Re: UV damage

Allan Farr <afarr@...>

Thanks Mike
Actually, I'm less worried now. The main area of UV damage (or dry lay-up) are the elevator slots (t/e of canard), so it seems to me that at worst I will just have to replace that (or maybe add an extra ply of bid on top?). I will get a local Varieeze builder to have a look. What brought this about is finding that the a/c doesn't have the black UV protection, just a yellow (ochre?) undercoat/filler, with gloss white on top. It's possible these paints have UV protection built in, but it would be good to know for sure as UV here in NZ is about as extreme as it comes (we live under a hole in the ozone). The a/c has previously had a stress test on the canard & wing which it passed with no "cracking or popping" & with the wings returning to their original positions, so I presume it must be basically sound.
Allan F

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Dwyer
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Tuesday, 13 March 2007 12:39
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] UV damage

That is absolutely UV damage. I would scrap the plane as you don't know
how much delamination/damage was done to the underlying foam. Your life
is worth more than it would cost to build new parts.
Mike Q200 N3QP 1000+ hours

Allan Farr wrote:
> Some of the visible fibreglass on my plane (cockpit, elevator slots on canard, etc.) shows a lot of cloth & very little resin. Does anyone know if this is likely to be UV damage, or perhaps just a dry layup? Also, I would like some info on manufacturing the elevator trim system, is this available?
> Allan F.
> Q2 Rev 99% completed by others.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.