From the photos at the end of your video that beautiful paint job covered a number of sins! I've seen experimental amateur built aircraft that put the best commercially built aircraft to shame, as far workmanship is concerned. I've also seen EAB aircraft that appear to have had damage installed during the build process. I love your videos. Please keep them coming Bill!! Thanks.
Thanks for sporting the Old Farts Fly Hat. To the SB - one might think to wrap ears around the fittings and tie the load to the skin structure... maybe look at how Cessna and Piper accomplished the design. - Just a thought.....
@@RV7FlyPer I like my plane to get the full implementation of SBs, so if I sell it in the future it will the safest it can be. I did the same with the rudder pedal SB last year. No sweat. Just my OCD.
When drilling the skin to the new spar, how to you align the holes as the dimpling process opens up the holes in the skin beyond the #40 hole. If care is not taken, the dimple in the skin and the spars will not match.
If I understand it right, the structure has no ribs behind the elevator brackets (?). So the lift-loads from the elevator bend the brackets and pulls and pushes perpendicular on the rear spar. That causes spidercracks around these holes. If only a "quarter riblet" was placed behind the bracket and rearspar, the perpendicular loads on the spar are led away into the skin, and the structure is more sound concerning loadpath. I tried to explain that I do not agree with the proposed mod-kit, but I am not the HODO of tis aircraft. (but at my job I was sort off.)
Im not too sure about that 100 percent. Almost every crack ive seen was next to a badly set rivet. Its the very first part a new build constructs and probably the first holes they drill, debur and set a rivet in. The more i see the more im convinced. Even that piece yiu repaired I can see that the spar web was deformed about a few of the rivet holes
A large company like Cessna have the capabilities to do a good stress analysis and thorough flight testing of their aircraft than a small kit build company. The pilot owners of kit builds are left having to debug the problems of kit built aircraft.
Virtually all aircraft certified or not, have multiple service bulletins that develop over time as the fleet ages. Van's designs are arguably as well modelled and tested as any certified A/C. They're not a small company either - over 11,200 aircraft have been built and flown to date. Compared to Cessna's 44,000, that's a pretty respectable number.
@@randallhenderson7432 I applaud the 11,200 number, however, just a clarification. Actually the Van's aircraft have, in fact, not gone through complete CAR 3 or Part 23 certification and testing as all certified aircraft must do. In addition, It is true that Cessna has only built 44,000... ...172s that is. That 44,000 number is not inclusive of any of the other models of aircraft Cessna has produced.
From the photos at the end of your video that beautiful paint job covered a number of sins! I've seen experimental amateur built aircraft that put the best commercially built aircraft to shame, as far workmanship is concerned. I've also seen EAB aircraft that appear to have had damage installed during the build process. I love your videos. Please keep them coming Bill!! Thanks.
Thanks so much!
Enjoyed this video! Looking forward to the next one...errr...two videos!
Thanks! I 'll try to get #2 out early next week...
Great video!
Thank you!
Thanks for sporting the Old Farts Fly Hat. To the SB - one might think to wrap ears around the fittings and tie the load to the skin structure... maybe look at how Cessna and Piper accomplished the design. - Just a thought.....
Would not have hurt to walk across the ramp and see how brand C and P do it...
Very timely. Got to do this on my 6A despite no cracks.
why ? the annual inspection is sufficient.
@@RV7FlyPer I like my plane to get the full implementation of SBs, so if I sell it in the future it will the safest it can be. I did the same with the rudder pedal SB last year. No sweat. Just my OCD.
@garyvanremortel5218 Great way to go through life. Peace of mind is priceless...
Tremendous video!!
Thanks!
When drilling the skin to the new spar, how to you align the holes as the dimpling process opens up the holes in the skin beyond the #40 hole. If care is not taken, the dimple in the skin and the spars will not match.
Just being careful!
If I understand it right, the structure has no ribs behind the elevator brackets (?). So the lift-loads from the elevator bend the brackets and pulls and pushes perpendicular on the rear spar. That causes spidercracks around these holes.
If only a "quarter riblet" was placed behind the bracket and rearspar, the perpendicular loads on the spar are led away into the skin, and the structure is more sound concerning loadpath.
I tried to explain that I do not agree with the proposed mod-kit, but I am not the HODO of tis aircraft. (but at my job I was sort off.)
IMHO a poorly designed fix for a poorly designed part. Thanks for watching!
The stresses placed on the stab spar (spider cracking) is it from letting it drop, or airflow resistance?
🌏🛩️
Aerodynamic loads and propeller pulses
Im not too sure about that 100 percent. Almost every crack ive seen was next to a badly set rivet. Its the very first part a new build constructs and probably the first holes they drill, debur and set a rivet in. The more i see the more im convinced. Even that piece yiu repaired I can see that the spar web was deformed about a few of the rivet holes
A large company like Cessna have the capabilities to do a good stress analysis and thorough flight testing of their aircraft than a small kit build company.
The pilot owners of kit builds are left having to debug the problems of kit built aircraft.
such a shame that a large company like Cessna did not really solve the corrosion of the wing-spar issue then...
@@RV7FlyPer discovered after 50 years of service.
Sort of puts the X in eXperimental...
Virtually all aircraft certified or not, have multiple service bulletins that develop over time as the fleet ages. Van's designs are arguably as well modelled and tested as any certified A/C. They're not a small company either - over 11,200 aircraft have been built and flown to date. Compared to Cessna's 44,000, that's a pretty respectable number.
@@randallhenderson7432 I applaud the 11,200 number, however, just a clarification. Actually the Van's aircraft have, in fact, not gone through complete CAR 3 or Part 23 certification and testing as all certified aircraft must do. In addition, It is true that Cessna has only built 44,000... ...172s that is. That 44,000 number is not inclusive of any of the other models of aircraft Cessna has produced.