Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 11:15 AM - Re: Jaguar Cowling questions Part 5 - painting (Gary Vogt)
2. 07:22 PM - AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A - word to the wise (Kevin Lancaster)
3. 08:09 PM - Re: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A - word to the wise (Gary Vogt)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Jaguar Cowling questions Part 5 - painting |
Boris,=0A=0AThe gray paint is a primer. Dave preps the inside of the tooli
ng and then puts =0Ain 2 to 4 coats of primer. Brain fart right now, can't
remember the name. That =0Aprimer is to fill all of the pin holes that wo
uld be there if the glass were =0Alaid up without it. It's a good place to
start.=0A=0AHere are the steps I use. Of course, this is off the top of m
y head so I may =0Amiss something.=0A=0A1) Locate any obvious imperfections
. These will typically be in areas where two =0Aparts are joined.=0A a)
Start with the deep or large areas. For deep or large areas, use any of
=0Athe 3M body fillers (aircraft spruce) or even the new light weight bondo
. They =0Aall work well. =0A Go to an automotive shop and talk to
someone. If you have a favorite =0Abody shop, check there. =0A
=A2 Note: Deep areas: Deep is a relative term. We're talking 1/16 in
ch =0Adeep. =0A Large areas: Large is a relative term
. We're talking =0Aanything you want to fill or shape.=0A After you
've filled the large or deep areas, block sand with 80 or 120 =0Agrit sand
paper. Once you get the imperfection filled, or surface blended, =0ASTOP.
=0A =A2 Note: Use quality sand paper from an auto body supp
ly. This stuff =0Ais expensive. I buy rolls of 6 inch self adhesive disks
, around $60 a roll. I =0Abuy 80, 120, 220, and 320 grit.=0A=0A b) Now
look over the cowling for small areas. Use Spot Putty (auto parts =0Astore
) for any small imperfections. =0A Look over the whole cowling for
every tiny pin hole or imperfection. =0A This is the hard part. Mark them
all with a pencil.=0A You may think you have all the holes; you'll k
now for sure when you =0Apaint your first coat of primer. =0A
=A2 Note: Small: Small areas such as scratches, pin holes, shallow
=0Adents, etc. =0A After you've filled the holes, let the cowling s
it over night. =0A Get a sanding block(s) from the auto body supply
. I have 6 inch, 12 =0Ainch and 18 inch blocks. Buy rolls of 3 inch self
stick sand paper for the =0Ablocks. They are expensive too.=0A=0A2) You've
completed all of the initial sanding and prepping. Now, using the =0Asand
ing blocks, block sand large areas to make sure they are flat. =0A The
cowling is pretty straight so that should go quickly. You can buy =0Asandi
ng pads that bend around corners. They work well inside the exit ramps,
=0Ainlets, etc.=0A Use 120 to blend everything. If you have a dual acti
on sander, it makes =0Athis step go pretty quickly also.=0A=0A3) When you a
re ready to prime, wash it with soap and water. Dry. Then, wipe =0Adown t
he cowling with DX 330. Tack off any dust with a tack rag.=0A Paint wit
h 4 to 6 coats of K-36/K-201. Let dry over night. =0A=0A4) Sand again wit
h 120 grit. Block out the large flat areas with the largest =0Aflat block
you can. Work your way to the smaller places.=0A Mark imperfections wit
h a pencil. You can also buy a spray paint called =0AGuide Coat. That hel
ps a lot with larger areas.=0A=0A5) Wash with soap and water. Dry. Wipe w
ith SX 330.=0A=0A6) Prime with 2 coats of K-36. Sand with 220 to get the b
ig orange peel down. =0A Then hand sand the whole thing with 320.=0A=0A7) W
ash with soap and water. Dry. Look for any imperfection you want fixed.
=0A Fill, sand, and repeat until you are tired of trying to make it perfect
. =0A=0A8) Paint with any of the Poly-Urethane paints. I like Imron only b
ecause I've =0Abeen painting with it for 30 years. =0A=0AOn the first 3 co
wlings, I fitted, primed, sanded and painted the whole thing =0Afor $10,000
. So, basically, for $3750, I invested about 60 hours per cowling, =0Aincl
uding paint. =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: "b
vnj@yahoo.com" <bvnj@yahoo.com>=0ASent: Sun, June 12, 2011 10:09:23 PM=0ASu
bject: TeamGrumman-List: Jaguar Cowling questions Part 5 - painting=0A=0A
=0AHi Gary,=0A=0AI need a little help with painting. Unfortunately my only
painting experience is =0Athe walls in my house. =0A=0AWhat is the gray stu
ff on the outside surface of the cowls? A friend of mine saw =0Ait and said
"gel coat". Is it a gel coat or is it 6 coats of k-36 urethane =0Aprimer y
ou mentioned earlier?=0A=0AThe instructions say "prime with two part epoxy
primer". If there are 6 coats of =0Aprimer already, do I still need to prim
e on top of it?=0A=0A=0AShould I use the same k-36 primer? If not, could yo
u please recommend one? Do =0Athey sell it in the local auto paint store? I
f not, where can I buy it?=0A=0ANormally I find things like that on the net
but there is just too much info on =0Apainting. Gives me brain overload.
=0A=0AThank you,=0ABoris. =0A=0A=0AOn Jun 6, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Gary Vogt <t
eamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:=0A=0A=0A... I prime with 6 coats of K-36, thin
ned 20%. K-36 is a high build urethane =0Aprimer. Block sand the first ti
me with 120. Prime again with one or 2 coats as =0Aneeded. Block sand wit
==== =0A
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A - word to the wise |
Hi folks. This question was brought to my attention and I thought it
sounded like it needed to be cleared up - Maybe I can help.
First, be sure you are reading the latest revisions of the SB and AD. There
were some clarifications in the revision intended to help clarify the proper
compliance issues here.
As you know, Service Bulletins are not mandatory. They are "words to the
wise."
The process the FAA uses to make them mandatory is to reference them in the
Administrative Directive.
So in this case, the AD makes the SB mandatory.
Page 7 of the AD contains the following Question and Answer:
"Does This AD Incorporate Any Material by Reference?
(g) You must do the actions required by this AD following the instructions
in American General
Aircraft Corporation Service Bulletin No. SB-185-A, Revision A, dated
January 10, 2005."
That means that the SB is mandatory and if you read the SB it clearly
requires recurring checks every 500 hours.
Options? Back to the AD:
"May I Request an Alternative Method of Compliance?
(f) You may request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD
by following the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes
otherwise, send your request to
your principal inspector."
The question Gary asks about the "unless already done" statement (in the
Compliance column of the chart explaining how to address this issue) is a
good one. The statement applies to the initial inspection required within
the next 100 hours Time in Service (TIS). I agree that his is confusing.
Remember that when the AD was revised it was likely that the inspection had
already been done as the original AD had already required the inspection and
the SB (word to the wise) was out prior to that - the intent was not to make
everyone who had just inspected their planes do it again within the next 100
hrs. Once the initial inspection was done, the next column instructs the
reader to follow the SB going forward.
As for the source of the AD, Cliff is close but he has his stories a little
mixed up. The planes that were damaged by hail were at Embry Riddle's
Prescott campus and E.R. performed the wing panel replacements and that had
no bearing on this AD. There were never any planes hail damaged on the ramp
at American General.
According to Loyd, who helped author the AD, it originated out of a flight
school in the UK that had removed and replaced the wings without properly
shimming them. They had 3 (yes, 3!!) instances of spar bolt fretting due to
improper shimming, over torqueing or some other undetermined practice.
There was also one instance reported in the US on an earlier model Grumman
which is how they were all swept up in the FAA net and included in the AD.
So the "word to the wise" is, follow the SB, check the bolts within 100
hours and every 500 hours thereafter - I do. And, "word to the legal" per
the AD, perform the inspections according to the SB which says to check them
every 500 hours. Being legal is up to you and your A&P, but please be wise!
J. Kevin Lancaster, President
True Flight Aerospace, LLC
----- Original Message -----
From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2011 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A
>
> I agree. The AD is NOT recurring. If it was performed properly and the
> wing spar clearance is correct and/or was shimmed properly if needed then
> that doesn't change and the only thing beneficial would be to check the
> spar bolt torque to see if they are secure. There have been some bolt
> failures, possibly due to loose fitting wing spars which worked back and
> forth and apparently loaded the bolts causing fatigue failure. And of
> course bolts could have been over torqued. The AD came about after
> American General replaced a bunch of wings that were hail damaged at the
> factory sitting outside. Draw your own conclusions.
>
> Cliff
>
> On 6/11/2011 2:31 AM, Deems Herring wrote:
>> The AD must be completed . Service bulletins are never mandatory for
>> part 91 operations. The AD reference to the SB is simply giving you an
>> acceptable way to
>> accomplish the requirements of the AD. As always you can apply for
>> permission to use an alternative method of compliance and if approved
>> you would never be required to perform the actions in the SB. Only the
>> FAA can make actions mandatory. Whether it is prudent to perform SB 185A
>> on a repetitive basis is a different question.
>>
>> Deems
>>
>> teamgrumman@yahoo.com
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A
>> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 22:50:30 -0700
>> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>>
>> Did this go out to the TeamGrumman-list? I thought someone wouldhave a
>> comment.
>> *
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A - word to the wise |
Thanks Kevin,
I've been doing them each 500 hours. I even have a calculation in my data base
for each of the planes I maintain showing # hours until the next inspection.
It's a shame the AD isn't written to address the frequency of inspections.
As part of a PMA application I had to submit drawings that were clear and
non-ambigious. Anyone should be able to take a drawing and make a part. I
think the least the FAA could do would be make sure Airworthiness Directives
were clear.
Thanks for the feedback.
Gary
________________________________
From: Kevin Lancaster <jkevinl@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Mon, June 13, 2011 7:19:23 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A - word to the wise
Hi folks. This question was brought to my attention and I thought it sounded
like it needed to be cleared up - Maybe I can help.
First, be sure you are reading the latest revisions of the SB and AD. There
were some clarifications in the revision intended to help clarify the proper
compliance issues here.
As you know, Service Bulletins are not mandatory. They are "words to the wise."
The process the FAA uses to make them mandatory is to reference them in the
Administrative Directive.
So in this case, the AD makes the SB mandatory.
Page 7 of the AD contains the following Question and Answer:
"Does This AD Incorporate Any Material by Reference?
(g) You must do the actions required by this AD following the instructions in
American General
Aircraft Corporation Service Bulletin No. SB-185-A, Revision A, dated January
10, 2005."
That means that the SB is mandatory and if you read the SB it clearly requires
recurring checks every 500 hours.
Options? Back to the AD:
"May I Request an Alternative Method of Compliance?
(f) You may request a different method of compliance or a different compliance
time for this AD
by following the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise,
send your request to
your principal inspector."
The question Gary asks about the "unless already done" statement (in the
Compliance column of the chart explaining how to address this issue) is a good
one. The statement applies to the initial inspection required within the next
100 hours Time in Service (TIS). I agree that his is confusing. Remember that
when the AD was revised it was likely that the inspection had already been done
as the original AD had already required the inspection and the SB (word to the
wise) was out prior to that - the intent was not to make everyone who had just
inspected their planes do it again within the next 100 hrs. Once the initial
inspection was done, the next column instructs the reader to follow the SB going
forward.
As for the source of the AD, Cliff is close but he has his stories a little
mixed up. The planes that were damaged by hail were at Embry Riddle's Prescott
campus and E.R. performed the wing panel replacements and that had no bearing on
this AD. There were never any planes hail damaged on the ramp at American
General.
According to Loyd, who helped author the AD, it originated out of a flight
school in the UK that had removed and replaced the wings without properly
shimming them. They had 3 (yes, 3!!) instances of spar bolt fretting due to
improper shimming, over torqueing or some other undetermined practice. There was
also one instance reported in the US on an earlier model Grumman which is how
they were all swept up in the FAA net and included in the AD.
So the "word to the wise" is, follow the SB, check the bolts within 100 hours
and every 500 hours thereafter - I do. And, "word to the legal" per the AD,
perform the inspections according to the SB which says to check them every 500
hours. Being legal is up to you and your A&P, but please be wise!
J. Kevin Lancaster, President
True Flight Aerospace, LLC
----- Original Message ----- From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2011 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A
>
> I agree. The AD is NOT recurring. If it was performed properly and the wing
>spar clearance is correct and/or was shimmed properly if needed then that
>doesn't change and the only thing beneficial would be to check the spar bolt
>torque to see if they are secure. There have been some bolt failures, possibly
>due to loose fitting wing spars which worked back and forth and apparently
>loaded the bolts causing fatigue failure. And of course bolts could have been
>over torqued. The AD came about after American General replaced a bunch of
>wings that were hail damaged at the factory sitting outside. Draw your own
>conclusions.
>
> Cliff
>
> On 6/11/2011 2:31 AM, Deems Herring wrote:
>> The AD must be completed . Service bulletins are never mandatory for
>> part 91 operations. The AD reference to the SB is simply giving you an
>> acceptable way to
>> accomplish the requirements of the AD. As always you can apply for
>> permission to use an alternative method of compliance and if approved
>> you would never be required to perform the actions in the SB. Only the
>> FAA can make actions mandatory. Whether it is prudent to perform SB 185A
>> on a repetitive basis is a different question.
>>
>> Deems
>>
>> teamgrumman@yahoo.com
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AD 95-19-15 R1 and SB-185A
>> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 22:50:30 -0700
>> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>>
>> Did this go out to the TeamGrumman-list? I thought someone wouldhave a
>> comment.
>> *
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|