Plane woodwork!

[CanFly]

Hi,

Would this aircraft be considered sufficient for the Woodwork pictures?

The Turner T-40A took me 5500 hours to build and was constrcted from plans only. It flies beautifully and has no nasty habits. A two seater with a 150 hp Lycoming engine. This photograph was taken on Vancouver Island, B.C Canada.

CanFly

[Dean]

WOW!

Theres a woodwork project you don't see every day.
Great work!

Maybe you should subscribe to my magazine - www.computerpilot.com

*shameful plug I know* :)

[Dan]

Canfly,

Any pics of construction ?

What wood do you use? (some sort of ply ?)

Can we have one pic of the Lycoming 150hp Gruntmaster ?:cool:

[CanFly]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your remarks.

I will have to scan the photographs taken some time ago and will do so as soon as I can.

The basic wood used in the all wooden plane was Douglas Fir for the longerons, framework, and spars. The wing and forward fuselage surfaces are covered with aircraft grade 1/8 inch mahogany. The rear of the fuselage and tail feathers are covered with 1/16 inch birch ply. The sufraces of the plane was then covered with a 1.2 ounce per square yard fiberglass cloth and glued down with epoxy. That was used to ensure no lifing of the wood fibres.

The plane was not built from a kit of any description.

A photograph of the "Gruntmaster?" I don't follow. I'm sure that you will let me know what that is.

Ray

[gold leader]

Gee that takes me back......
In 1990 I was a first year apprentice aircraft maintenance engineer, and I got to work on something similar to your kit-build. Big difference though... for the most part (so my bosses would tell me) they were extremely dangerous aircraft to fly. And this was demonstrated to me the very first time I tinkered with one.
The fellow who had built his aeroplane had got something slightly awry, so that the stall warning would sound constantly in flight. His solution? Disable the stall warning of course!
My hat comes off to you for your incredible work, but you would never get me up in one lol

[CanFly]

Hi Gold Leader,

Thanks again for your comments.

A couple of items to sort out - the plane is not a kit in any way, just plans, then go build it!

I appreciate that you wouldn't want to fly in it, that's the response of many. However, it has over 300 hours of trouble free flying, and to make thinks easier than your previous experience, it isn't equipped with a stall warning. In no respect is it dangerous to fly, no more so than the average spam can built in a factory, but far more pleasurable than those.

What is a Gruntmaster?

He may be sober tomorrow, but he would still be Winston!

Take care,

CanFly.

[BobGilmour]

CanFly

Gruntmaster=metalthingie w/ things inside go up&down; cause front thingie go round&round; effect planegoup; result youhappyman!!!

CheersBob.

[CanFly]

Hi Bob,

So, that's what it is, the little engine that chugs along in front of me! I don't have a photo but will gladly take one at the earliest opportunity when I have the cowling off. I have other photographs taken some time ago but I need a scanner to send you those. My Canon G-3 digital is far easier to use and I don't need to use the scanner.

I imagine that with your background in aviation engineering you would be interested in that area.

Yes, wood is good!

Ray

[BobGilmour]

Hi CanFly

Actually it was Gold Leader with the background in things that fly ... although I am interested too but just have never been associated with the industry. Have never actually held the reins though.

Other than as a passenger in quite a few small fixed wings and a couple rotary machines, I've also flown rear place quite a bit with a mate who was right into microlights -> trikes. That is, a hanglider canopy with a pod and subaru donk hanging from it... Crew consists of pilot and rear seat passenger (=ballast). Now they are pretty tenuous machines to go trusting your defiance of gravity in. There is actually only one bolt holding the whole bottom bit to the top bit. They call it the 'Jesus' bolt. I guess in the rare event that it fails, it would probably be about the last thing you would say ... or words to that effect depending upon your various persuasion of faith.

By the way, are you aware that you can use your digicam as an acceptable copier. Just take a photo of your photo (or whatever) under fairly flat light. Flouro light is ideal. Just adjust your white balance and do a few t&e's until you get an acceptable result. Use of a tripod is recomended because you'll probably be shooting down around 1/15th of a second or so. Set to manual and find a combo of shutter speed and aperture that works depending on your lighting. Only problem really is with glossy originals (hence the flat lighting). Have a go.

Must go, have three bowls waiting for a finish rub.

Cheers,


Bob.

[CanFly]

Hi Bob,

Thanks for the information regarding taking shots with the digital camera. I'll give it a try this week and post the result of the engine picture for Gold Leader. Hopefully, he will read the comments I made when writing to you.

I am not too keen on relying on the Jesus bolt for excursions skyward, I prefer to have my two wings securely attached with 1/2 inch bolts. A lot of faith is required to fly that type of aircraft, or, as some say, any type of aircraft!

You mention your bowls waiting for another rub; how many coats did you apply? If you take a look at the urn I made some time ago you will notice that the finish has shrunk and the pores of the wood are visible. I gave that urn 12 coats of varnish and rubbed between each. It looks as if it could use some more.
I used the background of sheepskin to impress the Australian viewers; the wool is an Australian sheepskin cushion we have.

Ray

[BobGilmour]

Hi Ray

I haven't got a lot of time. Have to slip out of 'house-mode' and make the long journey to my work ... ooh, about 20 feet.

I'm a great fan of rubbed finishes. Have spent much time using spray guns in the marine field on and off over the last 20 years ... so don't go down that track any more unless I've got to. But, a rubbed finish on any timber work, on or off boats, let's the wood do the talking and doesn't distract a viewer's attention from (1) the beauty of the wood and (2) ... and more importantly ... your own skill at creating a visually appealing piece of work.

My finish depends on what I'm making. But, talking here just about my 'fine' finish ... which is reserved for bowls and sculpture. My 'functional' finishes are much simpler and easily repairable.

I'm not going into details about how the finish is achieved ... it's simply at a point along a continuum of try a bit of this, try a bit of that. But, it involves some flood coats to start, some wet sanding along the way, a drying oil and machine buffing, finished with a hard wax and machine buffing (the latter to deal with fingerprinting for display).

I didn't look at your piece. I will later. From 'varnish', I assume you mean polyurethane. I use that stuff at present, although am playing with another non-yellow option. I'm always changing little bits here and then ... usually end up full-circle back to where I started.

All polyurethanes shrink. As do most other polymerisinig finishes. For me ... one of my objectives is to impart a shine on the piece that allows the grain to penetrate ... that's why I work with wood, not plastic, right. So, your 'problem' doesn't strike a cord with me.

The question is 'how much grain is good' though. Sounds like you got too much for your liking.

Secret is, you have to sand to a fine degree before you begin applying finish. I go through to 400 dry - using an air random and cut-down soft pad - usually 4" ... sometimes 2" for small works. That's important because you get a really great even finish ... and you get to enjoy it before you die. Ok, purists want hand-papered finishes ... but I know an owner of a large boat who sacked a professional re-finishing guy because his boat was getting rooted to the boatyard while this guy lovingly hand-papered the whole thing ... and then botched up the final spray job. His motto now ... "I only want machine finishes on any boat of mine".

Oh, I just re-read that. That's machine finish for the dry sand part. I do also wet sand ... and I do it by hand. Have tried machine (air) but it gets very messy. Also, when I get down to 800# and finer, by having my fingers right in it, I can usually feel if a bit of grit slips in, and can capture it and deal with any scrathes before proceeding.

You can use a grain filler (ie sealer with filler) if you want a smoother effect. Do that around 240# or so, dry. And again at 320 if you want the Ferrari look. I do that about 50% of the time. You can also use a non-filled sealer to close off interstitial spaces which will eventually result in a more grainy finish (ie 'matt') but not one which will take up too much finish and darken unacceptably. One disadvantage of commercial filled sealers is that usually the filler is fumed silica (white) and it will show iin the pores of the finished product. I often make my own using clear nitro pre-catalysed lacquer and whatever (microballoons - brown, very fine wood dust - from the # next one down to that you have been using, powdered charcoal!!.

Start applying finish after all that. You can also stiffen the initial finish coats a bit with something really fine (as above). I usually do a few flood coats first to fill any micro-pores - for an eventual poly finish, I use penetrol here - which is a drying polymer oil based thingie of some secretly guarded formula - although I reckon it's mostly boiled linseed. There's heaps of other options, but I use it because it's about the clearest (ie non-yellow) one I've found. You have even more options over your side of the puddle ... that we've never even heard of.

I apply poly in successive stages and wet sand it in. Followed with a backing coat rubbed thin after each wet stage. I go with stages 400 through 1200, in 200's. You could do the same with dry paper though if wet sanding polyurethane isn't to your likeing.

But note, before I start applying finish, I've already set the amount of surface relief, so shrinkage isn't an issue. I also don't ever launch into finishing until a prospective piece has reached minimal moisture physical weight stability - as measured on digital scales, once a week, and in warmed drying box once the piece has been dry sanded. Moisture meters aren't appropriate here. By the way, I live and work in low humidity conditions to begin with.

OK ... hope some of that helps. Don't try and dissect my method. It's one that works for me and most other people might hate. It's pretty lengthy ... but so is french polishing. The end results are expensive ... many hundreds of $$ for not very big static display pieces. But, people buy them. So I get to bath in my own glory and ... pay those dreaded darned bills.

Gotta go. Feel free to ask any q's if you want some of the gaps fleshed out a little. But, time is pretty short now that we're into the end of the week. My finishing benches are almost chocked with stuff that has to be finalised and wrapped in swaddling clothes for pay-day on Sunday. I do a lot of bread and butter pieces as well ... to fill in the gaps when the light of self-glory is a bit dim ...

Cheers,

Bob.

[Dan]

Sorry Ray, I havn't been home for a few days to reply to your question.


grumtmaster = donk = what Bob said :)

Dan