you could make them mad.

[stearman3]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Hank, did you mean Pyrolin (sp?)

Nope, I have worked with Cellulose Acetate many times, this was another type of plastic and was really lousy stuff. I have some of it and it is shriveled up and dry as old potato chips. I will remember what it was as soon as i can't get to a computer. ;-)
The only advantage it has was it was easy to heat form at pretty low temperatures and didn't burn as fast as Cellulose Acetate.
Hank

The Bakers are good folks, I doubt you could make them mad.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

PYRALIN! That was it. It was a trade name for a type of plastic that was Celluloid's main competitor. Most of it was Ivory color and I think it was used for a lot of the knobs in the cockpit but it shrank and cracked. It was invented by a company in the late 1800s and was a pyroxylin plastic that was originally used for everything from jewelry and hair combs to drawer pulls and toys. It was really popular but after a few years would dry out and fall apart so pieces of it in good shape are really valuable now. If I remember right it was made by adding ground fish scales to Celluloid and didn't burn as bad as straight Celluloid.

Hank

I have some pieces of what was clear (now yellow, shrunken and cracked) and some Ivory color knobs Josh and I were trying to duplicate. A couple of them still look pretty nice, but not nice enough to use and are REALLY brittle.

[M Towsley]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Oops, I just noticed you said pre-WWII, cellulose acetate was used during the war.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

When Wally wrote "Pyrolin (sp?)" it was like someone finally got the "flush lever" to pull. Sometimes my head gets over filled with useless trivia and I can't dig through the pile for the "important" stuff.

Hank
A bottomless well of useless trivia (with a few diamonds in the mix if you can find them).

[wmfife]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

I was going to say Perspex, then learned it's a brand name for Acrylic as is Plexiglas. The Plexiglas name dates as far back as 1933 (wiki) but the name Perspex was used in aircraft factories during W.W. II and though not certain I think probably a little before. Now I am informed if it's called Perspex it's not the domestic product (any more at least) and is inferior to true domestic Plexi.

2c more. (Running a low-budget tab...)

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

Hey guys, got what looks like a "minor" problem. My 41 Deluxe had two SPST switches for the mags when I bought her. They got switched out ages ago for a Grimes mag switch from a Cessna, hidden behind the panel and I buried the key in the original type lever. When it is all together it looks just like 1941. The 41 Deluxes did not have the A-7 switch, they had an older one with a cast metal lever. Unfortunately (or not) I had the regular key in the switch and the A&P IA asked about it. I actually hadn't hidden that the original switch was not there, I have even posted pictures of the set up here, but I hadn't even though that a Grimes would be a problem. He isn't going to hold up a first flight or signing her off for annual, but there really SHOULD be a 337 changing the mag switch to the more modern type.
Anyone out there have a 337 to change out the old lever switch for a Grimes?

Hank

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: NC-36296 Jarrett 41 BL (BC) 12-65 Deluxe

It has been suggested to me that since I am only changing from an old, unreliable, probably impossible to repair pre-war mag switch (ignoring the fact that someone replaced that one with two Radio Shack toggle switches years ago) to a more modern, certified switch, that all I may need is a log entry showing the new switch has been installed. There was never any entry showing the old switch was replaced with the toggle switches.
Thoughts from the A&P IAs in the tribe? As I said, this is NOT a safety issue for me, the new switch is the same as on uncounted Cessna 150s and other modern planes, it is just how the "legalities and log entries" should be done. My IA is perfectly comfortable that it is a safe and functional change, but seeing what entries others have made and had accepted will help me make it right on my logs.

Hank