"Paul Hastings" wrote in message
.. .

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
On 2008-07-07, Paul Hastings wrote:
The way I read it your saying that composite repair is not possible or
much
harder than aluminum repair.

There are well established methods for repairing composite damage,
without
any annoying rivet bucking noise.

Why, then, can't you get composite factory aircraft repaired short of
sending the broken part back to the factory?

Yes, I know the discussion is around homebuilts, but if composite repairs
are well understood, then there should be no reason to require all
repairs
to be done at the factory.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (got it!)

Not knowing which factory you are speaking of, my guess is more of a
company policy issue for liability reasons. I know Northwest(I live in MN
too) isn't sending parts back to Airbus they are repairing them onsite.

So are many homebuilders with composite planes, imho composite repairs are
easier. Especially in your example of hangar rash, if you ding the leading
edge in aluminum How many rivets do you have to drill and rebuck if it is
a single piece leading edge. It gets even worse if you bend an aluminum
spar.

Paul

From what I've heard around my local chapter, composite repairs are not much
of a problem--at least as long as the spars and fuel tanks are still OK.

OTOH, you really can't beat the pre-punched aluminum from VanGrunsven for
assembly time. If you already have some wiring and systems knowledge from
your work experience, you could almost make an argrument to build an RV to
fly while you are building something that fit your "ultimate" solution. If
you don't have that experience, you will have to deal with the "90% done and
90% remaining" problem, but the same will sitll be true of the composites.

Peter