Head in the clouds

Before I could go any further with the aileron controls I had to know the exact position where the aileron torque tubes will disconnect for the wing-folding mechanism. That point will be in a direct line with the pivot point for the wing dihedral and that is determined by the compound articulated joint where the rear spar connects to the fuselage, which is the only point where the wing remains connected to the fuselage when it folds, apart from the strut connections of course.

 

So - the next task was to get back to the CAD work and design the rear spar wing root fitting. That took a day and a half but once I'd worked it out I felt ready for a bit of machining again, so decided to go ahead and make them. Part of the reason for making them straight away is that it was pretty tricky to get my head around what moves when and where, as the wing folds and rotates, so I wanted to be sure it would work and end up as it should. Remember that these wings don't just fold back, they also rotate and fold flat against the fuselage sides.

 

Anyway, I started machining last Friday morning and finished on Monday afternoon. They probably don't look much for 29 hours of machining but there are a lot of processes involved to machine them manually. Or perhaps I'm just getting slower in old age ...

 

They went together just fine which was pleasing and seemed well, but as I fiddled with them I realised that at the last part of the wing-folding action the inner and outer parts wanted to over-centre around each other. At first I thought that would be a good thing as they would 'park' positively with the spar root fitting under the fuselage attachment. But ... the 'collapsing' action as they over-centred would position the end of the wing lower skin beyond the fuselage fitting requiring an ugly cut-out in the skin or a cover plate, neither of which I fancied.

 

So - the answer would be to make up a new pair of the central links and round off one end of each but leave the other end square so that it would only have limited movement, how much movement it actually needs can be determined later and the square end adjusted to suit. Consequently I spent most of Tuesday making the replacement links.

 

More 'real work' starting tomorrow so I guess things on the plane will slow down a little, for a while.

 

The picture shows the articulated rear spar wing root fittings, which, in combination with the top and bottom articulated strut end fittings that I machined this time last year, allow the wings to quickly and easily fold flat against the fuselage sides -

 

 

36hrs for the build log, a total of 1880hrs so far.

 

 

With the aileron torque-tube installed I could concentrate on getting the aileron controls made up.

 

I will need another eight 5/8"x0.049" 6061T6 pushrods in all. Two behind the seat, connecting the torque-tube to the overhead bellcranks, two from those bellcranks to the torque-tube stubs in the cabin roof, a pair in each wing to operate the flaps and a pair in each wing to operate the aileron control surfaces.

 

So I machined up 16 pushrod ends to accommodate the ball rod-ends.

 

Next I drilled the bellcrank plates which I made up about a year ago and spent time with the little shop-press to shape them. One arm of each is bent outward a little, to the width of a rod-end, the other arm is bent out further because it will accommodate spacers similar to those described in the previous post, but this time it's to allow the pushrods to depart at an angle, rather than to twist. The same basic concept though, to provide increased clearance between the cheeks of the rod-end and the clevis.

 

I put some temporary rivets in the bellcrank plates and their bearings, they'll need to come apart again for painting, which I'll do at the same time as all the other components being made up at the moment for aileron and flap controls.

 

Once I had the bellcranks in place and at right angles to the line of the pushrods I could measure the required pushrod length and make them up.

 

The pictures show the machined pushrod and bellcrank hardware and the trial-fitting of the pair of pushrods between the control torque-tube and the bellcranks at the top of the cabin -

 

 

Another 11hrs for the log, 1844hrs so far.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enjoyed the update; nice work and your getting closer to that 90% done marker / milestone. Cheers Mike

As in ... 90% done, 90% still to go?

 

>

 

>

 

With the first of the elevator pushrods in place I went to the rear of the fuselage and clamped the elevator control horn in the central position, then I could determine the exact length to adjust the rear elevator pushrod (there are four elevator pushrods in the length of the system). That rear pushrod needed to be the exact length that would make the control horn contact the control stop at the same time as the bellcrank on the other end of it is at right angles to the pushrod, since there is no differential in the elevator motion i.e. the up and down angle is the same. Once that length was determined I removed the rod-ends and nuts, cleaned the threads and applied Loctite 243 before re-assembling and tightening them, being careful to end up with both rod-ends in alignment with each other.

 

I re-installed that particular pushrod with temporary nuts on the clevises because they will have to come off again for the fabric covering, and moved on to the next pushrod. Similarly its length had to be adjusted so that it was at right-angles to the bellcrank and also at right angles to the walking beam halfway down the fuselage. Then remove it, disassemble, clean, loctite, re-assemble etc. A word of caution for any future owner who might use this log as a manual when servicing the aircraft, it would be easy to damage the aft end of that particular pushrod if that end is not supported upwards because it could jam in the diagonal internal bracing, so when removing or replacing it, the aft end of that pushrod should always be unbolted from the clevis last and bolted onto it first.

 

Next I adjusted, removed, cleaned, loctited and replaced the third pushrod, the one in the forward part of the rear fuselage and which attaches between two walking beams.

 

Once those three pushrods were set to their final lengths I clamped the joystick in the centre of its travel and could then adjust the length of the forward-most pushrod, the one inside the torque-tube. Then disassemble, clean, loctite, re-assemble etc.

 

Important Note about this front pushrod - when the joystick moves from side to side in an arc of approximately 50° the forward elevator pushrod must 'twist' by that same amount. This MUST NOT result in any movement of the rod-end threads, or any twisting load on the pushrod. It is achieved within the lateral rotation of both of the balls in the rod-ends. They can only provide that motion if small spacers are provided each side of the balls, within the clevises AND the rod-ends must be well aligned with each other (± 2°). Those spacers (4of) are made from 5/16" tubing bored 1/4" and they are 1.9mm/0.075" ± 5% long. Installed with very small long-nosed pliers.

 

The pictures show the small spacers installed each side of the pushrod which rotates (note they're only on the first pushrod's rod-ends, not the other three pushrods which don't rotate), and how they allow the rod-ends to rotate further than they could if the clevis was only as wide as the rodend, without the spacers -

 

 

9 more hours for the log, 1833 hrs so far.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I marked the seat for a hole to be cut out for the harness straps and then undid all the lacing again to remove the seat and sew in a reinforcing patch around the hole. That done it was all laced back in again at the front only, the steel cable that the harnesses attach to at the centre was made up, swaged and fitted and the harnesses threaded through the seat and bolted to the cable in the centre, and to the cleats at the outside edges of each seat.

 

Next the aileron torque-tube which carries the joystick had to be threaded through the hole in the seat and threaded through the triangle formed by three tubes which supports the rear bearing for the torque-tube. It was a bit like trying to work out a chinese puzzle for the first time, so I was mildly relieved when I did find a way to actually thread it. For a few moments I was beginning to think I may have painted myself into a corner.

 

Next, and equally tricky, was fitting the split bushing itself, I had to machine some extra clearance to get a spanner on the nuts underneath, and modify a spanner for the purpose but got there eventually. I also made some extra 0.005" shims to go between the two halves of the bushing, and applied plenty of graphite because it was just a little too tight.

 

That done I was able to fit the forward torque-tube support bearing, also with shims and graphite powder for lubrication, the bolts on both t-t bearings are fitted 'snug' (not torqued) with nyloc nuts/washers etc, so as not to crush the plastic bushing material.

 

Once the torque-tube was fitted I could install the joystick between the pair of bellcrank bearings that carry it, and fit the first of the elevator pushrods that runs down the centre of the torque-tube.

 

Some pictures -

 

 

Another 10hrs, 1824hrs so far.

 

 

 

 

Next I needed to get the under-seat impact foam cushion made, so that I could complete the seat itself, because the seat had to be in before the joystick and aileron torque-tube could go in.

 

I sourced the impact-absorbing foam from my favourite foam suppliers, PJ Bowers in Reedy Creek. I don't think you'll ever find a more helpful fella than Steve, one of the partners there. They had some large bags of off-cuts from a theme-park protective crash-barrier. It is 12mm closed-cell polyethylene, multi laminated, and came in pieces about 120mm thick. Being closed-cell it won't absorb moisture and therefore is rot, mildew, and mold proof.

 

I cut up the sections of it with an electric carving knife, glued them all together with an industrial strength instant grab spray contact adhesive and then carved out channels and pockets on the underside for the four rudder cables, clearance for the throttle torque-tube and throttle levers each side, the throttle friction device and the harness attachments.

 

Then I could finalise the position of the lacings that would secure the seat fabric and make cutouts in the timber floor under the seat to accommodate the lacing, varnish the timber where it was cut and final-fit the floor in place with its screws.

 

Once that was in the throttle torque-tube was fitted and the three central joining bolts were torqued, then the throttle cable fitted to the left-side throttle lever, and those bolts also torqued.

 

Finally I fitted the throttle friction and torqued those bolts also.

 

Once they were in I fitted the seat and laced it up tightly so that I could determine exactly where the harness straps needed to come through at the middle attachment and marked it for modification in the industrial sewing machine.

 

Some pictures -

 

 

Another 14hrs in that lot, 1814hrs in total so far.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 18th 2017.

 

Once I had some new materials and components to work with, and with 'real' work slowing down as it often does in my industry around year's end, I could get back in earnest onto some of the final assembly work.

 

First I worked on the pedal assemblies. They were more-or-less completed some while ago but there's always some finishing touches to complete, I had to touch up some epoxy paint, fit the toe-brake pedals, and now that I had them I could fit the four new master cylinders which will provide both seats with full independent braking.

 

That all worked out fine so I was able to bolt the pedal assemblies to the floor panels and final-fix the floor panels down. Lastly I made the thin aluminium plates each side of the pedals, on which the pedals sliders run when adjusting the pedal positions, so that they don't scuff the floor timber. Gave them a bit of polish for a better appearance and was able to move on.

 

Some pics -

 

 

13 more hours for the log - making 1800hrs so far.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's more than a month since the last log update, though plenty has happened since, so it's time to catch up.

 

Last log entry was about the installation of the oil cooler at the beginning of December. Following that I realised that if I wanted to have sufficient materials to work with over the Christmas/New Year break, I'd need to get some orders worked out and processed. It took me two long days to work them out exactly, including all the bolts I could think of, various heat shroud materials for hoses close to exhaust pipes, bearings, rod-ends, the rest of the brakes components plus plenty of spares for ongoing maintenance and all that.

 

So I got an order off to FBI (Black Max brakes) and they were excellent, the order processed in two days and on my doorstep five days later by USPS. The weaker Aussie dollar this time made it a bit hip-pocket painful with the components this time coming to AU$800 and the postage AU$160, but at least I just stayed under the GST threshold so that helped.

 

The Aircraft Spruce order took a little longer, a week before it was despatched and twelve days to arrive, but it was right in the middle of the Christmas postal rush, so that wasn't too bad, almost exactly the same price as the Black Max order.

 

The third one was a bit of a misfortune in some ways. I mentioned previously about the shock of the cost of the UL600 Oratex fabric, BrianG the Australian representative had said he'd try and get a better price but I hadn't heard from him two weeks later so I guessed he couldn't do anything about it, so I went ahead and ordered fabric from Aircraft Spruce. The non-certified dacron is about $7/m compared to Oratex at $140 IIRC so that's a massive difference, but of course you then have to seal it, UV proof it and paint it. So I ordered the Stewart System adhesive and coatings, except the topcoat which added another $800 including freight and arrived in just four days from placing the order - awesome service!

 

Just after I'd ordered the fabric and coatings the Oratex rep came back to me saying that the factory in Germany had found some seconds fabric which was perfectly OK structural but had a slight unevenness in the colour, and that I could have that at about a third the price. I wished I'd heard about it a few days earlier but it was too late by then. Even so it would still have been double the price of the other, and I'd still have had to buy the topcoat paint to paint the metal skinned parts of the airframe.

 

I also did my research for the primer, undercoat and topcoat and a friend in the industry found me the best quotes, about $700 for all of it, so that's not too bad for a three-colour system.

 

The coatings research and discussions took another full day, so that's another 24hrs of associated work but I haven't included any of that 'admin' or design time in the build log, so it remains at 1787hrs so far.

 

 

Currently it's not permitted. Nev

What? LL training isn't currently permitted? Which dickwit removed it from the available endorsements, and when? As far as I'm concerned it should be a compulsory part of basic training, particularly since it's the main cause of fatal crashes.

 

 

...... but given that this airframe did crop dusting for years, condition of its components after its fatal crash in that life looked like it was ready for the tip, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a control item was fractured.

It was crashed in 1996 and rebuilt and put back on the register in the early 2000s, so if there was a damaged control that escaped replacement through all the rebuild inspections, it took 15 or so years to manifest itself ...

 

 

Spent a lot of phone, email and forum time banging on about a peak body, consultative process, blah blah blah etc. It is easy as a noisy GA/RAA amateur to sound off, but the real action is with the industry professionals who have a detailed understanding of the industry. I have previously worked in peak body reform before, in an industry I understand and you are often not assisted by enthusiastic individuals running their own campaign, unless it is part of a coordinated and resourced plan. All the same, pretty ready to start one or join one if we on the rec-av site want to form a group.

To judge the response and participation you're likely to get, I think it'd be worth starting a thread, at the least. Probably in the Governing Bodies forum.

 

 

It would be interesting to put together more of this story.

And it would be a most worthwhile thing to do. So many heroic stories are in danger of being lost to the sands of time.

 

I have just completed a fairly intensive two year research project to discover more of the story of my uncle's life. As kids we knew that he had been killed in WW2, was a pilot and there was some suggestion that his death was an accident where his plane was hit by a bomb jettisoned from his friend's plane following an aborted bombing mission. I'd also gleaned from my mother that he had been trained as a fighter pilot but she was intensely saddened by the loss of her big brother and found it impossible to talk about it much.

 

As was normal procedure, my uncle's logbooks were delivered to his parents (my grandparents) in due course and they were left to me when they passed away. My brother had them in storage for a while because I was overseas, they were in a shed and got wet and he didn't realise the value of them, so he disposed of them, I never did get to see them.

 

My research journey began out of idle curiosity about four years ago when I discovered the existence of the Runnymede Memorial, and his mention on one of the plaques. From there I was able to discover his Service Number, medals awarded and his Squadron and airbase. It turned out that there is a preservation society protecting and renovating the airfield and surrounds, and they had a lot of information that included mentions of my uncle.

 

It was then that the confusion about bombers and fighters was cleared up. After he returned from Florida, where he was sent for his Primary and Basic training on Stearmans, Vultees and Harvards, he went to 59 Operational Training Unit at Milford where he was trained on Hurricanes and then Typhoon fighter-bombers before being posted to 193 Squadron at RAF Harrowbeer, Yelverton, Devon.

 

With the assistance of the Preservation Society I gained access to the microfiched Operational Record Books (Forms 540 and 541) from the National Archives, which detail the daily operations and missions and I was then able to find many other of his Squadron Pilots' logbooks online and was even put in touch with members of the Squadron who knew him well, and the nephew of the pilot who feared it was his errant ordnance which struck his friend, my uncle's, aircraft and hence piece together most of his life and the details of his final mission and resting place. Though his body was never recovered, he went down in the English Channel near the Channel Island of Alderney. To be clear, the unfortunate event was no-one else's fault, my uncle was out of formation to the rear and 700ft below the rest, for reasons unknown.

 

Although sad at times it was a fascinating research project and has its rewards in terms of the preservation of another story of our wartime heroes. A new Allied Aircrew Memorial has been constructed at the entrance to Guernsey Airport featuring information about the 153 aircrew thus far known to have been lost in the Bailiwick waters, and for whom there is no gravesite.

 

Additionally, since the story is newly revealed and a little unusual, the Channel Island Occupation Society (CIOS - the Channel Islands were occupied by the Germans during most of WW2) produce a 'Review' each year featuring academic and general interest stories like this, and my uncle's is to be published this May.

 

Some links that may help your quest -

 

Royal Air Force - Operational Records, WWI - (Military)

 

If he was in the RAAF, as opposed to RAF - Tips for Researching RAAF Personnel and Operational Records

 

The National Archives

 

You'd also want to search for RFC (Royal Flying Corps) records, since they led up to the RAF which was formed in 1918, and I think the National Archives begins at RAF formation, but not certain about that.

 

Also, you may need to search French records because many of the early flyers joined French Escadrilles (Squadrons) rather than fly as part of the RFC. Finding his Service Number will be Key.

 

 

Ah, I see, then yes I had missed something. I didn't note the aircraft types so I assumed his flying was nearer to 1927 and not WW1. In that case yes, he must have been quite a flyer, not many survived 50hrs, let alone 600.

 

 

Any death involving suspicion, or any unnatural or unexpected death, where it is possible others were involved, is called a "reportable death", and must be reported to the coroner.It is then up to the coroner to decide whether there are valid reasons for holding an inquest. The whole scenario surrounding this crash was murky, and called for investigation.

Coroner and inquests - NT.GOV.AU

 

The inquest cleared the air and found the deceased pilot solely responsible for his own death through his careless and ignorant approach to flying an unfamiliar aircraft. He should have known better, given the fact he'd had a degree of training.

 

The basic problem lies in whether any other gung-ho, ignorant, arrogant, brash would-be pilot, would ever read this report, and take note of it, and exercise caution accordingly.

 

Methinks not - the cemeteries contain plenty of this type of personality who eventually killed themselves because of their arrogance, their "know-it-all" attitude, and their risk-taking behaviour.

 

The problem lies in identifying them and taking positive steps to try and stop them from killing themselves - and other innocents.

 

All the aviation regulations and enforcement in the world still doesn't stop dozens of these people from killing themselves every year.

All quite true, and as a result of this discussion just maybe some one will read the report and learn something that may save them from making the same mistakes. Nev pointed out the crux - how many similar crashes have there been over peoples' own property, their friends' parties or public gatherings they're attending, from the low level 'look at me' beat up with a low-level turn, collision with trees or power-lines, stall in the turn from skidding, turning down-wind or whatever, mostly by people with no low-level training at all, thus having no understanding of the illusions created from ground-related flight.

 

If it (discussions like this) saves one life then that's a start, hopefully in time FT establishments might have a library of compulsory viewing/reading as part of the pilot certificate, rather than relying on the chance of newbies coming across it on a forum.

 

 

Why ... he only has 600 hours, albeit in 1927. I don't know of any pilot that could be better than average with so little time in the air. Though I do know of a lot of 'sky-gods' that think they're invincible with even fewer hours. Or am I missing something?

 

 

How would he know the laws of physics for that wing and that trike?He bought the thing, probably because his friend was able to demonstrate a faster aircraft and tighter turns.

He was a Plant Operator - Excavator, in the earthmoving business.

 

Where was the administrative responsibilty for these two people, where was the instructor to take this person up to a safe altitude and train him on the new wing?

 

By flying below 500 feet the police could have charged him with culpable negligence if he had killed a passenger, and his estate still could be sued if his death has disadvantaged someone.

With the greatest respect turbo ... you've clearly not spent much time in the NT have you?

 

SM Greg Cavanagh is well known, in fact Cavanagh St in central Dwn is apparently part of his family name, such uninterrupted longevity they have up there. I'm astounded to see he's still an SM, you'd have thought he'd have made it to circuit judge at least ... In my experience he had to be one of the driest and least prone to general worldliness that I have ever come across - no disrespect intended to the judiciary in general. Considering the relative 'wildness' of the NT it astounded me, and others, just how isolated from reality the Territory Courts proved to be, one would think they might be more down-to-earth than in other places, but in my experience the opposite was the case.

 

The consequence of which is the complete disregard often shown by everyone, including supposedly responsible helicopter pilots, for the police (telling them porkies after a fatality, assuming they'd get away with it) and the judiciary. People in the East think it's bad in Townsville with adolescent indigenous as young as seven running around drunk, drugged and armed all night, blatantly stealing from houses, stealing cars, some with 160 offences before they reach teen years, but you should see the shadier spots of Darwin, and then wonder why places like the Don Dale detention centre became what they did without particular notice being paid by anyone up to and including the Ministers responsible.

 

 

True and all the more reason to collectively shout the house down. A consistent campaign required. Dedicated facebook site, bulk emails to his office, letters, press lobbying, industry bodies direct representation, and public support from media opinion leaders. Trawling the industry groups and individuals to put a working group together is needed so a very specific set of aims and ambitions can be decided and focused upon. Not CASA bashing but a reform partnership. If we don't make this a noisy issue the minister will do nothing.

Excellent thinking ... so what have you done about it so far?

 

 

Just a thought.. High aspect ratio 'should' make wing drop esp in an 'unbalanced - skid' turn more likely because the speed differential across the wing tips will be greater.. I would be interested in practical experience confirming this.. I only know of one who managed it on climb out and ended up in hospital..All respect, sad thoughts and prayer for those affected by the tragedy..

Again ... that has nothing to do with aspect ratio, though the effect in a skid would be increased with an increase in span ... BUT given the same span and a plane with higher or lower aspect ratio, the shorter chord of the higher aspect ratio wing would reduce the Re (Reynolds number) at which the foil would be operating, with a consequent very small (probably not enough to be detectable, in practical terms) increase in stall speed, to which you might be alluding, but simply thinking an increase in aspect ratio increases stall speed is erroneous.

 

However, with an aircraft with all things being the same (i.e. span included), except the aspect ratio, then the one with higher AR would have a higher wing-loading, and that would increase the stall speed - but what has that to do with this?

 

 

If there was no reference to say where the instrument was, how could the bad guys possibly prove anything, and why on earth would they be interested anyway?So Turbs, I reckon the risk is zero if you kept it quiet and didn't provoke anybody.

Until something goes wrong. Ref my earlier comment regarding a cabin fire from having pulled the wiring too tight, for example. Let's say that after illegally moving the instrument you had a cabin fire, which, incidentally, had nothing to do with the changes you made. Unfortunately, in your hurry to get the plane on the ground with a cockpit full of smoke, you ran into a ditch and the crumpled side of the footwell cost your passenger their foot. Ordinarily your insurance would pay but the insurance company also has pretty thorough forensic investigators they call 'loss adjusters' who very easily find a few internet images showing the panel arranged differently from the crashed aircraft. A quick check with the manufacturer will reveal serial numbers of aircraft with specific panel set-outs and hey presto, you're busted and charged for having flown an illegal aircraft and the insurance company refuses to pay for anything.

 

Now your pax will have to sue you for a mill or two. I think that's a good reason to not mess with an aircraft that you don't have the right to. That's why I've always built my own, like you Bruce, I don't like the restrictions placed on what I can do.

 

Another problem, even if you didn't have any problems with the aircraft after you made those changes, I think it very unlikely that you would change it back to standard before selling it. The next thing you know, the purchaser discovers it's not legal so he wants his money back and compensation for the hassles you've caused him. Or - he keeps quiet about it and then has a prang that's all his fault but then cites the changes you made as being the cause of his crash. He didn't have insurance but now it's nice and convenient for him to sue you for the loss of the plane and the injuries he received.

 

If you know anything about Court process and costs, even if their suit was unsuccessful, and you showed that he had been flying the plane quite safely as it was, it would still cost you double what the plane was ever worth in legal fees which you'd be unlikely to recover, given that it would have been demonstrated that you'd committed an illegal act in making the changes, and also sought to defraud in making the sale - AND it would cost you a very stressful year or three of your life.

 

Not worth the risk, I reckon.

 

 

This Polish Squadron has been mentioned before on RF. This Video tells their story. . .and their Betrayal at Yalta at the end of WW2. ( runtime 22 min )

What an incredible story of heroism and injustice. I had no idea of the details. I'm glad you brought this to our attention Phil, thank you.

 

 

When I studied solar design in the 70s I discovered that glossy white stays a couple degrees cooler than shiny al.

My experience with the boat was far more than a couple of degrees.

 

On a hot sunny, summer's day in the north I would estimate that the shiny aly used to reach 65C or more, it was literally too hot to touch for more than a second or two or you would get a burns blister. For example, it used to get way hotter than a black bitumen road at midday in the north. we used to walk around without footwear a lot up there and the soles of the feet became pretty tough, so you could cross a road without much discomfort but certainly not walk on the deck unless you threw buckets of water on it first.

 

After painting, the white areas used to be not much warmer than blood temperature, perhaps around a max of 45C, you could certainly walk on them with bare feet for a while before your feet became uncomfortably hot. The black areas were a little hotter, perhaps 50C and you didn't want to wait around on that for too long without footwear.

 

This has made me curious now, I'll make up three samples of aly, polish one, paint one black and one white and see what temperatures they reach in the sun. I think ColJones probably has a point about the insulating effect of paint regardless of its colour.

 

 

Black absorbs all colours of the spectrum and infra red as well. A black object like a car gets very hot in the sun, while a white or polished aluminium one will not absorb anything like as much heat.. The same applies to radiated heat from bushfires . Dark houses are not good for that situation.. Nev

Interesting thing that, about the polished aluminium and white paint ...

 

I had a large aluminium boat I used for my business in the Kimberley. Initially it had carpeted decks, the idea was to keep them cool, we even wet the carpet to help cooling by evaporation.

 

The sand and salt entrapped by the carpet quickly caused corrosion to get a hold so the carpets came off and I had the decks restored by polishing, I figured the polishing would keep them cool too. It didn't turn out to be the case, by 10am the decks would be so hot it would sear the skin off your feet if you didn't wear footwear, and even with thongs on your feet would get unbearably hot.

 

So - all traffic areas got painted white and non-traffic areas got mainly matt black paint to cut the glare. The white areas remained cool even on the hottest days, and the black areas only got warm. It was just basic two pack epoxy normally used for painting the inside of water tanks, so nothing fancy with insulating material in it or anything like that.

 

So - in my experience even black painted aly stays far cooler than polished aly for some strange reason.

 

I'd still have a white house roof rather than black.

 

 

Beavers have a reasonably high aspect ratio wing which makes a sudden wing drop in a stall common.

That's an odd comment.

 

A sudden wing drop in a turning and/or skidding stall would have nothing to do with aspect ratio.

 

As fh said, Beavers are generally considered to be a very kindly flyer.

 

 

My only guessing comment was strictly in relation to the forgoing sentence.By that I meant that the litigations only affected ( to the point of cessation of production) singles.Clearly having poor visibility due to having wings in the way is not restricted to singles therefore it would appear, dare I say it, to the man on the Clapham omnibus, that there must have been more too it then just visibility. but I was only guessing about the context of the visibility. What I didn't say but was thinking was that I did not recall the visibility issue. So was only guessing about that.

 

There was in fact a string of litigations.

 

They were regarding events like the seat locking pins on cessnas, the aforementioned manual that seemed to indicate you could teach yourself out of it, another pilot who against instructions on first solo departed the circuit area and flew over his house and stalled while in a turn are three that come to mind.

 

But it's been so long since I did the lecture to the club ( maybe 1998 or so that I can't recall or still have any references ) the cases.

No, nothing to do with any of those. I'll find you the reference when I have time. It was a single case where one sued another where a low wing was letting down to land and a high wing or biplane, maybe a Pitts was climbing after takeoff. The judge found the designers and manufacturers of Singles to be at fault so the majors stopped production instantly. Circa 1994ish ... I think.

My only guessing comment was strictly in relation to the forgoing sentence.By that I meant that the litigations only affected ( to the point of cessation of production) singles.

Clearly having poor visibility due to having wings in the way is not restricted to singles therefore it would appear, dare I say it, to the man on the Clapham omnibus, that there must have been more too it then just visibility. but I was only guessing about the context of the visibility. What I didn't say but was thinking was that I did not recall the visibility issue. So was only guessing about that.

 

There was in fact a string of litigations.

 

They were regarding events like the seat locking pins on cessnas, the aforementioned manual that seemed to indicate you could teach yourself out of it, another pilot who against instructions on first solo departed the circuit area and flew over his house and stalled while in a turn are three that come to mind.

 

But it's been so long since I did the lecture to the club ( maybe 1998 or so that I can't recall or still have any references ) the cases.

No, nothing to do with any of those. I'll find you the reference when I have time. It was a single case where one sued another where a low wing was letting down to land and a high wing or biplane, maybe a Pitts was climbing after takeoff. The judge found the designers and manufacturers of Singles to be at fault so the majors stopped production instantly. Circa 1994ish ... I think.

 

 

There were a number of adverse findings over a number of years in the 1980s over a number of accidents and events.Off the top of my head I can't remember them all.The issues must have only affected singles as Piper and Cessna and Beechcraft continued to make twins ( at least until Piper went broke ). Since the twins were also high or low wing there must have been more to it than that otherwise they would have closed down everything. Only guessing there.

It's no good stating something as fact then saying "only guessing there", at the time it was very cut-and-dried why ALL the majors stopped building light SINGLES, it was because only singles were covered by the precedent. If not they all would have stopped producing twins also.

 

I don't know whether its fact or fiction but Product Liability was introduced in the US in the 1970's. It wasn't like our system, and one of the things the manufacturers hated was that lawyers could call in an expert witness, and if that witness could design a product which wouldn't have killed the person, the company was guilty.Freightliner had a case where a couple were driving their semi tractor home in the wet bobtail after a haul, and coming round a corner it slid off the road wrapped around a pole splitting the outboard fuel tank, and incinerating the couple. In court expert evidence was given that if the fuel tanks had been mounted between the chassis rails there would have been no split,, and the couple would have survived. The judge awarded $11 million penalty against White Motor Corp, and $10 million to the estate.

So the high wing argument may well have been correct.

 

Also, at that time Cessna and Piper were selling their aircraft as an alternative to car travel, greatly playing down the weather risk factor etc. so that one could also be true.

Respect your other examples of US litigation but they're not to do with the precedent of this case. I'm surprised that the whole issue of the majors' instant shutdown obviously isn't better known.

Tomorrow I'll try and find links to the finding and the corporate reactions, though I'm short of time ... a little googling, anyone?