Wicks & A.S. Chapter/section kits

[Aiman]

I was planning on using the 'chapter' kits that are available from Wicks when I started my CozyIV project. Is it possible to just continue ordering these since the cozy/Long/open follow the same chapter layout? I know I will have a bit of extra foam from each chapter, since the Open is a little smaller than the Cozy..

 

Or, should I order the Fiberglass kit from AS&S, and get foam as I need it? Or order bulk fiberglass (by the roll) and foam as I need it?

 

Thoughts?

[macleodm3]

Its cheaper to buy in bulk, but chapter kits let you spend in more increments. The total cost of the plane will cost more if you purchase chapters due to shipping.

 

The planes are different enough that you need to compare the chapter by chapter materials list. The cozy is not just a 4 seat long-ez.

[rickh]

I bought fiberglass by the roll, there's some smoking deals out there if you look, and don't mind paying for a whole roll (or three ).

 

I ordered foam (only) from Wicks, had them slice the larger sheets to fit in a 24"x48" box (cheaper ship), the larger sheets (H-45) are oversize as well as dimensional charged (read: $100). Edge gluing them back together is moot, I haven't had to (yet). I've enough sheet foam for the strakes chapter.

 

If you can lump a few chapters together, ...

The added cost is trivial, and the 'excess' can be stored under the bed or rafters.

 

Rick

[TMann]

I ordered all of my foam at once, The glass I bought in full rolls.

I also created a MS Access database of all the parts required and populated that with the prices from each. That way when I was ordering a specific AN4 bolt, I bought them for the entire plane at the same time using the best current price.

 

.... the downside is keeping the prices updated.

 

Download the parts list from Wicks and then fill in the missing pieces using your parts list in the plans.

[longezdave]

I bought fiberglass by the roll, there's some smoking deals out there if you look, and don't mind paying for a whole roll (or three ).

Are those "smoking deals" from Spruce or Wicks? I wouldn't know how to be sure it was the correct cloth if it was from someone else.

 

There was some cloth that was sold (many years ago) by a vendor that was supposed to be the correct cloth. Burt did tests on the imposter and showed that its' physical properties were inadequate. The spooky thing was that they marketed it by the same part number - 7715.

[argoldman]

Are those "smoking deals" from Spruce or Wicks? I wouldn't know how to be sure it was the correct cloth if it was from someone else.

 

There was some cloth that was sold (many years ago) by a vendor that was supposed to be the correct cloth. Burt did tests on the imposter and showed that its' physical properties were inadequate. The spooky thing was that they marketed it by the same part number - 7715.

 

No, that is not entirely factual. There was a huge fight between burt and spruce as to the strength of the material. Burt threatened Spruce that if they even carried the material he would not authorize them as suppliers. I used to have copies of the letters that were sent back and forth (about 23 years ago). It seemed to all to be an economic situation in that all of the designers got a kickback from the "authorized suppliers" and the new fabric, much wider and made by Burlington mills since it was an unauthorized fabric had no such kickback (excuse me-- remuneration to designers). Burlington because of this pressure then reformulated the sizing and indeed made a fabric that had superior physical properties to the authorized material. Interestingly, I don't remember Burt doing any tests on that material.

 

One only needs to look at the multiple sales and baseless legal shenanigans that Nat did to various people (Uli, JeffRussell, to mention a few), to realize that our icons are business people, gifted, to be sure, but our universal idealization of them is not necessarily warranted.

 

The material was then sold by a fellow in West Tx, whose name escapes me now, that company was sold and then ultimately bought by Spruce. they discontinued carrying the product.

 

I don't for a moment frown on the business practice of the "rebates" To the designers. They put a lot of work into their designs, and from what I understand Burt put some money into getting the suggested fabrics made, However the free market enables one to search for the best at the best price, if they want. Many Dragonfly's (including mine) were built of that material. To my knowledge there has not been a structural failure.

 

The unfortunate thing is, today, that one can't tell what kind of cloth they are getting. That's why I chose to use the specified cloths (even though I got many yards from Wicks with the mirror image part numbers.)

[rickh]

Are those "smoking deals" from Spruce or Wicks?

Neither.

Burt did tests on the imposter and showed that its' physical properties were inadequate. The spooky thing was that they marketed it by the same part number - 7715.

Far as I can find, Wicks and ACS (and Hexcel?) are the only suppliers of plans UNI.

 

Thayercraft.com sells a 50" wide BID "specially woven" for them. Suspect it's the same, but I wouldn't know, I'm not using that.

 

Though I didn't get "certs" with the BID I bought (Wicks/ACS offer them for glass?) I have no doubt the stuff I bought was overstock or excess inventory 7725 F-16 volan factory boxed/sealed from Hexcel-Schwebel in 2003.

 

Rick

[longezdave]

Interestingly, I don't remember Burt doing any tests on that material.

Maybe we are talking about two different cloths/instances. What I am referring to is the cloth that Burt tested and reported to us on in CP 36 P3. The testing showed that the imposter's average initial failure point was at only 69% of the normal expected load. The ultimate failure was at an average of 81% of the expected load capability.

 

I don't for a moment frown on the business practice of the "rebates" To the designers. They put a lot of work into their designs, and from what I understand Burt put some money into getting the suggested fabrics made, However the free market enables one to search for the best at the best price, if they want. Many Dragonfly's (including mine) were built of that material. To my knowledge there has not been a structural failure.

I can't speak about the Dragonfly, but the Long EZ's fiberglass structural parts are roughly good for about 12Gs. Even if the structure was built with the cloth with the lower physical properties that I quoted above (using excellent workmanship), I don't think that you would normally see structural failures.

 

The unfortunate thing is, today, that one can't tell what kind of cloth they are getting. That's why I chose to use the specified cloths (even though I got many yards from Wicks with the mirror image part numbers.)

I just think that we have a better chance at getting the correct cloth if we go with the "approved suppliers". At today's prices, the UNI and BID for a Long EZ costs under $2,000. You might save a little on cloth by going elsewhere, but I just think it's better not to try to save money here. Just my opinion.

[TMann]

Hexcel 7715 & 7725 cloth is the same wherever you buy it. Wicks lists the numbers in reverse or (for what reason I'll never know) but it all comes out of the same plant.

 

If you talk to Hexcel, they do not look at the RA prefix (it doesn't exist within the walls of the factory.)

[argoldman]

Maybe we are talking about two different cloths/instances. What I am referring to is the cloth that Burt tested and reported to us on in CP 36 P3. The testing showed that the imposter's average initial failure point was at only 69% of the normal expected load. The ultimate failure was at an average of 81% of the expected load capability.

 

 

 

I can't speak about the Dragonfly, but the Long EZ's fiberglass structural parts are roughly good for about 12Gs. Even if the structure was built with the cloth with the lower physical properties that I quoted above (using excellent workmanship), I don't think that you would normally see structural failures.

 

 

It is very possible that we are talking about two different glasses The fiasco that I am talking about happened in the early 80's. The cloth both bi and uini was manufactured by Burlington mills.

 

 

 

I just think that we have a better chance at getting the correct cloth if we go with the "approved suppliers". At today's prices, the UNI and BID for a Long EZ costs under $2,000. You might save a little on cloth by going elsewhere, but I just think it's better not to try to save money here. Just my opinion.

It is very possible that we are talking about two different glasses The fiasco that I am talking about happened in the early 80's. The cloth both bi and uini was manufactured by Burlington mills.

 

Wasn't the prototype cozy made of left over pieces of glass from whatever, or is this just urban legend?

 

I agree that using the specified glass, at this point, is the best policy, even though we may be doing it for the wrong reason.

[Marc Zeitlin]

Wasn't the prototype cozy made of left over pieces of glass from whatever, or is this just urban legend?

Consider the source of that claim. It's complete BS.

[Neverquit]

Consider the source of that claim. It's complete BS.

 

How about giving Nat a call yourself?

[dust]

Consider the source of that claim. It's complete BS.

Heh, Heh Heh - a buddy told me of this comment - figured it was worth a reply - one reply is that I am very glad Marc does not visit my forum - it is a nice and informative place without him.

 

As far as BS - obviously you NEVER called Nat to verify my statement. He will Verify it as it is true.

 

He built his entire cozy 3 from the scrap bin (his words) from 3M when he worked there.

 

Yes - consider the source, a reliable one - me, just the facts, wether I like them or knot.

 

Adios

[David Clifford]

Heh, Heh Heh - a buddy told me of this comment - figured it was worth a reply - one reply is that I am very glad Marc does not visit my forum - it is a nice and informative place without him.

 

As far as BS - obviously you NEVER called Nat to verify my statement. He will Verify it as it is true.

 

He built his entire cozy 3 from the scrap bin (his words) from 3M when he worked there.

 

Yes - consider the source, a reliable one - me, just the facts, wether I like them or knot.

 

Adios

The village idiot continues his montra,,,,even over here. Don't let the door hit you in the a-- on your way out!

[Aiman]

Consider the source of that claim. It's complete BS.

I always consider the source(s). This is why I am over here, and not on the 'other' forum.. which.. not to add Jet A to an already RAGING fire.... didn't that forum recently melt down just before RR this last summer because one of the admins just HAD to have things his way (even though he was dead wrong)? Anyways, I digress.

 

I've met Marc, and most everyone else associated with this little squabble. Trust me, I'll fly with Marc before any of the other 'sources'. I'll take his word anyday over them too.

 

How about giving Nat a call yourself?

I would NEVER bother Nat in his retirement, since I am not even building a Cozy anymore! I'd hate to impose.

 

And yes... don't let the door hit you in the azz on the way out. We don't have time for this BS. I asked a serious question, and I got a couple of serious answers, and a few things to do more research on, thats all I wanted.

 

I rarely open fire like this. but god damn.. you have had this coming for a LONG time. Do you know how many people were betrayed by the brainless, ham fisted moderation, and eventual closing of your forum? Do you even think about this sh!t before you open your mouth or type, or click that mouse?

 

Jon/Admins/Moderators, apologies for the strong words used here, and the unnecessary drama it may cause, but, some things do need to be said.

[TMann]

........... let it go PLEASE.

[Aiman]

Sorry about the interruption.

 

I now have the TERF CD, and the bill of materials. I am going to just wait and buy in bulk, then order the wing/canard/winglet cores from Eureka.. so.. basically all I need to worry about is the fuselage, hardware, glass/epoxy, and the panel/electrical and engine systems.

 

On to Chapter 4, since I already have those materials...

[TMann]

On to Chapter 4, since I already have those materials...

....now you're talking!

[Edge 513]

Heh, Heh Heh - a buddy told me of this comment - figured it was worth a reply - one reply is that I am very glad Marc does not visit my forum - it is a nice and informative place without him.

 

Adios

Informative?

9/10th's of all the posts there are yours Dust. I just went to your forum. Almost no one posts there anymore except you.

Trying to be constructive here...Why don't you try to make some peace and maybe people will return.

[TMann]

Timeout:

Could we direct all of the 'Dust bashing' posts to the correct forum (which is not here!)

Let's not taint the water.

[mak790]

........... let it go PLEASE.

Of course I agree with you let's talk about canard related things instead of that pointless discussion.

 

Btw TMann are you going to post some pictures of your bird in the near future. Did you finish your canard what about fuselage is it ready etc.

 

Heh, Heh Heh - a buddy told me of this comment

In my country we use another word for this "snitch" or "informer".

 

Sry to everybody I couldn't stop. I really dont understand why some members of that other forum coming here to "taint the water" it wont work here.

 

Mak

[mplafleur]

It certainly is possible that 3M scraps were used. Nobody said how big the scraps were, and I suppose stuff they threw out might have been small to them, but large enough to use building parts of a small plane. 100% though? Probably not.

 

I mean, how large are the pieces you cut out?

[David Clifford]

It certainly is possible that 3M scraps were used. Nobody said how big the scraps were, and I suppose stuff they threw out might have been small to them, but large enough to use building parts of a small plane. 100% though? Probably not.

 

I mean, how large are the pieces you cut out?

I believe that he (Nat) was alluding to the possibility that he did not "buy" the materials he used to build the Cozy 111,,,,,,,that the materials were "salvaged" from the scrap bin at the place he worked, 3M. Most companies refere to it as "shrinkage",,,,and I am not talking about size here! Anyone who has EVER worked at any kind of a shop or factory knows exactly what I am talking about. Dust interperated that to mean you can use any glass available so long as the weave and weights add up. That is pure nonsence.

[argoldman]

I believe that he (Nat) was alluding to the possibility that he did not "buy" the materials he used to build the Cozy 111,,,,,,,that the materials were "salvaged" from the scrap bin at the place he worked, 3M. Most companies refere to it as "shrinkage",,,,and I am not talking about size here! Anyone who has EVER worked at any kind of a shop or factory knows exactly what I am talking about. Dust interperated that to mean you can use any glass available so long as the weave and weights add up. That is pure nonsence.

Wasn't this whole thread started by the question of substituting similar weaves by possibly different manufacturers, or unknown manufacturers and the suitability of that substitution. Unfortunately it seems to have degenerated into a battle, of sorts, with little to substantiate either side. I suppose we have to go through these things occasionally to cleanse the palate, as it were.

 

I do have a question, however and that is What was 3M doing with fabric that was designed, etc by Burt Rutan, or was it a similar weave by another manufacturer? There is a lot we don't know.

 

It is probably better to use the material specified until independent testers prove alternate materials better or worse, and better or worse for the structures that we are building. As it stands, the specified material works and has, as far as we know, never let a -Z down.

[Edge 513]

Good points Rich. I think the gist is that you just don't substitute what one "thinks" is/are equals materials/layups, without KNOWING what you are doing.

Thats what this thread is all about.

"The scrap bin" approach didn't sound at all like Nat. If Nat said something like it, it had a spin put on it that seemed irresponsible, and building a responsible 200mph aircraft and standing behind it was what Nat was all about.