Composite Aircraft in the long term...

I feel better about aluminum airplanes,
which bend instead of crack under g-loads
experienced by aircraft in flight.
e.g. AA 587 -- you can't even use the rudder.
Look at these old Cessnas from the 1960s--
you just bend them back when they get a dent.

Fiberglass makes great sense for boats, because
aluminum will rust in the salt water.

The Cirrus makes a great doctor killer.
The people who shell out 300K for one of the
300 HP SR-22 models are the kind of BMW-driving
egomaniacs with more money than brains.
They stare at that computer
screen instead of looking out the window and
flying the plane, which they need to do in an
aircraft that is going so fast.
This is why the FAA has proposed
the FITS training standards program.
In 2018 I think there will be a lot more Cessna 172's
around.

Just my 2 cents.

Ted

Jay Honeck wrote:

Okay, so Cirrus is cooking along at 60 aircraft per month. They're selling
everything they can build, and people who have bought them are ecstatic.

Fast forward to the year 2018. What's going to be happening to these
composite beauties?

Reason for asking: A long discussion with some pilots who were staying at
the inn, who contend that they just won't last. Using as an example the
fiberglass wing tips and cowlings that always crack, flake, and crumble
after 15 years, requiring costly (and usually unsuccessful) repairs, these
pilots are convinced that the composite material in Cirrus will eventually
behave in much the same way. And once your fuselage parts start to crack,
flake, and delaminate, the planes will become essentially large
paper-weights.

So what's the group-think here? Will we by flying used Cirrus' in 20 years?
Or will they all be scrap by then?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Hmmm, a little hostility problem I see...

Denny

"Ted Huffmire" wrote in message
...
The Cirrus makes a great doctor killer.
The people who shell out 300K for one of the
300 HP SR-22 models are the kind of BMW-driving
egomaniacs with more money than brains.

Ted,

which bend instead of crack under g-loads
experienced by aircraft in flight.
e.g. AA 587 -- you can't even use the rudder.


no offense meant, but that's a totally clueless statement - and you
probably even know it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Ted Huffmire" wrote in message
...
The Cirrus makes a great doctor killer.
The people who shell out 300K for one of the
300 HP SR-22 models are the kind of BMW-driving
egomaniacs with more money than brains.
They stare at that computer
screen instead of looking out the window and
flying the plane, which they need to do in an
aircraft that is going so fast.

Cirrus envy?

Jay,

cowlings that always crack, flake, and crumble
after 15 years,


Well, you and I know (or could know) that statement is poppycock. Our
Tobago, for example, is still going strong with an over 20 year old
plastic cowling. So there's part of your answer.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jay Honeck wrote:

So what's the group-think here? Will we by flying used Cirrus' in 20 years?

I still see a fair number of antique Corvettes on the road.

George Patterson
A friend will help you move. A really good friend will help you move
the body.

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 13:01:42 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:
Reason for asking: A long discussion with some pilots who were staying at
the inn, who contend that they just won't last. Using as an example the
fiberglass wing tips and cowlings that always crack, flake, and crumble
after 15 years, requiring costly (and usually unsuccessful) repairs, these
pilots are convinced that the composite material in Cirrus will eventually
behave in much the same way. And once your fuselage parts start to crack,
flake, and delaminate, the planes will become essentially large
paper-weights.

Our flying club in Houston had an old Arrow 1. The cowling was still in
good (but not perfect) condition. The cowling is in a hostile place -
baking hot engine. The structure of the fibreglass was sound. It had
been around since the 1960s.

As others have noted, plenty of old fibreglass gliders are still beautiful
today. Take care of the paintwork and the composite Cirrus will last too.
You need to take care of the paintwork on a metal plane too (or they
corrode, especially where I live, right next to the sea).

You can't really compare Piper's crappy cowlings from the 60s to the
processes used to make the Cirrus/Lancair/Diamond aircraft today.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

A good place to start looking at longevity is the Slingsby T-3. It is
probably the one aircraft out there that is really accumulating hours
at a rate with reliable and exacting maintenance standards, that will
give you a good idea. So far it has been a big bust in the training
program for the USAF. It is the only aircraft that I have ever seen
that has a structural temperature limitation. If the structure is over
a certain surface temp, it is prohibited from flight due to structural
degredation at the elevated temp. With the big engine, it is extremely
temp sensitive under the cowling and has what appears to be massive
vapor locking problems despite using multiple fuel pumps. The problems
with the a/c power and structure have become so problematical, that
the USAF grounded the fleet and will probably destroy the a/c rather
than let them get into civilian hands. I know it's only one aircraft,
but the design is certified at a minimum to FAR 23 standards.

What is interesting, is the a/c that are built to the same TC, and
using the smaller engines so far don't have the same problems. Even
those that are in military training programs outside the USAF don't
have the same fuel and structure problems that I've been able to find.

Craig C.

"Craig" wrote in message
om...
A good place to start looking at longevity is the Slingsby T-3. It is
probably the one aircraft out there that is really accumulating hours
at a rate with reliable and exacting maintenance standards, that will
give you a good idea. So far it has been a big bust in the training
program for the USAF. It is the only aircraft that I have ever seen
that has a structural temperature limitation. If the structure is over
a certain surface temp, it is prohibited from flight due to structural
degredation at the elevated temp. With the big engine, it is extremely
temp sensitive under the cowling and has what appears to be massive
vapor locking problems despite using multiple fuel pumps. The problems
with the a/c power and structure have become so problematical, that
the USAF grounded the fleet and will probably destroy the a/c rather
than let them get into civilian hands. I know it's only one aircraft,
but the design is certified at a minimum to FAR 23 standards.

What is interesting, is the a/c that are built to the same TC, and
using the smaller engines so far don't have the same problems. Even
those that are in military training programs outside the USAF don't
have the same fuel and structure problems that I've been able to find.

Craig C.


The Slingsby's problems are not composite related. They are engine/fuel
system related.

Some (all?) of the Diamona's (sp?) have structural temp limitations as well.
That's why they paint 'em white. Also, the folks who live in Phoenix or
other places that have extreme temperatures often keep 'em hangared.

KB

Jay,

The composites used on Cirrus are not anything close to the fiberglass
material you describe. The better comparison is to look at composite
sailplanes that are twenty and thirty years old and have no problems.
The UV issue was dealt with 20 years ago as well.

Because of the FAA's extremely conservative certification procedures
for composites, the structures are far, far stronger than metal
airplanes, which is why they also weigh as much. The FAA
certification procedures took away the weight advantage of composites,
but what it did was give us airplanes that are evern more overbuilt
than the Grumman Ironworks figthers of WWII.

Warmest regards,
Rick

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:WCl5b.344377$uu5.68896@sccrnsc04...
Okay, so Cirrus is cooking along at 60 aircraft per month. They're selling
everything they can build, and people who have bought them are ecstatic.

Fast forward to the year 2018. What's going to be happening to these
composite beauties?

Reason for asking: A long discussion with some pilots who were staying at
the inn, who contend that they just won't last. Using as an example the
fiberglass wing tips and cowlings that always crack, flake, and crumble
after 15 years, requiring costly (and usually unsuccessful) repairs, these
pilots are convinced that the composite material in Cirrus will eventually
behave in much the same way. And once your fuselage parts start to crack,
flake, and delaminate, the planes will become essentially large
paper-weights.

So what's the group-think here? Will we by flying used Cirrus' in 20 years?
Or will they all be scrap by then?