jimboflying
MEMBER
Are there significant differences between brands of fabric for use on an experimental cub? What is best for the Stewart System?
Fabric choices
- Thread starter jimboflying
- Start date
bob turner
Registered User
Used to be able to buy Dacron griege for experimentals. Half price; same stuff. All the certificated stuff is marked with STC, but for experimentals they are all off the same loom.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Interesting.
"[FONT="]All of the technical specifications for Ceconite and PolyFiber are identical and they are produced by the same company, Consolidated Coatings."
[/FONT]https://stewartsystems.aero/aircraft-fabric/
"[FONT="]All of the technical specifications for Ceconite and PolyFiber are identical and they are produced by the same company, Consolidated Coatings."
[/FONT]https://stewartsystems.aero/aircraft-fabric/
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
I bought some experimental fabric a few years ago for demonstration purposes at our restoration seminar several years ago. It was nothing like the certified fabric I was use to working with. It shrunk weird. I would not use it on a flying airplane.
bob turner
Registered User
I don’t think you can buy non-certified aircraft quality fabric any more. You can buy some stuff set up for Fiberglas layup, but it isn’t the same - 40 years ago the certified and non-certified was identical except for edge markings. They started putting a black stripe down the middle to help IAs identify bogus fabric.
For a very short time Stitts sold a lightweight fabric. I never tried it. It wasn’t glider cloth; it was designed to replace 103.
For a very short time Stitts sold a lightweight fabric. I never tried it. It wasn’t glider cloth; it was designed to replace 103.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
I think I have a partial roll of that unmarked fabric which came with a dismantled Stinson SR I bought 40+ years ago. No markings on it, yet it looks the same. Even if it's good, I'll not sell it to anyone.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
That sounds like something which was discussed at an annual IA meeting years ago. The stamp may be hard to find since it may have been cut off, there is a black continuous stripe which ought to be able to be found. But getting to an annual and not accepting the signature on the recovering 337 is a stretch.
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
bob turner
Registered User
I agree - IAs should spend more time fixing bogus 337s and weight and balances. Going looking for PMA stamps on fabric of aircraft that were covered in the last century seems a bit over the top. And Stitts isn't putting that big stripe on their fabric, so that should not be "looked for."
Opinion - I see a lot of major alteration 337s with no approved data - some IAs think they can approve stuff! Wing tanks are the biggest offenders - fortunately, my FSDO is cooperative.
Opinion - I see a lot of major alteration 337s with no approved data - some IAs think they can approve stuff! Wing tanks are the biggest offenders - fortunately, my FSDO is cooperative.
I seem to recall, it wasn’t until some time in the 70s that Ceconite got PMA Stits on the fabric. I think as a result of Stits going the PMA route first. There must have been thousands of airplanes covered in Ceconite from the early 1960s until the mid 1970s that didn’t have PMA fabric and the STC didn’t require it. I think they indicated that their fabric exceeded TSO C15 requirements and was approved via the STC. There were lots of folks, including FAA folks that thought STC was a manufacturing approval.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hardtailjohn
Registered User
Marion, MT
Stewarts is good over any certified fabric, for certified aircraft. They usually sell SuperFlight fabric. Superflight also makes an uncertified light fabric. I still have a 50 yard roll of Stits certified light as well as a 50 yard roll of HS90X. All good stuff, but they just weren't selling enough of the certified light to make it economically viable, was what I was told.
John
John
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
I recall the same thing. When first using Ceconite in the early 60s there were no markings on the fabric.
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
I maintained and flew a 90 hp Super Cub covered in the light Stits for a long time and had to make lots of repairs on the fuselage fabric on the tail at stringers and longerons.
KJC
FRIEND
Clear Lake, MN
I have used Stewart’s system with both medium weight Polyfiber and Ceconite and both work just fine. The airplane I am currently working on is covered in Superflite 101 (Heavy). I was quite surprised at how soft and flexible the Superflite 101 is. Very easy to work with and shrinks very well. I wouldn’t hesitate to use it again.
if you mission involves mostly on airport operations, just use medium weight fabric.
if you mission involves mostly on airport operations, just use medium weight fabric.
KJC
FRIEND
Clear Lake, MN
Thank you very much. It’s always nice to get a compliment. I sure would like to have it done by summer but this “real job” thing keeps getting in my way!!
The good news is Jim from Airglass says my pod is getting its final buffing and should ship next week. I had him mold it in black and he says that it’s a real pain but it will look great.
The good news is Jim from Airglass says my pod is getting its final buffing and should ship next week. I had him mold it in black and he says that it’s a real pain but it will look great.
I have decided on Oratex 6000 for my Javron. I ordered the sample kit and covered a spare rudder, remarkably simple and durable. Oratex offers "blemish" fabric at a 20% discount, using this I think I can cover the cub for around 7K. Lightweight and simplicity are my main reasons for using Oratex. QUOTE=Steve Pierce;824265]I bought some experimental fabric a few years ago for demonstration purposes at our restoration seminar several years ago. It was nothing like the certified fabric I was use to working with. It shrunk weird. I would not use it on a flying airplane.[/QUOTE]
